Being Amber Rhea

Hey, guess what? I’m hosting a panel at BlogHer Atlanta! Here’s the description:

The “Naked” Blogging Double Standard
At just about every BlogHer event we end up discussing the ramifications of “naked” blogging; that is, blogging your true self. Blogging’s low barrier to entry has provided a platform for everyone, and particularly women, to tell our own stories, to create a more diverse cultural record than has been historically typical, and to own our experiences and how transparently we choose to share those experiences. Every blogger draws their boundaries differently. In a survey BlogHer conducted a couple of years ago bloggers indicated that it was more taboo to discuss finances on their blog than sex! But, let’s get real: Really? We’re not sure we’re buying it. Is anyone else out there blown away by how much conflict the issues of gender, sex and sexuality (and society’s expectations of how women “should” behave) still stir up… and by how much judgment is still thrown at women who ignore the admonishment that “nice girls don’t?”

Every year at BlogHer the debate rages: Can we talk about shoes and still be taken seriously? Well, let’s take it a step further: Can women talk openly about sex and still be taken seriously? And is it different for men? Women certainly don’t agree on the answer, so you can be sure the answer is even more unclear in segments of society, industry and the blogosphere that are more male-dominated. How do we challenge that status quo - and support women in their choices, even when they might not be our choices? Join Amber Rhea, one of the women leading the charge for change, in a frank discussion designed to expose the naked blogging double standard and challenge our preconceived notions of what it means to be taken seriously.

Many thanks to super-cool Elisa for giving me this opportunity. (Gee, do I sound like I’m accepting any Emmy or something?) I hope you folks reading this will come and help make it an interesting panel. (I resisted the urge to say, sarcastically, “join the conversation.”) You can register for BlogHer Atlanta here. And here’s the run-down of what the BlogHer Reach Out Tour is all about, if you’re too lazy to click through:

BlogHer’s Reach Out Tour:
Register now for BlogHer ATLANTA ‘08!

When?
Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Where?
Georgia Tech Hotel & Conference Center
800 Spring St NW
Atlanta, Georgia 30308
404.347.9440

What is BlogHer ATLANTA ‘08 About?
For the first time ever, BlogHer is launching a two-week tour, bringing highlights from the annual event to six different cities. Each of these one-day conferences will feature a broad range of topics and speakers, a cocktail reception for networking and socializing, and a little bit of local flavor. We’ll be focusing on topics that seem to resonate strongest in each city, and looking for your local bloggers to lead the discussions.

BlogHer ATLANTA is the fifth stop on the six-city Reach Out Tour, and we’re looking forward to spending time with the many and varied “Hotlanta” bloggers. Details about the agenda, speakers, and sponsors coming soon. In the meantime, please sign up to receive the BlogHer Conference Newsletter and get announcements as they happen. Or sign up to receive our Conference RSS feed.

Who Should Attend?
BlogHer is open to anyone and everyone who considers themselves part of the blogosphere, and is particularly focused on highlighting the skills and talents of women who blog. All ages, ethnicities, genders, and levels of blogging experience are encouraged to attend.

Additional Info:

• Every stop on the tour will feature a track specifically designed for new and beginning bloggers.
• The cocktail reception will take place on-site at the hotel.
• If you’re thinking about bringing your partner, spouse, or kids — great! If your partner is not interested in attending the programming with you but would like to join us for the cocktail parties, that ticketing option is available.

Fees:
BlogHer ATLANTA ‘08 costs $100 for the full day, and this includes admission to the cocktail reception.

BlogHer will be staying on-site at the Georgia Tech Hotel and Conference center. If you’re interested in staying there as well, please call (800) 838-2060. Please note: We do not have a BlogHer group rate available at this venue.

Note: You will not be required to enter any billing information before you’ve had an opportunity to review and select from the various registration options; however, BlogHer cannot issue refunds.

About BlogHer:
BlogHer has developed one of the most influential communities by, for, about and of women who blog. BlogHer’s mission is to create opportunities for women bloggers to pursue education, exposure, community and economic empowerment through our online platforms and conferences.

More to come… must get back to work now.

Briefly, because I have to wrap a few things up before I leave the office and head home to get ready for pole dancing class… which is particularly timely given some of the links I’m about to provide.

