Being Amber Rhea

So, real quick, regarding my post from last night - the part where I talked about being frustrated w/ a lot of the “privilege” talk and how it’s come to be used as a barb to throw at someone - today I came upon some posts by Renee at Womanist Musings that deal w/ privilege, and while I don’t agree entirely w/ all her points in these posts, I think her points about privilege are right on and do a good job of describing what it IS and what it ISN’T. </stupidly_long_sentence> Hence:

Not exploiting or oppressing is what each person should actively be engaged in, and to think that abstaining from using your available power for personal gain is worthy of special recognition is once again an exercise of privilege. A man that does the dishes does not deserve praise because he is a man doing the dishes. A person that eliminates racial slurs from their daily vocabulary does not deserve praise for recognizing that this language is hurtful.

Honouring each person despite the “isms” attached to their body is part of human responsibility, and part of owning personal privilege. To say that I deserve a reward or recognition is akin to belittling the people on whose behalf you labour. It keeps hierarchy in the relationship in that you are positioning yourself as good because you have lowered yourself to help and this undoes any progress that your personal labours have made.

(from Allies, Privileges and Pats On The Back)

It is not acceptable to say, I am not racist, sexist, homophobic etc and therefore any accusation of privilege is misplaced. These privileges are encoded to the body before birth simply because of the society we are all born into. We do not live outside of socialization we are the product of it.

To become defensive and immediately stammer, oh no not me, is a clear indicator of denial. It is this very state of denial that allows privilege to maintain its insidious grip on society. One cannot actively fight against interlocking isms while continuing to deny the effect that they personally have on you. How are you to convince anyone that inequality is systemic, if you as an individual continue to benefit without acknowledgement? It is dishonest and begins ally work from a false groundwork. It’s like saying I’m not racist because my best friend as a kid was black. People see that kind of commentary for exactly what it is.

(from Shall We Talk About Privilege)

As for not wanting to advance in the corporate world; what must be factored in is that women manage the majority of domestic duties, childcare and elder care, exactly how do you expect them to compete in professions that demand 100% commitment. It is not like the male run government has socialized daycare, or organized communal kitchens, or a form of exchange for housekeeping. The doting husbands that we are all supposed to worship are still not doing 50%, and men wonder why it is that women have difficulty managing career and family. Here is a tip, there are 24 hours in a day and no matter how amazing your wife or partner is, eventually she has to sleep. Apparently God rested on the seventh day so get off our collective backs, and do some damn laundry.

(from Ssssh Male Privilege Is Meant To Be A Secret)

I am the first to admit that social construction is damaging to both sexes but I must question why it is necessary to continually make this an issue on women’s blogs? There are so many aspects of sexism that go unchallenged in our society because we have normalized the marginalization of women. Feminists have had to fight, and claw to get the smallest of validation for the difficulties of living life as a woman in this phalocentric world, and yet even in these small spaces, men have managed to continually interject themselves into the debate.

(from Men In Womens Spaces, Dear God What About The Men?)

I have several posts on particular topics saved as drafts, but since I’ll probably never actually write them all, I decided I’ll just do one post addressing all or most of them. Besides, reading my archives (which I’ve been doing periodically over the past week or so, as I slowly go through and tag the old pre-WP entries and update old URLs) made me remember that that’s how I used to write my blog all the time, that’s what comes naturally to me, and that’s why and how I started blogging in the first place. So, back to basics!
Read the full post »

I figured it was as good a time as any to publicly state that I am not okay w/ the way Anthony and IACB handle themselves in a lot of these feminist blogosphere discussions. I’ve called them out and challenged them (as I would challenge anyone I disagree with or who is being inappropriate) many times, but ya know since a lot of folks seem to have a problem with differentiating individuals from the Bloggy Borg, I’m just putting it out there unequivocally.

Anthony and IACB, your comments are still welcome here if you choose to comment (not that you’re pining for my gracious extension of courtesy, but whatever) but in many, many cases I think you have come off as condescending, rude, patronizing, and engaging in a lot of verbal chest-thumping and lack of checking your privilege.

So there you go.

Ah nothing to get back into the swing of things like blog drama, right? Fuck, I was supposed to be writing about PERSONAL stuff. -On the other hand, it’s all personal. The personal is political is personal is sexual is ME.

Originally posted as a comment on Octogalore’s thread by the same name.

• I am really starting to hate the word “privilege.” Not the concept, not the legitimate analysis; but the way it’s so often tossed around as an insult and a shield. The way even saying this makes me sound like the right-wing assholes I loathe. Big ol’ FAIL stamp to all that.
• Whenever someones says something about a “soul-sucking corporate job” as if this is a generally-understood, universally-loathed thing, I bristle.
• I think people who talk about doing what you love and the money will come, or it’s more important to do something for love, passion, commitment, dreams, ideals, etc. than money, have never really known what’s it’s like not to have a safety net (or never had a circumstance come up where they had to realize they don’t have one).
• When people ask - no, expect - me to do “pro bono” web development work, it REALLY offends me. It makes me feel like they don’t appreciate my work or value my time. It comes off as them saying their time is more valuable than mine.
• I love Starbucks. Same as last year’s confession!

Go on over to Octo’s post and leave your own!

Look what I wrote a year ago. I’d like to go ahead and reiterate all the themes therein.

Okay, I need to go to sleep now… -er, as soon as the dryer cycle finishes, that is.

1. Antidepressant meds are just a crutch / “happy pills” / yet another example of the influence of Ev0l Big Pharma / alter your personality / let you avoid dealing with your problems.

1a. Depression is a “mood.”

2. If you’ve had even one sexual experience with a person of the same gender, OMG YER GAY DEAL WITH IT!!1!1 (Duh, didn’t you know sexual orientation is defined by acts?)

3. [Insert sex act here] is inherently degrading to women.

3a. Okay so maybe it’s not inherently degrading, but but but men see it in porn and that’s the way it’s portrayed, so that’s why they want it!

