okay! so i'm back from my self-imposed exile. i probably won't be blogging as often as i could over the summer, as i am now a senior (i also turned 17 along the way) and taking four APs for reasons that are still unknown to me and running Gay-Straight Alliance (which i really want to rename Queer Alliance because i don't really think i identify with the gay/straight spectrum anymore. i don't really think that sexuality is that rigid as gay, straight, or bi) at my school and i'm the op-ed editor of the paper. which means that i am very, very busy and very, very tired. for a while my posts will probably be like, "obama, maybe? but mccain no. feminism good. misogyny bad. my back hurts."
i'm not crazy about obama, but i must say that i loved, loved, loved his speech last night and may have teared up one or six times.
i just finished toni morrison's beloved and i adored it. before that i read farenheit 451 and adored that as well. beloved was the first book by morrison that i've read. it kind of reminded me of dorothy allison, with the way she turns a phrase and her descriptions and the examinations of women and their relationships between them. but beloved also disturbed me. it was extremely chilling.
got to run, a friend's on her way over. i'll update later with a state of the union and something vaguely intriguing.
Friday, August 29, 2008
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
quote of the day
context: this quote is a response to john mccain's recent remarks on his campaign tour. here's the transcript:
"You know, I was looking at the Sturgis schedule, and noticed that you have a beauty pageant, and so I encourage Cindy to compete. [Laughter, cheers, applause, wolf whistles.] I told- I told her, with a little luck, she could be the only woman ever to serve as both the First Lady and Miss Buffalo Chip."
i encourage you all to visit the political carnival (http://thepoliticalcarnival.blogspot.com/2008/08/pour-some-sugar-on-cindy-mccain.html) and view the NSFW mash-up at what goes on in Sturgis. hint: it's not answering questions about world peace. it's more of the girls-in-bikinis-licking-bananas-attached-to-people's-crouches variety. yeah.
and the quote:
"Well, I guess it's a step up from publicly calling her a cunt."
-the fabulous melissa mcewan from shakesville
"You know, I was looking at the Sturgis schedule, and noticed that you have a beauty pageant, and so I encourage Cindy to compete. [Laughter, cheers, applause, wolf whistles.] I told- I told her, with a little luck, she could be the only woman ever to serve as both the First Lady and Miss Buffalo Chip."
i encourage you all to visit the political carnival (http://thepoliticalcarnival.blogspot.com/2008/08/pour-some-sugar-on-cindy-mccain.html) and view the NSFW mash-up at what goes on in Sturgis. hint: it's not answering questions about world peace. it's more of the girls-in-bikinis-licking-bananas-attached-to-people's-crouches variety. yeah.
and the quote:
"Well, I guess it's a step up from publicly calling her a cunt."
-the fabulous melissa mcewan from shakesville
Monday, August 4, 2008
losing my religion
i was talking to goblin today about an incident with a mutual acquaintance that has been really bothering me. i told her that i wanted to write about it, but that i didn't know how. and she told me to say exactly that.
so. i've wanted to blog about this for a long time. but i don't even know where to fucking begin.
i guess i'll start here: last summer, i was fairly close with someone we'll call pundit. a poli-sci major who had recently graduated, he was at the time my only outlet for my political beliefs, which during my pre-self-education stage were mainly unorganized rants about reproductive rights (and this blog is clearly different than that because..uh...i know who bell hooks is now? let's go with that). pundit was the first person who actually listened to these beliefs and thought that what i had to say was important. this was a big deal for me, and i remember enjoying those conversations immensely.
pundit and i pretty much grew apart and stopped talking after that summer ended. pundit has always been a person with very few social skills and that awkwardness made it difficult to maintain a friendship with him, but there was no defining incident that tore us apart or changed my opinion of him. until a conversation i had with him a few weeks ago.
i got an im from pundit on facebook. i hadn't talked to him in months so it was unexpected, but that's just the way it goes with him. we had a reasonable pleasant conversation, until he mentioned the girls gone wild series for reasons i don't remember. and then he said this:
"That's something I really hate about women."
