Right. So I guess I only have a few things to say about this…

Posted: January 15, 2010 in Slut Shaming & Whorephobia, WTF???

Grumble.

I don’t watch MTV.  So I cannot comment on the show.  But you know, it strikes me as amazingly wonderful when women who, oh, you know, care about women, bust on their fashion sense and bodies- fake or not.   A long, long, long time ago in that other blog I wrote about how I was just not down with women cracking on other women’s appearances, no matter what they were….guess what?  I’m still not.  I think it is fucking shitty to bust on a woman if she is overweight, or if she has acne, or if she has stretch marks, and likewise, I think it is shitty to bust on her if she is thin, or has big boobs, or big hair, or dresses in low cut shirts.   Same shit, different day.   Some folk- feminist or not- just cannot deal or cope without ripping other women down because of the way they look or dress.  Sad really…as if ripping on a size three gal in booty shorts with big boobs is gonna make anything better or make anyone truly more comfortable in their own skin.  How fucking hard is that to get, really?

And you know…I bloody well DARE someone to actually PROVE that stripping or stripper like work out routines- think what you will of them on other levels- are not Work Outs.  No one has to like them, no one has to think they are empowering, I so don’t give a fuck about that, but if one is gonna claim they are not a good cardio workout, I am gonna say they are a fucking idiot who knows nothing…and I’m gonna be right.

Comments
  1. hexy says:

    … wait.

    it’s a show about eight people most of us would call guidos partying at the Jersey Shore for a summer.

    What??

    Uh, no, ND. No, we wouldn’t.

    • Ernest Greene says:

      I have some friends from Bay Ridge in front of whom I doubt anyone would use that word. But then I guess it must be hip and cool to toss off anit-Italian epithets because ND says so. Her dittoheads never fail to line up and cheer, regardless of how stupid and mean-spirited her latest screed may be.

  2. Roy Kay says:

    To be honest, no measure of disdain and hatred from 9-2 would surprise me. She’s probably cheering the earthquake in Haiti along with Pat Robertson right now just as soon as she can find a RadFem hook for it.

    • Ren says:

      “She’s probably cheering the earthquake in Haiti along with Pat Robertson right now just as soon as she can find a RadFem hook for it.”

      Way Out Of Line. Period.

  3. rootietoot says:

    she lost credibility with me a LONG time ago. All I hear from her is *blahblahblah* (makes a little hand puppet) The whole picking on people for their looks, that’s SOO 7th grade.

    I bought a DVD of a stripperesque workout a while back. You’re not kidding, it’s hard. Quite the flexitbility making, too.

  4. rootietoot says:

    left a comment there, odds on if it will make it past moderation?

  5. Ouyang Dan says:

    Um…WORD.

    That is all.

    When you are right, you are right.

  6. The body-fascism in ND’s (or Integrit-E as she called herself for giggles in the piece) writing is appalling.

    That said, I think there is a valid point in her article that the product is being sold on the basis that the most fun a(ny) woman can have (or, in the subtext, should want) is to look and act sexy.

    Which I think is problematic.

    On a completely different note, that Flirty Girl Fitness Pole sounds like a bunch of lawsuits just waiting to happen (seriously, what kind of material can it be made from if it’s available for just $1? And going to sustain the weight of a human person lifting themselves on it? And what about making sure it’s installed properly and safely!?)

    I left a comment over there, dressed it up with “oh, I think you have a good point”, and then dropped a note at the end to point out that her attitude to the appearance of the women in Jersey Shore was not much better than the fat-shaming involved in the advert she complained about. Who knows – it might even sneak past the radar ;-)

  7. Nine Deuce says:

    Roy Kay – are you fucking serious? Unbelievable.

    • Ernest Greene says:

      Faux outrage from the person who suggests others off themselves as a rhetorical flourish. How original. Nesflash: routine verbal cruelty can be damaging to one’s credibility as a humanist.

  8. Nine Deuce says:

    Hexy – I posted this on my page and changed that wording as I agree with you.

    It has come to my attention that a few people have a problem with the use of the word “guido.” My word choice/diction was off. It said “people most of us would call guidos.” I don’t call people guidos, nor do my friends, so I shouldn’t have said that. The people on the show, however, do call themselves guidos and guidettes, so I picked the term up from there. I am also familiar with the appellation as applied to the subculture the people on the show belong to, so I know a lot of people might use it in that sense. Still, I don’t, so I’ve changed the wording.

