Since moderation issues are on my mind, I decided to lighten things up a bit and present the Best of the Peanut Gallery, comprised of excerpts from some of the comments men have attempted to post to Women s Space over the last 30 days or so. It is an interesting mix; I hope you laugh as hard over some of the comedic attempts at commentary as I did! That way, the disturbing commentary might not be quite so burdensome.
Im a man. I searched for Brit’s crotch and I found this site. I love the site and the discussion.
It’s haunted me and Ive since had discussions about it with my feminist wife who has majored in women’s studies and I guess has tolerated my point of view all this time. I always thought of myself as a feminist, but maybe Im not. My wife is angry with me because of my counter arguments.
This missive isnt about Brit’s crotch but maybe it is. Because I found this site due to my curiosity…
To the women of this site, I ask: What is the definition of feminine minus the polution of the male point of view? When I say “feminine”, Im talking about sexuality and the projection of such.
Im not talking about equality across the board, which I believe wholeheartedly in.
What do the women who contribute to this blog find acceptable when it comes to sexuality, the appearance of sexuality and the response to said sexuality?
Please, Im not trolling here…
Maybe if he knocks it off with the aggravating anti-feminist counter arguments he is evidently making when his feminist wife takes him to task over his internet searches for Britney Spears crotch shots, they can really delve into the definition of feminine minus the polution of the male point of view.
This poster knows how to make the world safe..
Why these people get irritated when someone talk about morality.
You people exposing morethan allowed any religion. Is it freedom. I call it utterly careless attitude of a community whom goes for freedom which destroy our social life by rape, adultry, drunks, abortion and all of form of sins which is prohibited by god through his teachings.
Go to Bibile. Quran or any other little moral writings. then we all will be in safe
This would be, I believe, the first time I ve heard the term non-dick :
What a bunch of lying dicks and non-dicks, you came to this site to see pussy!
so where is it???
?? And then there are all of you pretending to have “intellectual thoughts” on this search for a pussy view.
Actually, in my search for a pussy shot, I’ve had a lot of fun at your expense……thanks.
This poster is concerned about Britney Spears self esstem. Reminds me of the guy who, when one of my daughters reamed him a new one for being a misogynist jerk, said, You re ruining my SELF of STEAM.
You have to either have, self esstem issues or would have been pretty damn pissed to go out to a night club and show your privates especially with no knickers on.
Come on celebrity or not your a women respect yourself. i watched a documentary on tv in the United States about young girls going out binge drinking and doing stupid things in public that they later regretted doing this was a classic example.
I say if your out drinking look after yourself.
I actually like Brittany Spears and i think shes beautiful and no matter what the media says about i bet shes an awesome mother……….im glad she got rid of that no good loser KFed.
I might give him a few points for the last paragraph, if he d made some comment about the photographers taking up-skirt photos and why that was wrong. Oh well.
hi, heart.
It’s that guy defending the sadists again. I don’t know if you actually read these things or what. Anyways, I found another post by you on the same subject while I was surfing.
(I swear to God I’m not stalking you.) Anyway, it was on the same subject, and in it you mentioned that some people might think sadism and misogyny don’t necessarily go hand in hand, but that’s what you think and you won’t hear arguments to the contrary.
That’s repugnant.
I’m not offended by your views on the subject, I think they’re naive; but your refusal to let your beliefs be challenged disgusts me. If you don’t think you can defend your beliefs, well, god, you’re surrounded by people who can. If you’re not emotionally able to accept my views, well then you shouldn’t have started the conversation.
It’s this ability to surround oneself with nothing but like-minded people that I really hate about the Internet.
Like I haven t had 4,678,902 debates about this on the internet. The guy can evidently find me with no problem, so I figure he should go find some of those old debates.
It s so funny create one venue, just ONE, on the internet, which isn t going to tolerate endless wranglings over what might be wrong with sadomasochism and people are infuriated. They can create 15 blogs a piece, you know, and write of the joys of beating someone, being beaten by someone, the thrills of risky sex practices like fluid bonding, if they want to. But create one venue where it isn t going to fly and they are disgusted and it s what they hate about the internet that radical feminist women have, at last, an opportunity to discuss what we want to discuss unhindered, undiverted, unattacked, without having to waste energy dealing with this kind of thing.
