You Shouldn’t Be so Angry….

Posted: June 21, 2011 in Blogging, Rants, Sex Work

Okay, in the last couple days I have had folk ask/discuss with me/comment about how, well, I seem so angry and curse a lot and shit of that nature.  And yes, sometimes, it apparently is much like shooting myself in the foot, but you know, I am almost willing to bet, just from past history and previous experiences, that if I had been nice and sweet and mellow to Meghan on that thread…my questions and concerns still would have been ignored, talked around, not addressed, and remained hanging there unanswered.  Why?  Well this ain’t exactly my first time to this sorta dance, and in the past, even when nice as pie, well, no answers.  Deflection.  Galloping Goal Posts…and why yes, heaps and heaps of patronization and assumptions and other assorted foolery.   Would Meghan have been any different if I had not blown up at her?  I dunno.  Maybe, but I kinda think no because she has ignored the questions and comments and theories which are not in line with her own mode of thinking from people on that thread who were civil and polite to her, and well, it seems to be the typical nature of the beast, as it were.  These folk do not like to be challenged, regardless of civility, and thusly will not directly engage unless they have utter control over the spin, discourse and level of hostility-or are forced to, like in an actual debate setting, but even then the majority will tap dance like hell to keep you off their asses with actual fact and the views of people who actually work in the sex biz and do not just study it.  Simply put, they ignore being questioned by anyone who is not one of their own, and will do just about anything to not have to answer the hard questions.  Been there, done that, have all the notes & headaches.

So I then ask the folk who ask about me being angry and hostile? Well, why the hell wouldn’t I be?  You can only be dismissed, patronized, presumed about, lied about, distorted, and generally treated like shit by these sorts so many times before, well, you get angry.  Very Angry.  You can only hear the same dehumanizing, infantilizing, broken record bad reasearch bullshit before you say “fuck this, I am done being civilized with people who obviously think of me and people like me akin to crap”.   You can, in short, only take so much.  And I sorta wonder if the folk who are saying “you shouldn’t get so angry” would say that if it was THEM being treated like that, addressed like that, and why yes, condescended to like that all the damn time.  I wonder if they had to put up with this crap, 24/7, seven days a week, 365 days a year, for x amount of years, if they would dare question why I get so angry.  Let me tell y’all something, true beleivers….I LONG ago gave up on other people being willing to stand up for me or defend me or say hey, that anger of yours, it’s  justified.  You know who I can rely on to stand up for me and challenge this shit and not say “oh, don’t take it so serious” or “oh it’ not really that important” or “oh, you shouldn’t get angry about it’?


Me.  Yep, that’s right, just me.   So, do not tell me not to get fuckin’ angry….or try being dehumanized, patronized, condescended to, lied about, and all that other good fucking shit 24/7, seven days a week, 365 days a year for awhile….then come back and tell me why again that it shouldn’t piss me off.  I dare you. 

Anger isn’t necessarily bad, y’all.  It reminds you that you are in fact alive, and yep, serves and One Hell of a Motivator.

  1. dead_vladimir says:

    but if these people are not interested in a debate why do you try? For a lot of people, like a lot of people on the internet, it’s all just one big circle jerk of meeting other like minded people and telling each other how right they are and reinforcing what they believe (in fact that’s what a lot of internet discussions are, people finding the other people who agree with them regardless of evidence, in a way it allows people not to have their beliefs challenged since they can now search the entire world to find like minded people). If all they are going to do is dimiss you, condescend to you etc. why bother talking with them in the first place? Why play their game of victim and aggressor? Not only do you validate their everyone is out to get us fetish by playing an aggressive role they can spin, but frankly by even acknowledging them at all you give their spurious and incorrect beliefs legitimacy by treating them as if they deserve responses.

    • Roy Kay says:

      In many ways I concur with Vlad, though there are a few differences here. The main one is that you are a fan of Hugo Schwyzer’s, so it would be reasonable to assume you’d have half a shot there. The other is that someone has to speak the truth and counter tthe lies of the enemy.

      The thing that I keep wondering is how do you take the war, as it is a war, to the house of the enemy. When you are the target and not them, it’s a losing war of attrition. How do you make it cost them the livelihood and liberty they cost you and your associates.

      • Ren says:

        well, if you had seen me at that debate against Jensen, you’d know. I do and did deserve to claim victory in that one.

        Also, what ya both forget, is I DID take a giant step back from this. I did indeed, and in truth this has prolly been the first time in AWHILE I even engaged about the subject with ANYONE. ANd people reading that engagement, well, they see who ran off and did NOT seem willing to be challenged- at it wasnt me.