Yes, no surprise, shit like this and this (check the comment from “L”) downright enrages me. And even that word, I think, does not do justice to the pure RAGE I feel when I see people DENYING MY AGENCY AS A HUMAN BEING, denying my very existence, denying that I am an intelligent, capable, self-aware woman who is CONSTANTLY examining and reflecting on my own life and the choices I make. It hurts the most when it comes from other women, in particular other feminists.

I don’t know how or what to write about this shit anymore. Ren has written rounds and rounds of sense on her blog, as have many others; but Ren has been particularly prolific (and repetitive, because apparently it’s just NOT GETTING THROUGH to some people). Frankly I don’t know how she has the energy anymore. It drains me, to constantly try so hard to get people to understand the simple fact of, “This is my life, this is my truth, this is WHO I AM, and you don’t have to like it but you DO have to accept it, and accept that I have done enough ‘examining’ for the both of us, thankyouverymuch.”

It enrages me, and it makes me feel sick, and sad, and just awful about humanity, actually. Because why is it such a difficult concept to convey, that my life is mine, my choices are mine, and just because they differ from yours that does not mean I’m damaged or stupid? Why is it so hard to see that accepting the same old stereotypes of women who are openly sexual (not to mention women who work in the sex industry!) as stupid or damaged or victims or villains is nothing more than some seriously OLD-SCHOOL PATRIARCHAL BULLSHIT? It HURTS to have that same old double standard inflicted on me by other women, by other FEMINISTS.

This post gets the “hypocrisy” tag because, as I said to Elisa the other night, that’s what it is, plain and simple.

Pole dancing, for example? The smug characterizations of it as “empowerful” or “degrading” and whatever other bullshit so-called feminist bloggers (not to even mention non-feminists, especially anti-feminist men; holy shit, I can’t even go there, I would get damn near suicidal) say about it, talking OUT OF THEIR ASSES, assuming I must be doing it for my boyfriend (!!!!!!) or whatever else… holy fucking shit I cannot take it anymore. But guess what I DO know, assholes? That when I’m pole dancing, I feel joyful and whole, I feel a happiness that I rarely feel at any other time that permeates my entire being, I feel ALIVE - and the last thing on my mind is what “Teh Menz” might be thinking (especially because nine times out of ten, there AREN’T ANY MEN PRESENT anyway).

I don’t know how many times I can say this before it will get across. And maybe it never will - which is the part that hurts the most.

From Apostate:

Back to my bosses… there’s something in their voices, a quality of how they speak when they are issuing orders, disagreeing, taking an antagonistic position. I believe it’s what people call “strident” when it’s coming from women and “authoritative” when it comes from men. And I’m serious: it gets me fucking hot.

I actually get a high surrounded by these strong women. What’s the smiles of men approving of my tits compared to the knowledge that kick-ass, strong as hell women have my back?

They don’t give an inch. They win arguments. They carry their points. They aren’t afraid of retorting sharply to the condescension of a man. They’re bitches. And you bet, they’re seen as such by most of the people they deal with, but damned if they care.

I’m learning. My voice has always, at times, acquired that strident quality but only if the situation was right. I still keep it consciously out of my voice very often because I have more superiors than juniors (as an aside, gaining worldly status - professional, ideally - is absolutely necessary to achieving full bitch status). But the bitch inside me is not very well-hidden. When I recently tried to tell one of my bosses that I was “easy-going” she gave me a funny look and then said, “Yeah, I get that a lot too,” and then we both burst out laughing.

I’ve noticed. You get old enough, you’re a woman - an intelligent woman - for long enough, and you become a bitch. There is no way around, unless people’s attitudes regarding powerful women change. Your voice and manner become strident acquire authority. People may not like you, but you get shit done, people do as you say and yes, you get respect.

Women like this inspire the hell out of me, too. I’m reminded of what my (awesome, female) lead business professor said in grad school, to my project group, which was made up of all women:

“A stern man is a stern man. A stern woman is a bitch.”

And I think most of us knew it by then, anyway - seriously, you learn it pretty early and it gets beaten into your head repeatedly - but coming from her, there was something inspiring about the way she said it. Yes, that double standard SUCKS and we have to continually fight to change it; in the meantime, though, I’ll happily be the ball-buster, the cunt, the bitch, whatever else, and anyone who has a problem with it can attempt to blow it out their tightly-clamped ass. It sure beats the alternative.