I mean, if we want to talk to them, we can find them anywhere and talk to them, no? Do they ever think about that.
Is it that hard to believe that some men might have misogynist bedroom fantasies, while not being misogynists in real life?
Yes? Misogynist in the bedroom equals misogynist everywhere else. This is the kind of man, and logic, I find alarming and dangerous.
You also mentioned something (maybe on this board, maybe on that other board) that if you thought these guys had shown any respect for women, you might believe that they might be decent guys, but clearly they didn’t, and so on. Now, I don’t know much about online sex personals etiquette, but somehow I can’t imagine that if a woman went looking for some BDSM, she’d be all that interested in responses like, “Let’s respectfully discuss your proposal over coffee.”
Here is a guy who has just asked me whether I think it s possible for a guy to be misogynist in the bedroom and not misogynist elsewhere.
Here he demonstrates why he doesn t even believe that himself. From his perspective, if a woman is looking for an sm encounter, she must want to hear what all those guys in the Craig s List experiment had to say, no coffee and respectful discussion for her.
This philosophical dude feels we really need something more substantial than stories of women being dragged a mile behind a car, having their bodies chopped up and stewed on the stove, being raped and burned to death, being lined up in schoolrooms and shot, being basically unrepresented as heads of Fortune 500 corporations, to convince anyone that men terrorize women:
Generic man-hating isn’t going to gain momentum.
Yes, men can be dogs but you have to give the public something to work with here.
Yes, the whole human experience and history is strongly influenced by and dominated by males. Religion, law, government, as well as social and economic dissonance has developed.
Some barriers have been overcome, and most of your first world countries have decreased that dissonance. Less developed countries, generally speaking, seem to be more likely to have cultures that support females as being chattel. I think that the targeting that women get in first world countries has sublimated into forms that even they may not recognize as happening.
Personally, I think most undergarments women wear are designed exclusively by men for me. Pantyhose, bras, girdles, garters, et al all seem to fly under the radar of awareness, but in my mind are just short of something that could have been used in their own version of the Spanish Inquisition. Even womens shoes are designed to force them to strut provacatively, meanwhile their feet are being crushed and bent in painful directions.
Meanwhile, mens shoes and underwear are comfortable and functional. I have no idea why women put up with that stuff. Make-up, to me, is all part of that nonsense too.
If women want to be taken seriously, they need to take themselves seriously. Confidence, Intelligence, Independence, Assertiveness, and the ability to make decisions under pressure will get you farther than a tight sweater and boatloads of make-up. To be honest, it is more appealing too.
At last, the stunning conclusion:
Finally, I don’t think every pocket of the world is saturated with male dominance….if there are issues to be addressed in your corner of the world, the focus should be finding balance among elements to achieve equality. Vilifying all that is masculine may erode power of male dominated societal view, but the view will only last as the dominance the other way is held.
Education is key to a longer lasting balance.
Education is key to a longer lasting balance.
Heavy.
Glad you squared that away for us.
Sometimes women offer interesting commentary, per yay:
This site is retarded. Heart you are annoying.
Aside from the fact that I could care less about Britney’s crotch you seem to care too much what everyone’s opinion is on the subject. Like a little too much, I might add. Shut up already moron!
Here is my opinion on the matter. Britney should know better than to not wear panties and bend over in front of paparrazi or spread her legs with a short skirt on without panties knowing she is a huge star and will most definately be showing the world. She is skanky as in no class just like Janet Jackson who likes to show her boob to children at a football game then act all innocent.
Britney knew what she was doing and if she is that stupid to do everything I just mentioned without any inkling of the ramifications then maybe she will learn from her mistakes and embarrassment if she even feels any. Obviously, it was a publicity stunt and she enjoys that kind of attention and will do anything to get it. Just so you know, i wore a really short skirt on my birthday with no panties but I was with my bf and I am not super famous so no gives a rats ass.