  9. Nine Deuce says:

    Ren – I am not the one presenting a normative body type, the commercial is. They’re the ones putting the message out that a woman has to be thin to be worthy. As for my comments about J-Woww, she has the most absurd fake breasts I’ve ever seen. They’re just crazy. I’m not making fun of the way someone was born, but of their choices. Her clothing is also hilarious, and I don’t think it’s the end of the world for me to say so. Dressing sexy, should you choose to do it, doesn’t bother me, but dressing like a cartoon version of sexy is funny, and I’m allowed to say so. You can feel free to make fun of any clothing choice out there, because it’s a choice. I won’t get mad if you think the way I dress is funny. There is a huge difference between ripping on someone’s weight and their outfit, and I did not say anything derogatory about anyone’s weight, but rather just reported the message in the commercial.

    SE – Nice try, but I don’t allow comments from attempted rapists or people who fantasize about sexually murdering women on my blog. Also, I can read.

    • You can read, but your reading comprehension is sadly lacking. I have never attempted to rape anyone.

      I once, while in a state of severe mental illness came close to doing so, but I did not cross that line.

      And if my fantasies are reason for you to judge me incompetent to comment on your blog, then I guess you think it’s just hunky-dory that a British court just refused to prosecute a rape case because the victim had sexual fantasies of group sex?

    • Ren says:

      Hum. Damn us people with normative body types. We should be stoned to death…oh wait, too short to be normative, too many scares, but otherwise…

      You know…I like her fake breasts. Apparently, she likes them too. You don’t have to, but you know, saying she looks like a clown (ala comment to Joan) is, hey, an asshole move. You know, I’m an asshole, but not in that mode. And ya know, as far as people dress?

      Hell, I dress like the lost Tremor Brother. I’m not going to rip on ANYONE’S wardrobe…if they like it, hey, wear it, more power to ‘em and I hope they are happy in it, whatever it is, my personal taste or not….I’m sure as hell not going to make fun of them for it.

      I find it kind of amusing…I say, flat out, that its not cool for women to bust on other womens looks…and I’m the fucking asshole. You do just that, and because its a cheap shot at a gal in skimpy clothes with fake tits…woo hoo, awesome (and so damn feminist!).

      Good thing I think so much of what rad fems spout, especially about shit like this, is a fucking joke. Not necessarily a good or funny one, but a joke never the less.

  10. Joan Kelly says:

    Hey Ren (and ND if you read here again) –

    I left a comment at ND’s place too. I feel like I understand both sides – so who even fucking knows, now that I think about it, why I’m chiming in at all. Ah well.

    I know when I first encountered you on the internet, Ren, I felt like mostly what I ever saw was you only saying defending-type things about the sex industry and beauty culture, etc., and I got annoyed, and then was snarky, and then we didn’t like each other. I did not write as much – and perhaps still don’t, for some people’s tastes – about how I’m not keen on someone with my beliefs (radical feminism) actually mocking other women for things besides their words or actions, if either are misogynist (rather than just sadly stupid or something).

    I felt uncomfortable too, reading the blurbs about a couple of the Jersey Shore girls – and ND, I agree that of course you have the right to make fun of whatver you want, especially on your blog. What I don’t understand is why someone else’s misfortune (getting a terrible boob job) is something enjoyable to make fun of them for – and even though okay a short version is “well she did it to herself,” the thing is, it’s actually *what she looks like now*. It’s not like she’s in the midst of giving a blow job to roy kay up there and your ripping on that could have even an imaginary effect of getting her to stop. It’s her body now.

    And as someone who’s had bad skin, and who’s been a really fucked up dresser in my youth (from weirdly-at-times revealing clothes to horrible horrible lack of fashion sense or any guess at what would even look flattering on me), I just wish you wouldn’t mock those things.

    I don’t think either of you is evil for where you stand on any of this, just felt provoked to say my piece.

    • Ren says:

      end all beat all and what I have always said is I do not like it when women bust on other women’s looks…whatever those looks are. That’s not changed with me at all.