3b. I mean come on, most women don’t really want to do [insert sex act here].

3c. Why do you care so much about porn? Don’t you know there are REAL problems out there? Don’t worry sweetie, no one is going to take away your precious porn!

4. What?? You’re voting for Hillary because she’s a woman? That’s REVERSE SEXISM! That goes against everything feminism stands for and is totally the same thing as institutionalized sexism.

5. Bloggers are not journalists. They lack credibility, they have no editorial process, they can just post whatever they want with no sources, they’re not objective, and they’re unprofessional.

5a. Can I back up my statement with sources? I… Oh, shut up, you blogger!

6. Pole dancing is not empowering. Oh, sure, if you do it and like it, FINE, go right ahead, I’m not going to STOP YOU, but don’t try to pretend it’s a feminist choice.

7. You deleted someone’s comment from your blog? Why do you hate free speech??

To some readers, this may appear to be coming out of nowhere, but just bear with me!

I don’t think it’s right to suggest that for one person to have their voice heard, another person must not have their voice heard. For example, when Ren’s ever-endearing blog trolls trot out the tired old “Yeah Ren your blog is great and all, but what about the sex workers who don’t love their jobs like you do? Why aren’t we hearing from them?” - everyone in response seems to agree that yes, we should be hearing from them, but that does not mean Ren needs to shut up. Her voice matters just as much as theirs, and her experience is just as real and valid as theirs.

Obviously, there is always the issue of what is appropriate at a particular time or place. You probably don’t want to break the news of your recent engagement at a funeral, for example. But just because I don’t want you flapping your lips in my living room doesn’t mean you can’t or shouldn’t flap ‘em all night long in your own.

With regard to accomplishments in general, I also get a sense that all too often, we eat our own. This is why I’ve got the following quote from Octogalore in my ever-growing header quotes rotation: “We need to be able to feel good about certain achievements without falling on our swords every five seconds.” It really resonates with me.

I’ve noticed this behavior in a few organizations I’ve volunteered with, and it’s gotten to the point where I’m almost ready to bow out completely. I wonder, if someone in my “inner circle” (read: blogroll) of feminist blogging buddies got a book deal, would everyone else turn on her? Talk about how yeah that’s great, but such-and-such other person could’ve written a “better” book? Or would that only happen if the person was perceived to be white, middle class, or otherwise relatively privileged? Is it suddenly okay to draw generalizations about the lives of some people you know online, but not others? To my mind, the power of blogging lies in the idea that everyone is an individual with a unique life experience and a story to tell. And no, of course that story is not going to be totally fascinating and compelling to everyone, but it still matters in the sense that anyone’s story matters.

And, finally, I’ve never been one to enjoy wallowing. Sure, some wallowing is necessary and even cathartic from time to time; but then you identify problem areas, brainstorm possible solutions, and move forward. While it sucks that the bloggers getting book deals don’t represent a wider segment of the whole, that’s the reality right now, so what can we do to change it? We can do things like write letters to feminist- and blogger-friendly publishing companies, suggesting bloggers whose writing they might be interested in (and might not know about); we can make use of self-publishing services such as Lulu.com and use the metrics of sales from those efforts as part of a pitch to an established publishing company; and I’m sure we can brainstorm tons of other ideas that are constructive and don’t rely on tearing one person down in order to lift another up.

In various places ’round the feminist blogosphere, I have been deemed part of the (here comes your favorite word, Jenny) Sparklepony Brigade. We’ll put aside for now the fact that I can’t believe anybody is actually using that word seriously, and move along to the other reason this is particularly hilarious.

I just have to laugh, a somewhat bitter “are you fucking kidding me?” laugh at this designation. Me? Presumed to be “adhering to conventional beauty standards” (*guffaw*) and “supporting the status quo?”

If there was every any doubt that these people don’t know who I am, it has now been eliminated.

The bitter part comes from that fact that throughout middle school and about half of high school, I was the ugly girl. Looking back, I wasn’t actually ugly; but they (yes, they) had me pegged that way, and it stuck, and that was that. I was the ugly girl who dressed weird and had unruly hair and listened to weird music and couldn’t afford name brand clothing and didn’t want it anyway. They called me “freak.” When I had the audacity to actually ask out a boy, he responded by pretending to vomit; there was much approving laughter from on-lookers.

And now, people on the internet are saying I’m upholding the status quo and perpetuating beauty rituals for women! Ye gods!!

I don’t wear make-up. I have short hair because I can’t be bothered to deal with anything else (well, and because I like the way it looks on me). I shave my legs once in a while, if the stubble starts to itch. I rarely wear skirts. I don’t like a lot of pink or other “girly” stuff. Sometimes [stupid] people assume I’m a lesbian.

And it’s even funnier when you start listing out the other people who are part of this horrifying Sparklepony Army… Belledame, Kactus, Antiprincess, Trinity, Ren… seriously, we’re the ones enforcing the status quo? With what magical powers?

People say that Ren, arguably, does fit the conventional media-perpetuated beauty standard, but I don’t think she does, actually. But I guess because she admits to waxing and wearing make-up (hello, it’s part of her job), that’s enough to make her Public Enemy #1.

That is all for now. I have to go put on a skirt (yes, it’s one of those rare occasions) and get ready to go to the Flesh and Fetish Swingers Ball with Rusty.

Cross-posted from a comment I left at Ren’s blog. The blockquoted part is some very-pleased-with-herself LiveJournaler talking about me, in reference to something I said after breaking my own rule and commenting on the latest Feministe porn thread/debacle.

—

Oh, and didn’t you love that one interjection by the girl who just CAN’T IMAGINE why anyone would think that ATM is a bit off color?

Okay dumbfucks, it’s on.

I would love for somebody show to me where I said I can’t imagine why anyone would think ATM is a bit off color. (Although, the phrase “off color” sounds a little too “this offends the delicate sensibilities of the high society ladies” for me.) I do not appreciate having words put in my mouth. (You can form your own pun or metaphor here.)

