Feminist is a Contranym

Posted in Dumb Ideas Girls Have on April 20th, 2010 by bl1y

Thanks to those of you who voted me in the Feministe’s Next Top Troll competition, but unfortunately I didn’t come anywhere remotely close to winning.  Freaking 6% of the vote.

I should probably chalk this loss up to the pitiful power of my internet celebrity (come on people! if Stephen Colbert can win competitions to have a part of the International Space Station named after him, I should be able to win a lousy internet poll!), but I’m going to blame this on the fact that I wasn’t actually trolling with my comment.

As I explained earlier, I wasn’t trolling, but rather just pointing out that feeling like you aren’t lusted after sexually is basically the daily norm for all but a few men.  Surprisingly, several of the readers came to my defense, arguing that not only was I not trolling, I had a legitimate point to make.  While women complain about being looked at too sexually, most men would love to get just a little bit of that type of attention.  Just look at the way nudity is used in movies:

Naked female butt = Sexy.

Naked male butt = Funny.

Here’s my favorite comment from one of the readers:

I do believe this guy’s insecurities are sincere, and men as well as women are victims of body-shaming. But, yeah…”men are body-shamed, too!” is not really helpful, denies the existence of sexism, and is also an awesome silencing technique.

Wow!  I never knew my comment was so loaded with meaning.  I should be a freaking poet!

Alright lady, here’s a basic course in English and logical reasoning skills.  If I’m arguing that a similar or corresponding problem exists for men as it does for women, I can’t possibly be denying the problem facing women.  To say “we have it bad, too” acknowledges that you have it bad, and simply says that we’re all in the same boat together.  When a Mexican says to a black man, “Hey soul-hombre, we got it bad, too,” and the black guy replies “Yeah, but at least we ain’t Arabs,” they’re not denying that any of their groups is discriminated against, they’re accepting that each of them has the same problem.

This just goes to show the sort of Us v. Them mentality that infects a lot of mainstream feminism.  They’re not interested in working out solutions or exploring what is actually going on.  They just want to fight and they want to win, and they can’t win unless there’s a loser, and that loser has to be men.

There are, of course, a lot of feminists who are actually interested in fighting sexism in whatever form it takes, and hoorah for them.  It sucks they get lumped in with the people who disguise their bigotry with equality.

And, just to really drive home how closed minded, intolerant, and hypocritical some of these women are, let me tell you how the troll contest ended.  I got ban-hammered.  Now, of course it’s the right of anyone who operates a blog to allow or disallow whatever comments they want.  But, the right to do something is not the same as the right to avoid criticism.  Here’s the comment that got me banned:

[Mod note: warning for trans readers re: misgendering]

Imagine an M->F transgendered person made the complaint that as a man he feels he can’t experience the kind of sexiness that might be available to him as a female.

Still trolling?

Before getting into the substance of the comment, be sure to take a good look at the warning the moderators posted.  Warning for transgendered readers!  This douchenozzle  refers to a (hypothetical) man who desires to be a woman as “he!”  If you don’t avert your eyes, your fragile trans-sensibilities may be permanently upset!

Look, you dumb cow, if you’ve survived one day being transgendered, you have a thick enough skin to not have your life shattered over a pretty benign post on the blogosphere.  You don’t need some random wannabe-do-gooder protecting you like you’re a little child.  Trannies are capable of getting ticked-off for themselves, and when they do, they do it with knives, not faux-progressivism.

But, on to the substance.  It’s a legitimate freaking question!  Do you really think the readers of Feministe would have been so quick to suggest that my complaint stemmed from a dysfunctional penis (sexist and ablist! sweet!) if they believed I was transgendered?  Frack no!  The comments would have instantly been about how awful the world has been to me by imposing hetero-normativity and traditional masculinity, and how unfair it is that just because I was born male I wouldn’t get to experience what it’s like to be feminine.

Call a self-righteous hypocritical bigot out, and down comes the ban-hammer.

