Sure thing, Joan Kelly, will do.

Re this post and the preceding ones.

Yeah, enabling Howly Blog does put you beyond the pale. I'm afraid so. I mean, truthfully, personally, I never cottoned to you much anyway, so no great loss. But, seriously? You are sucking up to a couple of vile trolls who would basically be Fred Phelps with a couple of small adjustments. Glad to see you've found a "spine" of some sort, though. It does take guts to "agree to disagree" about blatant hatemongering, fuck knows.

And, for the record, the tu quoqueing you've been doing? Yeah, those women (yes, women) are *also* toxic hateful assholes. Amazingly enough, the existence of some assholes doesn't excuse vile bigotry, which is, let me repeat, exactly what you are oh so magnanimously choosing to ignore as "disagreement." Let's not even get into the "what? I'm not saying I -like- infanticide, I'm just saying it beats the alternatives."

So, yeah, posting this will no doubt feed the martyrdom complex as well as the vomit monster machine, and, yeah, I keep swearing I'm giving up the dwama, but you know, I can live with it. Because, wrt the whole "if you don't like them, just don't read them?" You're full of shit. They post flaming gauntlets like that and especially leave hatespoor trackbacks to any trans blogger post they find for a reason. They wanted a reaction. They got it. And now, so have you.

Enjoy.

"I'M NOT YOUR FRIEND, BUDDY!!"

Apologies, as a prelude to amends, if possible.

To brownfemipower, among others, at least for...not helping, let's say. And I was already thinking similar things wrt the "swarming" business. Still thinking. Not the main point here.

The main point here is: no women, trans or cis, are getting served by NOWHC at all since December, because there simply isn't the support.

And:

It continues to be horribly fucking unfair that so many people have no access to health care or so many other necessary services at all; and that regardless of what happens with NOWHC, trans women continue to be among the most disenfranchised even among the disenfranchised. And yes, more people need to be aware that trans women are women too and need access to womens' services; and that first of all, services need to exist and be available in the damn first place, and we -all- need to care that this is the case.

Maybe there's actually something productive I can do to help. I'd like to.

ETA: Holly has more commentary.

Cake, or Male Infanticide?

(We're out of cake).

First of all, blame mandos for this. He's been enabling my rubbernecking habit like whoa by deposting these links in unrelated posts. Sort of like my cat would have brought me dead mice if he were any good at mousing. The cat, that is. I've no idea how good mandos is at mousing. Presumably they're more difficult targets than The Eternal Moonshine Of The Wadfem Dwama. And this first source in particular is like the dead mouse with hantavirus.

Nonetheless. I had to look. And now, apparently, before seven days go by, I have to share, or Sheila Jeffreys comes out of the television and eats my brains. Therefore:

http://aroomofourown.wordpress.com/2009/05/17/am-i-crazy/

Am I Crazy?
2009 MAY 17
by Margaret
I will rank the following three scenarios, options, if you will, in order of my preference:

Male infanticide.
Female infanticide.
Females continue living as males’ slaves.
Of course, these are not the only three options available, though they do seem to me to be the options most likely to occur with any lasting *effect* (with full recognition that numbers 2 and 3 concur).

But, yes, I believe male infanticde to be the best of those three options. That is to say, I believe male infanticide to be a *better* option than the current circumstances. That doesn’t speak to what I might feel the *best* option would be. I only mean to put into perspective my stance on male infanticide, given its invocation in the comments of another post. I think it’s better than what we’ve got.

Note that I also feel that female infanticide is a better option than being born into patriarchy as it stands, as well.

I just happen to think it’d be better if the males were the ones dying, rather than that the females be the ones dying *and* suffering.

You have to admit, at least she screwed her courage to the sticking place and -said- it. If saying shit that most people find repulsive and WTF? isn't radical, what is? Huh? As Lady Macbeth notes:

I would, while it was smiling in my face,
Have pluck'd my nipple from his boneless gums,
And dash'd the brains out.
Bite they little heads off,
Nibble on they little feet...

...no, wait, sorry, that's from Hamlet. Anyway, Lady M's probably not all that great a role model on account of she was created by a male author and was in it for her husband's ambition, thus a tool of the Patriarchy and not a true Revolutionary, despite her admirable fighting spirit. (The fact that she's fictional shouldn't be held against her; after all, it's not like the OP being quoted here isn't actually a cartoon).

Right, so. Meanwhile, not very far away, also brought to you courtesy of mandos, there's a new (apparently) dude on the block.

http://thelongestwar.wordpress.com/

Unlike most men, I admit I started this physical life as a female fetus, like all human fetuses do, also born of a woman like all human beings are.* Also, I’m embarrassed to be a man with all the societal privilege manhood entails. Hence, this blog. It soothes my conscience**...

... To end man’s war against womankind may take men not just doing laundry and ending non-sexual violence, but practicing celibacy as a commitment to not exploiting women. Real celibacy, not what Catholic priests pretend to do. Unless men wise up and take better action, Mother Nature might just wipe men out and leave women with procreative parthenogenesis. Life will go on, with or without men.

I’m proposing celibacy for bi and het-sex men (any men born as men interested in sexual relations with women) as the ground of being to expand male consciousness as a pathway toward real peace. Celibacy for this group of people would mean that no woman would be sexually exploited by any xy-chromosome humanoid while a lasting peace is sought through heightened awareness for all...

...(1) See and (2) Break Free. It’s a simple two-part plan to species unity. I said simple, not easy. But if the war ends in my lifetime, maybe I can start having real sex as a whole human being with another whole human being.