What I said was, could we PLEASE stop with the judging of other people’s sexual activities, if those activities are among consenting adults. WHY IS THIS A DIFFICULT CONCEPT? Why is this controversial? You know what, nobody has to like ATM, I really don’t care, to be quite honest. What I do care about is when people start with that same old drivel about, “Oh, how could anyone like THAT, that is just so DISGUSTING, if you like that there must be something wrong with you!!” And with ATM in particular, people have a goddamn conniption fit about “OMG POOOOOO!!!11!!1″ In which case, I think calming the fuck down and getting a little education about the way the body’s plumbing actually works (assuming one does not have a medical condition that would make things different) would be a good idea. We don’t have much in the way of sex ed in this country, nor much in the way of education about our own bodies; and all of that goes double when it’s something (gasp!) “off color.”

I’m sorry, but I got over poop jokes when I was about 13. Not sure about the rest of y’all.

—

*simmers*

I will have more to say on this topic later.

First of all, I’m staying the fuck out of the latest porn thread at Feministe, because my patience is running very thin these days. But for those who are interested, the over/under on “how long will it take for this thread to derail” was 20. Turns out betting on the “under” was a good call.

And so far, Dacia is the only one speaking sense over there:

However they position themselves politically (and especially if they avoid that entirely), its extremely important to listen to people who work in the adult industry and respect their experiences and knowledge of the way the industry works. So many conversations about porn seem to spin rapidly out of control without giving voice to the people on the inside.

On a practical level, with porn, I find that people sometimes complain about issues of representation that are a function of logistics. For example: porn viewers often complain about the lack of real female orgasms in porn. As many women know, orgasms can be difficult to achieve - sometimes much more so in a roomful of expectant film crew members with hot lights and time/tape a-wasting. As a viewer, I’m totally into the real orgasms. As a producer/director they stress me out. When I used to get naked for money and had clients/photogs demand that kind of authenticity, I would get annoyed and feel put upon if I couldn’t deliver.

I’m glad she decided to drop by and attempt to bring everybody back down to Earth a little, but if I were her I wouldn’t go back another time.

ETA: Mythago is speaking sense, too:

Well, having been one of those “actual women”, I couldn’t agree more. Because my role, apparently, is to either wail about how terrible and exploited I was and how lucky I was to get out, or to STFU because if I don’t spout that line, I’m a brainwashed gender-traitor tool of the patriarchy. I’ve had some anti-porn feminists get angry with me because they’ve been talking about The Poor Sex Workers and I had the nerve to pipe up and say “You don’t speak for me.”

Argh, I must, must stay away… starting… now!

I came across yet another random blog thread this morning where it devolved into radfem hand-wringing and sticking-out-of-tongues at the so-called (by them) “YAY PR0N!!1!” crowd. (And no, I am not going to provide a link. I am sick of people going, “OMG WHY WON’T SHE PROVIDE A LINK???” My blog, my call.) As if on cue, a commenter chimed in with, “Well, Biting Beaver used to be a sex worker, and she’s anti-porn and anti-prostitution!”

This strikes me a bit like, “Well, I have a black friend, and she says it’s okay for me to use the N-word!!”

Which is, of course, one of the most fundamental trappings of unrecognized privilege - viewing one person who is a member of a group as a representative of the entire group. (So, for example, a woman who wrecks her car proves that women are shitty drivers; an unemployed Latino man proves that Mexicans are lazy; and so on.)

One sex worker’s bad experience does not negate another sex worker’s good experience; and vice versa. A fundamental concept that we’re all supposed to be keeping in mind here is that people are individuals who experience the world in unique ways, and my experience will never be like yours, or hers, or his… etc.

I don’t want to harp on this anymore, though. I don’t like to fall into the trap of just doing blog posts about, “Oh look at this shitty thing another radfem blogger said!!” because even though I blog for myself first and foremost, sometimes I do worry a bit about what people might think of feminism as a whole if they see posts like this one. -And, yes, I know that if someone draws generalizations about all of feminism based on my complaints with one miniscule segment of the feminist blogosphere, ultimately that’s their problem for not using their brains; but still, I don’t like to be negative more often than positive. However, I do feel compelled to comment on stuff like this from time to time, because it upsets me to see such sentiments expressed under the guise of feminism.

And, now, I’m off to photograph dilapidated old buildings.

Promoted from comments at Ren’s, I shall quote myself. Italicized portion is what Ren wrote that I was responding to.

—
I also felt like when I said why it is so important for me to put a sex-worker voice out there that is not the stereotype I got slammed for that for not standing with my sex worker sisters…and yeah, my mind is still circling around that one with some angry trepidation because you are damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

*nodding vigorously*

That’s why I bowed out of that conversation. Because I knew it was going to be just another exercise in “talk myself in circles, and STILL get slammed for not being absolutely perfect by EVERYONE’S standards, none of whom are projecting at all, oh no.” And I have had it up to my eyeballs with that shit, whether it comes from religious people, radical feminists, other so-called progressive types, or anywhere else. I do not need to be put under a microscope and used as anyone’s example specimen to illustrate what is wrong with X, Y, or Z theory.

So, yes, Ren, I heard you from the beginning and understand what you are getting at - challenging the stereotype is important. And it does NOT necessarily have a corollary of, “…and anyone who fits the stereotype is someone I’m going to take a big shit on.”

Nobody’s listening, and I’m feeling incredibly distressed. And now they’re talking about Melissa Gira needs a “smack-down” - without even taking the time to read the first thing about her or anything she’s written. Well FUCK YOU. Yes, YOU. People I thought I trusted are showing their asses BIG TIME and I’m disgusted with it. And no I am not linking to the thread in question, and too damn bad if you want to cry about it. Go cry to someone who gives a shit, because I am past caring.