If I were, I would be seeking attention by showing my crotch on purpose to the media. BTW, Britney you need to get some rash medication. Good going.
Lastly, everyone should just move on now because no one really cares about what Britney does as they really shouldn’t. Worry about your own crotches, fire crotches and what not. Hell if i was papparazi and i saw that I would be clicking away with the camera as well so….
yeah. Get real! No one got hurt in the making of this retarded publicity stunt.
Way to go Britney and rock on with your bad self. Everyone has an opinion and it really doesn’t matter what anyone thinks- not even Heart or me. So move on with your life Heart.
We get it already.
Even though that commentary is Exhibit A of internalized misogyny, I can t help but laugh every time I read it. Sometimes, all you can do is laugh.
Sorry if I was rude in my last post but I just get a little upset when people obsess over justifying other people’s mistakes (if you want to call it that)as if it really matters. What she did was her own doing and every single person has a different opinion on the matter and yet it still doesn’t matter what any of us think. We don’t know Britney or what she thinks on a daily basis.
The only support she needs is her real life friend’s and family. You all go on and on as if you are making a difference when all you are really doing is wasting your time and energy about annoying papparazi that are like roaches and will never go away. I am sure she has adjusted to the lifestyle she chose as most people do.
And i really didn’t see any rash in the pictures. I was just being sarcastic. I wish Britney well and don’t care about her crotch and I hope she isn’t affected by this too much.
Who knows? Maybe she was drunk.
And even finishes with season s greetings!
There are much better things to worry about and discuss and think about like Christmas in a few days and being with loved ones. Take care and be well. Merry Christmas all
Tei Tetua, who if I m not mistaken is a men s rights guy who posts at Alas sometimes, wrote the following in response to .
In a bedazzling example of precisely that phenomenon, Tei Tetua thinks it s important to focus in on which Boston paper published the article (I named the wrong paper) and the bad company feminists are keeping publishing the article there. Forget about atrocities against women, whatever, atrocities against women happen. Get used to it.
Also, forget about the fact that mainstream newspapers don t publish articles about atrocities against women as atrocities, which was the whole point of the article I linked to.
That article was from the Boston Phoenix, not the Globe. The Phoenix is a weekly paper that used to be “underground” or “alternative” or whatever you want to call it.
It’s the kind of paper where each issue includes a sex section with all the ads from “escorts”, and every time, that section has an appropriately enticing picture on the cover. The same issue of the Phoenix also had an editorial slamming Jimmy Carter for his recent book comparing Israel today with South Africa in its bad old days, which I think is a topic that needs to be talked about much more (and there’s a link with “Orthodox Jewish woman beaten by men”). In other words, some people might say that feminism isn’t in the best company in that paper.
Then this guy crawls out from under his rock to remind us all that we are, truly, surrounded by pedophiles, misogynists, dangerous men. Men who say what this man says below are dangerous men.
When men expose themselves in public they are considered as flashers and could face charges of indecency, but when Brittany Spears does it to save her dying career she’s the poor victim of men’s peversity.
She has become a public figure ever since she wore her enticing and provacative school girl uniform. She put herself in the sexual market place, music videos. It was Brittany’s choice to tie her shirt up to expose her belly,not the audience.
It was Brittany that decided to put a new twist to the old school girl fantasy that has been around for as long as there has been school girls. Her twist was to put an actual girl who was still in school in a music video. Where as in the past this school girl fantasy was usually filled by someone older posing as a school girl.
Most men who buy into this fanasy usually have to pay someone to do this, Brittany just made it more acceptable. Brittany is desperate for adulation. She using something other than her voice to attract an audience.
Why would any women put themselves in that situation. Obviously she isn’t modest because she really plays up her sexuality on stage. Take for instance when Brittany and Madonna kissed on national television.
Two music celebrities selling a form of sexuality on public television. But it’s perverse for men to watch it or want to see more. It’s perverse that men want to see her crotch now, get real.
Brittany is the only one selling crotch shots. Why should men be persecuted for buying something a grown women wants to sell. For Brittany she has decided to sell her voice and image and it seem she has developed a market for herself.