...I can no longer wield my spear in the longest war. Plenty of warriors remain ready. To womankind I would say: In this war, it’s the spear and not your spirit that he’s interested in. To paraphrase a recent title of a book-based movie with a sappy ending, “He’s never that into you (in other than a spear-thrusting way).”

*oh snap, Macduff so was NOT! You missed the ironic part! You should be careful with your turn of phrase, there, sport. Even if you totally don't mind losing the kingdom and the battle and the, um, spear, and all that patriarchal jazz.

**You do that with your left hand or your right?

***

But this guy's so, so, maddeningly close, and yet doesn't quite seem to get there. In the interest of protecting Womankind, he heroically falls on his own, um, spear; he denies us all his essence (although fortunately we still have his bloviations). Which probably means he's not planning to burden the Earth with his spawn, either. He even refers to himself as a former (female) fetus, heaping due guilt upon his own head at having developed the Y chrom and then gone on to take up all that privilege and oxygen...

...and yet, he doesn't quite seem to leap to the logical conclusion that Margie there probably already did, or should have.



We will refrain from mentioning l'affaire B---ng B---r here, just because I don't want to link to anyone who still has that shit cached. But, yes, truth is stranger than AbFab etc, at least in the Land Of The Online Wadfem.

In epilogue: as long as we're speculating about possible parallel worlds, I wonder how much more energy and goodwill I might have had, how many great works of art I might have created, new elements discovered, buildings leapt in a single bound, if every time I'd been tempted to rubberneck at this sort of thing, much less engage, I'd instead just hit this button.

Good idea, "rebranding."

As in, the Republicans are "rebranding" the Democrats "Democrat Socialists." Which apparently requires a special meeting, and funny hats, and a special dispensation from Godwin agreeing that they are Exempt from the Law as they are officially Post Irony. not from Steele, though, cos no one cares what he thinks.

As I understand it, the Democrats were considering holding a meeting to redub the Republicans "the Epic Fail Party," but it seemed a tad redundant.

ETA: Wait. I hadn’t realized we’d reached "pell mell." Crap. Oh, sure, I knew we weren’t hunky dory, and things have been decidedly higgledy piggledy for years now. But pell mell? Ipso facto, that’s bad news, yo.

That said: I have to concur. Bil of Bilerico, you're wrong here.

Here's why. Also see. And. And. Or just go straight to the person you were threatening to excuse me fantasizing about sic(cing) Lily Law on.

And for the record, Bil, I consider a lot of things "unacceptable;" it's why this nice respectable cis white dyke has finally taken you off the roll, much as I've valued a lot of your work. I'm sure you'll manage fine, obviously; but hey, for the record.

p.s. and I have the strangest feeling of deja vu.

ETA: No, you hopeless dumbass, "Die In A Fire" does not LITERALLY mean someone is coming after you with the jug of kerosene and a torch.

also? if you've been avoiding sidewalk cracks all this time? Moms thanks you, but really: it's okay to -step.-

The axe is totes real though. Srsly. BE AFRAID.

ETA again: okay, I know DIAF is actually not exactly cute or funny for people who've been seriously threatened with kerosene and torch, or knew people who, yep, died in a fire. I'm not snarking at people who don't like the term, and it does seem like people are actually getting triggered or -something- right and left here. I was specifically snarking at the guy who suggested that Bil note the common Internet acronym as a "2nd threat," because, you know, if that's the yardstick you're using I think yeah, you -would- be handing out a lot more bans. Like, probably half your commentariat at one point or another (if it's not that, it's something else) Which is your prerogative, ban away (RESPECT MAH AUTHORITAH!), but ffs any random person who invokes that isn't making a -threat-, all right? For a start, besides being common, it's not a threat, strictly speaking, that, it's a curse.

I mean, there's a lot of shit that gets casually uttered on the Internets (and elsewhere) that's actually not necessarily dandy just because everyone says it.

Beyond that, I'm not following this crap anymore because it's making me want to double-spork and I'm running low on eyeballs here. Regardless of how "real" -any- of the growly motions and handwaves are--and yeah, it does at least seem more -realistic- to suspect that someone offering to report someone's info to the police means business than someone talking about "heads on pikes," all right? --yeah, bottom line, Bil's been clueless, so's the HRC (and way beyond clueless) and it really blows that the very -real- and imo justified anger at the White Normative GAY andlesbian (and sort of bi)
... .... ... ... ... ...((((((((((((((((((((((((((((and okay trans when we need 'em for a symbol but meanwhile we'll collectively keep throwing real trans people under the bus every chance we get))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

...face of the "Umbrella" movement gets dismissed, again, because OH NOEZ MEEN SCARY DWAMA DWAMA DWAMA.

It's good advice, it really is

This. Specifically that piece is regarding RaceFail '09. but applies in multiple situations I'd say.

mind you I also resolved I'd be going to bed by midnight, kicking Coke and eating more green vegetables.



and yet still somehow I cling to my idealism, despite it all.

Deep fucking thinky thoughts on recent online events

such as they are, and such as I have energy for. (I know you will be thrilled to read them, because they are from Me, and as all such things are inherently, endlessly fascinating):


She's got a point there, kids, srsly, who was supposed to give a shit in the first place?, gorgeous, ohmyfuckingGOD, shut UP, can't deal with the meta/irony today, sorry, other extremely deep, abstract and difficult thinky thoughts you should read, sums it up, pop-psych "I'm Okay-I'm Okay, What Is This "You" Concept That You Speak Of? language gets over/misused too, unfortunately, especially when it's employed as yet another defense wrt systemic problems like racism, sorry this shit never seems to fucking end, and word, word, word, word, word and -snerk-, word, word, fail, ETA and an accurate observation of still more epic fail.