…Post about last night’s Social Media Club event coming. It will be ranty. But, overall, I am really trying to stay positive, because there is a lot to be excited about! And don’t worry I’m not seriously seething with anger or letting it consume me or anything. BUT:

People on that thread I’m alluding to here? Fuck right off unless you want to actually LISTEN. (And yes, some of ‘em on that thread DO want to listen. But not all. Not by a longshot.) I do NOT like feeling backed into a corner.

I tried to express what I mean wrt the whole FFF thing in this thread, but apparently it’s still not coming out clear enough. Sometimes I have problems articulating what I mean clearly. Add to this the fact that sometimes it becomes difficult to tell whether it (or how much) is attributable to me not being clear enough, and how much is the other person/people not wanting to hear me. It becomes frustrating.

I need to write a separate blog post, I guess, trying to explain, once again, once and for all, what I mean. I’m tired of people - even well-intentioned people - sort of assuming that because I’m not falling in lock-step with arguments made by BA, Donna, and BFP, that I’m a-okay with the dismissive remarks about them just being “jealous” or “sensitive.” That’s bullshit, and I am in no way endorsing such stupid, petty assessments of the situation. Other people have given me a primer on the existing grievances WOC have w/ the larger feminist and political blogosphere. Magniloquence did so in the thread at sassywho’s, and then I felt embarrassed because she went to that trouble when really… none of it was news to me. But I guess something about what I wrote made her think that it would be news to me? I don’t know.

The grievances are real. WOC have been marginalized in the blogosphere, and it sucks, and it needs to stop.

But still - I am not okay w/ a lot of how the FFF fall-out went down. I do not think JV deserves to be treated as a whipping girl. I do not think it’s unfair to point out that at a certain point, all the noise gets mixed together and when you’re in a vulnerable spot, you have to retreat inward and take care of yourself and tune out the people yelling at you from all sides. And I don’t see why saying that is assumed to be a tacit endorsement of negative treatment of WOC by men and/or white bloggers, or why mentioning that JV has feelings is assumed to have a corollary of, “And the WOC bloggers’ feelings don’t matter.”

Frankly I’m tired of it all. I might do one more post to try to explain myself, but maybe not. Because I get tired of trying to explain myself. I get frustrated.

And I don’t like the assumptions being made, by some very intelligent bloggers who I consider friends and whose opinions I respect immensely, that, basically, I haven’t examined enough if I don’t agree with X, Y, and Z perspective on the matter.

It all sounds too familiar.

And YES, as a matter of fact, for anyone who cares to ask, this is all about me, because this is my blog.

I feel like this is something I could maybe explain more clearly to individual people, one-on-one, talking rather than writing. But even then, I don’t know if I’d be heard.

Queer Dewd had a lot of good things to say and so I will defer to her on much of what I’m trying to express, because she is very good at articulating things that I struggle with.

But even then, it’s not complete. There are things I have been trying to express, that apparently just aren’t coming out right.

This whole thing has left me feeling very wary about much of the blogosphere where I previously felt comfortable and at home.

From Ilyka Damen, on what happens when white folks start trying to step outside of white privilege and acknowledge the way it can color (no pun intended) the way we see things:

After awhile, you’ll start to notice you’re seeing things you never saw before, perhaps couldn’t see before. Things that made no sense to you even just a few months back, suddenly make too much sense. Where before you saw legitimate complaints against OVERSENSITIVITY and PARANOIA and JEALOUSY and PETTY DIVISIVENESS, you now see an order and a method. But the order is all out of whack and the method is brutal and graceless. The order constrains what you would see free, and the method is only used to punish whatever, or whoever, threatens the order.

Things look different, and things don’t always look so good. Your White Lens is shrinking. It isn’t filtering your vision as well as it used to. Instead of seeing everything bathed in a pale rosy glow, you see more individual colors. You see more light, too, but the light reveals much that disturbs you.

Some days you about claw your own eyes out trying to put that lens back on. Like a relationship you know is no good for you that you nonetheless return to occasionally for familiarity, for comfort, or for sex, so is that lens. But you can’t revive that dead relationship and you can’t seem to make that lens grow back to its original size, either.

Spoiled now is the way you used to see things. A lot of pleasant reading has turned coarse and awkward. Where before you would read:

I think what is most amazing to me is that this doesn’t take place in some tent in the middle of the desert or a stone hut. These people are not dressed in tribal garb — they are wearing jeans and t-shirts and the whole thing takes place in a street in what appears to be a modern town.

–and say, “Yes, how odd that is!”, now you’re aghast. You wish you could find another interpretation for this besides, “I wouldn’t be shocked by such brutal behavior from primitive savages. But from modern, Westernized people? Bizarre!”

And you know that it is anything but bizarre, and you know the author knows it too, and you know that is not what she meant, so now you worry. You worry that maybe you, too, are becoming oversensitive. And is it really important? People are dying. You should fight the real enemy. Don’t be petty. Don’t get so hung up over mere language. They’re just words! Don’t be divisive. George W. Bush is still President. Focus! Fight the real enemy.

Plenty of real oppression to tackle without you imagining more from people who mean well. Let it go.

But you will remain uneasy. You will have been reading different points of view than you once did, and you will notice something ugly the purveyors of these viewpoints have in common: They will all, at some point, or maybe often, maybe even daily, have been told to shut up and fight the real enemy. They will have been told this by people who have hurt them, even as those same people swear they mean well.

Because of this, the people you are newly reading will sometimes make the same decision you just did, the decision to let it go; but they will not always make it for the same reasons you did. Sometimes that decision will be made to stave off an inner exhaustion you don’t have. Other times it will be made in a heartache you don’t know, and still other times in a rage you can’t imagine.

No, you will not know what any of this could possibly be like. You will only know that you hate to see it.

The same holds true, too, for men who decide to acknowledge male privilege and start to look at things and situations with a critical eye.