okay, let's pause for a minute here. in no uncertain terms is this an acceptable thing to say. i honestly could not believe that pundit, a college-educated political science major and self-identified liberal could say something so misogynistic and repugnant. but after more thought, i realized that the general american public would not be as shocked. think about it, how many "witty" opinion columns have you read where an oh-so-clever guy talks about he just hates how all women talk about themselves all the time! and he hates that they all are obsessed with the shoes! he hates women who watch sex and the city! oh-ho-ho, you clever man. i know just what you are talking about. i raise my budweiser to you, my friend. and of course, men are not the only ones who spew this bullshit. i'm willing to bet that the feminist online community has not forgotten about charlotte allen's "women are some dumb-as-fuck bitches" editorial. oh, sorry, i forgot. that was a "tongue-in-cheek" piece. it's pretty disturbing how okay it is in our society to talk about their hatred of women. and yeah, i realize that there are no articles being printed that simply read "I HATE WOMEN". but come on people, read between the fucking lines. hell, most of the time you don't even have to read between the lines because the lines just spell it out for you.
let me make it clear: hatred of any kind towards any group of people, whether it be based on race, gender, religion, age, sexual orientation, anything, is not okay. ever.
so going back to pundit. he tells me that he hates the "type of women" who are just big vapid whores flashing their tits for attention and more blahblahwomenhatingcakes. so i tell him, simply, "i think that's a very misogynistic thing to say". and i get this in response: "how so?".
okay, i realize that i've been quoting the dictionary lately, which i usually hate to do, but i just have to do it again:
Main Entry: mi·sog·y·ny
Pronunciation:\mə-ˈsä-jə-nē\
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek- misogynia, from misein to hate + gynē woman
Date: circa 1656
: a hatred of women
if you start off a conversation with "here's something i really hate about women" and then question why you are being called misogynistic, then i think that you should go look up the definition of the word "misogyny" and then come back and continue your argument with the recognition that you are actively hating women, and prepare yourself for the response you are going to receive from me (hint: i'm not going to be happy).
so i explain to him that his hatred of women who participate in GGW dvds is both inappropriate and extremely unhelpful to everyone, and that he should not blame the women who expose themselves on these shows but consider why they feel the need to do this, because something tells me it might have something to do with a society that tells women they must be sexy to be accepted and not the fact that women are genetically encoded to show their breasts to everyone.
then he logged off.
here's another hint: if we are having a conversation and i disagree with something you have to say, do not run away from me in the middle of the fucking discussion. i find it childish and offensive.
a day or so later, i get a message from him. i'm going to repost the conversation between us because i think it explains my position on the issue we discussed and illuminates some of pundit's beliefs.
pundit: I was saying that the women in the GGW dvds were not a credit to the female sex. The DVDs show college women, not in the act of learning, and making something of themselves, but degrading themselves and acting out because they are in front of a camera. Just as the stereotypical college male is a skirt chasing booze vacuum, the college girls depicted here are sex objects with little sense of pride or dignity. This is a stereotype that I would like to see discontinued. On another note, you should see the documentary "America the Beautiful", which addresses what you were talking about, with regards to the pressure on women to conform to a certain standard of beauty.
Sorry if there was a misunderstanding. I make a point of taking women seriously as people, and there are certain types of women who make it difficult.