Elsewhere:

absotively, sorry, I can't even read this shit, speaking of "torture", kthx buh bye then.



-returns to studying for RL exams/papers n shit more or less-

ETA: And yet, you're still talking. Like, A LOT (hint: "we're sorry, we fucked up, shutting up and listening now" and then -doing it- would've been better, rly, and yes, it's been done before, many times, among other things it's called "Hugo Schwyzer," and if that doesn't strike fear into your heart then yeah nothing more to say here)

Buh bye, Blago

Srsly.

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. – Gov. Rod Blagojevich was thrown out of office Thursday without a single lawmaker coming to his defense, brought down by a government-for-sale scandal that stretched from Chicago to Capitol Hill and turned the foul-mouthed politician into a national punchline.

Blagojevich, accused of trying to sell Barack Obama's vacant Senate seat, becomes the first U.S. governor in more than 20 years to be removed by impeachment.

After a four-day trial, the Illinois Senate voted 59-0 to convict him of abuse of power, automatically ousting the second-term Democrat. In a second, identical vote, lawmakers further barred Blagojevich from ever holding public office in the state again.

"He failed the test of character. He is beneath the dignity of the state of Illinois. He is no longer worthy to be our governor," said Sen. Matt Murphy, a Republican from suburban Chicago.

Blagojevich's troubles are not over. Federal prosecutors are drawing up an indictment against him on corruption charges...

Question: what made this guy so special, as far as corruption goes? Is the real difference mostly that he was more of a blatant asshole about it than, well, *koff* a bunch of government officials who somehow managed to avoid impeachment?

Not that I don't think he deserves it, I hasten to add. Just: wow, he's special, isn't he...

Maybe it's the hair.

For the record

Dear Violet Socks,

In light of this admirable sentiment,

The attacks on Palin have been analogous to what horrible racist attacks on Obama would look like. I dislike Obama and don’t trust him politically, but that doesn’t give me the right to call him a n***r or a coon or a spade, or indulge in ugly racist stereotypes to demean him.

You may also wish to desist from referring to him as "Oppossum."

In other news, apparently Hillary will be Opossum’s Secretary of State...

Clever and original though that is.

The term coon did not originally appear as a racial slur term for a Black American, though over a short period of time it evolved into that. In early minstrel songs, the "coon" was reference to a raccoon, whose meat was supposedly preferred by plantation slaves. In many cases, for unknowing composers, the term "coon" became entangled with the 'possum, also thought to be a preferred food source. Apparently, many composers were not very familiar with American wildlife and could not tell the difference. As a result, "coon" and "possum" were often used in the same context.

Just putting it out there, friendly-like.

Alternately you could cheerfully ignore it as coming from an evil 'bot (of various sorts), apart from still more whining about how you can't say ANYTHING bad about Obama lest you be accused of being a RACIST, which you so ARE NOT so STOP SAYING THAT.

Btw, as for the rest of that post?

She’s certainly qualified and it’s a position almost worthy of her gifts, but I fear the worst. The last Secretary of State who was given credit for anything or treated as a hero was Henry Kissinger (which is not to say he deserved it). Ever since then the Secretary of State has been the designated fall guy for each administration’s missteps. Given that Hillary is already loathed by the men who run the government and the media, it’s hard to imagine her emerging unscathed.

What’s really interesting, though, is that Obama is willing to entrust such a position to a woman who, according to the Obama campaign, openly lusted for his assassination. A woman who is also, according to Obama, a corrupt plotter, a secretive and sinister agent of evil, and of course a racist.

Innit though.

And a lot of non-PUMA's didn't want Summers and said so, but don't let that ruin your "only us against the tide of DOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!" narrative or anything.

And while we're on the subject of racism:

Yes, I know, "racist" is the worst thing one could ever, ever, ever accuse anyone of being and one must therefore reserve such speculations for, like, actual lynchings, if that ("he's a nice boy! he doesn't have a racist bone in his body! he didn't mean it PERSONALLY. he just got...upset"). Nonetheless. It is hard to know what (else) to make of, well, pretty much anything that comes out of Reclusive Leftist these days, but specifically, now (once again via Palin Puma Watch):

Warning: post contains a quotation with racial epithets.

Apostate, bless her, is still trying:

I agree with you that the sexist stuff is inexcusable. However, please believe me to be sincere in saying that it does seem as if there is simple *adoration* of Palin in the PUMA camp. This adoration is not in keeping with your stated disagreement with most of Palin’s platform.

Plus, at least half of your commenting community sound like Republican women to me. I may be wrong about this, but such is my impression. After a certain point, your commenting community begins to define the tone of your blog.

To which Violet replies:

Apostate, your comment 136 about people “adoring” Palin reminds me of an old and horrible phrase: “nigger-lover.” That used to be what racists called white people who committed the sin of not sharing in the racism of the day. If you refused to join in the slurs, if you stood up for the simple humanity of a black person, if you tried pointing out his or her qualities and abilities, you weren’t seen as being just or decent; you were a “nigger-lover.”

It is a sad commentary on the zeitgeist that by simply refusing to engage in the bashing of Palin, by standing up for her as a person, for trying to see the real woman, for treating her with basic dignity and honesty, I’m “adoring” Palin.

As for the “everyone” you refer to who interprets this as adoration, that is an artifact of your circumstances. From what I know of you, the only feminists you come into contact with (online and in real life) are exactly the same lemmings who have engaged in the kind of sexist Palin-bashing I’m describing. The mostly young feminists online have devolved into a caricature; I’m embarrassed by them. Planned Parenthood allowed the Obama campaign to use its mailing list to send out a smear email about Palin.