Now the general public wants what she is selling. And I bet there are many lesbians out there you aren’t hating because they want to see Brittany’s crotch. Society has come a long way accepting gays and lesbians for who they are, why can’t you get off your high horses and let men and women do what they have always done.
Men have to do all the chasing after the women they love or lust after and it is the women who does all the rejecting. History isn’t written about women pursuing their mate it has always been the man.Traditionally it has been the man who asks for the first date.
I know alot of women,but I don’t know very many women who ask men out on dates. And I don’t know many women who go around in little black miniskirts witout panties. Especially if they are going to a public function where they’ll be the centre of attention.
what Brittany does with her crotch is her business and everyone is buying it. I think she would do better just doing a sex video like her moral compass, Paris Hilton. Women’s groups aren’t exactly lining up around the blockto protest the expoitation of poor Paris Hilton.
No women’s group has picked up the cause for poor Pamela Anderson or Janet Jackson. And what can we do for the exploitation of Madonna.Face it sex sells and it is usually done by a man and a woman.
Now days it done by evryone to anyone. Who knows now days. Stay tuned for the next big production of chasing beaver, apparently it’s a bisexual thing.
With so many problems in the world why do we need to spend time on this. She is just wanting publicity.
Yeah, man.
Let the poor dudes get their crotch shots, would you?
“I can’t believe there are still women who don’t get it: ALL men. ALL men.
All. It’s concealed to get laid. It’s revealed when they lose it.
Take a look at the nice men in the Craig’s List post: see the lefty cool guy with the bandana, the guys out there in ‘nature’, the grandfatherly looking guy? There will be women who they have helped across the street, stood up for in a harassing situation, loaned money to so they could buy school books for their children, spoken for when she didn’t get a promotion, agreed that women should be able to walk here and there safely. Get real.
They’re all rapists. It’s not this guy is good, that guy is bad. Men.
They are all men, and they all have the privilege. The man you are sleeping with/working with/sitting next to in your gender studies class/being a blood donor/working for community issues/saving your babies life in the pediatric ward~~~~~~~~ALL.”
is this any different from saying all blacks steal?
all blondes are stupid? all feminists hate men?
This kind of question is, again, why I moderate.
To respond to this level of cluelessness would require energy, time, and bandwidth none of us has to spare, and all of us prefer to devote to women s issues. Besides that, anybody who finishes that kind of question with, just curious is asking to be spammed.
Way to go with lumping all men together in one awful sea of women hating testosterone.
Can’t you see that these are just sad wankers trying to get laid? I guarantee you that 99% of them have never taken part in any BDSM activity before and simply saw the ad as an opportunity to get laid. The ad was specific in saying the submissive wanted cruelty and violence so that’s what they offered.
The ad was graphic, so they were graphic in their replies. It’s not about hating women; it’s about meeting a biological imperative to have sex with as many women as possible. These guys are not angry they’ve been ‘outed’ as women haters; they’re angry because they’ve been outed as sad little men who can only succeed with women who put up no resistance.
This guy is creative and original!
You all need to get laid.
fuckin’ nice.
where can i get the video???
??love to have it.
oh by the way fuck you broads!
if heterosexual sex was a male dominated thing: wed have a hell of alot more people on earth. Men think of sex every 58 seconds, women do maybe twice a day.
Here the facts-and-figures guy evidences he doesn t know the difference between rape and sex, has no clue that in fact, most rapists walk and none, in the U.S., is killed for rape, and doesn t get it that women bear no responsibility for their own rapes:
Concieving a child is a two-way thing, if a woman is raped than she goes to the authorities and-while they kill the man who did it- she gets counseling.
I ll include his final line because of its unique and interesting spelling of chauvinistic, kind of along the line of Jovan for Men :
P.s.s.
The Media only has “concoted” a shovanistic view of women because there are women out there that will submit themselves to being photographed, exploited, ectectect as a career opportunity.
Not to be dissuaded by the radical feminist nature of this blog, the politics of this blog, or the posts in this blog, ardent life offers us biblical counsel:
People are imperfect. In fact, this is the very foundation of Christianity; people fail, ad God stepped in to save the day.