alexandra: I think that the problem is that you're blaming the women, not our society. Do I like the Girls Gone Wild series? No, not really. Do I think it helps women? No, not really, especially considering the sleezeball nature of its founder. But who am I going to blame: the women who participate in the show, or Joe Francis and the culture that tells us that showing our tits will bring us love and attention? I'm going with option B. Ask yourself why it is that these women act the way they do in these films. Is it because they were born with some fundamental difference than you that causes them to bare their breasts to cameras? Or is it because they are only doing what society tells them they should do? Look at how highly sexualized our culture is, from the advertisements selling sex and women's bodies to the multibillion dollar sex industry. It's even worse with teenage or college-age girls. We are told to be sexy, but don't have sex. Have sex, but don't be a whore. Show us some cleavage, but good god, woman, put your shirt down. Is it any wonder that the girls of GGW dvd are so confused that they think that this is the best option for them? And how fair is it to call them "sex objects" and perpetuate the slut-shaming cycle? And where does the line between sexy and slut get drawn? Hey, I'm a teenage girl. I've dated several people and I've hooked up with people outside the confines of a relationship. Am I a slut?
pundit: As long as we're letting people off the hook for succumbing to society's expectations, should we forgive Adolf Eichmann, who worked out the nuts and bolts of the Holocaust? Eichmann's antisemitism and homophobia was more a function of his societal upbringing rather than pathology, and since he was career oriented, designing an empire spanning murder mill seemed like a great way to get ahead. A more contemporary example are the religious bigots, who are often home schooled, or educated in such a way as to discourage critical analysis of their preconceived notions. Why do we hate them for failing to rise above their bass-ackwards society?
Granted, flashing one's chesticles doesn't exactly amount to mass murder or bigotry, however, I consider sexuality a privileged commodity not to be wasted on the undeserving, and it mystifies me that young women would flash a camera held by somebody they don't even know, to make a DVD watched by perfect strangers.
If you consider your partners deserving, I'm fine with that. I am aware that many people are just sexually adventurous and like to try out different people. I know somebody like that and she's a very good friend of mine. Not a slut. As long as we're on the subject, why is it considered threatening whenever I go outside completely naked accept for my trench-coat? I always get dirty looks from people, especially mothers and nuns. There seems to be a double standard against male nudity.
PS Follow this linkhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America_the_Beautiful_%28film%29
PPS The words "slut", "whore", "skank" etc. are somewhat context sensitive when used by guys. This is especially true when used by MY guys. (Yes, I'm well aware of the pretentiousness and arrogance displayed by the fact that a particular clique would consider itself the sole arbiters of what constitutes a slut/whore/skank. Don't brow beat me about it.) If you ever happen to talk with Kirsten again, ask her to tell you about her old roommate, Amy. It's not a happy story. Hint: they don't talk anymore.
(NOTE: i have changed the names he mentions at the end of this message)
alexandra: Oh please, that is such a bullshit argument. You're honestly expecting me to take you seriously as you try to tell me that conforming to society's beauty standards are the same as the fucking Holocaust? That is a truly shameful comparison, and I think you know it.
Hey, you want a reason why impossible beauty standards are different than the Holocaust or religious extremity? Here it is: because they are fucking everywhere. Every. Fucking. Where. Not just one country, not just one culture. Everywhere. And you know what? Unless you acknowledge the fact that you are a white male who has a hell of a lot of privileges in society, you will never understand the struggles a woman has to face every day and you will never understand why I am telling you to lay off those girls and stop and think for a second about what it must be like to live in a world that tells you that if you are not beautiful, you are nothing. I'll repeat that: if you are not beautiful, you are nothing. Get off your high horse and take a fucking second to actually think about what these women are going through. Because guess what, when you sit around all day judging people, it helps absolutely no one. You're not solving a damn thing. In fact, you're adding to the problem.
And guess what, I am going to "browbeat" you about the fact that you think it's okay that you and your friends decide who is and who is not a slut. I think that's pretty disturbing. I'm even more disturbed about the fact that you actually wrote a paragraph justifying the fact that you go around as the Great Decider and calling girls whores if you think they reeeeeally deserve it. You think it's arrogant and pretentious? Guess what, you left behind "arrogance" a looong time ago, the minute you started attacking women based on how you perceive their sexuality. Let me help you out here: it is never okay to call a woman a slut, a whore, or a skank. Never. So cut it the fuck out.
pundit: Are you looking for an apology? 'Cuz it does seem strange that we're in agreement about the detrimental affects of GGW.
