"Vacant" Geek Girls

[TW for sexism and ageism.]

So, I'm a huge webcomics nerd.  I read dozens of them: Goblins, Girl Genius, OOTS, Girls with Slingshots, Questionable Content, Gunnerkrigg Court, Dumbing of Age, XKCD, The Meek, YAFGC, Lackadaisy, Sinfest, on and on.  In addition to keeping up with all these, I'm always on the hunt for new stuff, and have a ginormous bookmark folder full of "to read" comics.  Currently, I'm devouring Weregeek.

I'm also a huge geek in general - I love fantasy/sci-fi and gaming.  So, I'm positively adoring Weregeek because it appeals to all of my dorky interests.

This morning, reading along in the Weregeek archives, I came across this strip.  (If you can't see it, it's basically a four-panel comic strip in which one of the main characters has a fiery rant about a NYTimes article which posits that Game of Thrones couldn't possibly be of interest to women.)  I love reading outraged comments to horrible articles, so of course I scrolled to the comments below the strip.  And it was great!  I'm reading through these, nodding and internally cheering at the snark, and then.

Some douchebag made a comment that perfectly exemplifies why I'm hesitant to join a local LARP, or do cosplay, or D&D, or any of the things that Weregeek is about that I would love to participate in.

By commenter rb:

too bad that (vacant) geek girls appealing to the eye in my circles are as rare as epic (or similar) grade loot in a newbie area. or way off age D=

Seriously?

I read on, desperate to find among the people snarking that sexist article, someone also snarking that sexist comment.  But he went completely ignored.

I'm not here to condemn people for not calling him out.  I'm here to do it myself.

"rb", you are a misogynist (and ageist) asshole.  You remind me rather strongly of Mike from Something*Positive.  Before he started the superhero gig and actually became vaguely likeable.

Vacant is not synonymous with single.  What on earth possessed you to use that term?  It sounds like you think of single women as a parking spot that simply hasn't been taken yet.  Which is obviously so wrongheaded, I can't even.  You are the quintessential, entitled Nice Guy™.  We are not here to be easy on your eyes.  We are not here to be your potential romance.

We are here to do over-the-top roleplay of fantasy characters and go on epic quests.

Venting

[TW for sexism, racism, jingoism and classism.]

Okay, I just need to rant for a bit.

I'm a fan of country music.  I love the sound, and many of the songs are absolutely fantastic, and deal with difficult topics that most mainstream music avoids (e.g., cancer, abuse, etc.).

On the other hand, country music is a proud bastion for so many things that are horrible: racism, sexism, jingoism, BOOTSTRAPS.  This has intensified to absurd levels since 9/11.

But the one I need to rant about today is probably the most egregious example of sexism that I can think of off the top of my head (how sad is that?): Keep Me in Mind by The Zac Brown Band.

The way I listen to music is that I pretty much completely ignore the words for the first five listens, and then suddenly the words are there.  Now, Keep Me in Mind is the catchiest song EVER, and Zac is an excellent vocalist, so I kept hearing this fun new song and kind of hearing the words but not really. And then, suddenly the horrible, horrible words registered.  I don't even have to go past the first stanza, because IT IS THE WORST.  One line at a time:

How come all the pretty girls like you are taken, baby?

Ugh.  Yet another message of many reminding single women (NOT GIRLS FFS) that they're single because they're ugly, and that men are superficial enough to only be interested in women that meet the conventional standard of beauty.  Isn't it the feminists that are supposed to hate men?   Dudebros, y u hate men so much?

I've been looking for someone like you to save me

Men are not infants that require being saved.  Again with the misandry.  Which, of course, doesn't actually result in the marginalization of men but rather the women (saviors), and so it is misogyny masquerading as misandry.  Boys will be boys, and all that.

Life's too easy to be so damn complicated

If your biggest life complication is yearning after a woman you can't have (and you're whining about it like a toddler denied candy), then you are on a level of Not Getting It that no one can touch.  You are standing on top of Privilege Peak, and the reality down in the foothills is completely obscured by the mists of your white, straight, rich dudeliness.

Take your time and I'll be waiting

YOU ARE A CREEP NOW.  Go find a woman that is actually available.  OH WAIT all of the pretty girls are taken!  Well, gosh, that just leaves you in a pickle now, doesn't it?

Go away, think about your life for a while, and come back when you've moved beyond frat boy levels of sociability.

Raising the Bar

[TW for ableism, sexism, homophobia, Christian supremacy, classism.]

Via Juanita Jean's blog, I found the website of Dr. Stuart Spitzer, a Republican running for Texas State Representative.