People screw up every-single-day. When a person is hi-lited as a good and godly person, one that you aught to respect, it somehow amplifies there Sin as somesort of huge imposing hurricane that wipes out the importance of what that person taught. People screw-up, get over it already.
Let
God be named True, and every man a liar.
I like the part I bolded. Yay, verily and amen to that.
Oh god. I wish mine were as deep.
One of them did wish me a Merry Christmas, calling himself V.
G. for Vanilla Gorilla. I labeled him Vulgaris Giardia.
I think he s been around before.
One visitor way back kept saying that feminists were destroying fathers rights with their children and that apparently everyone experiences orgasms through Saturday night sex and I did through writing about police or something like that. Which actually had nothing to do with the topic but whatever.
There were several posts bringing up every myth about feminism you could think of and a few new ones. But basically it was about how feminism ruined every man s fun. I heard a bit on my site from visitors deriding feminism for a blog that wasn t really discussing feminism.
One visitor said that he was going to quit posting because he didn t want to bring credibility to my site, not because his boss had told him not to do so and left in a huff(but then again, he was always in a huff) but I think he just changed nicknames. He just complained about the police chief most of the time, and now I think I was too harsh on him about that, because the police chief isn t worth defending.
I try not to think of most of what was written on my site.
Most of it was so toxic it just sucks the energy right out of you.
This put a huge cloud on my day, but I am glad you posted those comments, Heart.
I like to have brutal reality checks (and this post was one), which remind me that if I think that common sense can be expected from the majority of blogs commenters, then I am mistaken.
Sometimes however it gets a bit too heavy to read such insulting comments.
Amazing what passes for an opinion.
So true, Sijeka!
And yeah to everything you said, too, radfem. The thing is, can you (generic you ) imagine how it would be if I actually approved all those comments (and those were the Best of the P-nut Gallery, you should see all the rest of them! :/ )?
This place would be a circus, you know? We women would be knocking ourselves out trying to get a word in edgewise between trainwrecks, brawls and people patiently explaining things that these idiots have no interest in having explained. In the meantime, every misogynist around would be getting plenty of licks in and enjoying every one.
This is what Twisty means when she describes her blog as for advanced patriarchy blamers. That s what my blog is, too. People who want to participate here need to be at the very least interested in feminism and willing to learn about it and discuss it.
This morning, for example. A guy tries to post to the Ashley thread, describing himself as pro-feminist and for equality for everybody. (And as we all know, someone saying that does NOT mean the person is pro-feminist.
It s more likely to mean they are meritocratists or equalists or some other form of men s rights person. Anyhow.) So he says a few things about all the great points we have all made, but then says:
It was not done because she was a woman, it was not done because of a patriarchal society, it was not done because of “Fear of Female-ness” as profacero describes it.
Or at least, there is NO EVIDENCE to support this view apart from your prejudices. You seem to believe that every bad choice by someone in a position of athority must be an issue of gender politics. Now I do not have the time or the inclination to type out message after message and explain to you how this issue has little to do with the poor child’s gender; but I doubt you’d listen anyway.
I’ll just leave this comment as a reminder how you are challening worthy dicussion points away from their original meaning, to promote your sexist, anti-male propaganda; and by so doing eliminating your more accepting allies. Good day.
He comes in here, iow, posts four paragraphs, then says he doesn t have time to explain his thoughts, other than to say, we re wrong.
And to demonstrate zero awareness of women s state in the world, and so on and call women sexist, demonstrating, again, that he is absolutely not an ally to women.
So I spammed him. Who has the *time* to go through that abjectly disrespectful post, in which all he does is chastise feminists while offering nothing of substance to support his own view, and patiently explain 40 years of analysis and work to him, or millions of years of patriarchy to him?
Totally, totally disrespectful, yet guys like this really do think they are pro-feminists.
Argh.
Posting this kind of stuff is a good way to create an ongoing trainwreck site.
If you call it a feminist site, you can enjoy the vicarious licks these guys get in while pretending to be one of the good guys. Then you can post some pornography links oh, let me not get started Monday morning!