Now, the moderators claimed that I was banned for improper pronoun usage in referring to a trans woman as “he,” because the proper thing to do is refer to a trans woman as “she.”

Says who?  Katherine McKinnon?  Carol Gilligan?  Some other High Holy Priestess of All Things Gender?

Sorry, but no, this isn’t France, this is America, and in America we don’t have to take orders from some grammar pontiff.

Some trans gender people live as their sex assigned at birth, not as the gender they want to be, and they are well within their rights to do so.  Take, for example, Eddie Izzard.  Yes, he dresses up in women’s clothing for a lot of his shows and pretty clearly wants to be a woman, but he refers to himself as a man, wears men’s clothes more than women’s, has grown facial hair, and makes a hideous woman (but a decent looking man, which is why he probably dresses as a man so much).  He’s even kept an unambiguously masculine name.  I refer to Eddie Izzard as “he,” because that’s how he generally presents himself, and how I think he would prefer I talk about him.

Trans gender comes in a thousand different flavors, …sweet, delicious flavors…  …And there’s no one set of rules, grammar or otherwise, that is going to fit everyone.  Sanctimonious women’s studies professors can’t create any rule that is going to trump mine: if you live as a man, I call you “he,” and if you live as a woman, I call you “she.”  That’s it, and I’ll be shocked if anyone finds a system that’s more fair or tolerant.

I grew up in the South and so I, like most people of my generation from here, have very little patience for bigotry of any kind.  When you come from an area with the sort of stigma we have, you are more conscious of the issues and work doubly hard to avoid repeating the mistakes of prior generations.

So, if you find Feministe to be as idiotic and self-righteous as I do, feel free to contact the person responsible for putting me on “permanent moderation,” Chally: chally.zeroatthebone@gmail.com

And PS , you dumb fracking bovine, despite your hand-wringing over accidentally referring to a “trans woman” as a “transwoman,” the polite way to refer to a man who lives his life as a woman is not “trans woman,” it’s just “woman.”  But hey, I guess it’s cool to marginalize the very people you think you’re sticking up for, so long as you treat them like children in a very public way and refer to yourself as “one of those scary feminists.”

Tags: , , , , ,

They See Me Trollin’

Posted in Uncategorized on April 16th, 2010 by bl1y

They hatin’

They try to catch me postin’ dirty.

Over at our favorite hack feminist site, Feministe, there is now a Feministe’s Next Top Troll competition, and yours truly has been nominated.  Here’s the comment they chose for me:

People don’t compliment you on your body, and when people look at your they think “Oh my god, what a weirdo. Doesn’t she know what her body looks like”…

You just discovered what it feels like to be a typical man.

It’s not really clear on the Feministe page, but the first paragraph there is a quote from the article I was responding to.  The article was complaining about how if you’re fat woman or a disabled woman or whatever you don’t get compliments on your body, you aren’t looked at sexually, yada yada yada.  My comment is just the last line, that (with rare exception) this is how men live every single day.

So folks, please go over to Feministe and vote for BL1Y.  I don’t know why, but I want to win this thing.  Go vote now!

Tags: , ,

Chally Ho!

Posted in Uncategorized on April 8th, 2010 by bl1y

Chally is one of those scary, scary feminists you’ve heard about.

You know, the ones that make ridiculous, over the top claims that sound great to other feminists but don’t stand up to basic reasoning and logic.  She wrote on Feministe today about a survey in Australia covering people’s attitudes towards domestic violence.

I find the notion that anyone other than the person subject to a crime can do any excusing – or forgiving or anything along those lines – to be deeply wrong. It is of course not specified in the survey question who is doing the excusing, which tends to suggest that there’s some kind of objective decision-making power to be accessed: here, let we the public determine whether the violence committed against you was the okay sort or not, and what response is in order!

Yeah! Outlaw juries! Burn down the legislature!