One thing I would like to mention is that a type of defensiveness is a natural part of this process of coming to an understanding (for most folks, in my experience). If we’re all patient with each other, as long we’re willing to actively listen, learn, and grow, then the results will be profoundly positive.

Side note: Some of you might think it’s odd that I’m posting this and nodding my vehement agreement after the way I apparently have “defended” Jessica Valenti. Eh, too bad, so sad. Acknowledging white privilege and systemic oppression on various levels and for various reasons doesn’t mean everyone falls lock-step with identical views. (Not for white folks, and not for POC, either; to suggest otherwise would be offensive and reductive to all.) I stand by everything I wrote about the FFF fiasco; I believe all of it and will say it again and again if challenged. My posting of Ilyka’s words was not motivated by this specific situation, but by trends and patterns of behavior I’ve come to recognize during my 5+ years blogging - and, not to mention offline interaction. Ye gods.

The whole FFF thing? It just goes to show why I can’t write a book. I’m way too sensitive, and I wouldn’t be able to handle people shitting all over me. And you know, legitimate criticisms or not, at a certain point when you’re the subject of all that shit, it becomes hard if not impossible to differentiate the legit stuff from the self-congratulatory ad hominem. And who has the time or energy for it, anyway? It would send me spiraling into a flare-up of depression. And then, at a certain point with this stuff, people start going, “Oh, why isn’t she addressing any of our concerns?? Why isn’t she answering??” Maybe because she’s fucking exhausted and can’t stand the constant barrage of what, eventually, all just sounds like “YOU SUCK YOU SUCK YOU SUCK” - and what could she do to redeem herself, anyway?

I’m just sorry that it all turned out this way. There are constructive conversations to be had about the book’s strengths and weaknesses, but their potential is being drowned out more and more every day.

ETA: I don’t care what anyone else says… this post almost made me cry. Let’s review again… I’m highly sensitive and I also have the sometimes-blessing, sometimes-curse of being very able to put myself in someone else’s shoes. And as I’ve explained, in this whole situation I feel like I can relate to Jessica to an extent, and at a certain point it just becomes, let’s remember she has feelings.

And yes, I get it, the people with the legit critiques have feelings too. Believe me, I get it. But this isn’t a pissing contest. It’s about piling on and just backing the fuck up for a minute.

This may get me skewered but I’m past caring. Actually, I almost didn’t post any of the stuff I wrote about FFF because I felt I didn’t have the words to accurately convey what I mean. I still feel that way, but I posted it anyway.

Jessica might not even like me IRL if we were ever to meet, but still, something about this is seriously twisting my gut in the wrong way.

I was planning to write a nice, structured review, but I just couldn’t get my thoughts to be cohesive enough. It’s obvious I’ve been out of college for a while, and thus not having to write formal essays and such.

So, what follows is kind of a stream of consciousness screed, with bits and pieces of comments I left elsewhere over the past week mixed in.
—

I finished Full Frontal Feminism the other day. I’ll go ahead and warn you - this post probably won’t be pretty. Because, I’ll be honest - I’m pissed. And I don’t intend to self-censor in order to potentially not offend someone. I hate that feeling of having to choose my every single word so carefully because it might offend some person I don’t know, for a reason I can’t anticipate.

I liked the book. And, even though back when I was only 1-2 chapters in, I said that I thought it spoke to the upper class women I knew in college who thought feminism was “quaint” and viewed sexism as a thing of the past - now I’m not so sure. I mean, I still think it can speak to those women, some of them at least. But I think it also, most definitely, can speak to some middle class and working class young women. Knowing myself, I can say this for sure: if I had read this book when I was 18, it certainly would have spoken to me. Working class, depressed, socially awkward white girl living in a (verbally and emotionally; with rare occasion, physically) abusive household.

And yes, I identify with JV more than a little bit - and even more so than before, after reading the book and getting more of a picture of her experience growing up. So yes, I may get a bit personal in my review and lash out; I’ll try to keep it as confined to the book itself, but I’m also fucking pissed at the way people are ripping into her - and yeah, I get it, many of them have legit reasons to be pissed based on shit that’s gone down in the blogosphere, but from where I’m standing it looks like she’s become a goddamn punching bag, and white privilege or not for me to say that, I’m fucking saying it, because that’s what I see, and I don’t care who you are, but it’s not right to do that to someone.

Now, let me also say upfront, before anyone starts saying I’m just sucking JV’s proverbial cock… I liked the book, but I did not think it was perfect, or an end-all, be-all feminist manifesto. It had some problems. In particular I have some issues with how she seems to resort to the same old “Yeah, you can wear make-up/heels/whatever, but make sure you remember it’s not a feminist choice! Don’t kid yourself!” trope. You can do certain things as long as you feel bad about it, or, at the very least, don’t feel good (and god forbid empowered) by it. Also the marriage chapter was pretty weak (not surprising; there’s generally at least one weak chapter in any book like this that covers a broad range of topic areas) and fell into stereotyping and telling women what they should and shouldn’t do. She was very adamant in saying that women should not change their last name when they get married, for example. Chapter 11, “Beauty Cult,” was a mixed bag because I could relate to the first part of it so much that I almost started crying… it brought back some really painful memories. But the rest of the chapter fell into stereotyping again.

So about chapter 11, that reminds me. People are saying things like, where does Jessica get off talking about body image issues, when she’s young and hot. Excuse me?? That is so fucking offensive. Talk about invalidating someone’s life experiences. Plus, it sounds really high school. And she probably got enough of that kind of shit, you know, in high school. When people were abusing her because of her looks. Which, regardless of how she looks now, that’s what happened to her and that kind of thing leaves lasting scars. I should know, because that’s what happened to me. People who are dismissive about it seem to me to be lacking compassion and stuck in a state of arrested development, and yes I said it. I don’t know about the rest of you, but I don’t see myself with a completely objective eye. The way I see myself in the mirror is all mixed up in psychological shit, stemming from things that happened years and years ago. Is that so hard to understand? I’m betting that’s how it is for most people.