  11. Joan Kelly says:

    and because I’m already here – I *do* tihink the ND-is-dancing-on-dead-Haitians’-graves thing was a cheap and obviously ludicrous shot.

    • Roy Kay says:

      Cheap and ludicrous. Yes.

      But the next post of honest sympathy, not cut 10:1 with preening pity from 9-2 will be the first. And it’s not like she won’t rope anything into her monolithic worldview.

      ————–

      In some ways I agree with 9-2 on the stupidity of fashion. I still look askance as bundles being spent on tuxedos, the fine points of white tie vs. black, and why women spend so much time and money on white outfits they will wear once to their wedding (or the bride’s wedding) and then be stuck with mothballing forever. I just don’t need a Patriarchy(R) to blame it on.

  12. Ernest Greene says:

    When it comes to cheap shots, ND is Annie Oakley.

  13. Nine Deuce says:

    Joan – I wasn’t making fun of her for having a bad boob job, I was marveling at the fact that she looks to have chosen to get the hugest implants possible. It looks absurd. I also dressed like a weirdo when I was younger, and I probably wouldn’t make fun of anyone for that. The thing about making fun of fashion is, if I’m making fun of someone for not looking hot, then I’m a dick doing patriarchy’s work, but if I make fun of someone for aggressively objectifying herself to the point that she looks like a clown, I don’t think it’s quite the same deal. I suppose that, all in all, it’s probably a little bit silly for me, as an adult, to keep making fun of people for doing things I deem uncool, but it entertains me. In any case, I actually like J-Woww. She’s a total badass and her behavior is bewildering in a really cool way.

  14. Nine Deuce says:

    Ernest Greene – Peddling anti-woman propaganda can also damage one’s credibility as a humanist. I’m almost amused at the fact that people continue to bring up the “kill yourself” thing. For fuck’s sake, I wasn’t telling submissives to do it, I was saying that the world might be a better place without men who like to see women hurt. I still think so, and the fact that you bring it up every chance you get in order to play the martyr is pretty funny. Let’s be serious, here. Who does more damage to real women, me or you? You can do whatever kind of transparent mental gymnastics you want to to pretend you’re all about women’s rights and freedom, but it’s pretty obvious what that entails for you: the freedom to suck dick for money. I think I prefer female feminists who aren’t pornographers.

    • Ernest Greene says:

      Well, well, finally a direct response, and utterly predictable at that. Peddling anti-woman propaganda? I’m not in the propaganda business. That’s your department.

      Glad you’re amused that those whose deaths you think would make the world a better place continue to find that view objectionable, and the way you stand by that opinion guarantees you plenty of future amusement. Suggesting that some people’s lives are expendable because of their sexual orientations is a regular laugh riot to a certain sort of individual and I have no doubt you’ll continue to do so periodically, as you have here again, if somewhat more circumspectly.

      I find it hilarious that you apply this view to dominant BDSM players but not to submissives. As most BDSM players go back and forth between roles, I wonder at what point you think they qualify for self-extermination.

      My refusal to let you slide with that kind of hate speech has nothing to do with any feeling of martyrdom on my part. You have exactly zero direct impact on my life. Much as you might wish it otherwise, you present no threat to me whatsoever. I’m hardly likely to kill myself based on your suggestion, and I seriously doubt anyone else will either. It’s still a vile thing to say about a group of people you have utterly mischaracterized and missed no opportunity to scorn and defame, irrespective of your self-admitted lack of any personal experience with any significant number of them. But then, that’s what pro-am hate-mongers do, isn’t it? Who knows? Keep up the breezy patter and maybe you’ll land a book deal out of it. Or better yet, a drive-time talk radio slot.

      Indeed, let’s pretend you can be serious for a moment and take on the question of who does more damage to real women. I didn’t realize this was a contest, or that you consider anything you say or do damaging to women you consider real in any way at all, but okay, I’ll go there with you.

      For the record, I don’t consider anything I do to be damaging to women – and BTW I consider all women real, including sex workers with breast implants – or I would quit doing what I do. If you have evidence to the contrary involving me personally, I invite you to bring it forth. Otherwise, it’s just another blanket accusation unsupported by fact. Though you often pretend otherwise, I suspect you do have some working knowledge of what constitutes an empirically demonstrable fact.