Eh.
Hi Heart,
Thanks for that.
No way, Mary Sunshine, I m taking that peanut out as a graphic and putting in that great cartoon!!
LOVE IT!
Love all the rest of you wimmin too!
I find that most people simply do not comprehend or either have a willful determination not to comprehend the difference between challenging and personal attack.
I am a critical reader, I know this, no one will ever take this belief away from me. My opinion of myself has been validated with an English/Literature degree with honors (I may add). I can pick apart every sentence, every word, every moral to the story, noting tone, connotations, collocation, etc.
In addition I have a personality type that some may prematurely conclude to be a peacemaker but is in fact a type that looks for the best and most efficient approach to whatever goal I have attached myself to. Making peace comes secondary to satisfying the goal, the agenda.
I have yet to ever, EVER receive a comment or a response to a comment that I dismissed or deleted that was in fact challenging.
I do not dismiss or delete challenging discourse. Because challenging is a good thing. Challenging is when someone else extends themselves generously to show me how what they are saying will help improve or change what I am saying or to help me understand what is faulty in what I am saying.
I call this type of discourse generous because no one is being paid for it. And as much I despise the fat cats of our society I am of the type that will not extend me unless there is some sort of payoff as well. I do not write as much as I could in my blog because I am not paid for it.
I will no longer leave comments at places who do not return the favor (hence pay me) because I refuse to be a whore of any type. The same with spelling and grammar. I do not go out of my way to make sure I am perfect in that regard because I am not getting pay for perfection.
If it begins to feel like labor then it will stifle production, which will distort satisfying the goal. The goal being pleasant (yet productive) discourse. I will give generously when I feel/think my generosity is welcomed/appreciated.
Generosity is never conveyed in personal attacks. Never. I am no perverse sicko that takes pleasure in the pain.
Personal attacks are meant as just that, ATTACKS!!!
Attacks divert the goal, muddle the purpose. And as I said, I am the efficient type. Give me the theories that are possible, and throw out the ones that we know for a fact will not work.
Attacks do not work.
People who want to attack label their attacks challenging, however, I challenge them to stop being so lazy (or passive aggressive) and read what they write. Because once I see the attack, I am no longer reading.
I’m no longer “feeling them.” I’m no longer interested. To me, they become the stand in for whatever I am opposing at the moment (thus why some women sound like men).
And I will be damn to let the opposer/oppressor tell me how to reposition my thoughts.
I find it amazing how a collective group will gain up and deny an attack when the attack is there in black and white. It is disheartening.
Because it proves to me that their clique, there need for approval, their very existence as a group is so fragile that each player within that group has to be given a pecking order, hence, substituting “fuckability” with “disposability.” See how I just made that method patriarchal? Because to me when attacks are used, it becomes patriarchal, oppressive.
It becomes trying to dismantle the master’s house with the master’s tools.
Just thinking aloud Heart. Personally, I would never give my attacker a venue by displaying their attack.
Perhaps occasionally as you are doing now, just to show that attacks do come along, but not routinely. All of their garbage has just become one big default. Because if you were to change the names, dates, and topic each of your examples could stand in for any of the mess that has ever been left for me.
What I find amazing is, we (me in particular) are incredibly small fish in the big scheme of things, yet the biggest guns are brought out.
chasingmoksha: People who want to attack label their attacks challenging, however, I challenge them to stop being so lazy (or passive aggressive) and read what they write. Because once I see the attack, I am no longer reading.
I’m no longer “feeling them.” I’m no longer interested. To me, they become the stand in for whatever I am opposing at the moment (thus why some women sound like men).
And I will be damn to let the opposer/oppressor tell me how to reposition my thoughts.
So true! Really good thoughts about the difference between being attacked and challenged.
I try to make that distinction, too, in the posts I approve. That s what s so aggravating about the guy this morning he says he doesn t have time to actually challenge content. What s the point of discussing something if content is not going to be provided, challenged, hashed over, processed, more content, more challenges.