Look, scary feminist lady, the whole idea of a criminal justice system is that the public (through its elected representatives in the legislature and peer-juries) determines what violence against you was okay, what was criminal, and what response is in order.  If we left it all up to the victim, pretty much every crime would carry the death penalty.  Okay, Chally does acknowledge this:

Legal punishments and such are up to the state, but forgiveness? The emotions around the events? All that stuff? Not up to not the state, not members of the public, but just those who have been harmed.

Actually, forgiveness and excusing your actions is, and should be, the domain of the state (as well as the individual).  The whole idea behind defenses and the intent element in criminal codes is that the state will forgive or excuse certain actions.  But not if Chally had her way.  Bye bye self defense.  Bye bye youthful offender.  Bye bye battered women’s syndrome.

Okay…maybe we should get rid of that last one.

Tags: ,

Illegal Abortions Now Illegal

Posted in Uncategorized on February 23rd, 2010 by bl1y

The Utah state House and Senate have passed a law that would criminalize the procurement of an illegal abortion.  (The law does not penalize abortions obtained through regular legal avenues.)   Basically, the law makes it illegal to ask your boyfriend to hit you in the stomach to terminate your pregnancy.

Seems pretty reasonable, but plenty of raging panties are already bundled up about it.  Feministe.com is running an article with the headline “Utah bill would criminalize miscarriage.“  Here’s the complaint from NYU Law grad Jill:

The Utah miscarriage law is understandable because it targets women who intended to have miscarriages.

I understand that. We do hold people more culpable for things that they do on purpose; we also hold people accountable for a lot of things that they do negligently. My question, though, isn’t with the punishment aspect, but with the activism aspect. Let’s say that we take anti-choicers on their word that they really, truly believe that a fertilized egg is a unique, individual human being, and that the death of that egg is like the death of a person. If that’s the truth, then why no activism around trying to find a cure for the close to 50 percent of fertilized eggs that naturally don’t implant, and are flushed out of the woman’s body? Sure, it’s not intentional, but if there were some disease that killed 50 percent of all five-year-olds, I’m pretty sure we’d be doing something about it, no?

I realize this is all pretty far afield from the actual Utah legislation, but it’s illustrative, I think, insofar as it demonstrates that the concern here isn’t really about fetuses or life or any of that. It’s about punishing women.

This isn’t at all about “punishing women.”  It’s already a crime for a third party to end the life of your fetus (outside of consensual abortion, of course).  All this does it make the law more fair by punishing women who obtain illegal abortions.

Tags: , , , ,

Mark Ingram Isn’t Pro-Life, Babies Are Pro-Ingram

Posted in Uncategorized on February 2nd, 2010 by bl1y

I don’t really care too much about the Super Bowl.  For me football season ends with the BCS Championship (RMFT!), but the Tim Tebow ad looks like it’ll be interesting to watch.  And, it’ll provide lots of feminists getting their panties in bundles and saying lots of stupid things.  Most excellent blog fodder.

The popular women-first blog Feministe is claiming that Pam Tebo(Tim’s mom) , wants to take the right to choose away from women, and that the ad is anti-choice.

Well, the ad hasn’t been released and not a lot is known about the specifics of what it will say.  However, all reports so far have pointed that it will simply be Pam Tebow discussing how when she was pregnant with Tim she had complications and was urged to get an abortion, but she decided to have the child anyways, and the ad will urge women to choose to carry their children to term.

Urging someone to make a specific choice is very far from trying to take away their choice.  Otherwise, a campaign urging people to use condoms would also be anti-choice, but of course that’s absurd.

Since the rhetoric surrounding abortion has become so completely retarded, let me explain a few things:

No one (except a few whackoes) is anti-choice.  Pretty much everyone supports certain choices, like contraception or waiting to have sex.  It’s a question of which choices you want.

No one (except a few whackoes) is completely pro-choice.  Infanticide has been a means of getting rid of unwanted infants in several societies, but even super extreme feminists are likely to be against infanticide.  Most moderates are against certain forms of late term or partial-birth abortions.

PS: On a personal note, Tuck Febow, you big crybaby.

Tags: , , ,