So yeah, I feel like I relate to Jessica. From what she wrote in this book about her own experiences growing up, I see a lot of similarities. And I know how that stuff feels. Or at least, how it felt for me. And moreover, I know how it feels to have people not take me seriously - online and off - when I try to open up about some of the most painful experiences of my life. (I’m looking at you, Amanda Marcotte.)

You know, a lot of folks in the feminist blogosphere talk about playing the “oppression Olympics.” Like back when that shit went down with Heart and ChasingMoksha, and Heart was all, oh, I can’t be racist because I married a black man, and I did it as a political statement. As if that isn’t supremely racist right there. So, when people called Heart on her bullshit, it devolved into this whole “who’s the most oppressed of all” game, and people (rightly) called bullshit on that. But, I can’t help feeling like what’s going on here is a game of oppression Olympics. As in, she’s white and not dirt poor and went to college, therefore, painful experiences in her life don’t matter or aren’t as important, and issues of oppression that don’t have to do with race (as if it’s possible to separate any of that stuff out anyway - intersectional analysis, remember?), or don’t have to do with the most extreme examples of classism possible (Queer Dewd wrote about this), don’t matter.

And the cover. What the fuck about the cover. You know what, I don’t give a shit. And I was pissed back in October when Nubian had a meltdown about it. What should Jessica have done - put a woman of color on the cover? Then wouldn’t she have been accused of just using people of color to make a point? (Which is one of the things she being accused of now, incidentally, but not because of the cover.) She has said she chose this cover because she feels like it represents her. And for all the people who are pissed because ZOMG IT’S A NEKKID WOMAN - fuck off. Seriously. That’s another reason I think it’s a good thing the cover is what it is. To challenge those old assumptions about sexy/smart that still pervade even supposedly “progressive” thought. (And yes, I know, I’ve heard the complaints about “well that’s not sexy to me.” You know what I mean. Give me a better word and I’ll use it.) Plus, if that cover can jump off the shelves to people and potentially sell more books? All the better. If that’s what it takes to get some people to read it, and they end up seeing the benefits of feminism, then awesome. (Plus the fact that authors have very little say over the cover, but QD already wrote about that in detail, so I won’t bore you. Suffice it to say, the way some people were going on and on about it, I was thinking, “Your ignorance is showing.”)

Do I think more women of color should have book deals of their own? YES. Absolutely. But I don’t understand why that should mean this book can’t exist. Yeah, yeah, no one said that - not in so many words exactly. But the sentiment has been floated; it doesn’t take much to read between the lines. “Oh, if only she had done this; if only she had changed that.” Until suddenly, it’s a completely different book.

As Queer Dewd has pointed out, Seal Press has a history of publishing feminist books by women of color and other traditionally marginalized feminist voices. They tend to specialize in niche areas. And anyway, why should one book be all things to all people? It can’t. It’s impossible. It would be stupid to try.

I do think there are areas where Jessca could/should have done more when it comes to talking about how certain issues affect WOC. For example, chapter 8, about motherhood. Barely a page is devoted to the fact that while society expects white, middle/upper class women to be baby-making machines, the same does not hold true for WOC and lower class women. She sort of glosses over it. She devotes a little more time to the related issue of eugenics and forced sterilization in chapter 5, when she talks about organizations like CRACK advertising in poor black neighborhoods; but in general, the coverage of that whole area was pretty weak. On the other hand, the stuff in chapter 5 was probably sufficient, given what I understand to be the book’s intended audience, and the fact that it’s a primer rather than an in-depth examination of any particular issue.

Oh, and about the language? Well, there were parts of it that I didn’t like, but it had nothing to do with there being “too much cursing” - I mean, just take a look at this blog; I drop F-bombs like they’re going out of style. People who have a pearl-clutching attack because of that can blow it out their asses. What I didn’t like was the few times Jessica fell into ad hominem; it wasn’t often, but it did happen. There was a line about “prudes,” for example. That was unnecessary, and I feel like it actually kind of undermined the valid, strong point she’d just made.

—
Okay! This isn’t in any kind of order (obviously). Later I might update with links to other blog posts, and such. I’m feeling too lazy to do that at the moment, because it’s late and I need sleep. A bunch of people have written about it… Queer Dewd, Ren, Blackamazon, Petitpoussin, Donna, Sylvia, Jill at Feministe, and many others who I probably haven’t read. Google ‘em.

More to come, I’m sure.

Dear Denizens of Bloglandia,

Do not shit all over my friends.

Especially do not shit all over my friends at some blogs, and then come over to their blog(s) and act all nicey-nice and pretend that you care about dialogue. I’m not buying it.

K thx bye.

Luv,

Amber

Via My Private Casbah.

Lately, I keep going back to a conversation I had with a friend several months ago… basically the gist of it is, I shouldn’t take such great pains to explain myself. I shouldn’t expend so much energy trying to make sure every asshole understands what I mean. Because it really ends up being an exercise in futility. All that really matters is that I understand myself, my motivations, my needs, and so on. And why am I so concerned about what a bunch of assholes think, anyway? Some people are just never going to get it, no matter what I say. They have made up their mind about me. They’ve created a little cartoon version of me in their head, and that’s what they’re sticking to; they’re sure as shit not going to take a minute to actually listen to the words that are coming out of my mouth. (And, for the record, I can’t type or read that last clause without hearing Chris Tucker screaming it at Jackie Chan.)

Here are a few outtakes from the most recent craptastic Pandagon thread:

Animeg said:

I think Amber is a feminist, just one opposed to thinking about power dynamics in sex, which confuses me, but much does these days.

WTF. See, this is what I’m talking about. And they wonder what I mean by people putting words in my mouth! (I’ll get to that quote.) I said I didn’t understand why everything always had to be construed as a power play. I didn’t say I’m opposed to thinking about power dynamics in sex. Geez, talk about making a logical leap there! Give me a goddamn break.