What s the point of writing four paragraphs to say you don t have time to write anything of substance? As you say, the point is to attack, even if the words aren t attack words. And sometimes, words that seem to be attacking are actually challenges, but the challenges go ignored (or are attacked!
) because of the objections to the words that are being used.
I m like you, though. Darned if I m going to say what I have to say in a way that is acceptable or pleasing to someone who is attacking me.
That feels too much like all the abusive relationships I ve ever had the misfortune to have had.
Heart said: Tei Tetua, who if I’m not mistaken is a men’s rights guy who posts at Alas sometimes
Yes, Heart, you are mistaken. I had to do a Google search to even find Alas to remind myself what it was about.
It looks as if that s the place run by some guy who uses the name Ampersand , who does cartoons he calls Amptoons and recently caused a fuss by selling some kind of business rights to pornographers. That incident was the first time I ever heard of it and I d half-forgotten it since. I ve certainly never posted anything there!
You re probably confusing me with someone else. Easy to do. The world is full of people using the names of cannibals.
I was on the Ms board (got snarled at by Jihada once, but who didn t) I occasionally post at the Phoenix and the Chicken, and I m quite active on Feminist International. I get along pretty well with the people there, but they re a bunch of liberals, mostly British: you d hate them.
I can t resist adding one last item.
Talk about innocent. I wandered in here a few weeks ago Eh, let s see what Heart has to say today and what did I find but some outrageous story about Brittany Spears. Yes, that s how I found out about it!
If I ve made it my business to find the pictures since then, I ain t sayin . But really, it s showbiz through and through. If you think she wasn t expecting the paparazzi, all prepared with something to show them, you re being seriously naive.
They need her, she needs them. The real puzzle is why anyone in the world thinks any part of Britney Spears is interesting.
Oh sorry to lump you in with the shudder- men s rights/father s rights types on Alas.
I don t know why I thought I saw you there, Tei Tua. Maybe I just knew I remembered you from somewhere and thought that must be it.
I think Britney is a very interesting young woman, myself.
She probably did expect that what happened would happen. As I said in my original post though, no matter what she does, she s going to be wrong. Might as well live by her own lights, do what she wants, and let everybody else do whatever they re going to do.
The fact that she might have expected what happened doesn t mean it was right that it did, or right that she had to expect it given what assholes the papparazi (and a lot of other people) are. The fact that she might have expected what happened would happen, doesn t mean she did it to get the response she expected she d get. I think Britney, in her time, will surprise us.
One thing she is, is gutsy. I love that in a woman. Patriarchy hates that in women, for good reason it makes us uncontrollable and unpredictable.
I love, for example, Sinead O Connor. She s done a lot of wild and unpredictable things, too. She s her own woman.
So is Britney Spears, I think. If she wants to get married for 24 hours then divorce, she does. If she wants to take up with an asshole, she does.
If she wants to divorce him, she does. If she wants to have two kids bing, bing, she does. If she wants to go out on the town scandalously, she does, and doesn t really care what anybody says.
From my perspective, all of this bodes well for her. She s got something all women need: the capacity to do what she wants to do and not really care, bottom line, what other people think about it.
Oh, sorry!
Looked and saw only M and s I guess! That s a GREAT comic!
Love it.
Thanks, Melissa. Great cartoon !
But I m always coming unstuck in time like the protagonist of the Kurt Vonnegut story, Slaughterhouse Five.
It’s not about hating women; it’s about meeting a biological imperative to have sex with as many women as possible. These guys are not angry they’ve been ‘outed’ as women haters; they’re angry because they’ve been outed as sad little men who can only succeed with women who put up no resistance.
And it s the men who get all huffy when we label this behavior rape society !
Egads!
So a normal man = a man who overcomes a woman s resistance to sex. Nice.
Tei Tetua, I don t think having a lot of money makes anybody invulnerable, but particularly not a woman. I think women with money and who are famous can still be battered, raped, sexually harrassed, subjected to domestic violence, objectified (to wit: crotch shots), subjected to brutal child custody fights, treated like shit by the men in their lives, treated like shit by the media (National Enquirer: Britney gains 45 lbs! ) And so on.