        • dead_vladimir says:

          this is not like the debate with Jensen in a real open format =it’s not saying your arguments aren’t good or etc. but it is trying to engage people who will never care or value your opinions and in fact who want to rile you up so they can hold you up to their converts to go see look.

          it is like Barack Obama getting upset that he can’t get the KKK’s endorsement for his re election run in 2012

          These people you talk about wanting to engage, or invested in a policy of non engagement.

          You want to reach out and give an alternative view point, I understand that, but maybe rather than getting int he muck with them you need a separate format. Blogs aren’t the place to fight them, debates in colleges, peer reviewed journals etc. are. Like your debates on campuses or in published articles etc, or well that’s my two cents. it seems here you just get to play to their lowest denominator and that’s something they will always win in, because it isnt about them reaching out to new people with their ideas, they instead simply are using you a foil to reinforce their crackpot stereotypes.

          • Ren says:

            if I didn’t blog, I never woulda been invited to the university things. and as I said, I did and have taken a huge step back because of all the bs. This time, for the first time in a long time, I engaged, and simple fact is- NOTHING has changed and these people are all the same.

            • Ren says:

              it is also one of those things; you may not get it or why I do engage or get pissed about it. Fine. It s something that is important to me even if it isn’t to others.

              • dead_vladimir says:

                oh I am not saying you shouldn’t blog or express your issues here in your blog; I just seee engaging idiots who will never listen and indeed are waiting to twist your every word to justify all their preconceived opinions and invalidate and take out of context etc as a zero sum game.
                It’s not that you shouldn’t blog o r care about these things, it’s just you shouldn’t waste your precious time on the obvious idiotic zealots.
                You truly do have more important things you could be doing and your inteleect is better spent being insightful than beating your head against the brick wall of their ignorance.

                • dead_vladimir says:

                  *see **intellect

                • Ren says:

                  ugh, so now not only do I get told not to be angry but I get told how I could better spend my time? I am tired of being “told”, really.

                  ANd yes, engaging with the dead set is futile, however, people without hard opinion one way or another also read these exchanges, and I have had them tell me that my words have helped change or solidify their views for them in these exchanges. THAT makes some of the bs worth it, and is a good thing IMHO.

                  • dead_vladimir says:

                    hey i never said be angry! that’s one thing I will never say lol
                    And you are free to spend your time as you want as are we all, it just seems that you get agitated by this, and franklyit’s not telling you what to do , to say you are better than these people so why let them vex you?

                  • Ren says:

                    You’re right, you did not tell me. I apologize for my over reaction. Just a touchy subject for me.

    • Ren says:

      I try because OTHR People read this shit, andat least that way, those OTHER people get two views and see how the one side refuses to engage.

    • What is confusing is when they SAY they want debate and then they chicken out when they get one. Happens to me ALL the time; they will even ban you for it. Ballgame banned me from Feminist Critics for daring to argue with him–why the fuck does he have an anti-feminist blog if he doesn’t want to argue? Ohhh, what he REALLY wants is a whiny-ass BOYZ CLUB that enjoys PRETENDING to argue with mythical phantom feminists, not real ones.

      Took me awhile (and the banning) to figure that out. (Ren figured it out before I did.)

      When people say stupid shit that insults us (as a feminist I AM insulted by much of the bullshit posted at FC, for instance, that is ME they are talking about, thankyouverymuch) , it is necessary to correct it. Especially if they are outright lies, such as, porn is rape. Hello, what?

      Expect the porn actresses to disagree with that, and if you don’t, I question why you spent $60,000 on a shitty education that didn’t teach you anything about human nature.

  2. […] I haven’t been keeping up so not sure if people were saying you shouldn’t be so angry at your place or at Hugo’s…either way, I read the thread at his place a couple of days […]

  3. rootietoot says:

    I am actually thankful you do it.. Your cojones are bigger than mine, and by confronting them, you are planting the seeds of doubt in their heads. If they are surrounded by like minded sycophants, and never hear an opposing opinion, they’ll start to think they’re intellecutal gods. Your calling BS on them will, on some level, remind them that they are not, even if they do barf up all kinds of defensive verbal mucus to protect the sanctity of their dewicate feewings.

    • Ren says:

      thank you. and seeing as these sorts tend to treat happy housewuves with about as much respect as they treat sex workers (what would they do with a sex worker and house wife, heck, that is like a Horseman of the Apocalypse to these people! Oh,wait…I am married and do stay at home when not doing eeeevil porn and stuff….hummm).

      yeah, some women are more equal than others.

    • dead_vladimir says:

      see I don’t think it is seed planting doubts, i think it is just encouraging them, They tend to define themselves as persecuted and this lets them put you in that role and let’s them play victim. See how fast they claim threatened when not actually threatened; etc.
      Thry crave the audience, I think they are more harmless when just ignored.

      • Ren says:

        actually, people have swtiched sides due to the debates and what not. Four of Five formerly hard core anti sex work folk, some who even hated my guts, have changed their opinions….so there IS hope really.