Or, is it more along the lines of this…

For all the rabbitting on radfems do about “thinking critically about your choices” and “examining them in the larger social context,” I definitely get the impression that all that talk applies only to people who agree with them. If I say, “Yes, I absolutely agree with you that people should think critically about their choices and examine them in the larger social context! I spend a lot of time doing that! And the conclusion I’ve reached for myself is…” - well, if that conclusion isn’t in line with what Radfem X thinks or believes, then obviously, I haven’t been thinking critically, and/or I’m just a poor deluded victim. But you can bet your last bottle of lube that the moment I say (for example), “Actually, you know what, you’re right; all porn is bad” - Radfem X will praise me for my superior critical thinking skills.

And yes, I know Animeg isn’t a radfem (or at least, I’m not aware of her IDing as one)… I wasn’t singling her out. I’m just saying.

Moving right along…

Auguste said:

To follow it up with a paragraph which doesn’t really apply to the blow job/blow jobs in question is just silly.

Oh? Is it? What about that whole “larger social context” business? If I remember correctly, in the first incarnation of the Great Blowjob Wars of 2006, plenty of radfems were lamenting that so many deluded women were focusing on individual blowjobs, rather than looking at the social construct of The (Platonic?) Blowjob and all its patriarchal, oppressive implications.

And, you know what, I’m not denying that those implications exist; they do! I just don’t know how much we accomplish by constantly restating the obvious. Because the radfems in that debate didn’t seem to like the idea of women “reclaiming” blowjobs as empowering, either. It’s all a power play, and Teh Patriarchy™ always wins. Is that really the final word on the matter? It’s enough to make anybody depressed as hell.

But anyway. I’ve digressed. My point: I was trying to tie “the blowjob in question” into the larger issue at hand (ha), but apparently that’s only okay if someone you agree with does it.

Chris Clarke said:

Yeah, having someone suggest that you examine your life is exactly the same as oral rape.

Oh, Chris Clarke, why? I like you, I really do. You’re a great writer and I thought you had a keen sense of irony. Might I gently suggest that you re-read the post - on Pandagon, no less! - from August 22 about irony and “snark” and how they’re used online?

Punkass Marc said:

My god, I thought I was going to have a heart attack when Amber compared feminists shoving words into your mouth (whatever that means) to oral rape.

There’s sex positive and then there’s “so what? it was just oral rape.” BIIIIG difference, folks.

Oh, Marc, bless your heart. See there? Where you said you thought you were going to have a heart attack? You were being sarcastic! Hyperbolic, even! In an attempt to really get your point across at just how disgusted you were by my… sarcasm.   ::crickets::

I was tempted to write a big long paragraph about how, guess what? I don’t think oral rape is okay! But that is so fucking stupid, why waste my time? Guess what, all you Einsteins out there? NO SHIT, I don’t think any kind of rape is okay! I love how quickly we leapt from (merely) misconstruing my words to, “AMBER RHEA THINKS RAPE IS A-OKAY!!1!”

(Ah, fuck, that’s going to get me some Google hits now, isn’t it? Argh…)

More later. I have decided to take up the Radfem Challenge™ of, “Show me where any radfem ever said X!” They love to talk about the “strawfeminist.” Well, I’ve got some stuffing for them.

Well, she’s back at it. I didn’t want to get all caught up writing another blog post, because I have work to do, dammit (my CSS kung-fu is reaching new heights lately) - but I just need to get this out.

I think the bloggers who compared Twisty to a grown-up “mean girl” were spot on. We’re not in high school and she’s not the captain of the cheerleading team, but goddamn if everything else doesn’t fit. She writes all-or-nothing statements like (from the first BJ post that started whole kerfluffle last week), “no woman, since the dawn of the patriarchal co-option of human sexuality, has ever actually enjoyed this submissive sexbot drudgery” - and then wonders why plenty of women take offense? Seriously, is it really that difficult to understand, especially for someone who seems to be very intelligent? In one sentence, she has made a sweeping statement about all women (implying that women everywhere are so alike that there’s no need to bother speaking about them as individuals), labeling them as “sexbots” (reducing women to a sex class? hmm, where have I heard that before, and from whom?) and making an all-encompassing statement about a sex act as “submissive” and “drudgery” - leaving no room for argument on any of those points. Congrats, Twisty, you’ve effectively backed us into a corner. Way to alienate countless other feminists. That’s really excellent for the cause, there.

At some point in that first thread or the one following it, someone came along and said something like, “The fact that everyone is paying so much attention to this means that Twisty has hit on the truth!” Well, now I can’t find the blog, much less the post or comment, where somebody pointed out the glaring faultiness in that kind of argument… Belledame, I think it was on your blog? If so, feel free to link to it. Update: here’s the post. I was mentally cheering “right on!” while I read it.

But anyway, back to this latest trainwreck. Here are a few of the more ludicrous comments that I had to talk back to (we know the virtue of talking back, of course). And I’m doing so not because the commenters have “hit on the truth.” I’m not even touching Twisty’s post itself… I don’t have all day, after all.

I’m personally inclined to think that, while it may be fun or create bonding or what have you, swapping bodily fluids is pretty much intrinsically icky no matter which particular fluids they are. (Yes, even breastfeeding a baby.)

Well, hon, you’re entitled to your opinion, of course, but to me that smacks of some serious body-image issues and a pretty hefty serving of OCD. (This commenter goes onto ramble about “germs” for a few more sentences.)

Did you know that you are “reprehensible,” and you are suggesting that straight women (i.e. women who like giving blowjobs; apparently there is no distinction between those two concepts) be sent to the back of the bus?

Actually, most of the people who responded to the anti-BJ fracas took great pains to make it clear that no person should ever do any sex act that s/he is not comfortable with, and should not feel pressured or obligated to do so. Careful wording was used to stress that obviously not all het women (or any other sexual orientation) enjoy [insert sex act here], nor should they be assumed to. So, remind me again who was lumping all het women together WRT their feelings on blowjobs?