If you knew about my experience with Sarah Mayse, you might understand why I feel as I do.
The point of the Eichmann/GGW comparison was to illustrate that we are all responsible for our own behavior and attitudes, and cannot blame the society we live in for our actions. It is our duty to rise above it, not succum to it. To the best of my knowledge, nobody has ever been killed by breasts. (At least, not natural ones, but that's not really the point.) Perhaps a more appropriate metaphor would have been Shylock the Jewish loanshark, from Shakespear's "Merchant of Venice". When defending himself in court for attempting to exact a pound of flesh as payment for a debt, he claims that he is only conforming to his role as a greedy and merciless banker that society forced upon him.
"I am a Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions? Fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer, as a Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die? And if you wrong us, shall we not revenge? If we are like you in the rest, we shall resemble you in that. If a Jew wrong a Christian, what is his humility? Revenge. If a Christian wrong a Jew, what should his sufferance be by Christian example? Why, revenge. The villainy you teach me I will execute, and it shall go hard but I will better the instruction."
alexandra: I'm not looking for an apology. I'm telling you that you've said something I find offensive. An apology doesn't show me that you understand what I'm saying and you understand why what you said was offensive. It doesn't mean I hate you and it doesn't mean I'm taking it personally. This is the same way I would react with anyone who says something that really offends me. And no, I don't think we're in agreement about anything you've said here.
And I don't know who the hell Sarah Mayse is and frankly, I don't care. I don't care if Sarah Mayse has slept with every single person she's ever met. I don't care if Sarah Mayse has been a prostitute since age 12. It's still not okay to call women sluts and it is not something you can defend.
this conversation really, really disturbed me. let me share why.
TIPS FOR DISCUSSING WOMEN WITH ALEXANDRA:
1) do not tell me who is and who is not a credit to the female sex. it is not judgement day, and even if it was, i don't see a halo on your head.
2) do not tell me that you "make a point taking women seriously as people". that is quite possibly one of the most offensive things anyone has ever said to me, and if i have to tell you why, you are reading the wrong fucking blog.
3) do not compare girls gone wild to the fucking holocaust.
4) do not ask me why "we" hate religious bigots. in fact, do not use "we". you stick to yourself. i hate bigotry, not people. i refuse to hate people i have never met, because that is exactly what bigots do and i have seen too much shit from them to sink to their level.
5) guess what? sexuality is NOT a "a privileged commodity not to be wasted on the undeserving". i don't even know how to make sense of that ridiculous statement and i don't know how anyone could view that as a logical thing to say.
6) do not tell me that you are "just fine" with my sexual life. that is amazingly condescending.
6) i know i mentioned this in my message, but who the fuck do you think you are telling me that it's okay for you and your friends to call women sluts because you guys are the only ones allowed to do this?
i'm just so angry. and i'm disappointed. i think this hits me a lot harder than it would if it was just some random guy on the internet saying this, because it came from a friend.
i'm going to end this post with a quote from melissa mcewan, webmistress of my favorite blog, shakesville.
"Feminism is an integral part of progressivism.
If you're not a feminist, you're not a progressive.
No matter how much you hate Bush.
No matter how much you hate the Iraq war.
No matter how much you hate our current torture policy.
No matter how much you want to restore habeas corpus.
No matter how much you're totally going to vote for the Democrat in November.
If you're not a feminist, you're not a progressive.
You're a fauxgressive.