The women in my circle, in real life and online, are long-time feminists who are deeply disturbed by what has happened.

By the way: I usually like Shakesville, but the last time I was there they were uncritically repeating the rape kit smear. I haven’t been back since.


What. In. The. FUCK.

Aside from the gratuitous use of racial slurs, the inherent WTFery of a white woman lecturing a woman of colour about racism, and the disingenuous bullshit about how she's just been defending Palin's humanity instead of actively encouraging people to vote for her, read these comments and tell me with a straight face there's no adoration going on. Read Violet's repeated assertions that she recognizes Palin as "kin" to her and tell me she's just objectively defending a woman against sexism...*

So, first of all, seconding the rest of PPW's commentary there (which you should go read), and this and also this, insightful analyses of what else might actually be going on with the Palin fanbase.

I'll just add this, because now I'm good and pissed:

You know. Given just how much projection is going on there ("lemmings" "devolved into a caricature" "embarrassed by them" "smear," and that's just in that one post). And given that there is otherwise very little Earth explanation as to how exactly someone gets from "likes Palin, an unpopular view in the larger feminist community" to...that;

I'm gonna go out on a limb and suggest that maybe, just maybe, -that- was what VS (along with some others) was really wanting to call the "O-bots" all along.

I mean. -Such- betrayal. -Such- outrage. Is it -really- all because gosh darn it we should have just supported the woman, -any- woman, over the man, -any- man? Really. And yet, at that same place: the campaign to throw the vote, however "unwillingly" to McCain; and even now, a number of snarks at Michelle Obama (ain't she a woman?)

So, say the nomination had ultimately come down to Edwards versus Clinton, and had narrowly gone to Edwards (assuming of course he hadn't fucked up with the stupid sex scandal, which of course besides being the political suicide that it was would be duly and correctly excoriated by most feminists: everyone loves Elizabeth, he was another arrogant shit, but anyway moving on). Would the PUMA's have existed at all? In this form? And still be going, and going, and going, and fucking going? With freepers all over the fucking place now, yet? Really.

I mean, anything's possible; we can all speculate a thousand "what if" scenarios, right, and the goddam election, I keep having to remind myself, is -over-. Mostly because, well, now the -hard part-, and the adrenaline is hard to let go of.

But also, yeah, crap like this.

This post-PUMA thing, as I'm looking at it, insofar as it may be relevant at all, is shaping up as an unholy "confluence" between the dregs of what was already a noxious form of "cultural" feminism, which already had more than its share of thinly-if-at-all-veiled racism, creepy calls for "purity" and crypto-fascist nostalgia for mythical times, among other reactionary markers; and actual full-on right wing reactionaries. Now with more xenophobia and nativist bunker mentality!

Which is, of course, -exactly what the world fucking needs-. FEMINISM, especially, we -need- this, fuck knows. I mean the real problem with mainstream feminism, it turns out, is that it's -not focused on white and/or straight women enough.

Oh, yeah: it's hard out there for a white, straight woman.

[from someone called "Cindy"]

The following I’ve written as an open “letter” to Americans (from my perspective as a straight, white woman):

We are American women.
We have done eveything society asked of us.
We behaved in school.
We looked as pretty as possible at all times.
We learned to cook.
We learned to sew.
We went to church.
We dated nice boys.
We got married.
We took our husbands’ names.
We gave up our identities.
We took jobs for less pay.
We bore you children.
We lovlingly taught, nursed, guided, and nurtured these children.
We volunteered at our children’s schools.
We baked cookies for community fundraisers.
We volunteered at political campaigns.
We volunteered at nursing homes.
We took care of our elderly parents.
We have been loyal American patriots.
What have we done wrong? Why do you hate us?
Were we not pretty enough for you?
Did we not scream loud enough during childbirth?
Are we not dying at the hands of intimate partners fast enough for you?
Why do you hate us?

Poignant, innit?

Almost as poignant as the plight of Joe the Plumber (whom?): you bought a dream which was never even -meant- to be applicable to 80% of the population in the first place (and unwanted by another good 15% or so I'd say); and now that the dream is clearly being revealed as a bill of goods, you:

a) cling frantically to the politician who promises to keep the increasingly threadbare, -even to you-, fantasy going, no matter what the cost to you, let alone anybody else in the entire world (whom?)

b) incredibly, are now whining, to the 95% of the population to whom this means exactly jack and shit, for -sympathy-, even as you continue to do everything in your passive-aggressive power to fuck them over. All while denying strenuously that you're doing any such thing.

Ummm...sorry, what was the question? Right, right. "We" hate "you, plural," because, um.

a) You're beautiful, like a Prell commerical (or whatever the fuck that was. Also, popular and shiny, and we covet your red scrunchie.

b For your freedoms, unless it's for your not-freedoms.

c) Because "we're" "the" "axis" "of" "evil." Thugs, 'bots of various sorts, etc. etc. etc.

d) Because we, the WINO's aka "Women In Name Only," forgot the "feminist" rule that you're not supposed to attack a woman (i.e. a "real" woman, whom I guess at this point the only one would be...you), no matter what she does to you first.

Certainly not because "you" are a whiny, plaster-of-Paris, self-absorbed, genteely bigoted, rightwing -git- who's becoming everything you claim you're afraid of and (collectively) would be dangerous if you gave any signs of being able to find your way out of a grease-proof paper bag unassisted.

I'm sorry; was that sexist of me? Too -mean-? -Unfair-? Unladylike unfeminist?