And on this very blog,women gush about something which is objectively disgusting because of how much pleasure it gives their mista.

Okay, leaving the whole “objectively disgusting” part aside, because that’s just ridiculous… actually, “how much pleasure it gives their mista” was not the only reason women were “gushing” about blowjobs. Most talked about how much pleasure they get from it themselves. Isn’t feminism supposed to be about agency and self-determination? (See also figleaf’s thoughts on the matter, including a steamy comment from yours truly.)

“wahhh, but feminism means that I can do what I want without ever having to think about the context, society or history or the rest of the world’s women, and anyone daring to suggest that I might examine that, is an evil hairy dyke telling me what to do and it’s all their fault that everything’s horrid and that I broke a nail and the republicans are still in power”

No, dumbass, try again. No one ever said any such thing. In fact, one central theme I detected in most of the sexpos responses was the importance of personal examination, challenging assumptions about sex (whether those assumptions come from feminists, Christians, or anyone else), taking the time to think about the whys and wherefores behind one’s sexual proclivities and how the cultural climate might play into that, and acknowledging that sex does not exist in a vacuum. But, sure, the sexpos feminists who took the time to write thoughtful, measured responses are the ones with reading comprehension problems. Whatever helps you sleep at night, champ.

Well shoot, isn’t a cock hanging out of a woman’s mouth the picture that comes to mind when we think of women’s liberation?

Ah, sarcasm… how often you are abused. To me, that comment sounds an awful lot like the same old rhetoric coming from a different source. Seriously, let’s once and for all get past the inane stereotype of “Women can’t be sexual and intelligent” - or, to be more germane, “If she sucks cock, she’s a bimbo with no brain.”

Well, now I’ve made my way down to the comments that liken suburban housewives to slaves on antebellum Southern plantations, and I just have to stop. Now, look - this is not a denial that there are women who live in a state of unquestioned subsurvience to men. Far too many women do, and that problem urgently needs to be overcome. I just don’t see how refusing to give head - especially if giving head is what you want to do - furthers that goal at all. But maybe it’s me. I’m a tool of Teh Patriarchy® living in deep-seated denial, after all. (There can be no other way!!)

I’ve spent far too much time on this and have now gotten behind on work. Go figure. Anyway, also be sure to read Rachel Kramer Bussel’s awesome blog post, “Feminist blowjobs and other oxymorons”. That gal is a fierce wordsmith who makes a hell of a lot of sense.

You know, I’ve just about had it up to here - *places hand on forehead in a gesture not unlike a salute* - with the argumentative style of projecting one’s personal experience onto the entire world. “I don’t like X” or “X isn’t right for me” becomes “No one likes X” or “X is wrong” [the "for everyone" is implicit there].

Now look, I’m not saying I’ve never been guilty of this style of argument. AFAIK, we all have been guilty of it to some extent. However, like bringing someone’s physical appearance into an argument, it’s one of those things that I try to stay vigilent about in myself, and I offer a correction if I catch myself doing it.

One of the most egregious and ridiculous examples recently came from Twisty at I Blame The Patriarchy. Her iron-fisted condemnation of all blowjobs, everywhere has sparked a bit of a kerfluffle (to use Anthony’s word) in the feminist blogosphere. There was a similar reaction to Twisty’s BDSM thread from a few months ago, but on a smaller scale. More bloggers, who were otherwise inclined to defend Twisty, took offense at this latest thread because, let’s face it, more people are into BJs than BDSM, and therefore (unfortunately) more people are inclined to defend them.

If, as Twisty claims, no woman truly likes blowjobs, then I suppose I am either 1) lying to myself, my partner, and the world; or 2) actually a man. Discuss.

Coincidentally, I came across another post this morning which, in all its heteronormative status quo reinforcement, may appear to be the polar opposite of the radfem position. But, nay! Look a little closer (it doesn’t take much) and you will see the same all-or-nothing, “what’s right for me is right for everyone” attitude that I’ve pointed out before in religious fundies and radfems alike:

As a woman who was single for most of my adult life (I married late), proclaiming the [sic] singles “couldn’t be happier” is a crock and we all know it. They certainly could be happier, and I bet that each and every one of those allegedly deliriously happy single people would rather NOT be single.

Thanks, Modestly Yours! I will now go purchase some of your merchandise that equates me with a bovine.

There’s really no call for either of those posts, or the ensuing firestorm over each. If both bloggers had simply written from the position of what they’ve found to be workable in their own lives, instead of telling all of us that we must live as they do, far fewer people would be (rightfully) getting their panties in a wad.

Belledame nicely sums up the problem with Twisty’s Blowjob Thread®:

“I think [sexual act] is gross and vile, and I can’t understand why anyone would do it”–perfectly fine.

“No woman likes [sexual act]“–not so much.

Or, well, go ahead and say it, but then don’t be surprised when people take umbrage.

Because with the first one, sure, you can take offense at the “gross and vile,” but really the only argument is “well, I don’t”–and say-hey! both positions can exist!

But if one responds to

“No woman likes blahblah”

with

“I’m a woman and I like blahblah”

–then you’re not just expressing a different sensibility, you’re now in the position of having to defend an entire worldview. Which gets a lot more irritating when the original speaker, instead of saying, even something like:

“Okay, you’re right, my bad. In my experience, blah blah is gross and icky, the very thought gives me a deep-down queasy feeling; it makes me feel soiled and degraded and objectified; and I truly don’t get how anyone could like it, but, hey, if you do, you do, I guess”

instead goes, essentially,

“well, clearly you’re just kidding yourself; this is How The World Works. [i.e. appeal to not-named authority]“

Anyway. Expect more on the whole BJ issue later - maybe here, or maybe as a guestblogging post somewhere else. We shall see. Either way, I gotta throw in my 2 cents, because I’ve been added to the Wikipedia page on sex-positive feminism.