  4. rootietoot says:

    *intellectual*, I mean…

  5. Reading your words on this topic exposed these people as the hypocrites they are, for me at least. I admire you for being willing and able to step into the fray and call them on their shite, because people like me who are new to this topic of debate and actual real-life impact need to hear your voice.

  6. kingschwarz says:

    Not sure whether this post is in part motivated by my comments re. the last one. If not, never mind (just call me Roseanne Roseannadanna). If so, let me state for the record:

    1. I never said not to get angry with Meghan. In fact I said I thought I understood your anger, and I owned up to anger issues of my own.

    2. I advised only against ranting and cursing @ Hugo or other like venues, as opposed to here, which is your wholly owned space, subject to your moods, whims and desires, and

    3. I offered this advice not because I hold out hope that Meghan and her ilk will respond to politesse and open their minds to your questions and ideas, but because

    4. There are other readers/commenters @ Hugo who might really listen to you and be persuaded, and there are real things at stake such as the potential change in Canadian law; however,

    5. They may be distracted or diverted from your key questions and ideas by the rough language and the ensuing dust cloud of pouting and whining and claims of victimization kicked up by Meghan et al.

    6. And I am all for your pointing out in no uncertain terms when they are engaging in hypocrisy, patronization, condescension, evasion, diversion and all the rest of that nasty armamentarium.

    7. By the testimony of readers like mamacarriemakes and others, your voice is valuable and impactful, and it can make a positive difference in the public arena.

    8. By your own testimony, you bested Robert Jensen (who is inter alia an apologist for 9/11) in public debate. My guess is that your victory was won not by rants and curses but by the power of your critique and ideas.

    So I am not saying not to get angry – which is your right – but only to consider the venue and the appropriate register and tone. You own an important public voice, which I and others value. We want it heard loud and clear.

    • Ren says:

      Jensen helped me along by shooting himself in the foot in various ways.

      • kingschwarz says:

        Hmmm, I suspect you are being modest. Anyway, congrats on nailing that snake in the grass. (Apologies to snakes, who actually are useful and pleasantly circumspect.)

    • See, this is where I get off…

      Why is Meghan’s language not regarded as “rough”? As Roy said, she is the one with the power of the state and the cops on HER side. She speaks for the STATUS QUO which declares “whores bad”… the opposition and the minority do not have the POWER to be as “rough” as the majority/status quo who are saying the good-girl, academically-approved stuff. She speaks for an institution, women’s studies. She throws her academic weight around deliberately. SHE is the one using rough language: ERASURE is rough too. Making proclamations about the lives of others is DAMNED ROUGH, IMHO.

      I think Ren simply replied to that.

      Its strange to me that *the response* is considered the “rough” stuff, not the person who picked the fight and declared what other women must feel and think.

      • kingschwarz says:

        Meghan’s ideas and their policy implications are rough – I would even say brutal – but she strategically keeps her language within the bounds of politesse. That way when she provokes you, she can claim that you are being violent and she is being victimized etc. This is a deceitful game of course. You are quite right to point out that Meghan is seeking to wield power and victimize others. The immediate circumstance is a possible rollback of Canada’s prostitution laws. This would likely result in the extension of legal and civil rights to prostitutes and a real betterment of their situation. To the extent that Meghan and her ilk impede this rollback, they are at the very least complicit in the brutalization of others. So real things are at stake here, and I am advocating that the counter-voices make a special effort to restrain their tone, not allow themselves to be baited, and keep the focus of the debate on ideas, policies and social realities. That is a debate you and Ren should win decisively.

        • Second Waver interlude! Back in the day, being a good girl, being polite, was proof you were a brainwashed fembot! Everything changed when they called in Daddy to protect them. I covered that in my piece on Julian Assange:

          And yes, I know, conspiracy theories, boooo! But its my blog and I can talk about Dorothy Hunt if I want! (hey that rhymes)

          Anyway, I see the “stop using cuss words, you scare me!” trope as reactionary bullshit of the same sort I am discussing in that piece. (Apologies for conspiracy theories and length. Also, unrelated trans brawl developed in comments.)

          • kingschwarz says:

            Well, I enjoyed your post about feminists and the state. Not too long ago I had a discussion with a prominent minister – the daughter of a Supreme Court Justice no less – who supports the occupation of Afghanistan on the grounds that it benefits women there.

            My point about language is a simple, pragmatic one. Moderating one’s tone is not about being a good girl or boy, nor is is it about being reactionary. It is about maximizing your chances of winning arguments and persuading people in public fora.

            • rootietoot says:

              If you can use a calm, logical tone, and still provoke them into name calling, then you’ve won…that’s how I see it, anyway. Once the argument degrades to that, then they have nothing left in their arsenal.