Because, you know, I feel just awful about it.

Damn.

ETA Then again, with endorsements like these, how could you possibly go wrong, am I right?

http://www.greenconsciousness.org/weblog/2008/01/reclusive-leftist....

I, who am a dried up angry embittered angry cynical paranoid angry hag, burst out laughing out loud, over and over and over as I read the Reclusive Leftist. She is anti war and I am not, which is usually the Great Divide but not here. She cares about women even if she doesn't get what it will take to create room for women under Sharia to breath. (it will take a lot of killing).

elsewhere, from the same charming commenter ("Green Consciousness;" she's some sort of eco-feminist too, see, Animal Liberation Front and so forth):

http://www.greenconsciousness.org/weblog/2008/06/another-so-called-...

Muslims are a threat in every country they immigrate to and from -they bring their anti-semitic hatreds, their misogyny, their separatism, their gender apartheid and their dhimmi tactics against the infidels which include a moral threatening outrage over imaginary and legitimate criticism. They cry victim to shame and guilt trip the people they victimize. We must defend our democracy from these Muslim war tactics or we will be their victims.

Obama used these tactics successfully against the Clintons by calling them racists every time they made any factual statement the BO campaign could twist to their advantage. People had to know what they were doing when they jumped on that race baiting band wagon but they wanted BO to win more than they cared about fairness...His backers proudly wear teeshirts with the name Hussein to proclaim their solidarity with his Muslim heritage.

If legitimate fear and loathing of fascist Muslim culture and religious practices can be made to seem racist, soon the hate laws will cover Muslims. Then Muslims will use these laws the way abusers use injunctions against their victims. The way that group of Muslims baited authorities on that airplane where they prayed in the aisles, asked for seat belt extenders, went to the bathroom in groups and generally tried to provoke a lawsuit.

I struggle --- constantly struggle with a hatred that is growing in my own heart, not toward Muslims who I coldly recognize as my enemy, but at those who pretend to stand for women while protecting slave masters who seek to dominate us by overwhelming numbers or by force. Muslims as individuals are both good and bad but it is the women I am concerned with and about - those who feel a desire to be their own boss and oppressed by their religion, practices and culture. The correct thing to do is to help the decent people leave the Muslim faith and find a way to live free. Very hard but battered women do it, all abuse survivors do it. You cannot live free and stay Muslim. This attitude must become part of our foreign policy in that we insist on secular political systems in countries we support. Because the Muslim religion does not tolerate nonbelievers, we nonbelievers must not tolerate the Muslim religion to gain power in our democracy which is vulnerable to it...

THE POWER OF POSITIVE CLEAR-EYED LESBIAN GAZING! or, UNLEASH THE RADICAL FEMINIST WITHIN

Dammit, Ren, you had to make me look.

Speaking of trainwrecks in progress...the whole tl:dr thing, no doubt, chock full o' erm erraticness, but I was particularly drawn by the touching advice of dear Satsuma in these troubled times.

(oh, follow the link from there)

...I’m from the tough love school for women. It is not popular to say that we are 100% in charge of our own destiny, because this makes women who have fallen through the cracks feel bad. Feeling bad won’t get you anywhere in life.

Women on this blog get mad at success or any woman who thinks this is exciting and challenging. What I have to say, is that my life is a testiment that if you APPLY the wisdom of radical lesbian feminism, and you don’t fall into the trap of ever living with men as an adult, and you throw your mind as far as it will go, you’ll actually have a much better life than all the women who think they need men to prosper. I’m saying you will be healthier and wealthier if you DON’T marry men, live with them or have children.

I’m saying brilliance and cleverness and excitement and accomplishment are what await a true radical feminist.

What pains me here is that women don’t believe this. I think there are a lot of women in the world who are truly afraid of being different. They struggle to fit in everywhere, instead of choosing to live by an inner guidance system or even an inner true light.

Women think other women should fail and suffer. I’m not from that school of thought. I know that education and study advance you, and I know you need no handouts, welfare bureaus or social service agencies to do this. When you leave behind the production machine of patriarchy — which is not factory work, but childbearing, you really are free from personally contaminating patriarchy.

It’s what I find so frustrating here at times, this head in the sand, I don’t give a damn attitude. It’s this worship of poverty and downward mobility, or the belief that a radical lesbian life will not cause you to be better off in the end.

There is nothing worse than reading about women who can’t afford dentists here. Somehow that gets to me the most. I meet women everyday who are already setting themselves up for this. If they have the good fortune of working with me, they’ll do a lot better...

Every time a woman marries a man and has children and quits work in the state of California, puts her at a greater risk than buying a financial stock right now. The risk is that she is throwing about 10 years away from retirement planning, and stands to get divorced at a 50-60% rate. That means she will probably be the sole support of children and her standard of living will drop immediately. This happens every day of the year...

...I found poverty actually dull, and thought that I could do a whole lot better than a lot of straight women out there and have a better life. I think heterosexual women often feel they are superior to lesbians, and think our ideas are utopian.

But I believed in the male free life, and I believed that lesbian feminism led to incredible personal, political and spiritual insights.

It’s what causes me to greatly admire ambitious women. It’s what makes me love gritty women like Sarah Palin, when feminists out there think she is the devil....

...I love smart ambitious women. And there is nothing smarter and more ambitious than women who win high office in politics, and nothing more threatening to women who haven’t risen this far. The irony is the old guard feminists get mad at the Sarah Palins, just because they have personal beliefs that don’t tow a party line. I don’t tow a party line that says be poor, don’t achieve, don’t make a lot of money, don’t have the best in life… that doesn’t go over well. But feminism frees all women, and it comes out looking rather odd. Sarah Palin is a feminist in my book, and she is a fundamentalist christian. How shocking! Maybe a lot of women here simply don’t know how caring and loving fundamentalist christians actually are. Perhaps they haven’t met fundamentalist christians who are lesbian accepting.