End of story."
so. i've wanted to blog about this for a long time. but i don't even know where to fucking begin.
i guess i'll start here: last summer, i was fairly close with someone we'll call pundit. a poli-sci major who had recently graduated, he was at the time my only outlet for my political beliefs, which during my pre-self-education stage were mainly unorganized rants about reproductive rights (and this blog is clearly different than that because..uh...i know who bell hooks is now? let's go with that). pundit was the first person who actually listened to these beliefs and thought that what i had to say was important. this was a big deal for me, and i remember enjoying those conversations immensely.
pundit and i pretty much grew apart and stopped talking after that summer ended. pundit has always been a person with very few social skills and that awkwardness made it difficult to maintain a friendship with him, but there was no defining incident that tore us apart or changed my opinion of him. until a conversation i had with him a few weeks ago.
i got an im from pundit on facebook. i hadn't talked to him in months so it was unexpected, but that's just the way it goes with him. we had a reasonable pleasant conversation, until he mentioned the girls gone wild series for reasons i don't remember. and then he said this:
"That's something I really hate about women."
okay, let's pause for a minute here. in no uncertain terms is this an acceptable thing to say. i honestly could not believe that pundit, a college-educated political science major and self-identified liberal could say something so misogynistic and repugnant. but after more thought, i realized that the general american public would not be as shocked. think about it, how many "witty" opinion columns have you read where an oh-so-clever guy talks about he just hates how all women talk about themselves all the time! and he hates that they all are obsessed with the shoes! he hates women who watch sex and the city! oh-ho-ho, you clever man. i know just what you are talking about. i raise my budweiser to you, my friend. and of course, men are not the only ones who spew this bullshit. i'm willing to bet that the feminist online community has not forgotten about charlotte allen's "women are some dumb-as-fuck bitches" editorial. oh, sorry, i forgot. that was a "tongue-in-cheek" piece. it's pretty disturbing how okay it is in our society to talk about their hatred of women. and yeah, i realize that there are no articles being printed that simply read "I HATE WOMEN". but come on people, read between the fucking lines. hell, most of the time you don't even have to read between the lines because the lines just spell it out for you.
let me make it clear: hatred of any kind towards any group of people, whether it be based on race, gender, religion, age, sexual orientation, anything, is not okay. ever.
so going back to pundit. he tells me that he hates the "type of women" who are just big vapid whores flashing their tits for attention and more blahblahwomenhatingcakes. so i tell him, simply, "i think that's a very misogynistic thing to say". and i get this in response: "how so?".
okay, i realize that i've been quoting the dictionary lately, which i usually hate to do, but i just have to do it again:
Main Entry: mi·sog·y·ny
Pronunciation:\mə-ˈsä-jə-nē\
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek- misogynia, from misein to hate + gynē woman
Date: circa 1656
: a hatred of women
if you start off a conversation with "here's something i really hate about women" and then question why you are being called misogynistic, then i think that you should go look up the definition of the word "misogyny" and then come back and continue your argument with the recognition that you are actively hating women, and prepare yourself for the response you are going to receive from me (hint: i'm not going to be happy).
so i explain to him that his hatred of women who participate in GGW dvds is both inappropriate and extremely unhelpful to everyone, and that he should not blame the women who expose themselves on these shows but consider why they feel the need to do this, because something tells me it might have something to do with a society that tells women they must be sexy to be accepted and not the fact that women are genetically encoded to show their breasts to everyone.
then he logged off.
here's another hint: if we are having a conversation and i disagree with something you have to say, do not run away from me in the middle of the fucking discussion. i find it childish and offensive.
a day or so later, i get a message from him. i'm going to repost the conversation between us because i think it explains my position on the issue we discussed and illuminates some of pundit's beliefs.
pundit: I was saying that the women in the GGW dvds were not a credit to the female sex. The DVDs show college women, not in the act of learning, and making something of themselves, but degrading themselves and acting out because they are in front of a camera. Just as the stereotypical college male is a skirt chasing booze vacuum, the college girls depicted here are sex objects with little sense of pride or dignity. This is a stereotype that I would like to see discontinued. On another note, you should see the documentary "America the Beautiful", which addresses what you were talking about, with regards to the pressure on women to conform to a certain standard of beauty.