      To extend fairness to you that I can’t imagine will be reciprocated, I don’t think you do actual damage to women either, other than ridiculing and degrading those of whose behavior, occupation or appearance you disapprove. Sticks and stones, as the saying goes. You’re snide, mean-spirited and cruel to women in a way I would never be, but I give them credit for the ability to shrug off your spite pretty handily.

      You do not, in fact, know anything at all about me beyond what I do for a living and my outspoken refusal to let others spread vicious lies about it unchallenged, and you’re hardly in a position to judge how I define freedom for women or men, not that you allow reality to cloud your judgment as a general rule. I’m not going to explain myself or defend myself to you in any way. You’re just about the last person on earth whose opinion of my character matters in the slightest.

      As to what kind of feminists you prefer, that is entirely your business and of no concern to me whatsoever. It’s also of no concern to huge numbers of women who identify as feminists, including some who also happen to be pornographers.

      You can be as smug about it as you like and just keep right on laughing, but I’m going to continue calling you out on your habit of mixing political demagoguery with personal spite in savaging those about whom I care when the opportunity arises, and I’m certain you’ll provide me with that opportunity many times in the future.

      You get to say what you want and so do I. You may not like that feature of living in a pluralistic society, but that’s the kind you live in and I doubt your ability to change that, or much of anything else, however ardent your desire to remake the world in your own image.

      • Nine Deuce says:

        You poor bastard. I’m totally out to get you and it just isn’t fair!

        • Ernest Greene says:

          I am neither poor nor a bastard. Life is not fair. I do not believe you could tear yourself away from your own narcissism long enought to concentrate on really trying to get anybody in particular. You simply choose to despise people in wholesale lots. It’s so much easier that way, requiring much less intellectual effort.

          Of course, historically that way of doing things has had some bad outcomes, but I’m sure you’re hating all the right targets and not just me, so a better tomorrow will surely result.

          You’re really not as good at the sarcasm thing as I expected. Is that all you’ve got?

    • Oh, so let me get this straight, ND…your policy of going off on straight male dominants in consensual D/s relationships as mere “sadists” who only exist to rape and abuse women, while not even allowing real male doms to defend themselves and mocking their sub “slaves” who do insist on their right to speak their own experiences….that doesn’t do damage to “real women”??

      And the fact that you spend every chance to post here on Ren’s blog to make even more crackbacks on the male regulars who post here, yet would not even give them the chance over there at your place to defend themselves without unleashing the GenderBorg fury….but hey, it’s all OUR fault for being men and wanting women serving our dicks, right???

      Sorry, Nine Deuce, but you don’t own the Internet and certainly not this blog..and those of us who see your bullshit for what it is retain our right to call you out on it.

      I’m sure that your friends will be ready with another “Boycott Ren Ev until she throttles the evil misogynist men whom she enables” thread…but too bad.

      Anthony

      • Dw3t-Hthr says:

        Oh, it’s been clear to me for a long time what ND thinks of submissive women; she doesn’t stoop to reply to us. Nope, it’s all about the mens for her.

        Pity she doesn’t care enough about women to respond to our stories. It might give her a little feminist cred.

    • Megan says:

      Who does more damage to real women, me or you?

      You do, ND. Hands down.

  15. Nine Deuce says:

    And when did I ever call myself a humanist? I don’t care about humans unless they are humane themselves, and that rules out sadists, does it not?

    • I don’t care about humans unless they are humane themselves, and that rules out sadists, does it not?

      No, it really doesn’t.

      But you wouldn’t understand about that. And right now, I’m too angry at you to try to explain.

      • Ernest Greene says:

        That did strike me as a rather odd declaration coming from a self-styled crusader for social justice. I guess only those who meet her definition of humane would qualify for liberation. Sort of a strange conflation of Calvinism and Leninism.

    • hexy says:

      No, it doesn’t.

    • “And when did I ever call myself a humanist? I don’t care about humans unless they are humane themselves”

      And, if we are to take that as a rule, why should anybody care about you?

    • Ren says:

      Hey, I’m rather sadistic, but you know, if you happened to be in a burning car, I’d make an attempt to pull you out.

      • Ernest Greene says:

        You’re going to ruin our bad reputation with that kind of behavior. Don’t you know we’re supposed to throw gasoline on burning cars?