Just for kicks and giggles, I read through the page, and the penultimate paragraph is one of the most... um, telling I've yet read about the wrongheadedness of Republican politics [emphasis mine]:

"I believe there are two competing ideologies in play. One would debate the role of family, the rights of the unborn, the merits of gambling, and even whether absolute truth exists. This worldview says that if we can’t all get over the bar, we need to lower the bar. I think we need to raise the bar. ... we should not lower the bar just to get everyone over it. I would rather try my whole life for a bar set too high and fail, than walk over a low bar into a pool with the sediment of all, but the virtue of none."

Republicans: "If you're too poor, too disabled, too low-class, too minority, then reaching the bar is not for you." And lets not forget the depiction of these people as virtueless dirt. That is not raising the bar, unless you happen to be standing on your head, then 'raising' to the rest of the world looks a whole lot like 'lowering'.

How about we try raising the bar of human compassion, hm?

Really, CRACKED? Really?

[TW for fat hatred.]

Have you ever been to the humor website CRACKED? It's one of those places full of interesting tidbits of mostly useless information. I've gotten lost there for hours, reading article after article, and laughing all the way through.

Tonight, I read 6 Lies About the Human Body You Learned in Kindergarten. Since their lists count down to #1, I enjoyed the first five. Yep, I knew that the tongue tastes things pretty much equally everywhere; yep, I understand neuroanatomy enough to know about elasticity; yep, I know that there are many more than just 5 senses. And then I reached #1: Your Metabolism Makes You Fat or Skinny.

The image that follows this subtitle is a montage of a slender, muscled man on one side sitting in front of a plate of raw spinach, a fat man on the other side shoving a huge burger into his mouth, both superimposed on an image of fat-creased skin. The article predictably goes on to characterize fat people as gluttons who eat far more calories than they can expend, as time bombs to a horrible fat-related death and as incapable of accurately reporting their true caloric intake. Naturally, since CRACKED is fond of including hilariously subtitled images, there are six images of either fat people, food, or fat people eating food. I'm not going to paste any of the subtitles here; they're easy enough to find if you really want to read them.

In short:

Calories in != calories out. I'm not a machine.

Fat people live just as long as "average" [sic] people. Quit conflating fitness with weight, please.

Individuals are a better witness to their experiences than strangers are. Calling fat people liars because your experience/culture/really bad interpretation of scientific research tells you that 99% of fat people eat themselves into fatness is an extremely dishonest and stigmatizing approach that serves only to inflate ego and marginalize fat people.

To preempt the commentary that CRACKED is a comedy site and therefore shouldn't be taken seriously, bigotry of any kind does not happen in a void. Each instance reinforces prejudice and hostility.

P.S. If you choose to read the article, for the love of all that is holy do not read the comments.

The Power of Words

[TW for fat hatred, depression.]

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will forever haunt me.

About two weeks ago, I was at my mother's and step-father's house when my step-father, during a discussion of the (horrible) show Biggest Loser, abruptly said, "I hope you're not using this new interest of yours [HAES] as an excuse to stay fat."

It's not often I lose control of my jaw muscles, but this was one of those times. I was paralyzed. My mind went totally blank. I wanted more than anything else to refute the shame that had been foisted upon me; to counter the ugly enthymemes within that short sentence, but no words came.

Things were heading downhill before my step-father said this, and went further downhill afterwards (ending in being fully silenced and prevented from defending myself), but that sentence sticks in my mind as the most damning. I've blogged before about why I'm ardently dedicated to the fat acceptance movement. I am sad to say that in the two weeks since this encounter, I have slid significantly backwards; reverted in many ways to the way I used to think. The cognitive dissonance and the unmitigated hurt have been nearly overwhelming. When I read articles or blogs or research about obesity and health, I find myself questioning the conclusions that one can be both fat and healthy.

I've gone through that single sentence and ripped it to shreds in my mind, over and over, and yet, I still wonder. I am learning, I am growing, I am still dedicated to fat acceptance, but my foundation of surety in the message has been shaken. In my head, the battle looks something like this: "The basis of that statement is that fat is bad." "It ain't exactly good, though." "Fat just is. You cannot divorce me from my fat - I am not a person despite my fat." "No, but you can certainly lose that fat if you weren't so lazy." "Weight doesn't matter!" "Of course not, but fitness does, and if you just took a twenty-minute walk around the block a few times a week, you'd lose plenty of weight." "I already do that." "It's obviously not enough." "But he implied that this whole thing was just an excuse to stay fat!" "Well, isn't it?"