I’m also reminded of something Sassywho wrote a while ago. Her blog has since gone invitation-only, but I have a quote of it saved in an old post:

I am the Cunt who challenged your ideas in a meeting, and it even turns out I was right. I am the Whore who has slept with more men than your quota for a woman who deserves your respect, even if it is less than your number. I am the Fucking Slut who responds to your verbal abuse while I am bartending by making you wear that beer you just ordered.

I am the Bitch who wants equality in a relationship and refuses to be your mother. I am the Ballbuster who isn’t intimidated by your masculinity. I am the Wife that was not okay with your 15+ affairs, so I had an affair myself before I left. I am the Fucking Bitch who filed a restraining order on your ass and prosecuted you to the fullest extent of the law when you tried to intimidate me and my friends with harassment to keep me in the relationship. I am a Misogynist’s worst nightmare.

YES.

I fully support Ren declaring herself the god-emperor of Rome for the day.

Common sense, people. Let me show you it.

I do not understand that while there is no question that sexism affects everyone, there is such a refusal to see that there is a great difference between “slut” and “stud”. Or that cat-calling, honking, or otherwise making loud overtures towards a woman will, often, annoy the shit out of that woman and it is, generally, not something men have to deal with as often, if at all. I give a thumbs up to the idea that attraction is natural, but a thumbs down to “society expects/forces this behavior on us, thus I must”…the God Emperor of Rome believes in free will. And that both men and women are capable of employing it and using it to not do what society tells them to do all the time.

And seriously, I do not understand why more men are not, apparently, offended at the idea that they’re basically mindless automatons doing whatever society or “biology” (to which they often nebulously appeal) tells them to do. ‘Cause I’d be pretty offended if people were suggesting I’m incapable of making my own decisions. Oh wait, people are suggesting that, and yeah, I’m offended!

Sometimes my mind just boggles at the, well, mind-boggling stupidity of it all.

Which reminds me of the title of a post I need to write: “I am not a patient person.”

I heart this post by Debauchette. An excerpt:

Sex with someone changes over time in interesting and beautiful ways. Aggressive sex tends to expand my boundaries; intimate sex tends to deepen the territory within those limits. It allows me to shut off my brain, to be primal, physical, and open, and to experience someone else in an equally primal state. It heightens my empathy. It reminds me to stay in the moment.

And promiscuity was an important part of my development as a woman. Promiscuity made it possible for me to better understand myself, my emotional needs, my kinks, my physical range, my priorities, as well as my relationship to other people. When we accuse women (never men, always women) of having no respect for their bodies when they sleep [with] many men, we’re working from the assumption that sex itself is degrading to women (never men), when the contrary should be true. That nagging, pervasive Judeo-Christian construct of sex as some corruptive force keeps us defensive and nervous when we should be forthright and proud.

My rejection of sex-as-sin morality isn’t new - I think every major artistic movement has fucked out of social, sometime political, defiance, but it never seems to stick, maybe because it’s mostly men who are doing the rejecting, the fighting, and the fucking. Or maybe because history is predictable and repetitive - there’s always a backlash, and then a backlash to the backlash. Whatever it is, I’m just another promiscuous blip in a continuum of irreverent fucking.

Via Melissa (I would never read Gawker Media blogs if it weren’t for her!), powerful words from someone called Slut Machine, on Jezebel:

I’m pissed. It’s an anger that’s been on a slow boil that’s beginning to bubble over, and at this point, there’s no putting a lid on it. I’ve been writing about sex on a pretty public platform for some time now, at first anonymously, and then under my real name. I’ve had to endure ignorant assumptions and cheap shots made about my looks, my weight, my vagina, my tits, my sexual health, my mental health, my morality, my character — and all for what? Being honest? For liking sex? I’ve poured my guts out all over my keyboard, and I’m well aware that that invites criticism, particularly on the internet, where people think they can say whatever the fuck they please — in the most offensive manner possible that they would never employ in real life — with impunity because they’re protected behind a shroud of anonymity. It’s frustrating. And lemme tell you, I am so sick of people telling me, “You write about sex and personal issues. You have to accept that people will sling insults.” Fuck. That. Shit. I don’t have to accept it. I refuse to accept it. Mostly because I know that this wouldn’t happen if I were a man.

Rock on, lady! I can relate. (Today’s understatement.)