        I mean, everyone knows sadists of all sorts are indiscriminately brutal, amoral and incapbable of humane action. In fact, we barely qualify as human, much less humane. If we weren’t so completely consistent in our cruelty, we’d be much harder to dismiss with reductive cliches. Can’t have any annoying nuances fucking up The Grand Theory of How It Is, now can we?

        • Ernest Greene says:

          I will admit to being somewhat incapable of spelling correctly in these little black boxes occasionally, but I’m not sure this is particularly sadistic. Hard to say, since that’s the defining characteristic of my entire personality.

        • Ren says:

          Hey, I am only a raging inhuman indescriminate brute on tuesdays! (snerk)….

  16. Nine Deuce says:

    Ernest Greene – Give me a fucking break. Roy Kay wins hands down. He’s compared me to Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and now Pat Robertson. At least my comparisons are accurate and don’t reek of a complete ignorance of history and just about everything else in the world. Your victim complex is so striking that I almost can’t believe you’re not an MRA (that I know of).

    • Ernest Greene says:

      Hm. Yet another contest I’m surprised you’d care to join. Roy Kay can certainly speak for himself, but when it comes to odious comparisons, you’re certainly no slouch. Your use of them is so common I can’t be bothered to clutter the bandwidth here by repeating them. As for the accuracy of your comparisons, that is an assertion of which I prefer to remain dubious.

      You’re the second person to accuse me in a similar forum of having a victim complex. I guess that’s the smack du jour. After you’ve ripped someone up and down, by name or category, any protestation to the contrary neatly drops the object of vitriol, ridicule and calumny into the “victim complex” box. How convenient. I guess some people just deserve that kind of treatment and should learn to relax and enjoy it, eh?

      And your implication that I’m an MRA is equally unoriginal. Heard that one too. It’s as false as the rest of the tired invective you spit in my general direction.

      I’d expect fresher material from such a creative thinker.

    • Oh, bu this is rich..the woman who allows her blog to enable the likes of Luckynickl, delphyne, Laurelin, Stiormcloud, and Factcheckme is moaning and groaning about RoyKay and Ernest calling her BS out….and then breaking out the “victim complex” and “MRA” cards at those she and her gang so brusquely assaults.

      Better replace the glass surrounding your house, ND, before you throw stones at others. Just sayin’.

      Anthony

      • Ernest Greene says:

        Yes, well, it’s become all the fashion to accuse me of portraying myself as a Persecuted Victim, which I believe has been trade-marked by the other side in this argument, and as someone who respects intellectual property, I wouldn’t want to infringe on their claim. I suppose the intention is to humiliate me in some preposterous fashion on the assumption that any man would take offense at being portrayed as a whining cry-baby.

        No one who knows me would think for a heartbeat that I’m motivated out of self-pity or a desire for the sympathy of others. I’m pretty confident of my ability to take care of myself and I’ve been called much worse things in person by individuals one might actually have reason to fear than the tired liables ND and her pals trot out whenever my name comes up.

        But I do weary of being called a rapist, a trafficker, a pimp and a torturer and for reasons oft-stated and well understood, I take a zero-tolerance stance toward even vague and implied threats of violence from extremists of any stripe.

        What motivates me is not “a persecurtion complex” or a desire to be seen as a “martyr,” but something much simpler and more straightforward. It pisses me off when fools who have never met me and know absolutely nothing of me as a person tell rotten lies about me. Perhaps I should be above that sort of thing by now, but the knowledge that those lies can stick and influence the thinking of people who may one day have to decide whether or not I go to jail because of some picture I made rather than anything I actually did, I don’t feel I have that luxury.

        And in any case, I haven’t the inclination. I don’t like bullies and I learned a long time ago that bullies are also cowards best dealt with firmly and promptly. Trying to ignore them is taken as weakness and encouragement, so I back them down as soon as they start their routines. Overall, I think it works pretty well, strategically speaking.

        Much of the contempt I feel toward blowhards like ND lies in the fact that, while hurling charges of privileged this and privileged that at everyone else, they hide behind their own privilege of protected political speech, which is much better defended by The First Amendment for which they have so little regard than the kind of artistic expression in which I engage.