You can’t be both right? Well in my opinion, how can you be a free woman if you are living with men and having sex with them. Yuck!! But I am sure feminists here who do this would still think of themselves as feminists, right?

Men don’t trash Palin the way so many women feminists do.

So this contradictory belief may seem mysterious; a love of both Palin and Clinton. Something about their personal struggles I deeply identify with. Something about seeing a woman on stage accepting a VP nomination while her husband holds the baby is so amazing to me...

...I am not a leftist or even a rightist, I am a woman who really goes for it, and never contaminate themselves with men kind of feminist. I’m not the hippie sex drugs and rock and roll type person. I hated all that nonsense, just wasn’t me. Perhaps a lot of that leftie stuff just annoyed me and still does. Weirdly enough, give me a proper fundamentalist christian any day over a vulgar swearing sexualized lesbian.

-clap clap-

Sorry to get carried away with the C&P--tl:dr, that's still only like a third of her latest saga, never mind the surrounding shitstorm--but I'm sort of riveted. If it's performance art, it's frigging AWESOME. It's like the bastard child of Tony Robbins, Sheila Jeffreys, and Dawn Eden.

oh, and almost forgot this bit:

No I don’t want failure and poverty, and no I am not swayed by everyone else going nuts over a stock market that is quite predictable. The fortunes are made quickly after events like this, while everyone else is still in panic.

ETA: also, too, also, I need to say this, once and for all:

Toe the line. Toe the line. Not -tow-. TOE. There's a line in the sand. You're not supposed to step over it; you're supposed to -toe-. You can't -tow- the line, unless you mean you're physically moving the drawn line someplace else altogether.

Bwaaaaaaaahahahahahaha....

Erm, I meant to say, of course, THAT'S NOT FUNNY. frownie.

TRUE Lesbian Feminism, Part 1
Let me tell you about lesbianism.

We used to talk a lot about lesbianism as a political movement - back in the old days when lesbianism and feminism went together, and one heard the phrase "lesbian feminism."

Today, we hear more about lesbian sadomasochism, lesbians having babies, and everything lesbians need to know about sex - what has fashionably come to be called the "politics of desire."

In this series of entries, I want to talk about lesbianism as a political movement, but before doing that it is necessary to address lesbianism as a lifestyle - what has for many come to be a sexual preference without a feminist politics. That is what this particular entry will be about.

For one thing, this lesbian lifestyle is preoccupied with sex.
...



Current location: UMass Amherst, Massachussetts
Current mood: like a true, asexual lesbian
Current music: Bitch & Animal
Entry tags: bringing my politics to the bedroom, eat food not vagina!, fucking is patriarchal, jesus why won't u lesbos do what i say?, keep your theories on my body, lesbianism is a political statement, my lack of sex is so radical, political lesbianism, queerness is cutting-edge theory, real lesbians don't fuck, sex = most lethal tool of the patriarchy, straight "lesbians", stuffing my politics in yr vagina

Python of the day, 7/25/08

Kickass, I didn't realize getting a root canal was a feminist act

Someone of whom I've never before heard posting at somewhere I've heard entirely too much of, but you can go there via here or here or here, here, or here, anyway:

ashley Jul 20th, 2008 at 1:50 pm


the defining characteristic of feminism is that it's not fun and it
costs dearly in social acceptance.


when guys approve, it's a great guage of whether or not something is
feminist at all.


who doesn't like to dance around naked? we should all be able to do it
without any rules or judgment or without having invited physical
assault on ourselves.

...you know, fuck it, fisking much less serious attention would be redundant in more ways than one, so very briefly:


1) I dunno who's supposed to "having invited physical assault on ourselves," but

2) did you know that being kicked or stepped on with spike heels hurts -a lot-? It's true.

3) y'know, Harlan Ellison and Woody Allen ceased to be amusing long since, too, for similar reasons (same old spiel gets boring, misogynist dickhead actually not all that charming at the end of the day, angry rebel schtick somehow less convincing when coming from an obviously really comfortable person, oh yeah, and the misogyny really does kind of get old)

4) indeed, dancing around naked (or however) without judgment or rules would be nice. here's an idea: be the change you seek.

5) so! how 'bout that Project Runway?


I'll blog about something substantial when y'know I have the mental energy to write about something that takes more effort than a good fart.

ETA: Jesus fucking Christ. Seriously? Seriously?

ginmar Jul 21st, 2008 at 7:55 am
Oh, christ, she’s got a picture of her ass on her blog? And she’s got Ren Ev commenting? Yeah, that’s empowerfulizing. RE’s had her nose broken four times in this emperfullizing career of hers as a stripper, but it’s the feminazis that are mean and awful to her. Jeezus.

and, currently, in moderation, this:

RenEv Jul 21st, 2008 at 8:18 am
Ginmar-
Let’s not do this again. Yes, my nose has been broken 4 times: Once in a car accident, once in a sports accident, and yep, by an abusive partner, who happened to be female. Never as part of my job, never due to stripping, or anything like that. My ex partner wasn’t a dancer or a patron of strippers, she was just a violent person. Also, once again dragging out my personal life to prove an argument, and distorting the actual facts of what happened, well, yes, I’m sick of it. My broken noses did not occur in the course of my job, and anyone saying so is not only lying, but very, very unethical...

ginmar Jul 21st, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Drakyn, why are you here? I can easily show those here how you treat feminists.
And frankly I wouldn’t trust anything RE said at all. She appears to have a miserable time as a stripper and porn actress, but she gets really infuriated at feminists who point that out. And she just plain makes shit up about radfems.