Sorry if there was a misunderstanding. I make a point of taking women seriously as people, and there are certain types of women who make it difficult.
alexandra: I think that the problem is that you're blaming the women, not our society. Do I like the Girls Gone Wild series? No, not really. Do I think it helps women? No, not really, especially considering the sleezeball nature of its founder. But who am I going to blame: the women who participate in the show, or Joe Francis and the culture that tells us that showing our tits will bring us love and attention? I'm going with option B. Ask yourself why it is that these women act the way they do in these films. Is it because they were born with some fundamental difference than you that causes them to bare their breasts to cameras? Or is it because they are only doing what society tells them they should do? Look at how highly sexualized our culture is, from the advertisements selling sex and women's bodies to the multibillion dollar sex industry. It's even worse with teenage or college-age girls. We are told to be sexy, but don't have sex. Have sex, but don't be a whore. Show us some cleavage, but good god, woman, put your shirt down. Is it any wonder that the girls of GGW dvd are so confused that they think that this is the best option for them? And how fair is it to call them "sex objects" and perpetuate the slut-shaming cycle? And where does the line between sexy and slut get drawn? Hey, I'm a teenage girl. I've dated several people and I've hooked up with people outside the confines of a relationship. Am I a slut?
pundit: As long as we're letting people off the hook for succumbing to society's expectations, should we forgive Adolf Eichmann, who worked out the nuts and bolts of the Holocaust? Eichmann's antisemitism and homophobia was more a function of his societal upbringing rather than pathology, and since he was career oriented, designing an empire spanning murder mill seemed like a great way to get ahead. A more contemporary example are the religious bigots, who are often home schooled, or educated in such a way as to discourage critical analysis of their preconceived notions. Why do we hate them for failing to rise above their bass-ackwards society?
Granted, flashing one's chesticles doesn't exactly amount to mass murder or bigotry, however, I consider sexuality a privileged commodity not to be wasted on the undeserving, and it mystifies me that young women would flash a camera held by somebody they don't even know, to make a DVD watched by perfect strangers.
If you consider your partners deserving, I'm fine with that. I am aware that many people are just sexually adventurous and like to try out different people. I know somebody like that and she's a very good friend of mine. Not a slut. As long as we're on the subject, why is it considered threatening whenever I go outside completely naked accept for my trench-coat? I always get dirty looks from people, especially mothers and nuns. There seems to be a double standard against male nudity.
PS Follow this linkhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America_the_Beautiful_%28film%29
PPS The words "slut", "whore", "skank" etc. are somewhat context sensitive when used by guys. This is especially true when used by MY guys. (Yes, I'm well aware of the pretentiousness and arrogance displayed by the fact that a particular clique would consider itself the sole arbiters of what constitutes a slut/whore/skank. Don't brow beat me about it.) If you ever happen to talk with Kirsten again, ask her to tell you about her old roommate, Amy. It's not a happy story. Hint: they don't talk anymore.
(NOTE: i have changed the names he mentions at the end of this message)
alexandra: Oh please, that is such a bullshit argument. You're honestly expecting me to take you seriously as you try to tell me that conforming to society's beauty standards are the same as the fucking Holocaust? That is a truly shameful comparison, and I think you know it.
Hey, you want a reason why impossible beauty standards are different than the Holocaust or religious extremity? Here it is: because they are fucking everywhere. Every. Fucking. Where. Not just one country, not just one culture. Everywhere. And you know what? Unless you acknowledge the fact that you are a white male who has a hell of a lot of privileges in society, you will never understand the struggles a woman has to face every day and you will never understand why I am telling you to lay off those girls and stop and think for a second about what it must be like to live in a world that tells you that if you are not beautiful, you are nothing. I'll repeat that: if you are not beautiful, you are nothing. Get off your high horse and take a fucking second to actually think about what these women are going through. Because guess what, when you sit around all day judging people, it helps absolutely no one. You're not solving a damn thing. In fact, you're adding to the problem.