        Neither ND or any of her pals face even the most remote chance of spending a single night behind bars for anyting they say. Oh yes, speaking of persecution complexes, they’ve all been censored and silenced and smothered by the patriarchy, poor delicate, well-meaning souls that they are, but they can lash out any time they wish at anyone they choose at no peril to themselves whatsoever.

        On the other hand, I, a pampered instrument of patriarchal oppression who serves the interests of the ruling class with such evil effectivenes, may be hauled off to the slammer on any given day based on the whim of any prosecutor anywhere in the land as a reward for my services in helping keep all women down.

        I wonder if any of these dauntless radicals would ever post another word if they actually thought some significant legal consequences might come their way. I believe a few would, and for them I have a certain grudging respect.

        But as for those clearly using their blogs for purposes of self-advancement, I have no doubt that if the game became the least bit risky, they’d change their politics quicker than a dirty T-shirt.

        Meantime, who really benefits the most from the divisions their brand of toxic identity politics creates in the American left? When the domestic opposition is reduced to an exclusive club with almost no members and always ready to kick out the few remaining over the slightest ideological deviation, those in power sleep that much better.

        • rootietoot says:

          ” I, a pampered instrument of patriarchal oppression”
          Well, Ernest, so you *do* understand who you are, very good. (rolls eyes)

          “who really benefits the most from the divisions their brand of toxic identity politics creates in the American left?”
          Honestly? Only themselves, because it’s only amongst themselves that they have any sort of credibility. I see the whole Radfem thing as a silly circle jerk. I tried following their writings for a while, as an interested bystander because I was curious about what they had to say. However eventually their boring repetition and absolute inability to hear what people with different opinoins had to say (not to mention their disconcerting willingness to eat their young) made me think of harpies, and I quit.

          • Ernest Greene says:

            rootie,

            I should really do the same. I think it would be good for my mental health.

            • rootietoot says:

              I admit to trolling occasionally, because it’s fun, in a self-flagellating sort of way, like y’know…picking out a splinter or something.

              but honestly, they are not to be taken seriously. They just aren’t.

        • “On the other hand, I, a pampered instrument of patriarchal oppression who serves the interests of the ruling class with such evil effectivenes, may be hauled off to the slammer on any given day based on the whim of any prosecutor anywhere in the land as a reward for my services in helping keep all women down.”

          Yep. This is also my answer to several online feminists who over the last few months have complained about Ernest and others in the porn industry “playing victim”, while trying to set up anti-porn radical feminists as brave rebels against the status quo. I throw out this challenge to Nine Deuce or any other feminist who wants to take it up: show me *one* feminist, radical or otherwise, who has gone to jail, or faced other legal consequences, in any democratic country anytime in the last 40 years merely for something they’ve written or produced. Because I can point to several pornographers who are either in jail right now or are facing it, simply for the content of their films. And, in the case of Red Rose Stories, somebody who is on 5 years probation for written fiction. So what is the status quo here?

          And for a bonus, show me one sex-positive or sex worker activist who has had any kind of dialogue with law enforcement officials. Because I can point to several radical feminists who have done so, starting with Robert Jensen and Melissa Farley, who have addressed law enforcement groups in the last year or two.

          • Ernest Greene says:

            “I can point to several radical feminists who have done so, starting with Robert Jensen and Melissa Farley, who have addressed law enforcement groups in the last year or two.”

            Indeed, Melissa Farley has been quite busy on that front, helping to defeat Prop K in San Francisco and conducting her “research” on legal prostitution in Nevada with money granted by the Bush administration under the condition that any conclusions from such research in no way support the legalization of prostitution in any form.
            No doubt that research was of use to Donna Hughes and her neo-con feminist allies in the successful campaign to criminalize indoor prostitution in Rhode Island. That prohibition exposes prostitutes, particularly those in the dire economic circumstances that deprive them of the choice and agency attributed only to privileged sex workers by radical feminists, to greater physical danger and deprives them of even the most rudimentary protections of the criminal justice system is of no moment to Ms. Farley and her pals.
            And Farley’s effectiveness at covering the ass of the odious bent cop and rough trick Elliot Spitzer through her manipulation of her media connections at The NYT to shift responsibility for Spitzer’s corrupt behavior off of the actual perp and onto the general social evil of “Pornstitution” has no doubt helped oodles and bunches in his magical rehabilitation, as a result of which we must now see his despicable mug on CNN as a free-lance commentator, instead of in jail like the women he busted for prostitution-related offenses where he, unlike they, belongs.

