This is a ridiculous thing to say.
I will leave aside the question of whether a man can be a feminist - there is an interesting discussion summarized here.
What is certainly clear is that Duns is not a feminist. Why not? Because he put his name to a vile article glorifying violence against women.
I blogged here about an article Duns wrote for The Times describing how many women died in each Bond film, as this was an achievement. You can read it online here.
People can form their own opinions. To me, it is rubbish like this that creates a culture in which women are assaulted by men every day in their thousands.
From his response, on this blog, Duns seems shame-faced about this article as he should be.
After pitching a different article to The Times, he claims, this one appeared. ' A few days later, the article you have linked to appeared. It was the first I knew of it. It’s a complete fluff piece', he writes.
This is not good enough.
Are you disowning this article? Your name appeared on it.
If you want to disown it, you need to take the following steps.
1. Write a public apology on your blog disowning the article.
2. State how much you were paid for it, with documentary evidence.
3. Donate the money to a recognized women's charity.
4. Write a letter to the editor of The Times asking for your name to be removed from the article, and publish the letter online, together with the response.
If you are not willing to take these steps, I am completely justified in describing you as a women-hater, that is as someone who celebrates and glorifies violence against women, and who women's groups should be campaigning against.
Violence against women is the most major violation against human rights in the world today. There is an excellent summary of the issues here.
It is the casual acceptance among men - typified in Duns's work - that violence against women is okay that creates this problem. That is why it is important to stand up against it.