***

[RE again]...And yeah, seeing the truth of the history of my nose mutilated, distorted and used like that was triggering in a way for me. In that enraged crying sort of way. Getting the shit kicked out of you by a single abusive female asshole being used to fuel Gin’s little personal hate on for me and stripping when, gee, guess what, stripping and the money it provides and whatnot helped me get OUT of that situation, that fucking sucks. It’s wrong, it’s abusive, it’s oppressive, and it’s silencing...

Ginmar, if you're "not going to trust anything RE says," maybe at minimum you should stop trying to speak FOR her, especially when it's about her own damn experiences, hm? Particularly experiences of broken bones? Seriously, don't bother: just fuck off. Your shit is not wanted here, or pretty much anywhere.

.

Kyle Payne: Why it was a Big Fucking Deal, a note for the perplexed

Re this:

ETA: this, too

Hi, witchy, stormcloud, delphyne, Heart, whichever other of the "radical feminists" who just can't understand why this is a particularly big deal for those of us who aren't among the Elect, or what the difference is between this guy and, what is it now? all the other porn "users" in the world? all the other male feminists in the world (except the ones you approve of, of course)? all the other men in the world? (except for the ones you're in relationships with and/or still married to, of course), this one's for ya:

Because he's a predator who sounds plausible, he's STILL FUCKING BLOGGING AND GOING TO FEMINIST AND PROGRESSIVE CONFERENCE THAT OTHERS OF US MIGHT BE AT? Because there's an open hearing for his sentencing and getting the word out might just -might- get him a harder sentence if enough people read and go to it?

which, once again for the peanut gallery, is:

via Eleanor's Trousers:

Darren Johnson
July 8, 2008 at 11:02 pm
Any one who lives in Storm Lake or close to Storm Lake should go to this sick S.O.B sentancing on 11-Aug-2008 at the Buena Vista County Courthouse. Payne has asked for open sentancing. This means the Judge will listen to all that want to talk then decide what the sentance should be. He needs to do time.

CYA at the courthouse on 11-Aug-2008.DRD

***

Okay? If nothing else, does that register? At all? I know this is really fucking difficult to understand, but...

p.s. and no, in fact, "our" "male allies" (yes, I know the two or three, maybe four or five, people you mean. No, I'm not naming names. Deal with it. and a couple of others I suspect you -may- mean are not allies or friends of mine, in one case not anyone's at all; the mere fact that Renegade tolerates their existence on her blog doesn't mean jack shit other than that's her comments policy) being rude/mean Internets assholes to you, fanboying mainstream porn actresses and/or yeah, sometimes saying wince-inducing garden variety sexist crap and/or shit I just plain don't agree with, still really not equivalent to SEXUALLY ASSAULTING A PASSED OUT WOMAN. And hey, guess what, any of 'em ever does? I'll be first in line with the pitchforks and torches. I'll just have to have my puppet strings pulled by someone else, I -guess-.

But the fact that you apparently can't tell the difference between a predator like Kyle and someone who just happens to read Playboy or whatever and is mean to you and/or your precious ideology? Or, more likely I suspect, are pretending you don't see it for your own grudgetastic reasons? What's that old joke again?

"What's the difference between chicken stew and chicken shit?"

"I don't know, what?"

"Remind me never to go over to lunch at your house."

Not that that was ever on the menu. But, -really.- How fucking petty can you -be-?

p.s. no, dear Heart,

I really shouldn't bother, but since we're all about lies and the lying liars and all.

She fisks:

Examples of what I’m talking about from the pro-porn/prostitution side about anti-porn/anti-prostitution men:

I find what appears to me at first to be yet another garden variety (as these things go, there aren’t actually THAT many of them I don’t think) male radical feminist blog… Since I’m in the mood to snark, I read and roll my eyes a bit: yeah, your classic: all of 22 years old and teddibly teddibly earnest,

Male radical feminists (note, I don’t think a man can be a feminist or a radical feminist, but I think they can be allies, and the good ones don’t identify as feminists in any event, but whatever) are steretoyped as young (hence naive) and then the diminutive and effeminate “teddibly teddibly earnest”. Mr. Magoo comes to mind, or maybe Stewie on Family Guy.

hetboy dweeb fan[boying]** …creepy and risible in a milquetoast way at best

I mean, how much more unmasculine is it possible to be than to be a hetboy dweeb milquetoast, especially with the “que” spelling?

squeaky clean,

A man cannot be ”squeaky clean” and still be a man. It violates Section 34(b)(9) of the Codes of Manhood. Real men (not the anti-porn/anti-prostitution kind) are sweaty, dirty, stinky and hairy (thus they cannot be “squeaky”, too much hair). Squeaky-clean is for :::shudder::: GIRLS.

“articulate,”

Real men, not the anti-porn/prostitution kind, are not articulate. They are strong silent types who brood in their caves, their steely masculine silences interrupted only by the occasional grunt, belch, spit or blowing their noses onto the ground.

nice trimmed fingernails and suchlike,

Everybody knows the hands of any self-respecting man are dirty and rough with filthy fingernails from working under the hoods of 4×4s.

In other words, a man who opposes pornography and prostitution is less than a man and therefore deserves to be treated as women are treated by misogynists, be the misogynists male or female.

**I made ze error when I first wrote that as "fangirling."

This is my quote she's fisking. Without attribution, of course.