            But it’s not like radical feminists do any harm to “real women.”

            • Ernest Greene says:

              But of course, ND disagrees with me on this:

              “You see, fundies try to limit women’s sexual agency, often by force. Feminists do not. Even radical ones. I can tell you all day long that I think you should do something different, but all I’m doing is trying to persuade you.”

              Anybody want to buy a bridge?

              • Oh, but Ernest, you just don’t get it, don’t you?? “Radical feminists” like Nine Deuce most certauly don’t want to limit women’s sexual agency, or to tell women how to live their lives….ohhhh, NOEZ, they just save that for Teh MEN. And they most certainly are only interested in “persuading” women who don’t agree with their analysis to their logic….if women want to disagree with them and continue to cohabitate with us rapists, murders, sadists and “victim blamers” (not to mention evil pornographers and perverts), well, that’s their fault.

                Right. And Ted Haggard doesn’t hate gay men, either, he’s just “persuading” them to leave their evil perverted ungodly AIDS-tainted “lifestyle” and get right with Jesus. You can always walk away, of course.

                Just like the equal right of rich and poor to sleep under bridges, right??

                Anthony

              • rootietoot says:

                as someone who self-identifies as a religious fundamentalist, I guess my sexual agency is limited because I believe in monogamous sex within marriage,for my ownself… but exactly *what* goes on within those boundaries is no one elses business. As for radical feminists not trying to limit agency…WHAT?! HAhaHA!!!1!! *oh dear…*

  17. Roy Kay says:

    >At least my comparisons are accurate and don’t reek of a complete ignorance of history

    You are apparently not aware of how “cultural revolutions” – from Malus Malefactorum to Mao work. They all arrogate primacy of wisdom to those on the inside of the movement and actively seek to deny dissenters the freedom to venture – through speech, printed word, or staged production – contrary views. Were you merely to exercise you rights to control you own blog, that would be amply within your (Acch! Patriarchy(R) alert!) property rights. It is that you advance that the state should actively suppress these “free speech” rights in others that puts you squarely in their league.

    But, perhaps I am over broad. So tell ya what. Point me to an “enlightened” era of history lead by censors and maybe I’ll cast you in a more favorable light. This way we avoid Godwin’s law altogether. Deal?

  18. Stone Fox says:

    i went and read that post, ren. my brain hurts. i don’t think i’ve seen anything so over-analyzed in a long time. jersey shore; it’s just a fucking show. it’s a show about a bunch of young people doing stupid things and trying to get laid. weren’t we all young, horny, and stupid? (i sure was. i’m surprised i never got arrested with some of the dumb shit i pulled.) yes, they are vapid. yes, they spend a lot of time looking in the mirror. so? they’re young. at 19 and 20 years old, they’re still babies. i cannot believe anyone would make such scathing judgments about people on a TV show. must be nice to be a perfect person.

    if i had the opportunity, time, babysitter, and money, i would take stripper exercise classes in a heartbeat. i would love to have the mad skillz to shake my moneymaker in my husband’s face (WITHOUT looking like a complete idiot) in order to spice up the ol’ routine.

  19. Nine Deuce says:

    Stone Fox – I didn’t analyze the show at all, I just reported the parts I thought were funny. You’re right, though, fuck analyzing anything. That shit’s for losers.

    • Stone Fox says:

      “You’re right, though, fuck analyzing anything. That shit’s for losers.”

      yeah.. you’re right.. i’m sure the real intellectuals of the world are spending their evenings dissecting Jersey Shore.

      wow, you sure got me on that one!

  20. rootietoot says:

    “That shit’s for losers.”
    From your mouth to God’s ears. I can hold you to that, right?

  21. Nine Deuce says:

    If you have no sarcasm detector, sure.

    • rootietoot says:

      If you’re going to say it, then I’m going to assume you mean it, unless you indicate otherwise first, because that’s what honest, genuine people do. Oh, I’m sorry, did you mean that you’re not either of those?

      call me shocked and dismayed. tsk.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s