I also think this stuff does NOT happen to men in Britney s position, so let us compare people who are similarly situated, huh? Does anybody see Brad Pitt subjected to any of this stuff? John Lennon?
That slime weasel Mick Jagger? Kevin Federline, for that matter? Nope.
It s gutsy to do what Spears did because she knew she d be skewered for what she s done and she didn t care, she did it anyway. I think that if we are going to have world famous men who get a mountain of cash dropped on them when they are very young, then we ought to have the same thing happen to world famous women, no? The problem is, again, that the world responds to women like Britney Spears very differently from the way they respond to similarly situated men and there s a word for that and it is sexism which this blog is here to address.
Which is why the situation is worth talking about, why Britney s decisions are interesting, and so on.
“It’s not about hating women; it’s about meeting a biological imperative to have sex with as many women as possible.
Where the hell does this shit come from?
Where do we get this stuff?
There is no biological imperative . Much less one that drives me/men to have sex with as many women as possible .
Don t buy it. That s a fucking myth (in every sense of the word) that only exists in men s lizard brains. It s a lie - a rationale that s used to cover and obscure (partially) what men are really about.
With just a little examination it soon belies a deeper imperative, one that s more metaphysical and existential than merely biological (and so more gnarly), as per the following:
Look at all those feelings! Anger. Hatred.
Sadness. And those are just the recognized and named ones. Barely disguised is the sense of being deeply shamed.
And beneath all that is the fear. Can you see it? That s quite a constellation of human emotion.
And they re all connected. To sex. Go figure.
Men fear shame like nothing else. As Rich pointed out awhile back: women are generally afraid men will rape/batter/murder them, whereas men are generally afraid women will *laugh* at them.
The fear of being found out/outed/shamed is the driver.
When we re exposed, when the covers come off, we get scared. And most become angry over that. And so the hatred.
But that s just the half of it. Some of men s hatred is born of a deep but unrecognized and unaknowledged sadness and disappointment. Put it all together and you get one hella existential predicament.
There s a word for that conglomerate sensation: it s called rage.
Everything comes down to control. Power and control.
The big lie is that having and being in control makes us safe. Well, it doesn t. I mean, look at it.
We ll always be afraid of losing that control somehow, sometime, for one thing. The other thing is that sense of control is illusory. Control is an existential impossiblity.
A cosmic futility. The hell of it is, to ourselves and others, is that we end up hating what we cannot control.
The best we can hope for is self-control.
And even that s a longshot, given the tenaciousness and subtleness of the myths and lies we live in and out from. What s imperative is that we see the myths and stories we tell each other for what they are. No better place to start than from the top.
Or bottom, as it were.
Men s sex drive isn t biological. It s metaphysical.
It s deep in the heart, not bred in the bone. We need to ask ourselves, What is it really that we re trying to get? We re not going to get any at all, not really, until we at least get that, and man-up to it, own up to that and the other, face it and deal with it, togeher.
How to make that happen I m up for suggestions.
Men’s “sex drive” isn’t biological. It’s metaphysical.
Huh? Men s sex drives are supernatural? Just when I think I ve about heard it all
Um, no.
Sex drives are not metaphysical. Neither are they biological or deep in the heart. Plain and simple, it s conditioned and learned.
We re basically Pavlov s dog. We are taught what to find sexy and stimulating. We are given instruction manuals on how to have sex.
We are taught our attitudes toward women. And we are taught how to objectify women. There s nothing in the least bit metaphysical or supernatural about it.
Humans do not live by instinct. Humans live by a belief system. So if the patriarchy decided tomorrow that ears were sexy, that s what we d all be getting all hot and bothered over.
There would be 69 ways and a million books put out on how to stimulate ears. Uncovered ears would be taboo in public. And the porn industry would be featuring ears in their centerfolds.
We’re not going to “get any” at all, not really, until we at least get that, and man-up to it, own up to that and the other, face it and deal with it, togeher. How to make that happen… I’m up for suggestions.
What s this we and together crap?
Only men can change themselves. Women can t do it for them. So ask men for suggestions, not women.
News RSS