And yeah, this is related to the last post because it’s yet another manifestation of the sexual double standard and bullshit sexism in our society. (I kind of hate whenever I type “in our society,” because it reminds me of freshman year of college when my friend Kira and I used to hang out in Washington Square Park between classes with this very disaffected emo guy who was in a punk band, and one time Kira and I went to see them play and their music was all screaming commentary, and one song was just repeating “society” and “brutality” over and over, and Kira said, “I can’t listen to songs with the word ’society’ in them.” But really, there’s no other way to put it that I can think of.)

Octogalore is back in the blogging game after a hiatus, and one line in particular from her post today resonated with me:

“Often, as women, we leave ourselves last in our efforts to be about everything.”

I don’t identify with the entire post, but that line really struck me. I’m just going to repost what I said in a comment there…

This is something I struggle with a lot. And I think it’s partly due to how women are socialized: as caretakers. We are socialized to put others’ needs ahead of our own, and told this is a virtue. And when you’ve been getting that message from day 1, it’s pretty damn hard to resist.

But I try. I push back against those feelings that tell me I’m selfish if I take care of myself or if I don’t donate to every cause or volunteer on every committee or whatever.

And to be honest this is why I had to take a step back from certain corners of the blogosphere. It was making me feel too guilty, reading about all these causes I wasn’t involved in, and the not so subtle undertone of being a bad person if I wasn’t vocal for every cause out there.

—

This part is true too, and I get pissed off at how it’s supposedly so “hypocritical” to point out the glaringly obvious… well, hypocritical from a male liberal definition, of course. It’s funny (not ha-ha funny) how quickly the mask comes off, isn’t it?

How many guys do you know in 2-income households who are doing maybe 10-30% of the household/childcare work and don’t feel concerned in the slightest? Or, how many guys feel like if they are making money and changing the occasional diaper or attending the occasional Little League game, they don’t need to keep themselves in shape? Guys who wear your bra size but look pityingly at your miked Lean Cuisine? OK, you can stop counting now.

Mm-hmm. Now somebody will come out of the woodwork and tell me I’m being antithetical to feminism and a reverse sexist, and this is why they call themselves a humanist not a feminist, and blah blah.

But it’s true. And we’ve gotta keep pushing against that shit so it’s NOT the norm. Not that guys should feel über-stressed all the time either. But it’s not fair to have different expectations for men and women parents. That’s called a double standard, after all.

Via thoughts of an erotic laborer:

A third assumption made in the media that I find especially troubling is the unchallenged double standard between prosecuting prostitutes, and letting clients walk. So on the one hand, they are saying that Spitzer did something beyond the pale of morality, that calls into question his ability to be part of a family unit, and on the other they are saying that what he did generally doesn’t even merit prosecution. No big deal. Unless you happen to be a prostitute, in which case you deserve to go to jail.

I already posted a quote of the day, so this one will have to be for tomorrow (let’s just pretend I do these on a regular basis). Susan Mernit has written a seriously kick-ass BlogHer post, and really I should just say this is the post of the day instead of the quote of the day, because it’s hard to choose an excerpt.

I was going to write a post, at my friend Viviane’s urging, about women sex bloggers who are persecuted and their blogs shut down because their frankness offends members of their extended real world community, but I think the real issue we need to talk about is the high price women are made to pay, again and again, both for being sexual and for speaking their mind.

It’s not about the blogs, you see, it’s about the right for complete self expression. In other words, it’s about being silenced.

In my view, as much as we have strong women coming forth to share their experiences and beliefs, the culture at large is still making those who don’t fit the standard models—whether because of their sexual practices or their social mores—pay a price, and this is particularly true for women.

This kinda coincides with my latest Download Squad post (note the warning label is still intact, with irony apparently lost), but Susan is more eloquent. Read the whole thing. Oh, and she mentions Dacia and Paris Hilton one right after the other. Ha!

(But Susan, one question… Dave Winer is your friend? Really? Glad you guys get along, but geez, personally I cannot be friends with guys who say shit like, “Women are always accusing men of being sexist!” Cue tiny violin, take 5,676,372.)

There has been a whole lot of awesomeness at Bound, Not Gagged lately (in addition to their usual awesomeness, that is), in response to Melissa Farley’s latest piece of “research.” I urge everyone to go read all the good stuff there, listen, think, and learn.

There’s so much kick-ass writing there that it’s almost impossible to choose a blockquote representative of the whole. But Amanda really nails it with this post, so I give you the following quotage:

Today’s feminists rail against prostitution. They reduce women to their orifices and make judgments based on sexual activity - the exact same crime they accuse all men of doing to them. I fail to see the difference. One person who bases my value as a woman on my baby-making abilities and purity is pretty much the same as any other person who does - regardless of gender.