              • kingschwarz says:

                Agreed. Even if they do not resort to name-calling, I think they lose the debate. As you wrote, down the thread a few comments, they have nary a new nor compelling an idea.

  7. Kristen J. says:

    Well, FWIW, years and years ago your anger and kick-ass blogging was my introduction to sex worker rights. So you may not convince the hardliners, but for the idiots in the peanut gallery it can be tremendously helpful. That said, putting up with their shit is not your job.

  8. catlover says:

    But my dear, getting angry shows your frustration at knowing the other side is Right and you just have no argument – even if that is because they lie about your arguments or divert them as obvious denial of The Truth as dictated by The Bible or L.Ron Hubbard of Feminism or Marx or Holy Qur’an or any other written junkiedom.

    Sometimes, with some people, there is no argument. You don’t argue Pol Pot or Teaparty or Al-Qaeda, or some that use the word ‘feminism’ to promote just about everything women were fighting in the 1960s because ‘argument’ is kind of like a fair fight boxing match and they bribed the ref to fight any way they choose and penalise you for retaliating.

  9. machina says:

    What’s annoying is how repetitive this is. Go back to 2007 and, fuck, there are the same discussions. Can’t everyone sit down and agree that prostitution should decriminalised, porn legal and self regulated (as long as they keep their house in order), and stripping I guess much the same as now? Put in place exit schemes to provide options for those with really no other options. It seems really simple, to be honest.

    • rootietoot says:

      That’s the issue I have with all of them. Same old same old, never a really innovative idea, *yawn* Someone will say “Oh! I have a Great New Ideological Construct! Oppression Sux! Men Oppress! Therefore Men Suck! If there weren’t any men, we’d have no Sex Work! So Sex workers suck, too! ” ad nauseum.

  10. polly says:

    People who are pointlessly angry are a pain. And by that I mean either the type who are just angry with anybody and anything – and will frequently take that out on a vulnerable group (racists, misogynists, homophobes), or the type of people who think everything is just SO UNFAIR and they’re the hardest done by beings in the universe (though members of group a, are frequently also members of group b).

    But being angry as in “I refuse to take your shit” angry, when there is actual shit happening (as opposed to just whining) can be life saving. And nobody is under any obligation to be nice to somebody who isn’t being nice to them, but is too passive aggressive to make that clear. Fairness is a virtue, consideration is a virtue, politeness is a virtue. Mealy mouthed passive aggression cloaked as ‘niceness’ is just bullshit.

    I also can’t see the point in writing something you’re not prepared to defend. Yes endless trollery is a pain because it’s time consuming and goes nowhere (and we can all think of people who fit that description). But an actual argument – as far as I was concerned when I had a blog if I wasn’t prepared to publish sincere, but opposing comments, what was the point of having comments?

    • Ren says:


      well, I will admit I have some anger issues period, it is sorta a default setting for me, sometmes with or without reason, but I do try and work on it, and in all honestly, I do not think i have really been right out of the gate MEAN to people who have been civil or above board with me- hell sometimes I have even been nice to people – both in real life and in blog land- who were civil to me but tearing me apart elsewhere. I even think sometimes because I KNOW I have anger issues and can be a very nasty piece of work, I actually go above and beyond to keep that shit in check and be…civil. Don’t always succeed, but yeah, I do try. There has also been a history of double standards in that ANY and EVERY nasty thing I have EVER said is always dragged into ANYTHING I say or do, and well, any nastiness towards me, from insults to lies to threats, is oh, never mentioned, and if it is, well, that dissent is silenced.

      AND YES to the WHY, if you are unwilling to discuss or answer or engage do you EVEN BOTHER having a comment section. Hell, LOT’S of people, from you to Rootie to Erik to well, everyone here, disagrees with me or others here about SOMETHING- but disucssion IS allowed and even encouraged…that’ sorta the point of POSTING about complex issues IMHO- to have discourse, and not all of it all echochamber shit.

  11. antiprincess says:

    “Mealy mouthed passive aggression cloaked as ‘niceness’ is just bullshit”

    how do you know which is which?

    • Ren says:

      because nice is. “Hey, AP, your hair looks great today!”

      the other is “Hey, AP, your hair looks great today…..but have you evr considered dying it maybe red?”

      Then again, I am suspicious of ANYONE who comes across as nice to me at all for a long period of time before I actually trust them…..

  12. antiprincess says:

    good to see you too. 🙂

  13. antiprincess says:

    oh, patriarchal, but generally most chivalrous towards his new baby sister. Trillian (Silly Trilli to her friends) is 8 months old, and she plays ball and says NO. while being beautiful and drooling. but during my rare breaks from helicoptering my little capitulations to patriarchy, I’ve been noticing much blog activity…dipping my big toe in the water because I’m a big fat masochist…

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s