I mean, yes, I am DEEPLY invested in preserving REAL MANHOOD, the strong, silent, hairy, truck drivin' kind; isn't that completely obvious from everything I've ever written? And of course, I am all about upholding the gender binary; unlike, oh, say...Heart.

Kevin Aviance salutes the Patriarchy, as indeed do we all

Does it actually -hurt-, all those contortions?

And yes, being nice and cleancut and self-abnegating and -tearfully repentant-: you know, maybe, just maybe, the point -here- being that while it -might- earn you disparagement among the MRA's or even Hell's Angels (oddly enough, none of those are -here-), it -does- tend to make a man more plausible -when posing as a Friend To Abused Women-, don't you think, hm?

"Let's see; who should we pick for RA/earnest anti-porn lecturer/rape crisis counselor, hm? Should it be that degenerate looking man with the battered leather jacket, Harley, and vulgar, coarse language? (Or, for that matter, even the seven foot tall, flamboyantly sexual & clearly male drag queen?) Oh, no no no: he's SCARY, he's -not safe.- Let's go with Kyle here! He seems like such a nice young man; he's polite, soft-spoken, never gets angry, the compleat Boy Scout; why, he wouldn't even hurt a fly."

See?


Kyle Payne, radically unmasculine and Friend To Women, three days after the guilty plea


Ah yes, and while we're at it: let's make sure transgendered people aren't allowed to counsel women, or that trans women be allowed in womens' spaces, ever. Right, some people? They sound like "camp queens," after all; they're -weird- and SCARY, unless they can pass, -maybe-, and -real- women find that traumatizing. For that matter, non-trans women who strip and voluntarily perform in porn and say nasty, angry things, well, they're probably dangerous too, right?

christ.


p.s. oh, and yes, absolutely, I am only outraged about Kyle Payne as a roundabout way to make the world safer for ze pr0nz and my patriarchal puppet masters; it couldn't just be that I or Renegade or any of the other nasty, scary, pornified perverts think he's an abusive, still-dangerous piece of shit who needs to be taken down because, you know, he IS?

*

Yes, technically that was a rhetorical question. Obviously.

And now, off to ask my wall why it's peeling in such an unpleasant manner.

ETA: Thanks for this, from the SAFER blog: Kyle Payne and Screening for Sexual Assault Advocates.

p.s. Dear allies of various sorts: you know,

there's really no need to do this, either.

The troll encapsulated.

Some people go to the Bible for their clever and profound illustrations of Universal Truths; others find Shakespeare more satisfying. Being of more vulgar stuff, I find this suits my current needs, once more, with feeling:

Attention, attention must finally be paid. Again.

("D'Artagnan! How dare you talk to me that way, you...!")

O all right then, twist my rubber dwama/trainwreckspotting addict arm. Heart's got a new blog up

"to challenge and refute the attacks on me, on radical feminists and radical feminism on the internet."

I figure it'd be remiss to not at least point the way, all things considered.** So far it looks like the first few posts are about "the attacks on me," but I expect she'll get around to the rest of "radical feminists" and "radical feminism" and "on the Internet" shortly.

I will not be allowing comments on this blog; it is intended to serve as a resource. I will post each lie individually giving it its own post, so that a compendium is compiled, both of the lies and, indirectly, of the liars who tell the lies. I envision this as a sort of “Snopes” to which people can be referred whenever someone repeats or spreads disinformation.

Really? I envision it as a sort of Checkers speech as delivered by Time Cube guy, myself. I also envision you being just about ready for your closeup...

The lies, attacks, slander and defamation will come to an end.

Um...okay! This Will Come To An End! You Will Stop Looking At Me Funny! And then: EXTERMINATE! EXTERMINAAAAATE...!

no, no, sorry, wouldn't want to spread any more lies or slander: Heart is not, repeat, NOT a Dalek. Not even a LITTLE bit. Get that out of your heads right now. Severely.

my comments speak for themselves.

That they do, Heart. That, they most definitely do.

**see, Heart, even if you change your mind and the post after the fact, if you publish the post with links to someone's blog, it still shows up in one's Technorati stats. like this, see?

#
Lie No. 2: “Heart Has Said Women of Color Oppress Her/Are Morphing
Into Her Oppressor”
http:/ fightthelies.wordpress.com/2008/06/24/lie-no-2-heart-...

morphing into her oppressor’.” Inventers, tellers, and spreaders of
this lie: Encyclopedia Dramatica (which basically tells only lies,
but still, it tells this one specifically so I am including it)
drakyn, belledame, bintalshamsa, lisa harney, veronica, aradhana,
Trinity, Renegade Evolution* Truth: I do not believe, have never
believed, have never stated that women of color “oppress” me or any
other white woman or white women. I do not believe in
9 hours ago in Fight the Lies · Authority: 1

# Author unknown
Lie No. 1: “Heart is ‘Anti-Trans’ or ‘Transphobic’”
http:/ fightthelies.wordpress.com/2008/06/24/lie-heart-is-an...

Lie: “Heart is ‘Anti-Trans’ or Transphobic” Inventers, tellers, and
spreaders of this lie: snowe, anacas, dorktastic, drakyn, belledame,
snugglebitch, piny, who has blogged at Feministe, box3, bintalshamsa,
armchairshrink, Mandolin of Alas a Blog, lisa harney, marti abernathy
*, shannon* Truth: I believe that transgender persons should enjoy
full civil and human rights with all

Sadly, that excerpt is all that comes up in the stats, so we may never know why Renegade, Marti Abernathy and Shannon were asterisked. I'm sure they'll each be devastated.

ETA: snerk.