This, from one sentence. From one instance of concern trolling. Because it came from family, and in a form more concentrated than I'd ever experienced from that direction.

I know the italicized voice is wrong. I can verbalize precisely why it is wrong. But the new voice, the one that developed with my discovery of fat acceptance and HAES, is mere months old, whereas the voice of internalized self-loathing has been strong throughout my life.

The road to fat acceptance is a journey that involves confrontation of internalized misconceptions and a willingness to change. The willingness is there. The confrontation, ongoing. But I'm still walking this path, regardless of the occasional stumble.

Because of You, I am Afraid.

[TW for assault, self-harm, homophobia, and transphobia]

In the last two days, I've been betrayed by people I trusted- all over an article I posted to facebook (of all places) The article proved the point that female comic book characters are over-sexualized to the point of being non-functional as superheroes. The author (who is also an artist) did this by drawing pictures of male characters in the same clothes and positions as female ones (thus showing that female's costume is actually functionally useless, even when on a male superhero). Someone I considered a friend read it and posted a 'helpful' response of "Get better articles," because apparently if men were over-sexualized, they wouldn't be dressed in that way. (And zomg they said bad things about fishnets).

I read the response and honestly did not have the energy to right then explain the point of the article, so I went the nice route and just asked him to read it again, as he missed the point (I even included a smiley face to show that I did want him to learn, cause friendship.) But nope, examples weren't up to his standards, need better articles. Other friends tried explaining it to him, nope, he continued on. Finally I was starting to get upset so (being as it's my space and all) I asked him to stop, as I would soon start to be less nice. He stopped, but soon after another person who I thought was a friend jumped in and started attacking me to 'prove a point' - basically, that though I was being patient and nice, the very fact that I didn't accept my male friend's opinion was me 'being nasty'. Because opinions can't be wrong or something. But at that point I snapped and fought back in defense of myself, but she just would not back down. She got nasty enough to trigger me very badly. Repeatedly I asked her to stop and reminded her it was my space, but while she acknowledged it was my space, she did not stop. She continued violating me with her words.

At that point my real friend jumped in and defended me, but the other commenter just kept coming, gleefully mocking me with phrases like "This is the most I've seen Ange post in years" and "lol I'm being a dick (her words) to prove a point" and other choice phrases. Violation after violation. No after no. Finally I just gave up, tried one last explaining comment, and went to sleep (or tried to, as I was still triggered and my anxiety prevents me from actually sleeping), with no support system.

[Boyfrog and company are going through their own stuff, and got defensive when I couldn't -literally no capacity for it when triggered- comfort them, then got angry when I called them on something. I admit, my words were pretty close to mean (for which I am sorry), and I know I can't speak for others' experiences, but I don't really have much control over my word choice when triggered- I react; I word vomit in a knee-jerk way. I don't sugarcoat. I describe what I see. Anyway, we'll see if that can get back on track at some point, but for now that's besides my focus].

Once morning comes, I eventually find the strength to go downstairs and at least check my email (yep, I felt my stomach and heart tighten in the grips of a panic attack as I checked), and sure enough, another reply. At that point I was too upset and defeated to bother replying, so I tried to calm myself, until I noticed I got a message from 'friend' number one- the guy who brilliantly pointed out I should get better articles, and whose entire position smacks of both misogyny, heteronormativity, and a dash of homophobia and transphobia (Men would never be dressed like that! Cause men.)

See, I even went so far as to try to reply and apologize (seriously, apologize for being repeatedly violated and attacked, and of course my 'nasty tone' -_- ), but he apparently has either blocked me or removed his facebook account. So, I figured I'd put it here on display.

If you want to help a cause quit spamming every article without a critical eye. If an argument is bad, the author loses credibility even if the overall point being made is in fact a good or valid one. I've been on the side of the author in almost every article you've linked that I read. However, there were so many that were so poorly written such a flood can only drown out those people that are better at doing it. I wasn't trying to help feminism, I don't have the time or the passion, I was trying to help you do better at what you've been doing.

Also, the point of the article was directly stated early in the article. Anyone who felt the need to state it themselves should reevaluate their own comprehension levels.

Comparing Women dressed in sexy women's clothing to Men dressed in sexy women's clothing to come to a conclusion regarding how men dress is a fallacy. Ignoring something does not make it refuted. Arguing logic isn't semantics. Saying after looking down on semantics that words have meaning is hypocritical. What I'm doing now is being an ass, while also not being wrong.

Anyone who thinks I'm dumb needs a SERIOUS reality check.