Well, two things, actually; of which two blog posts this morning have reminded me.

1. The “Thirteen is trouble!!1!!! OMG!!1!!1″ thing. Veronica wrote about it. She says she felt insulted by it. So did I - especially because I was such a ridiculously well-behaved kid, all around. When people would start with that “ooooh the teenage years are the hard part!” crap, I would, like Veronica, want to behave like a crazy person, just because it seemed expected of me. But I never had the stones to actually do anything “bad.” And that made me annoyed with myself. But that’s another story. Anyway, the whole “teenagers are scary” thing always pissed me off because it seemed so dismissive, and made me feel like I was being set up for damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

2. The “make them do something they aren’t ready for” thing. Rootie wrote about it in passing, in a very touching post about her son’s 16th birthday. That bit stood out at me, though, as it always had; because from the time I was old enough to recognize myself as a sexual being, it always annoyed the shit out of me. And my annoyance only grew stronger as I got into my later teen years. Because, I was ready for that elusive “something.” And I was so frustrated at how girls were always cast as not being ready, and being pressured by boys who didn’t give a shit about their feelings; and boys were always cast as being ready at the drop of a hat, girls’ feelings be damned. There was nowhere that I fit in that script. The idea of a girl having active desires of her own, having agency, pursuing things she wanted, and - gasp! - at the same time being capable of recognizing others as people with feelings and desires of their own, was apparently beyond the pale. (Or, of course, girls were sluts. That was the other option. But again, it was all about them “letting” the boys “do things to them.” No agency. Always passive.)

And that’s what I think of that.

Ren rocks. And her post today about her faithful blog trolls (including the extremely annoying “concern” variety) seems particularly apt given… well, just see for yourself:

I look around at a lot of other people, homosexuals, BSDM enthusiasts, bisexuals, exhibitionists, other assorted “pervs and freaks” and I think…well, what about them? What about us? I am one of those people…and guess what, y’all, we’ve all suffered too for our sexuality. We’ve been stereotyped, called sick, cast out by family and friends, insulted, made to feel bad or lesser or wrong for liking what we like, doing what we do…

Read the whole post.

It’s great when you can get past the bullshit and just be. Be who you are, do what you love, and allow others the room to do the same - regardless of whether it’s what you love. And, for as much as it’s tossed around as snark, there really is something to be said for, “I’m a unique, special snowflake - just like everyone else.”

(Post about last night’s Social Media Club Atlanta meeting coming soon, when I have time.)

Okay, this is just too damn funny. Where to begin…?

I don’t really know what BlogNetNews is or why I’m supposed to care. Anyone can build an aggregator, but the blogosphere relies on community buy-in, and apparently some of my fellow Georgia bloggers think BNN is something worth noticing, or at least something not worth laughing at? I don’t know. I remember hearing about it a few months ago at Grayson’s, then I forgot; then Sara blogged about it yesterday.

– Okay. I feel the need to interject something here, given the profound lack of basic reading and listening ability many people demonstrated during the fallout of the Creative Loafing hunk-of-shit blogosphere article. People who apparently couldn’t see beyond their own shit got all hung up on, “These folks are just JEALOUS that they weren’t INCLUDED!!1!11!OMGhighschool”. This isn’t about me being jealous of not being listed on freakin’ BlogNetNews, ffs. This is just some funny shit… Ren, got an extra “Typical” file? I need to replenish my stock.

(Interjection over.)

So anyway, after I saw Sara’s post yesterday, I overheard Rusty talking about other bloggers (who I don’t read as often) who had written about this apparent Top 10 list. I decided to check out the BlogNetNews site. There was a link to email them your feed if it wasn’t listed. So I sent a two-line email with my blog URL and my feed URL, with the subject line “For BlogNetNews Georgia.”

Here is the email I received in response:

Amber,

I am sure you’ve heard this before: You are trouble. BNN/Georgia is a humble politics and public affairs blog aggregator. Your content isn’t very local or public affairsy. However, I love the blog and your obviously broad blogging involvement. Take a look at www.blognetnews.com/cotillion . I built it for a friend who is a member. I am wondering whether you might have an idea for a group that you belong to. Thoughts?

Best,
Dave Mastio

BlogNetNews.com
We Serve Blogging

Remember to visit our advertisers

Bwahahahaha… what the fuck.

We will come back to the “you’re trouble” remark. Let’s just stick, for now, with the “your content isn’t very local” part. I sent him some examples…

Search my 5+ years of archives (I haven’t been at that URL for long) if you’re so inclined… on the old blog I had a category for “Atlanta”; on the new blog I have an “Atlanta” tag. I publicize local events of interest very frequently. Everything tagged “Atlanta” at my new URL: http://www.beingamberrhea.com/tag/Atlanta

I organized PodCamp Atlanta. I’m the co-founder of the Georgia Podcast Network. Pretty darn local. I give presentations on the value of hyperlocal content. I attend meetings of the Atlanta Press Club (I’m a member), Social Media Club Atlanta, Georgia for Democracy, Georgians for Choice… the list goes on… to help figure out how to best leverage social media at the local level.

But okay. My content isn’t local or “public affairsy.”

Dave replies again…

Let me be a little more clear. The intent of the blognetnews state sites is to cover state and local news and politics. Reading your posts, I didn’t see you covering what I think fits in to waht I am trying to do on those sites. We are building other aggregators — city focused ones where all topics will be in and national ones that will take narrower slices of the blogosphere. You’d fit in both those places.

The last part of my note was a suggestion that you come up with an idea for a national aggregator where you’d fit.

I replied with a short note…

I understood the last part of your note, but I’m not interested in being part of a national aggregator. My main concern/interest is hyperlocal content, which is why Rusty and I started the Georgia Podcast Network. We feel new media has the most potential for influence at the local level.

I also asked him to clarify what he meant by saying that I’m “trouble.” His reply:

Visits to sex clubs are hardly the stuff of a mainstream site.

Now, this is the REALLY hilarious part. I mean, aside from it being just good old-fashioned sex negativity and compartmentalization of sexuality, it’s also just another boring rehashing of - guess what! - the double standard! Oh, yay! I just never get tired of that.

This is highly (grimly) amusing to me, because Rusty’s blog is listed on BlogNetNews. He recently wrote about our visit to the sex club, too. But, as Jenny said in an email, “You’re a woman. You may choose between your sexuality and your intelligence. You may not have both.”

Lest we forget!

Many other questions spring to mind, too, such as: what makes him think I’m trying to produce a “mainstream site” - whatever that even means?

Btw, Dave is fine w/ my blogging these emails because, as he stated, BNN is “big on free speech.” Just not wrt sex clubs, I guess.

I will reserve further commentary because really, these emails speak for themselves. I wouldn’t want to kick a puppy. (Commenters, however, should feel free.)

I don’t have much to say today, but Faith has written a beautiful post that I could relate to so much it was almost scary at some points. (I don’t agree that female sexuality in general is more potent than male sexuality, because I don’t believe most of those “in general” statements based on gender, and sexuality is a very complex and nuanced subject; but, if I had to agree 100% with every blogger I link to, I wouldn’t link to anyone.) So I’m just going to quote heavily from that.

It’s hard to pick and choose which parts to quote, but these are the parts that resonated with me the most:

I’m tired of fearing that I will be laughed at, yelled at, or abandoned by those I care about if I speak my true feelings.

and

I’m tired of the double-standards. I’m tired of being told it’s normal for men to have sex with as many women as they can get their hands on while I’m supposed to give myself to one man for his own personal use and protection.

and

I’m tired of being made to question my intuition because the things I feel make the people in my life so insecure. I’m tired of being told my feelings are not valid just because they are inconvenient to the person hearing them.

I might put up a brave face on my blog sometimes, but in reality, I worry and struggle with this stuff a lot. Maybe not as much as I used to, or not in the same way; but I do. I don’t give a shit what most people think, it’s true; but with the people I care about and value in my life? Well, they mean the world to me, and I constantly (well, not constantly, but you know what I mean) worry that something I will say or do (or not say or do) will anger or hurt them, and I’ll lose them. I know it’s irrational, and it stems from issues from my childhood (thank god for therapy, or I’d be way worse!) - and yet, there it is. Those old, early lessons are hard to shake. They become hard-wired, and I think you just have to train your brain not to automatically respond in the way you’ve become accustomed to.

That’s my theory, anyway. I’m working on it.

(My next post will be more upbeat and will be about the cool things Rusty and I have planned for the upcoming ~6 months.)

One of the arguments against pole dancing/stripping/various & sundry other things as empowering has been that the activity does nothing to fight patriarchal bullshit - and that it even reinforces the institutionalized sexism and gender inequality in our society.

I understand that argument, and on one level it does make sense. I don’t think the people who think that way are crazy or prudish - I get where they’re coming from. But personally? I see it a little differently. I wonder how many of the people who hold the aforementioned prevailing view have considered this:

For me, I see pole dancing, lap dancing, chair dancing, striptease (I’ve taken classes on those, too) to be part of that fight. To me it’s all about dismantling the deeply embedded stereotypes that pervade our culture - a woman can’t be smart and sexy, etc. Or, more specifically: if a woman “flaunts” her sexuality, then she can expect not to be taken seriously in other areas of her life. Suddenly her sexuality precedes all else, and is all that matters.

Why can’t a smart, powerful woman also - for example - pose naked in a magazine / on the internet / etc.? Why do so many people - men and women alike - do a bit of a double-take and seem to not quite comprehend it when they realize I’m a web developer with a Master’s degree, and I also like pole dancing, porn, and tons ‘n’ tons of kinky sex? Why is that such a strange concept?

That is the kind of bullshit that needs to be wiped away, as far as I’m concerned. As Naomi Wolf said: “I am sick of the opposition trying to make me choose between being sexual and serious; and I am sick of being split the same way by victim feminism. I want to be a serious thinker and not have to hide the fact that I have breasts; I want female sexuality to accompany, rather than undermine, female political power.” (I don’t particularly like her use of the term ‘victim feminism’ but overall that quote captures my sentiments exactly.)

The AJC’s Woman-to-Woman column is a steaming pile of shit. I’ve known this for several months, yet I admit I still sometimes visit it for the trainwreck factor. The latest debate* debacle, “Does what women wear contribute to sexual assault?”, is no exception.

I’m not going to waste my time or yours picking apart the asinine and disturbing blame-the-victim attitude the “right-leaning” columnist takes. Instead, I decided to have a go at one comment (by a person named Wiley) that I plucked from among its 500+ mostly-useless peers:

The focus needs to be on raising boys correctly. Not suppressing our daughters.

It starts with manners. Teach your boys early that it is NOT ok to verbally harrass a female you do not know. It is not OK to approach a female & comment on her body parts. It’s not ok to sleep with muliple women at the same time. It’s not ok to hire a women to dance naked at a college party, it does not make you a man. It makes you look like a fool.

First of all, let me say that from what I can tell, Wiley is one of the few commenters to leave truly thoughtful and sensible comments. So I’m not picking at him/her specifically (how could I, since I don’t even know who s/he is). From his/her comments I believe that s/he pretty much has the right idea, but I only point this out because I think there are plenty of people out there who have mostly the right idea.

Obviously the first sentence is spot-on. Recently I was reading a blog (unfortunately I don’t remember where, or I’d post a link) where a guy wrote about talking with some friends of his who were all relatively new fathers. Some of them were saying stuff like, they’re not going to let their daughters leave the house til they’re 30, because they don’t want them getting raped. The guy said, “If you don’t want your daughters to be raped, you should teach your sons not to rape” - and slowly watched the lightbulbs go on over their heads. So, in summation: yeah.

Now, as to the rest. Let me repeat, s/he has the right idea in general. But a few things stuck out at me.

[I]t is NOT ok to verbally harrass a female you do not know.

Probably just a typo, but that had me asking, “So, it’s okay to verbally harass a female as long as you know her?” I know, that one’s kind of nit-picky. Moving on.

It is not OK to approach a female & comment on her body parts.

No quarrel with this one. Obviously in terms of certain relationships, it’s a different story, but it’s pretty clear here that she’s not talking about those circumstances. E.g., you are not entitled to go up to any random woman and say shit like, “Hey, nice tits.”

It’s not ok to sleep with muliple women at the same time.

And that is where I put the brakes on. Reading along, and then… whoa! What? Which of these things is not like the others?

It bothers me that a lot of well-intentioned people conflate obviously abusive behavior such as verbal harassment with, well, having multiple sex partners. To me, it’s apples and oranges, the two don’t even come close to being in the same realm for comparison. But I understand that for a lot of people they are, because their ideas are based on a lot of underlying, unquestioned assumptions - ones that I held myself for a while, until I was in my late teens and began to really question and examine all that stuff.

The major difference here, of course, is agency. If a man verbally harasses a woman, she has had no choice in the matter. She didn’t invite him to harass her; he imposed his sense of entitlement on her. But as for having multiple sex partners? By that same logic, the women in the scenario are denied any agency - and that is the definition of objectification. (So yes, I am saying that Wiley’s statement objectifies women.) What is the assumption here? That the women in the scenario don’t want to have multiple partners? Or maybe, that they don’t want to have sex with this hypothetical man who has multiple partners? (That, of course, would be rape.) Now, if Wiley meant, “It’s not okay to be in a supposedly monogamous relationship and run around on your partner behind her back,” then I can get behind that. But the issue there is dishonesty, not sex.

Well, now I’ve expended a bunch of energy writing about all that, and I don’t feel like writing about the last sentence, about hiring a dancer. The multiple sex partners statement was the main issue that was a red flag for me, anyway.

Maybe Wiley hasn’t given a lot of thought to why s/he holds those views about sex; maybe it was a knee-jerk reaction. Or, maybe she honestly believes that having multiple sex partners is wrong. Whatever the case, let me also point out that a disagreement such as this one isn’t something that would prevent me from standing in solidarity with such a person to oppose violence against women, restriction of rights, objectification, and so on. But it’s something that bugs me because I don’t think enough people question these commonly accepted assumptions or acknowledge the potential they have to do harm (see Bitch | Lab for more).

* Ed. note: If this is 10th grade debate class, Diane and Shaunti get a B- and a C-, respectively

I really enjoyed hearing the thoughts/opinions/definitions that people shared in the “what is your definition of a slut” thread last week. Very thought-provoking stuff there.

Since I promised I’d share my (former) definition if other people shared theirs, it’s time for me to deliver.

Actually, this isn’t really a definition in the OED sense of the word, but rather an explanation of the reasons behind me using “slut” as an insult. As ARBY said, using this insult “more likely indicates a problem in the mind of the user.” So here’s what this “user’s” problem was.

Yes, in middle school and much of high school, I pegged other girls as “sluts.” Labeling someone as such stemmed from insecurity and jealousy on my part. This is something I think I knew on some level at the time, but didn’t recognize or admit. But later it became glaringly obvious. See, in middle school and the first few years of high school, I was a pariah. I was the ugly girl. The nerdy girl. The girl who dressed weird. The girl who had to learn how to weave through a barrage of projectiles - usually verbal, occasionally physical - and all the while pretend like this abuse (because that’s what it was; fuck anyone who trivializes it by calling it “teasing”) didn’t affect me. Looking back I can’t rationally understand why they all targeted me; but then I remember I shouldn’t try to decipher an irrational situation with rational thought.

Anyway. Obviously no one wanted to date me, much less have sex with me in those days. But, then as now, I had a massive libido, and it was painfully underfed. I ended up getting some warped ideas about sex in relation to desirability, attractiveness, and all that other bullshit. At least the girls who were called sluts were getting some attention. At least the boys recognized them as sexual beings. Sure, the boys may have been treating them in a disrespectful or downright dehumanizing way - but to my rattled young brain, it didn’t matter. They were called sluts and whores, their sexual experimentation made the subject of gossip and jokes - but it was something. I didn’t even have that much.

Tangentially, I was afraid of taking chances. I was terrified of what my parents might do. I didn’t dream of sneaking out, breaking curfew, going to parties (as if I would be invited anyway), and so on. So I felt like a coward as well as a social outcast. But really, it’s a good thing I was so afraid, or I could’ve ended up doing something really stupid or putting myself in a dangerous situation.

Changing schools in 11th grade was one of the best things I ever did for myself; and for all the bad things they did, I do thank my parents for letting me change schools and somehow scrounging together the money to pay for private school tuition. In a new school, where no one knew me and all the history of the past 4-5 years wasn’t following me around, I could start over and really be myself. And thank [your preferred deity] for that.

Nobody ever really answered my question from a couple months ago, about what your definition of “slut” is. If you’re already enlightened, liberated, whatever and see through the bullshit of it, then you can tell us what your definition previously was. (I’m betting this’ll be the bulk of the responses, since most people who throw that word around haven’t taken much time to examine what they believe about sex and why, and therefore aren’t likely to have very coherent definitions handy.) Anyway, tell me, because I am curious to hear. And then maybe I’ll show you tell you mine.