And guess what, I am going to "browbeat" you about the fact that you think it's okay that you and your friends decide who is and who is not a slut. I think that's pretty disturbing. I'm even more disturbed about the fact that you actually wrote a paragraph justifying the fact that you go around as the Great Decider and calling girls whores if you think they reeeeeally deserve it. You think it's arrogant and pretentious? Guess what, you left behind "arrogance" a looong time ago, the minute you started attacking women based on how you perceive their sexuality. Let me help you out here: it is never okay to call a woman a slut, a whore, or a skank. Never. So cut it the fuck out.
pundit: Are you looking for an apology? 'Cuz it does seem strange that we're in agreement about the detrimental affects of GGW.
If you knew about my experience with Sarah Mayse, you might understand why I feel as I do.
The point of the Eichmann/GGW comparison was to illustrate that we are all responsible for our own behavior and attitudes, and cannot blame the society we live in for our actions. It is our duty to rise above it, not succum to it. To the best of my knowledge, nobody has ever been killed by breasts. (At least, not natural ones, but that's not really the point.) Perhaps a more appropriate metaphor would have been Shylock the Jewish loanshark, from Shakespear's "Merchant of Venice". When defending himself in court for attempting to exact a pound of flesh as payment for a debt, he claims that he is only conforming to his role as a greedy and merciless banker that society forced upon him.
"I am a Jew. Hath not a Jew eyes? Hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions? Fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer, as a Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh? If you poison us, do we not die? And if you wrong us, shall we not revenge? If we are like you in the rest, we shall resemble you in that. If a Jew wrong a Christian, what is his humility? Revenge. If a Christian wrong a Jew, what should his sufferance be by Christian example? Why, revenge. The villainy you teach me I will execute, and it shall go hard but I will better the instruction."
alexandra: I'm not looking for an apology. I'm telling you that you've said something I find offensive. An apology doesn't show me that you understand what I'm saying and you understand why what you said was offensive. It doesn't mean I hate you and it doesn't mean I'm taking it personally. This is the same way I would react with anyone who says something that really offends me. And no, I don't think we're in agreement about anything you've said here.
And I don't know who the hell Sarah Mayse is and frankly, I don't care. I don't care if Sarah Mayse has slept with every single person she's ever met. I don't care if Sarah Mayse has been a prostitute since age 12. It's still not okay to call women sluts and it is not something you can defend.
this conversation really, really disturbed me. let me share why.
TIPS FOR DISCUSSING WOMEN WITH ALEXANDRA:
1) do not tell me who is and who is not a credit to the female sex. it is not judgement day, and even if it was, i don't see a halo on your head.
2) do not tell me that you "make a point taking women seriously as people". that is quite possibly one of the most offensive things anyone has ever said to me, and if i have to tell you why, you are reading the wrong fucking blog.
3) do not compare girls gone wild to the fucking holocaust.
4) do not ask me why "we" hate religious bigots. in fact, do not use "we". you stick to yourself. i hate bigotry, not people. i refuse to hate people i have never met, because that is exactly what bigots do and i have seen too much shit from them to sink to their level.
5) guess what? sexuality is NOT a "a privileged commodity not to be wasted on the undeserving". i don't even know how to make sense of that ridiculous statement and i don't know how anyone could view that as a logical thing to say.
6) do not tell me that you are "just fine" with my sexual life. that is amazingly condescending.
6) i know i mentioned this in my message, but who the fuck do you think you are telling me that it's okay for you and your friends to call women sluts because you guys are the only ones allowed to do this?
i'm just so angry. and i'm disappointed. i think this hits me a lot harder than it would if it was just some random guy on the internet saying this, because it came from a friend.
i'm going to end this post with a quote from melissa mcewan, webmistress of my favorite blog, shakesville.
"Feminism is an integral part of progressivism.
If you're not a feminist, you're not a progressive.
No matter how much you hate Bush.
No matter how much you hate the Iraq war.
No matter how much you hate our current torture policy.
No matter how much you want to restore habeas corpus.
No matter how much you're totally going to vote for the Democrat in November.
If you're not a feminist, you're not a progressive.
You're a fauxgressive.
End of story."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)