I hope the rest of your life is as miserable as the betrayal I felt yesterday. I have nothing but hatred for your kind.

You want betrayal? Try being verbally assaulted by two 'friends' over the course of 2 days, (a month after another, separate 'friend' decided to assault me in person), being gleefully triggered so badly that you want to slice yourself to ribbons, having little to no support system because they're all involved in their own stuff, having people 'secretly' show the attackers support though Likes and whatnot, and then being told to have a miserable life (while assigning things to me that I did not say). That is true betrayal, and I hope not one of you ever has to live through it.


ETA: I took down the whole article and attack, and put up a status basically saying that I'd been effectively silenced and triggered......and the woman who triggered me just asked if I was 'ok', cause it was 'nothing personal'......what fucking world do people live in that they can verbally assault someone until the point of trigger, and then ask a question like that, especially with any real seriousness.

Those Womenz and their Public Sexxorz

[TW for slut-shaming and objectification]

So, Reese Witherspoon won an MTV Movie Award last night, which is awesome for her. I actually enjoy her acting in the movies I've seen her in. And of course, as she's accepting the award, she gives an appropriate acceptance speech:

Accepting her MTV Generation award, the Oscar-winning actress slammed stars who have appeared in sex tapes and nude-photo scandals, telling them they should be ashamed of themselves.

....waitasecond.

Really? I mean, really really? You've just been given an award for acting and you take the time to blast other celebrities (read: women) for their bedroom preferences?

Of course, if Ms. Witherspoon was actually concerned about 'sex-scandals' (aka, the general public finding out) you'd think she'd place the blame on those who actually deserve the blame, such as the paparazzi, or the 'liberal media', or, I don't know, the culture which shames those who have sex lives that deviate in any way from the perceived 'norm' [Hetero, monogomous, no kink whatsoever, and definitely no women enjoying themselves or having sex because they want to have sex]. But no, she places this squarely on women (or as she says, girls), with this gem of a line:

“I get it, girls, that it’s cool to be a bad girl,” the mom-of-two told the crowd. “But it is possible to make it in Hollywood without doing a reality show. When I came up in this business, if you made a sex tape, you were embarrassed and you hid it under your bed.

Oh Patriarchy, the only culture where women don't enjoy sex, but simultaneously 'go after' enough sex to 'make it in Hollywood'. Oh and of course, add a large helping of slut-shaming with no mention of any male participation or activity whatsoever.

Oh, but she's not done, she has some 'helpful' words of advice:

Said Witherspoon, “And if you took naked pictures of yourself on your cell phone, you hide your face, people! Hide your face!”

Cause if there's anything we need more of, it's disembodied breasts or genitalia. Objectifying women ftw, amirite?

*vomit*

Stay Classy, Mike

[TW for sexism including objectification, ableist language, discussion of rape and abuse.]

So, I have this friend. For the sake of her anonymity here, I'll call her Greta. Greta has been in and out of a relationship with a guy named Mike for a number of months now, and I've been in the background watching and fretting. Things were never smooth between them, and the last time Greta broke up with Mike was unusually rough. In her words, she had to be "mean" to him two days ago to get across the point that she doesn't really want to talk to him right now. Mike, classy guy that he is, took the opportunity to rip Greta up and down in a blog entry that he advertised on his Facebook. (Normally I'd take pains to anonymize him too, but since he so clearly wants this to be public, it would be rude of me not to oblige.)

Entirely aside from the wild twisting of reality and ad hominem attacks, some of the things he says about women, sexuality and autonomy sent me into a flailing rage.

The blog itself inspired facepalm in name alone: Mike's Super Amazing Blog! Because, y'know, the more adjectives and exclaimation points involved, the better the blog's content. The offending entry, entitled What I Want, is a laundry list of things Mike is looking for - and things Mike is definitely not looking for - in a relationship. He begins with some classic ableist language ("lame") and waxes poetic about love and its variation and peculiarities. He asserts that he has very few demands, and that all he wants is this and this and this and this and this and that too, and a "good handful of boob" would be nice.

Mike then gets to the meat of his post: ten things he does NOT want in a partner. What strikes me most about this entire section is the oversexualization of everything. In his second point, "No Text Message Relationship!", which frankly should have everything to do with communication and nothing with sex, he twice alludes to sex. Apparently texting is okay when a woman wants to shag, but otherwise, he "can think of much more comfortable places to put [his] hands" than a cell phone.

The rest of the points have me torn between rolling my eyes heavenward and shaking in fury. Let's break it down: