…in what Radical Feminism isn’t.
This is such a stereotypical misunderstanding of radical feminism I am actually giggling – it’s so “Daily Mail”!
Sorry Andrea. I’m sure you’re a lovely person and, because of that, I doubt that you’ve ever seriously examined the “rules that men get to live by” to any great extent (‘examined‘ being the operative word here). Without that examination you have no basis whatsoever on which to formulate your thinking from any feminist perspective.
Ok. “Feminist” is a funky label these days – especially that of ‘Sex-Pos’ feminist (given our Western patriararchal culture)….
But, Andrea, you’re not even being revolutionary, you’re being reactionary.
How does that sit with you? Reactionary/radical? How much do you actually care?
Oh, I know. You just wanna make friends and not feel so alone. Funny how there were no ‘unapologetic’ radfems in your list of women bloggers who really are ‘themselves’. Because, of all women, radfems are the least fucking apologetic – for all women.
Silver Oakleaf (Andrea) – currently an object lesson in….
……non apologetic apologising. Yes – yet more panderding to the double standards and acceptance of women’s subordinate place in patriarchy and the bullshit that we face about ourselves – and FUCKING FIGHT – everyday.
I could go on – I have more questions – but that’s enough, for now.
597 responses so far ↓
eilidh70 // April 21, 2007 at 9:13 am
*confused* I haven’t received a copy of these rabid radfem requirements. How am I expected to know I have to lose the bunny ears?
RenegadeEvolution // April 21, 2007 at 9:44 am
Witchy: blow outs or not, I still..well…respect you…but seeing what Andrea said made me think, and wonder, and feel, and say I, as far as feminism goes, at least by many standards, am an expatriate. We can’t all do it your way…and its not that I don;t, hell, that most of ‘us’ don’t respect or understand your way, we just can’t do it…it’s not “true” for us. And I think that is the fairest way to phrase it. I realize Radical Feminism is like, well, home for you. It isn’t for a lot of us. That doesn’t make us bad people, it makes us…grr…other. Different. Not where you are…
I think Andrea is good people. I am tired of seeing good people hurt, you know?
sarmorrow // April 21, 2007 at 1:58 pm
My head hurts.
Gayle // April 21, 2007 at 2:06 pm
elidh70,
Haven’t you received your copy of Straw-feminism for dummies, yet? It must have been lost in the mail.
Andrea’s post does indeed look like a desperate cry for attention — she either longs to be coddled by the anti-feminist contingent of the feminist blogesphere or she’s after much needed links and hits. Or both. Probably both.
Oh, happy endings! Just look at the comment thread! Why her little bash-fest ALMOST made it into the (get this) “Carnival of Feminists.” If that post qualifies, that must be some carnival.
Gayle // April 21, 2007 at 2:20 pm
“I like strong women, I like to be strong myself, and as far as I’m concerned, strong people don’t need hiveminded cohorts keeping them in line every step of the way.”
And she won’t let Witchy post !!! LOL!
sarmorrow // April 21, 2007 at 4:09 pm
“And she won’t let Witchy post !!! LOL!”
I saw that. How daft can you get?
I can understand blocking spam bots and trolls, but a fellow feminist who wants to engage in an intelligent discussion? Nuts.
exangelena // April 21, 2007 at 4:22 pm
I’m a radical feminist, I wear makeup, a bra and skirts, and I remove my body hair …
But I don’t expect a medal for it. I know that I’m selling out a little to get by. I also know that patriarchy, as well as the multibillion dollar fashion, beauty and sex industries that encourage “femininity” have much more power than a few unorganized radical feminists on the internet.
I’m also curious to know who these radical feminists are. Most of radical feminist bloggers I read are not like the cartoonish version in the linked post, and many of them accept that for many women, femininity=survival.
Laurelin // April 21, 2007 at 4:41 pm
In total agreement, Witchy. But that could be just my hivemindedness
I’ve said it before; I’ll say it again: you rock.
exangelena // April 21, 2007 at 5:32 pm
Renegade Evolution – I don’t intend to speak for all radical feminists, but *I*, as a radical feminist, have big problems with the radfem blaming that’s been kicking around the internet.
1.) a lot of it relies on the strawfeminists that Gayle mentioned above that are usually inaccurate.
2.) the rhetoric often strikes me as very sexist – bashing radical feminists because SOME of us are lesbians, don’t wear makeup, don’t shave our legs, don’t do things that are “fun” and “girly”, basically because we don’t fit current ideals of sexy and pretty.
3.) radical feminists are always accused of oppressing and persecuting non-radical feminists, when in reality, most radical feminist bloggers that I read accept that most women have to make some concessions.
4.) the idea that rebelling against radical feminism is the ultimate act of rebellion, when, as I mentioned before, radical feminists have very little power, influence or visibility (like what Witchy Woo said, “you’re not being revolutionary, you’re being reactionary”)
Now I’m not saying that you or that all sex pos feminists say this stuff, but these are common themes that I’ve noted in the various anti-radfem posts I’ve seen.
v // April 21, 2007 at 7:01 pm
andrea is not ‘good people’. she’s is one of the most dishonest people i have come across online, and that really is saying something.
belledame222 // April 21, 2007 at 7:28 pm
She’s good people in my book. I realize my book is in the Library of the Damned, but what the fuck.
and gayle, hon:
it IS some Carnival, and I’m damned proud of it. hey, it’s even got yer pals Charlie and sparklematrix in it. it’s also got a fuck of a lot more other stuff than the Eternal Thrash, because, surprise, there’s actually some other shit going on out there.
and pre-emptively:
if’n you still don’t like it, you know what? It runs every two weeks and any one of you lot can host it your very own selves.
xox
belledame222 // April 21, 2007 at 7:35 pm
and by the way: no one said it’s the “ultimate act of rebellion/revolution/whatever.” some people simply got tired of the eternal game of wendy-house and decided they’d rather have a room of their own, thanks.
v // April 21, 2007 at 7:56 pm
takes a lot to make me that harsh bd.
belledame222 // April 21, 2007 at 9:15 pm
we’ve all got our buttons.
what the hell. I’m hardly a disinterested bystander here, god knows; but as i see it, Andrea did her time. so did Kim. so did some other people who’ve been pushed away. Jill Brenneman for instance.
it’s not a “straw” anything if it really does happen.
you know, i wrote a comment in that same thread that was, i thought, rather more diplomatic about “radical feminism” than…some people…might expect.
on the other hand i’m not feeling terribly diplomatic about Some People.
there’s been some seriously nasty shit, and no, it isn’t just “us,” the “wasps” or whatever it is (bzz fucking bzz) slinging it out;
and it’s like…
sigh. the makeup and the leg shaving: -no one- expects a bloody medal for it. -no one- that i’ve met. -no one.- What people -would- like is perhaps for other people to consider their point of view when they say, actually, there’s more than one way to interpret this shit, it isn’t necessarily “selling out,” but if you really don’t or can’t see it any other way how about at least laying off the “sparkle pony feminist” bullshit for long enough to concentrate on the actual fucking work? Because, you know, people can wear glitter and heels and even be unapologetic about it (that seems to be the sticking point) and still be damn good feminists;
and people can throw all their makeup and even porn in the trash and you know something: of itself, i don’t believe it does a damn thing for anyone else. if it gets you through the night, great, but: that is not what “personal is political” means.
and for the record there are -also- posts about leg shaving and hair in the Carnival. i put those particular ones in there because, unlike the people who mock “sexbots” and sparkle ponies” and even “whores” (and then act all surprised when some people take offense), those to me really did read like “personal is political,” as in: the posters owned their own shit, they spoke from the “I,” they didn’t try to tell other women what to do directly or indirectly–
and i’m sorry, but some people, you -raelly do do that.- and no, putting it in terms like “just THINK about it” doesn’t make it any less of a directive. it’s manipulative, and it’s patronizing: it implicitly assumes that other people simply aren’t as Advanced as you, haven’t thought about it, couldn’t possibly have done or by Goddess they’d have come to -exactly the same conclusions as you.-
whether it’s makeup or the evil prawn or—is- there anything else? oh, right, actually, yes there is. you wouldn’t know it sometimes, though, i swear, reading some places, and how many times have i said something like all this, in how many places?
whatever. I care about my friends, is the only reason i’m even posting here at all at this point. i can’t speak for all the bad blood between everybody but you know what: sometimes, it’s really not as Epic as you think it is.
sometimes, it really is just–
well, if you want to think it’s just because you’re too radical, or that it happens so infrequently it’s not worth mentioning except as straw–i can’t help that.
and yes, there’s a fair amount of mischaracterization going around; at least some of us stand by our words when called on it.
signed,
Rude Ignorant Wasp Patriarchy Enabler Insidious Conspiracist Only Bent On Destroying Radical Feminists Who Only Cares About Getting Men Off, By God, That’s Exactly Right.
v // April 21, 2007 at 9:27 pm
thats one of the reasons i think andrea is dishonest bd, because she doesnt cop to her own words, and then on top of that she lies about other peoples.
i dont have any issues with people changing their minds, moving on, whatever. what i do have a problem with is people who outright lie about what they said even though i witnessed them do so with my own eyes. then on top of that theres people who deliberately and maliciously use information given to them in private and in confidence by those who trust them to hurt those people. andrea does these things bd and no matter how much you dislike some radfems or whatever it is not going to change the fact she has done all of this several times in the last year alone. she is not honourable and she is not honest.
Gayle // April 21, 2007 at 11:15 pm
You spend far too much time knocking feminists on the internets, Belledame. It’s a game with you and it’s obvious to anyone paying attention. You’re always smack in the middle of these blogwars, cheering them on, feeding the flames. Jumping in defending your “friends” against, who exactly? Caricatures of your own making, caricatures of actual feminist bloggers.
I couldn’t much give a shit whether your Carnival talks about leg shaving or sparkly make up. The one thing I do agree with you on is that there is “other shit” out there to talk about. Actually, there are MUCH MORE IMPORTANT THINGS TO TALK ABOUT right now.
But it’s odd that you would state that here, and not on Andrea’s blog. Why didn’t you tell her that bashing non- existent, feminist stereotypes may not be the most constructive use of her blog at this time, you know, considering how women were just declared a little less human by our Supreme Court?
Instead, you called her post “awesome” and added this:
on 20 Apr 2007 at 2:05 am7 belledame222
“and goddamit Andrea, a day earlier and i could’ve put it into the Carnival…”
So apparently that ridiculous post was “the other shit” you mention above. You wrapped your lovin’ arms around it, even called it Carnival-worthy. If you really believe that, your priorities are even more fucked up than I realized.
PS: You obsessively lump people together when you attack, BD. That’s another trait which speaks volumes about your character. For the record, I don’t know who the hell “my friend” Charlie is. Did I post something at his/her site? Maybe I did. I don’t keep records of who is who and decide how I should group and compartmentalize them the way you do. Maybe someone linked there and I followed it and wrote something? Does that mean that blogger is my “friend?” I have read Sparkle Matrix, but I post so rarely there, I doubt she’d even recognize my name. Is she my “friend” now, too?
Pippa // April 21, 2007 at 11:17 pm
I’m hearing you Witchy. This isn’t an argument you can win. We have better things to do, my friend!
burrowklown // April 21, 2007 at 11:35 pm
This whole thing makes me sick.
exangelena // April 22, 2007 at 2:06 am
To be fair, I looked at bd’s Carnival of the Feminists and she did include several posts about the recent Supreme Court decision, as well as some from radical feminist blogs.
However:
“and by the way: no one said it’s the ‘ultimate act of rebellion/revolution/whatever.’ some people simply got tired of the eternal game of wendy-house and decided they’d rather have a room of their own, thanks.”
I’m not sure what the last sentence of that meant, but then what is with the many, many posts in which a feminist blogger talks about how she’s proud that she’s a “bad feminist” and loves men and being sexy, etc., etc., and the big bad (straw)feminist troops hate her because she’s a pretty feminist?
“it’s not a ’straw’ anything if it really does happen.”
Well, I have only been to your blog a few times, and I’ve hardly even heard of those other people, so I can’t say I know. But it’s not fair to tar all radical feminists with the same brush. (Although I have had many disagreements with sex positive feminists, and they have said some extremely hurtful things about me, note that I said upthread not all sex positive feminists have participated in this crap.)
“What people -would- like is perhaps for other people to consider their point of view when they say, actually, there’s more than one way to interpret this shit, it isn’t necessarily ’selling out’”
“putting it in terms like ‘just THINK about it’ doesn’t make it any less of a directive. it’s manipulative, and it’s patronizing: it implicitly assumes that other people simply aren’t as Advanced as you, haven’t thought about it, couldn’t possibly have done or by Goddess they’d have come to -exactly the same conclusions as you.-”
Isn’t it sort of obvious that there are some choices considered more acceptable than others and encouraged more? I’m not concerned with the acts and practices themselves, but with the existing conventions.
I hope I’m not derailing the thread too much, but I’ll continue with another example. I’m not skinny, but I’m considered “acceptably” slender by current racist, misogynist, fatphobic beauty standards. I benefit from those beauty standards, at least in regards to weight. However I strongly oppose them because they are wrong and make women suffer. I haven’t purposefully gained weight in opposition to said beauty standard, and I accept that I have “thin privilege”, but I do what I can to break down that beauty standard (I won’t make or tolerate fat jokes, I discourage women from making body-hating comments or dieting for cosmetic reasons, etc.)
belledame222 // April 22, 2007 at 3:09 am
I posted that there, gayle, because she is my friend, and because that is how I felt at the time.
and thank you for monitoring how much time i spend doing this and that and measuring how much i “should” be doing. now: who the fuck -are- you, finally?
exangelena–the point is, it’d be great if we could all stop fixating on our bodily shit altogether, policing each other, and so on. and: yeah, there are existing conventions; that doesn’t mean that people aren’t perfectly capable of simply replacing those with their own, in subcultures, in…the margins. and yes, that has an effect on people as well.
and once again, for those who felt my selection was biased: every two weeks the Carnival is held, you are more than free to go to Philobiblon same as i did and offer to host.
me, i posted
1) what was submitted to me and
2) what i was reading.
exactly which posts are you referring to that talk about how they’re hated because they’re pretty? Elizabeth’s? She was talking about indulging in fashion as a way to feel more alive on account of she’s got some hideous sudden disabling disease that she doesn’t even know if it might kill her. Octogalore, who wrote about her career as a stripper which really had fuckall to do with how “pretty” she was? Aunt B who wrote specifically about NOT being “pretty?” The queer femmes, i think there were one or two? and btw, per “SOME of us are lesbians–many of “us” are lesbians, too, you know, some who wear makeup and shit, some who don’t; and why the emphasis on SOME? who’s lesbian-bashing, here? no one that i know, and no one in that line-up.
the women of color who mysteriously always seem to vanish from these discussions?
belledame222 // April 22, 2007 at 3:22 am
personally, per the lesbian thing–i have to tell you, as far as i’m concerned my first and biggest problem with most of the online feminists i’ve had problems with is that as far as i’m concerned they’re coming from straighter than straighty-straightertonville. or rather: the term “heteronormative,” academic as it is–it’s a good one. menmenMENmenmenMEN let’s talk about porn which is all about men fucking women let’s talk about sex which is clearly all about sex with MEN let’s talk about how MEN OPPRESS us let’s talk about how being with women is such a SAFE SPACE because SAFE means SEXLESS…let’s talk about fashion and hair and shit like that which clearly means exactly the same thing to all of us…
and let’s all pretend that lesbians are like this sort of asexual Supra-Feminist who’s primarily defined by–well, what? purity? sisterhood? eschewing men? not goddess forfend actual -desire for other women-, shit no, that might be objectifying and then all the straight women wouldn’t feel -safe.-
and we can’t have that.
octogalore // April 22, 2007 at 3:52 am
WW: “I doubt that you’ve ever seriously examined the “rules that men get to live by” to any great extent (’examined‘ being the operative word here). Without that examination you have no basis whatsoever on which to formulate your thinking from any feminist perspective.”
Let’s “examine” this sentence. Boiling it down:
“I doubt you’ve examined [issue] so you have no basis to speak about [issue].”
That’s quite powerful. It would allow us to tell anyone they can’t talk about a certain topic, because we’re oh so sure that they haven’t really thought about it. If they had, maybe they would form the same conclusions we have. If they have formed other conclusions… it’s clearly because they haven’t really “examined.”
The reason that doesn’t work, of course, is: how do you know what Andrea has, or hasn’t, examined?
WW: as you know and as I’ve said, I respect your thinking; however, I’m not seeing any really thought-out analysis here. I’d be curious if you could explain your accusation of “panderding (sic.) to the double standards and acceptance of women’s subordinate place in patriarchy.” How is Andrea doing that? Can you substantiate this?
RenegadeEvolution // April 22, 2007 at 4:49 am
exangelena;
I know there are some great rad fem folk out there. There are also some who really are not. Shrug. I’m an asshole. With a serious temper. I admit that. But when people feel down, or attacked, often, they do lash back, or out. It happens. All I can say is Andrea has been on the level and human to me, and I appreciate it. And that goes a long way.
exangelena // April 22, 2007 at 6:11 am
belledame –
“exactly which posts are you referring to that talk about how they’re hated because they’re pretty?”
First of all, I wasn’t referring to the posts specifically at this week’s carnival, but it’s this phenomenon that ricochets around the feminist blogosphere and seriously gets on my nerves.
“SOME of us are lesbians–many of ‘us’ are lesbians, too, you know, some who wear makeup and shit, some who don’t; and why the emphasis on SOME? who’s lesbian-bashing, here?”
Some of the posts have criticized lesbian radical feminists who see certain kinds of sex as patriarchal (I don’t know or pay much attention to that debate) and accused radical feminists of all sexual orientations of being man-haters. As for the SOME, I’m not a lesbian basher, but I’m sick of radical feminists being perceived as a monolith. We may share beliefs but we’re individuals not a groupthink.
“the women of color who mysteriously always seem to vanish from these discussions?”
I think the two of us have been over this before at other venues – but I’m a woman of color and my nonwhiteness has a lot to do with my radical feminism. I’m getting really sick of white sex positive feminists implying that I’m racist because of opinions I’ve expressed that have very little to do with race, or assuming that because I’m a radical feminist, that I’m white.
exangelena // April 22, 2007 at 6:22 am
As for the “subcultures” thing, I’ll admit that I’m a straight girl from the suburbs attending a very mainstream university with the predominant models of sexuality being Girl Gone Wild or uptight prep.
“most of the online feminists i’ve had problems with is that as far as i’m concerned they’re coming from straighter than straighty-straightertonville.”
Huh. Most of the radical feminist bloggers (and the ones interested in women only space) I read are lesbian, although I agree that most of the liberal/mainstream feminists are straight.
I’m trying to remain civil and articulate but I don’t know if I’m doing a good job
I can see how the “SOME of us” business in the other post could have been misinterpreted and I apologize – I didn’t mean for it to be at all.
I just get angry sometimes because the characterization of radical feminists that I read from people who are anti-radfem erase my existence and experiences as a straight, nonwhite, lower-middle class radical feminist.
(Sorry for using your blog as a soapbox, Witchy Woo!)
Gayle // April 22, 2007 at 4:10 pm
Hey Belledame,
I’ve posted a comment or two over at My DD in the past, (yes, that wonky old white boy’s club, I’m a political junkie) does that make Jerome Armstrong my friend? I read an article on Huff-Post yesterday–is Arrianna my bud now, too?
What is it with you and this whole “friend” thing, anyway? Here you go again, claiming you cheered on that waste-of-space post because Andrea is your friend. Is Andrea really your friend? Does she call you when you’re down; do you take each other to lunch? Does she even know what your real name is? If you two are actually friends then, hey, that’s just super, but something tells me these cyber-friendships of yours are just more fodder in the arsenal, used as an excuse by which to attack other people.
“the women of color who mysteriously always seem to vanish from these discussions?”
Impressive how you morph from paternalistic protector of “friends” to loathsome propagandist in just one post!
Insinuate, insinuate, insinuate, eventually it’ll stick. Unless, of course, someone has the audacity to challenge you.
Uh oh:
“I just get angry sometimes because the characterization of radical feminists that I read from people who are anti-radfem erase my existence and experiences as a straight, nonwhite, lower-middle class radical feminist.”
Nicely put, exangelena. But how can an angry, anti-sex, racist, classist stereotype be maintained when your very existence contradicts it? Erasing you appears to be exactly the point.
Gayle // April 22, 2007 at 4:22 pm
Pippa,
I disagree. I think she can win it.
Burrowclown, I apologize if my posts are upsetting you or anyone else. That is certainly not my intention.
Faith // April 22, 2007 at 5:22 pm
“I disagree. I think she can win it.”
Hey, I have a thought. How about we all stop worrying about winning and protecting our damaged egos and actually do something constructive?
How’s that sound for a change?
Arantxa // April 22, 2007 at 6:22 pm
Oh well, as least I finally figured out the word ‘reactionary’ – the meaning of which has long eluded me.
Spicy // April 22, 2007 at 6:55 pm
This post – and the one that provoked it – make me depressed. Does no-one remember what the ‘enemy’ actually is?
Here’s a clue – it isn’t other women.
A radfem who neither recognises herself in the original post nor in the response to it.
fannyblood // April 22, 2007 at 7:15 pm
For the record, this is a post Andrea wrote some time ago on Vociferate. I posted this on her blog yesterday but she has censored it? I’m not sure why? I was just asking her her stance now on raunch culture since posting this:
……………………………………….
I heard before that Pussycat Dolls lead singer, Bimbi, has morphed into Cyndi Lauper and urged us humourless feminists to not take their lyrics seriously, because they just want to have fun (Bimbi is probably not her real name, but it suits her so I’m sticking with it).
Now, obviously, none of the Pussycat Dolls have written any of the lyrics themselves, I reckon it’s unlikely Bimbi and co. have read a book all the way through, but what they have done is slap a load of T&A on some fantastically sexist songs.
Now, I am a humourless feminist, so I wouldn’t know fun if it bit me in the ass, but I have to wonder about what is so inherently fun about the Pussycat Dolls and their irritating ‘music’. Their first single was all about delightful oneupmanship and feeling superior to some inconsequential man’s existing girlfriend. A song about one of those girls who delights in shagging other women’s partners, but is surprised when the same guy eventually shags around on her. I’m not seeing what’s so fun about that, men might like it when women have catfights over them, but in general women don’t. Even the usurper generally gets hers in the end when she finds her boyfriend up to his balls in someone even hotter than her.
Their second single features one of those Black Eyed Peas wankers (you know, the ones who had the song ‘My Humps’ about the joys of prostitution) going on about how female intelligence and personhood is irrelevant, because men are far more concerned with a woman’s various physical attributes. So far, so offensive, but do Bimbi and her comrades have any complaint about this treatment? Nah, according to them it’s all fine fine fine. They are content to carry on ‘doing their thing’ whilst the aforementioned wanker is playing with himself. Nice! So is that fun? Seems like the type of thing that most women report to the police.
The Pussycat Dolls are not in the interests of having ‘fun’, they are in the interests of making money, and the easiest way to make money if you’re female is by selling yourself. Unfortunately, they endorce songs which sell out other women, too. Bimbi can complain all she wants, but in a world where thousands of women every week are raped, where domestic violence against women is so prevalent, and in a world where women’s human rights are being eroded before their very eyes we really can’t afford to be lighthearted over any woman supporting the very system which oppresses us.
Sorry Bimbi, you’ve made your bed, and part of lying in it is accepting the criticism of feminists who recognise what a sell-out you are. But nevermind, I’m sure your money will make you feel better.
shannon // April 22, 2007 at 7:21 pm
Hey, Shannon will express her grievances with belledame. I think if the post feminists didn’t make a big deal out of things, there would be less fighting. Heck. even Jill, got yelled at by some idiot because she was able to note that society has some input on why she presents the way she does. Yes, things can be thought of different ways, but well..some ways are more right than other ways is what I am meaning. As a person who is obsessed by psychology, I think people can and do fool themselves. A whole lot! They don’t mean to, but the way the human brain works, there’s a whole lot of rationalizing going on for everyone.
I have to admit that I see saying that one is different from the norm and outside of society as a sign of immaturity, and as a person whose current life task is becoming an adult(a role incapable with femininity, as it happens), that really annoys me.
Laurelin // April 22, 2007 at 8:03 pm
Thanks for posting that, Fanny. It’s curious how the tone of that post is so similar to her present ones.
Burrow // April 22, 2007 at 9:01 pm
Gayle: I was lamenting the whole thing, not anyone in particular. The infighting and attacking each other is what makes me so sick.
Amber // April 23, 2007 at 1:43 am
Oh give me a freaking break with the superlatives there. If Andrea is one of the most dishonest people you’ve come across online, then your travels around the internet must be MUCH more pleasant than mine, thus far. There are some folks I could introduce you to, if you’d be interested in some perspective… let me just dig out the list of commenters I’ve banned from my blog…
v // April 23, 2007 at 1:11 pm
amber, it doesnt matter how many liars there are on the internet, she still stands out in my mind as one of the worst ive come across, are you gonna tell me im a liar too? shes done it to me, shes done it to ww just now – seriously since when did ww ever call other women whores? the irony is that andrea herself came so close to doing that so many times, she’s the one who described you and your mates as ‘disgusting’ last year and now she’s calling her ex mates ‘disgusting’ this year. her MO is exactly the same she just switched targets. i mean, seriously, you could pull up one of her year old blog posts and switch the target from sex pos to radfem and the rest would stay pretty much the same, same words, same insults, “disgusting! disgusting! disgusting!”.
i dont know why im even wasting my time talking about her, other than she accused ww of being a liar and calling other women whores, which is fucking bollocks, because one of the biggest differences between ww and andrea is that ww has integrity.
Kim // April 23, 2007 at 1:27 pm
Sigh.
Never ENDS, NEVER EVER, EVER NEVER EVER NEVER FUCKING ENDS.
I heart Faith and Spicy.
I think Fanny’s posting of old post of Andrea’s was downright creepy.
I think Andrea is good people.
This whole business sucks my ass.
Over and out.
Lya Kahlo // April 23, 2007 at 1:52 pm
An excellent attempt, Witchy, but as Vera found out trying to explain that something isn’t what they think it is, they just say “not everyone agrees with you”. Which is code for “we’re going to manufacture an insult out of this, damnit, and we’re not going to allow truth to stop us!”
As I think she may have told you, Witchy, she’s since given up trying to reason with them. I think she’s realized that they like pretending they’ve been insulted. They like manufacturing offenses from radfems. She’s hurt by it, I think, because she likes them as well.
Arguing strawfeminists is the only place left to go when you have no real arguments with feminism. No one tells them they can’t wear this, or they can’t do that. No one tells them they can’t fuck this person or in this fashion. But they like to tell everyone that we do. All that feminists have ever asked them is to consider how these things might be indicative of women’s position in society. That choices are not always personal and non-political. That maybe – just maybe – it’s NOT just about them. Somehow, this translates into “those bitches are jealous of us, hate sex, are crazy/mean/controlfreaks/etc, and hate us and men!”
“Sparkles” are subversive – subversive to feminism. So it’s nice that some have stopped pretending to be feminists. At least that approaches honesty.
RenegadeEvolution // April 23, 2007 at 3:24 pm
lya- no, in many cases, nothing has had to be “manufactured”. Nasty shit and lies have been said. Smugness and condemnation have been thrown around. No need to make up much of anything or attribute false motives- it’s all right there, really.
shannon // April 23, 2007 at 4:20 pm
Ren, there’s a huge difference between me being like OMG!! Lip glitter is $15!!! TOO L OF THE PATRIARCHY!!! and me saying that nobody ever can wear lip glitter. And even if I said that, why the f would anyone care? I’m one woman in a big small town, not the infallible hivemind of feminism.
shannon // April 23, 2007 at 4:40 pm
Ex told me to show everyone post feminism bingo:
http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m213/animeg3282/bingopostfeminist.jpg
Contents are offensive.
Lya Kahlo // April 23, 2007 at 4:42 pm
It’s clear these things have happened from all sides. Far too frequently. And yet, apparently it doesn’t happen enough for some so they need to invent more reasons to be offended by that which isn’t offensive, or more to the point, what isn’t intended to be offensive. The word “sexbot” comes to mind here. When it was clearly laid out what the word meant those needing more strife and more conflict cling to the insult they want to be there. And when this was pointed out it was countered with “not everyone agrees with you”.
Well, that’s handy. Fuck what the word actually means, and how it’s actually used. Apparently, regardless of anthing else – just saying “I don’t agree” renders everything else invalid. That negates the reason for debate all together – which is what I think the actual goal is.
“I’m one woman in a big small town, not the infallible hivemind of feminism.”
The hivemind of feminism being yet another strawfeminist.
Shannon – careful! Trying to point out the difference between what radfems are actually saying and what the others want to believe we’re saying is likely to be met with “I don’t agree with you”.
Amber // April 23, 2007 at 4:53 pm
No, I’m not going to call you a liar. Not sure why you would jump to that conclusion.
Still – if Andrea is one of the worst, then hey, lucky you. Consider yourself fortunate never to have encountered the MRAs, the Christian fundamentalists, and in particular the lovely fellow who referred to me as “the world’s biggest feminazi.”
Lya Kahlo // April 23, 2007 at 4:55 pm
A p.s. – in case this is misunderstood, allow me a moment to be clear – this is not saying everyone must agree. This is saying that continuing to disagree even after it’s been shown you’re misled, and continuing to deny that you’re incorrect is not an honest disagreement but rather either willful denial or a silencing tactic.
Kim // April 23, 2007 at 6:15 pm
“No one tells them they can’t wear this, or they can’t do that. No one tells them they can’t fuck this person or in this fashion. But they like to tell everyone that we do.”
Some radical feminists ABSOLUTELY say this.
It cannot be enforced, of course, but many, many times I’ve read how I cannot truly be a feminist because I wear makeup or shave or whatever.
Or that I need to examine my reasons for doing so more.
And always the general implication that I’m just not “as good” a feminist by doing so.
“Sparkles” are subversive – subversive to feminism. So it’s nice that some have stopped pretending to be feminists. At least that approaches honesty.”
Once and for all, can someone please tell me what a “Sparkle” is?
To anyone who reads my blog, am I a “Sparkle” and why/why not?
Kim // April 23, 2007 at 6:33 pm
” All that feminists have ever asked them is to consider how these things might be indicative of women’s position in society. That choices are not always personal and non-political. That maybe – just maybe – it’s NOT just about them.”
Not really directed at you, Lya but I am very tired of this. Because, where does one draw the line?
Me, I’m big on not wearing fur, buy cruelty-free products, support vegetarism and in general helping animals. Eating meat/buying products tested on animals is political also — but I understand not everyone has the same convictions against animal cruetly than I do. Everytime someone says “I love/need meat too much to be a vegetarain” I don’t launch into the million reasons this is wrong and how it burns my ass to hear it.
I just accept that either their “fight” for rights/equality is somewhere else, that they frankly don’t give a shit or that they have thought — but decide to eat meat anyway.
Fair enough.
(Though the strawmans here piss me off — I get the anger here, even as I think some — not all –things labeled “strawfeminists” are not “straw” at all.)
I have a natural sapphire — should I have bought lab created in case the earth/worker swere harmed?
Maybe.
But you know, I do what I can.
All we can ever ask is that folks help whoever they can in whatever way they can.
Also, I HAVE examined, deeply, how makeup, porn, etc. effect women’s position in society. Since young adulthood, I took it for granted and belived fully that porn of course is harmful to women.
Which meant, I never even vaguely entertained the notion that maybe porn isn’t the end all evil of feminism –til recently.
But that’s a different story.
It is offensive when you assume because a woman wears heels or strips or whatever that she’s never given it a second thought.
It’s offensive to assume she’s not a feminist — maybe not a feminist like you, but one nonetheless.
Sometimes folks examine and mull and educate themselves and still don’t agree with you.
That’s the nature of human individuality.
Lya Kahlo // April 23, 2007 at 6:35 pm
“Some radical feminists ABSOLUTELY say this.”
Link? A name? Anything?
Every time I personally have seen radfems say anything close to this is when they are talking about the patriarchy assumptions that go along with it.
On this thread there are radfems talking about doing these things – makeup, shaving etc.
Even if there are “some” (a conveniently non-specific amount) radfems who do say that – who gives a shit?
Right here and right now there is a radfem telling you that she does this as well. I do those things too. So what?
Here’s a hint – if a self-described “feminist” is peddaling the “you can’t do “x” and be a feminist” they’re peddaling a strawfeminist designed to discredit feminism.
Which means, you know, it’s NOT feminist.
As for what a sparkle is – I saw the term first on Ren’s blog so I assumed she or someone of that stripe coined it. You tell me what it’s supposed to mean.
delphyne // April 23, 2007 at 6:44 pm
“Some radical feminists ABSOLUTELY say this.
It cannot be enforced, of course, but many, many times I’ve read how I cannot truly be a feminist because I wear makeup or shave or whatever.
Or that I need to examine my reasons for doing so more.
And always the general implication that I’m just not “as good” a feminist by doing so.”
Well I remember way back when, November I think it was, when you used my words regarding this issue to illustrate what you destest about radical feminist attitudes Kim.
What I’d said was that I thought makeup wasn’t feminist. I stand by that. It’s my opinion and I’m entitled to it same as you are to disagree with it. Men aren’t held to a set of beauty strictures, only women have to deal with those and they are OPPRESSIVE thus, not feminist.
I don’t think you aren’t a feminist because you do these things, I don’t even think you are less of a feminist for doing these things. So I’m just wondering, which feminists have decided you are less of a feminist for wearing make-up because I’d like to have a word with them.
Lya Kahlo // April 23, 2007 at 6:59 pm
“Not really directed at you, Lya but I am very tired of this. Because, where does one draw the line?”
I don’t think it’s that hard to see. If the question comes down to you can indulge yourself or help someone else and you chose to indulge – how, exactly, are you an ally? This isn’t about expecting everyone to surrender everything and join the borg. This is about exercising some basic common sense. You mention vegetarianism – do you consider those who eat meat to vegetarians because they say they are, or are there some basic common practices and goals implied with the word.
Feminism is no different. It just so happens that the common practices and goals implied in the word aren’t all the noskirts/nosex/nomen/noheels nonsense “sparkles” like to pretend radfems are peddaling.
A common goal – the safety and freedom of women
A strawfeminist – you can’t wear high heels and be a feminist
_________
I am loathe to discuss the “p” word, but since you brought it up – this: ” I took it for granted and belived fully that porn of course is harmful to women.” is easily seen.
and this: “Which meant, I never even vaguely entertained the notion that maybe porn isn’t the end all evil of feminism –til recently.”
Let me ask you this: would you trust a tobacco company or its employees to tell the truth about smoking?
Personally, I wouldn’t. They have too much invested in promoting it postively.
Likewise, I don’t trust a porn company or its employess to tell the truth about porn or it potential effects on it consumers.
I’ve volunteered in a women’s shelter for a decade. If I recall correctly you too have similar experience (please correct me if I’m wrong). I see – daily – what happens to families into which porn is introduced. The harm and the damage are real, no matter how much it is denied. http://nopornnorthampton.org/
Lya Kahlo // April 23, 2007 at 6:59 pm
thank you Delphyne for illustrating the difference between what we’re actually saying and what they apparently really want to believe we’re saying.
Amber // April 23, 2007 at 7:20 pm
Lya – The term “sparkle pony” was coined by Ginmar. At least, that is the first place I saw it used.
delphyne // April 23, 2007 at 7:24 pm
Yup, and it didn’t have to do with make-up or any other “feminine” accoutrements, she coined it to describe the women who turned up to her blog calling themselves feminists whilst at the same time accusing her of being an evil man-hater and going on about how much they loved men – “princesssparkleponies”
Lya Kahlo // April 23, 2007 at 7:33 pm
So it doesn’t have anything to do with non-radfems (neccessarily) either? Why are they using it to describe themselves?
shannon // April 23, 2007 at 7:44 pm
Let’s push this a bit further. What if these invisible radfems called you not a feminist? What do you care? What effect on your life would it have if this really happened?
Arantxa // April 23, 2007 at 7:57 pm
I think these arguments about examining the role one plays in the world, reflecting over one’s actions and seeking to belong to or identify with a specific group of persons are things that we all do to varying extents and are not specific to any movement.
I don’t think online arguments – no matter how heated – reflect badly on feminists because I don’t agree that these online arguments are ‘infighting’: they’re not between women that work together. In any case, are we not allowed to be angry, disagree, lash out, be in the wrong?
I’ve learnt a lot from getting involved in arguments in the past and from observing them and good things can come out of thinking about one’s own behaviour and that of others.
Arantxa // April 23, 2007 at 8:08 pm
Good news is, shannon (lowercase?), one doesn’t need a licence to practice feminism.
Amber // April 23, 2007 at 8:09 pm
It’s not an “if.” Something that’s actually happened is no longer hypothetical.
That being said, it has absolutely no effect on my life, other than to make me shake my head in wonder at some folks.
Lya Kahlo // April 23, 2007 at 8:38 pm
Okay, so since it’s actually happened – who did it? what was said? I have never seen a radfem make proclamations like the ones you’re saying have happened, so sans proof I’m skeptical this is anything more than a misunderstanding.
That said, I second what Delphyne said.
v // April 23, 2007 at 10:05 pm
amber – yes andrea is one of the most brazenly dishonest people ive come across online. and yeh, i have come across the fundamentalists and ive been called much worse than feminazi. dont talk to me like im some naive kid prone to exaggeration and lacking in experience, thanks.
ren said on her blog, and i didnt see you make any comment on it, “Point is, out numbered or not, SOME radical feminists are the loudest, most abrasive, and yeah, cruel people I’ve EVER run across”. well ive known a lot of really fucking cruel people, and rens an incredibly lucky woman if she really means that and the worse cruelt shes EVER come across is indifference or insults online from less than a handful of radfems.
so no, amber, i dont need to get perspective. there are lots of really cruel people about, im only too aware of that thanks. but making comparisons like you’re doing still doesnt change my opinion about andrea which i came to, on my own, without coaching, from my own personal experiences with her. you disagree, fine, i used to think she was sound too. we live and learn, eh.
exangelena // April 24, 2007 at 1:54 am
Look, I don’t even know Andrea or half of any of you (I do visit egotistical whining and teetering slightly) and I have no idea what went on at whose blog last year or two months ago or whatnot – but as a radical feminist, I took offense at the hatred being spewed at me.
As for the whole “examining it” thing, I don’t think that “sparkles” (shorthand for feminine beauty and sex practices that radical feminists generally criticize) are bad in themselves, but I think that you cannot ignore the way that patriarchy encourages and rewards the “sparkles”. Two choices – “sparkles” and “no sparkles” are *not* created equal when one is conditioned from birth and the other is often ridiculed and punished.
I used the “fat” example above. I am not fat (although I’m certainly not Victoria Beckham or Nicole Ritchie). However I am 100% opposed to fatphobia and the anti-fat beauty standard. I’m not interested in saying that skinny is bad, and note that I haven’t gained 50 lbs in support of my beliefs and I still have my “thin privilege” – but I can do that and still agitate against the beauty standard that makes fat women suffer.
I also think that the comparison of the pressures of radfems vs. the pressures of patriarchy is asymmentrical. Patriarchy is a pervasive power structure, and I’d guess that few of us can escape from the presence of the fashion, sex and beauty industries. As for radical feminists – we’re an unorganized group of probably less than 100 women scattered throughout the world, we don’t agree with each other on every tenet of radical feminism and I’d guess that very few of us are “professional” radical feminists.
exangelena // April 24, 2007 at 1:59 am
And I’ve said this before, but another thing that annoys me is the way that the negative stereotyping of radical feminists sounds suspiciously like the way that misogynists stereotype feminists.
That we’re “man-haters”, we’re hairy, we don’t wear makeup, we’re uptight and no fun (humorless?), we’re old and ugly, we’re intolerant (feminazis?). Aside from the arguable “man-haters” and intolerant issues, what’s wrong with being hairy or not wearing makeup or being old or ugly? Why is everyone so interested in running away from that? You’re not hurting anyone by doing that, but you are offending the aesthetics of sexist men.
Gayle // April 24, 2007 at 2:24 am
“Hey, I have a thought. How about we all stop worrying about winning and protecting our damaged egos and actually do something constructive?
How’s that sound for a change?”
Doing something constructive on-line sounds great to me. Actually, I’ve been disappointed by how little on-line activism there is. For that reason, most of my “constructive” work happens off-line. I do respond to calls-for-action, etc., try to jump in when I can.
For the record: When I wrote “I think she can win.” I meant she can win in the battle of ideas. I didn’t mean to imply anything else.
While I agree with much of your comment, Faith, the false equivalence it paints is somewhat off-putting. WW didn’t launch the attack, she simply responded in defense of her deeply-held beliefs. Big difference there, IMO.
Burrow // April 24, 2007 at 2:54 am
exangelena I think I love you.
shannon // April 24, 2007 at 3:33 am
I lowercase it because I am lazy. I agree about being feminine and being unfeminine not being equal. People actually verbally praise me when I am feminine. But yea, I agree there’s nothing wrong with me in the winter when I have hairy legs. Who I am as a person is defined by more than whether some random guy thinks I am hot.
RenegadeEvolution // April 24, 2007 at 3:35 am
V: I wouldn’t say I’m lucky and know nothing about human cruelty, thanks. I’ve known some real abusive fuckhead prize winner asshole human beings in my time…but yeah, when it comes to the way I’ve seen some radical feminists treat non radical feminists, I stand by my words. I am not saying all, but some, most certainly. Abuse does not have to be physical or sexual to mess someone up after all.
Exangelena- You know, I have YET to see any woman who even LIKES the word feminist, no matter her camp, talk smack about a woman because of her weight, her choice not to wear make up, her choice not to shave, her choice not to wear “girlie” things, or her choice to not sleep with men.
I have however seen a lot of snide criticism of women who shave, diet, wear make up, dress “sexy”, so on so forth…. Sure, it is okay to ask anyone WHY they might do something, out of honest curiosity and all, but so very often, this isn’t honesty interest, it’s flat out bashing..,and NO MATTER the reasons one might give (I detest body hair on all people, I am in theatre and like dramatic make up, I live in Some City Where it is Hotter than Hell and less clothes are more comfortable in the heat) it just isn’t good enough or does not matter.
octogalore // April 24, 2007 at 6:09 am
Exangelena : “That we’re man-haters, we’re hairy, we don’t wear makeup, we’re uptight and no fun (humorless?), we’re old and ugly, we’re intolerant (feminazis?). ”
Much of these are straw arguments. Feminists of any stripe don’t make these generalizations globally, and are more likely to point out specific examples of the non-appearance-related ones where it can be argued they exist. As Ren says, I haven’t seen any self-proclaimed feminist comment about anyone’s weight or hair level.
Further, I find it interesting that the folks most likely to point out (apologetically, of course) how much thin privilege or bodaciousness they have, despite their sincere wishes not to have this stuff, are not the so-called sparkle pony feminists. Of course, it will be claimed it’s all in context. However, the contexts in which it’s mentioned, to me, are pretty thin…
exangelena // April 24, 2007 at 6:42 am
Burrow – Squeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!
Renegade Evolution – Then what is with the profusion of posts in the feminist blogosphere* meeting all the criteria that I listed? Lauredhel tackles the phenomena. No, generally they don’t criticize individual women for being fat or hairy, but the mythical strawfeminist who tells them that they can’t be pretty or sexy or wear makeup.
That being said, perhaps you’re more sensitive to the anti-”sparkle” blog posts than I am, and I’m more sensitive to the pro-”sparkle” blog posts than you are.
I think I’ve tried to explain it in other comments of mine – but I don’t necessarily have a problem with you if you wear fewer clothes because of the heat – goodness knows I don’t insist you walk around with sweat stains all day. I do have a problem IF and only IF you were to get defensive and complain that feminists who criticize the existing pressure on young women to wear trendy and scanty clothes are oppressing you and if you ignore the fact that the choice of wearing, say, a crotch-length miniskirt and tube top gets more societal approval than wearing a baggy shirt and loose trousers during the summer.
Continuing with my body weight example, I do get upset sometimes when heavy women say that thin women look like starving children, are nasty bag of bones, anorexics, unnatural, etc. At this time I am not slender because I am on a crash diet – it’s more a function of genetics, youth, an active lifestyle, anxiety and an aversion to calorie-rich meat and fats. However, I understand that their anger likely comes from years of hatred thrown at their bodies, and that I can tune them out any time I want and go back to my thin privilege. And I strongly believe that I can be slender (let’s be honest here, a US Size 4) AND be anti-fatphobia and against the thin beauty standard.
Sorry for the ramble, but I just want to say that I appreciate that you’re willing to have respectful dialogue with radical feminists. And hey, I’ve said some hurtful and mean things about sex positive feminists in the past. I don’t think you’re an asshole, I don’t think I’m an asshole – we’re both allowed our bad moments
*(I’m reluctant to link to any posts or name names, since I don’t want anyone coming over to Witchy Woo’s space that I’m currently using as my soapbox to fling crap at me.)
exangelena // April 24, 2007 at 6:57 am
octagalore:
“I find it interesting that the folks most likely to point out (apologetically, of course) how much thin privilege or bodaciousness they have, despite their sincere wishes not to have this stuff, are not the so-called sparkle pony feminists. Of course, it will be claimed it’s all in context. However, the contexts in which it’s mentioned, to me, are pretty thin…”
First of all, I’m not generally considered beautiful or bodacious. I have never been a pretty girl. I have been, however, spared the abusive treatment that many fat women get. Although of course, no woman is ever thin enough …
I also never said that I hate being thin. (Much more content can be found in my above response to Renegade Evolution.) I would probably have to quit my job and blow out my GI tract to gain enough weight to qualify as fat. I would be pretty angry if someone told me that I’m not allowed to be thin (although most of the radical feminists I’ve come across are not big on passing laws and ordinances),
I would be a “sparkle pony feminist” if I said things like “tee hee! I’m such a bad feminist, I’m thin!” or “I’m not going to be a radical feminist anymore because some radical feminist said I was too thin!”. And I think that the fact I have privilege – due to some random, meaningless combination of genetics and lifestyle – sucks.
I think that recognizing privilege is useful and changes the way you look at things. I’m nonwhite and female, and I find that I can discuss race and gender issues much more easily with whites and/or men who have examined their privilege.
I can see that women fighting size-ism might take me with a grain of salt and I don’t have a problem with that. I’m willing to help and be their ally, but I don’t want to appropriate their struggle.
Kim // April 24, 2007 at 10:10 am
Just weighing in for the moment to say I appreciate this discussion. It’s far too early for me to appropriately comment or even read everything here clearly as I’m not even thru my first cup of coffee.
But so far this discussion, sans name calling or overuse of sarcasm, I think is a good think.
Back later …
Kim // April 24, 2007 at 10:10 am
“a good think.”
THING.
I rest my case — not fully awake!
Pippa // April 24, 2007 at 10:42 am
It’s my opinion that in order to understand what you are dealing with Witchy, you take a look at the full comment thread for the original post. I’m stunned at the ignorance and loathing that is splashing around there. I am upset and disturbed by the whole tone. You might also go and look at the “Fall under a truck and die choking on your own blood.” comment on another site. I won’t link, you’ll find it. I am disgusted with what I’ve read today, and you absolutely have all my support IRL and online. Pippa x
fannyblood // April 24, 2007 at 12:01 pm
they are a very very angry bunch that’s for sure.
stormy // April 24, 2007 at 12:11 pm
The “Fall under a truck and die choking on your own blood.” comment was brought to you by The Feminists That Care About Women More [than those nasty evil radfems]TM.
A survey of the previous week’s posts (16-24 Apr) on that blog reveal that out of 24 posts, 6 posts (25%) are radfem/anti-porn-activist bashing. Now go to a radfem blog at random and try to find 25% of the posts dedicated to pro-pornie bashing.
This so-called ‘porn war’ is totally one-sided, with one person in particular continually inciting it and maintaining it ['the war'].
Personally I would like to take a match to that blog of strawfeminism.
stormy // April 24, 2007 at 12:13 pm
The “Fall under a truck and die choking on your own blood.” comment was brought to you by The Feminists That Care About Women More [than those nasty evil radfems]TM.
A survey of the previous week’s posts (16-24 Apr) on that blog reveal that out of 24 posts, 6 posts (25%) are radfem/anti-porn-activist bashing. Now go to a radfem blog at random and try to find 25% of the posts dedicated to pro-pornie bashing.
This so-called ‘porn war’ is totally one-sided, with one person in particular continually inciting it and maintaining it [’the war’].
Personally I would like to take a match to that blog of strawfeminism.
stormy // April 24, 2007 at 12:14 pm
[apologies for the double posting, the comment 'disappeared' on the first attempt, and re-appeared after posting it the second time -- Witchy, please delete the second one, thanks]
Lya Kahlo // April 24, 2007 at 12:34 pm
“And I’ve said this before, but another thing that annoys me is the way that the negative stereotyping of radical feminists sounds suspiciously like the way that misogynists stereotype feminists.”
Yes, that is interesting, isn’t it. Makes you wonder where they’re actually getting their info from.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“You know, I have YET to see any woman who even LIKES the word feminist, no matter her camp, talk smack about a woman because of her weight, her choice not to wear make up, her choice not to shave, her choice not to wear “girlie” things, or her choice to not sleep with men.”
Then you apparently don’t read the comments on your own blog. It’s routinely agreed on that radfems are jealous of all you hot’n’sexxxxaay chicks who get all the boys in a tizzy – because they aren’t as *prettyprettypretty* as you (collectively). And the boy cheerleaders always make sure to add that we’re all mentally unhinged in some capacity.
Vera used to read your blog, and therefore so did I – since she used the office comp.
“I have however seen a lot of snide criticism of women who shave, diet, wear make up, dress “sexy”, so on so forth…. Sure, it is okay to ask anyone WHY they might do something, out of honest curiosity and all, but so very often, this isn’t honesty interest, it’s flat out bashing”
And yet neither you or your buddies have managed to produce a single shred of evidence that this is the case. So I say once again, sans evidence I’m forced to conclude that either A) you’re inventing insults in order to justify your bashing radfems, or b) you can read minds and *know* a random stranger’s *true* motives.
And this is also what I meant by maybe this isn’t all about you. Though it may shock you, they’re not always out to get you. It is possible that you weren’t even on their minds when they wrote whatever they wrote that you find so personally offensive. (that’s still the collective “you”).
___________
“This so-called ‘porn war’ is totally one-sided, with one person in particular continually inciting it and maintaining it [’the war’].”
And notice, how whenever a negative point about porn is posted, its ignored and whole conversation becomes about how all the feminists are mean to them – you know, all the ones they have yet to name, and all the comments they have yet to prove are personal insults to them.
I’m underwhelmed, I have to say. And I understand now why Vera’s given up. No wonder she avoids certain blogs like the plague now.
stormy // April 24, 2007 at 12:52 pm
Thanks Lya, I have missed you around these parts lately. I just want to go “ditto” on everything you’ve said on this thread.
Laurelin // April 24, 2007 at 1:09 pm
Go Lya!
Kim // April 24, 2007 at 1:37 pm
Not to harp on the negative, but the following quotes are exactly the kind of blog discourse I so detest:
“radfems are jealous of all you hot’n’sexxxxaay chicks”
“Though it may shock you, they’re not always out to get you.”
“A survey of the previous week’s posts (16-24 Apr) on that blog reveal that out of 24 posts, 6 posts (25%) are radfem/anti-porn-activist bashing. Now go to a radfem blog at random and try to find 25% of the posts dedicated to pro-pornie bashing.”
When I see this sort of stuff, the sarcasm, the effort put into getting statistics (!!!) my eyes glaze and I’m not longer interested in reading with an open mind.
Seems to me the focus is more on fighting than reaching an understanding and I’m trying to stay away from the sort of thing.
For this reason, I’m not interested in offering up fucking blog “evidence.” I could spending hours and hours copying and pasting ONLY the mean-sprited comments from rad fems; name names; give links.
This sort of thing does not appeal to me in the least, indeed it is the behavior of someone a bit unhinged in my opinion.
I think you know where to find the sort of “evidence” you demand, Lya, as much as I would know exactly where to go to find the meanest of the mean comments from “the other side” (fuck “Sparkle”) a la “Fall under a truck” or what have you.
We all go to blogs where folks express sentiments to ours.
We’ve all read the comments and many of us have written them.
I’m all pissed off again.
At least I admit it.
No more from me for a while
Lya Kahlo // April 24, 2007 at 1:58 pm
“When I see this sort of stuff, the sarcasm, the effort put into getting statistics (!!!) my eyes glaze and I’m not longer interested in reading with an open mind.”
The sarcasm is meant to illustrate the absolute absurdity of the premise that anyone is “just jealous”. And to highlight the fact that NO actual arguements of radfems is ever discussed. Interesting though that you dismiss statistics are being just too boring (apparently) for you to consider. Conveniently that allowed to you totally ignore the fact that she’s proven its nonradfems who are doing the bashing – while you (collectively) are making up lame excuses as to why you lack any evidence.
“Seems to me the focus is more on fighting than reaching an understanding and I’m trying to stay away from the sort of thing.”
Yes, nonradfems are interested only in fighting. As you so quickly prove with the next pile of bullshit:
“For this reason, I’m not interested in offering up fucking blog “evidence.” . . . This sort of thing does not appeal to me in the least, indeed it is the behavior of someone a bit unhinged in my opinion. ”
Ah yes! How “unhinged” of me to request evidence of the treatment you (collectively) routinely accuse radfems of. How “unhinged” of me to ask that you back up your statements. It’s not like that’s a basic expectation in a debate, or anything.
The reason you’re avoiding my request is because you don’t have any evidence. But thank you for tossing in a few insults at me, as I have very noticiably not insulted you at all. It is very easy to see who is interested in “just fighting”. I expected better from you Kim. Especially from you.
“I think you know where to find the sort of “evidence” you demand, Lya, as much as I would know exactly where to go to find the meanest of the mean comments ”
can anyone parse out this sentence? I’m at a loss at the meaning here. Is she saying that we’re all the same because she might know one blog that insults?
I am also pissed off. Pissed off that nonradfems are apparently incapable of producing any evidence of the behavior they accuse us of. Pissed that the ignore basic, simple and reasonable requests that what we’re being accused of happens. Pissed that any moment now we’ll see another round of blog posts about how “mean” radfems are – still without evidence.
shannon // April 24, 2007 at 2:06 pm
I think the huge difference between meanness and oppression needs to be talked about. It’s mean to laugh at the fact that sometimes I try to wear shoes that I can’t walk in, because of the obsession with OMG, heels! in women’s shoes. It’s oppressive to talk about how women only make political decisions based on whether people like their shoes.
Also, evidence is seen as an important part of knowledge by many people., especially those who value being right over being nice. I did get the impression that certain people spend a whole lot of time bashing the other side. It’s not to say that I don’t mock the stupid on my blog, but I don’t go around complaining that people are super mean either.
Kim // April 24, 2007 at 2:37 pm
“Unhinged” was not directed at you for requesting evidence, Lya. My mistake if that wasn’t clear.
“Unhinged” to me is a rather what Stormy has done — gone to blogs specifically looking for posts which do not view rad fems favorably — “atttacking,” if you will — then getting stats, etc.
This sort of rather — stalker-esque? — behavior would make me wonder if she even bothered to read the CONTENT of my “anti rad fem” posts this week. It ain’t bad towards rad fems at my place, you know? I’m not all “I love porn!” either.
I just think a lot of stuff out on my blog and don’t care so much anymore if this makes me unpopular — with either “side.”
While I fully admit to getting angry (my use of “fucking” a few times in my last comment, for example), I don’t usually write posts just to “slam” or “attack” anyone.
I realize it seems I’m getting pretty nasty towards Stormy by calling her behavior “unhinged,” — I didn’t want to do that.
The whole “Operation Wasp” had led me to distrust anything that vaguely rings of that debacle –intense, selective-editing, blog hunting, “Wasp” Witch Hunt sort of thing — just creeps me out.
But hey, that’s just me.
You know, maybe the reason I get so uptight about all of this is that I genuinely don’t consider myself on either “side.” Which means when I feel “attacked” — genuinely or perceived as this may be — by a rad fem, I’m like “But I’m not AGAINST you!” you know.
As for the other “side” well so far, they’ve been nothing but civil towards me. I still smart over all the blog “friends” I lost when I began questioning.
Not expressing myself as well as I’d like due to time. Back later when not so rushed, perhaps.
Perhaps I could find a few comments/posts that upset me, if not embarking on a whole Rad Fem Witch Hunt. A Rad Fem Witch Hunt would make me “unhinged” via my own definition.
Lya Kahlo // April 24, 2007 at 2:59 pm
““Unhinged” was not directed at you for requesting evidence, Lya. My mistake if that wasn’t clear.”
Apologies for the misunderstanding then.
“It ain’t bad towards rad fems at my place, you know? I’m not all “I love porn!” either.”
I know very well. I read your blog frequently. I also know that there are some good people on all sides of the fence, and that this in fighting is mainly the fault of a crappy discussion medium (internet forums) – they lack tone, subtext and subtlety.
I think the main problem here is that we all – ALL – occasionally read some comments which were intended to describe an sitch between specific people, but we mistake as being a slam against the whole group. Or that slam the whole group unintentionally.
I want to know what it is that we’re saying that is being taken as an insult – so frequently. Because I am convinced it is not intended to offend, but to discuss things that need to be discuss. But perhaps send an unintentionally negative vibe to those who aren’t normally part of the group discussing it.
Perhaps what we really need is a feminist vernacular dictionary. (and for the record, I totally stole that idea from Vera)
Lya Kahlo // April 24, 2007 at 3:11 pm
A p.s. I think it’s unfair to categorized Stormy’s actions as “unhinged”. What she did is what debate requires – she provided evidence to back up her case. If gathering evidence is “unhinged” then every scientist, lawyer etc are unhinged.
exangelena // April 24, 2007 at 3:30 pm
“Fall under a truck and die choking on your own blood.”
Lya, stormy – what happened with that? I saw that at womensspace, but I think (as usual) I missed the flame war.
Lya Kahlo // April 24, 2007 at 3:53 pm
I know what blog the quote came from, but not what sparked it.
Kim // April 24, 2007 at 3:54 pm
Fair enough, Lya — you got me smiling over here which is a whole LOT better than what nearly happened with us a few comments back.
Ditto and retraction on any interpretation of Stormy as “unhinged.”
That’s what I’m talking about over here — understanding each other.
(I still have “unhinged” feeling towards the Op Wasp blog thing, namely as one quote of mine was yanked out of context. But I’ll get over it.)
stormy // April 24, 2007 at 3:56 pm
So, statistics cause you to shut down? Interesting, as they are a statement of fact, the proof of what is going on, but you choose to put your head in the sand. If you recall I have also done analysis of porn spam on a similar basis. That survey was interesting, as it was highly suspicious that only radfems were receiving such a volume of ‘rape porn’, and when I announced that I was to do another more indepth one on New Year’s Day, magically, it [porn spam] stopped on December 31st.
‘Trying to stay away’, is that what you called it when you joined in the Stormy-bashing fest of a month or two ago? Strange, as I had never had any disagreement with you, nor really any direct conversation (within the blogosphere). So let me get this straight, it is fine and dandy to ‘join in the fun’ of radfem bashing, but not ‘fine and dandy’ to collate evidence and call someone on a repeated behaviour?
Do it. I think you will find that the wealth of evidence of mean-spirited comments originates from one side, and you are more than happy to party along with that side in radfem bashing.
[Lya, actually it was obvious that she was refering to me as unhinged]
You may not write the posts, but you are still happy to join in radfem bashing. On the ‘unhinged’ nature of statistical evidence, I guess that all the rape researchers are also ‘unhinged’ for analysing events of an icky subject like rape?* The analysis of the blog content of a self-proclaimed feminist is actually important in this discussion. What I did not mention is that the ‘feminist’ content of that week’s survey yielded about three posts tops on ‘feminism’ (excluding just linking to other blogs). Hence that validates my stance that the blog has less to do with feminism, and more to do with bashing radfems.
*Actually, another fucking strawfeminist argument put up by pro-porners is that radfems ‘obsess’ about pornography. That is the double bind of, if we study it, we are ‘obsessed’ by it, if we don’t study it, we don’t know what we are talking about. Kind of reminds me of ‘typical’ Patriarchy in that double-bind stance.
Ah, some selective memory or observation. Operation Wasp was TWO POSTS, two posts out of hundreds—not exactly 25% of my posts, was it? Besides which, it was political commentary on the feminist blogosphere landscape, rather than a ridicule post as is standard at the pornie blogs. In a nutshell, for the incredibly thick of you out there, I should have perhaps simply said, “Trojan Horse”, which is RE, BD et al maintaining that they are feminists and infiltrating the radfem spaces, primarily to disrupt them from the inside. My mistake was in trying to do it by allegory rather than simply just naming names as I have done here.
Now if the pornies wish me to seriously regard them as ‘feminists’, they can easily do that by upping the percentage of quality posts on the subject of FEMINISM (not feminists) to around 80%. But the content of their blogs speak for themselves as to their motives, and it isn’t feminism. Wake up and smell the Patriarchy (agenda).
stormy // April 24, 2007 at 4:00 pm
I do not recall EVER quoting you (in any of my posts). I did quote another radfem in those posts, which I later removed at her request. So what is the quote that I took out of context?
RenegadeEvolution // April 24, 2007 at 4:01 pm
Hey, watch this..
I was the author of “die choking on your own blood” yep, I admit it. (Originally posted at my own blog, gee, I guess it got taken to Womenspace to feed something…imagine my surprise…) Why, well, I look around at see the way I think some pretty keen people…you know, not assholes like me are treated, like Antiprincess on a recent thread at Hearts, Laura back around January or so, anybody and everybody in the Wasp thing, BFP and BlackAmazon almost any and every time the address race or class, and it makes me angry.
There have been 3, exactly three women I can think of who know the word feminist who have mentioned jealousy. I’m not one of them. As for the men, I don’t tell them what to write, but it is a well known fact, sooner or later, EVERYTHING, every single comment posted to my blog is published, sometimes on the intended post, sometimes in a wrap up, but published nonetheless. That’s been my policy for a long time.
Yep, sure enough, I have been unleashing some fury on SOME radical feminists here lately. Between the above mentioned women I like being slagged off for no real reason, a few totally erroneous statements made at Genderberg about me, the calling of women like Jill B outright stupid, and the great anonymous (and in one case, signed) yet not too subtle pot shots at me that show up in my blog daily by radical feminists…gee, I wonder why I might take issue?
delphyne // April 24, 2007 at 4:04 pm
“I think the main problem here is that we all – ALL – occasionally read some comments which were intended to describe an sitch between specific people, but we mistake as being a slam against the whole group. Or that slam the whole group unintentionally.”
So which of us should take “die choking on your own blood” personally and which of us can breathe a sigh of relief knowing that it wasn’t directed at us?
delphyne // April 24, 2007 at 4:07 pm
The “some radical feminists are big meanies but the rest of you are fine (and thus its OK to wish them death choking o their own blood)” is an attempt at divide and conquer. I hope no-one falls for it.
RenegadeEvolution // April 24, 2007 at 4:13 pm
““Trojan Horse”, which is RE, BD et al maintaining that they are feminists and infiltrating the radfem spaces, primarily to disrupt them from the inside”
Cool your jets, Stormy, I’ve gone expat, which, you know, if you bothered to read anything I’ve said lately, you would have noticed. I won’t be dirtying up the F word with my presence for you anymore, okay?
And if you really want a list of nasty things to & said about non-rad fems, well, I might find some time to do that, again, but here’s a starter…
The recent treatment of Antiprincess at WomansSpace
Bugs & Wasp…you should remember those
Faith and myself got a little love over at Traffic Jamming…
The Charlie/Ladyfest mess re; BDSM…cause it is so nice to call folks sick fucks and all (see threads at SparkeMatrix. Inc.Hippie, I shame the Matriarchy for more)
That should get you started.
Lya Kahlo // April 24, 2007 at 4:31 pm
“That’s what I’m talking about over here — understanding each other.”
That’s all I want, in all truth. I think think the infighting is pointless and absurd.
“(I still have “unhinged” feeling towards the Op Wasp blog thing, namely as one quote of mine was yanked out of context. But I’ll get over it.)”
Please don’t think I’m just ignoring this. I have not commented on the Op Wasp blog because I don’t know anything about it. I don’t remember even hearing about it before – though my memory isn’t all that great.
_____________
[Lya, actually it was obvious that she was refering to me as unhinged]
At the time I misunderstood her post. I’ve apologized. I’ll do so again if need be.
_________
“Between the above mentioned women I like being slagged off for no real reason, a few totally erroneous statements made at Genderberg about me, the calling of women like Jill B outright stupid, and the great anonymous (and in one case, signed) yet not too subtle pot shots at me that show up in my blog daily by radical feminists…gee, I wonder why I might take issue?”
Finally, at least we’re heading toward some evidence. You say you get pot shots on your blog from radfems. Mind if i ask who? And, how are you sure it’s radfems? I ask because your blog attracts a multitude of people and I have a hard time believing it’s only radfems who leave nasty comments on it. Which is not meant as a slight against you or your blog, but rather a recognition that the occasional subject matter can bring trolls. And, not to mention the mras that go there that would have a great interest in discrediting feminists. Basically, do they acknowledge themselves as radfems?
WRT genderberg – do you know what threads? I don’t visit that one, and so don’t know what to expect from it.
_____
Delphyne – this question: “So which of us should take “die choking on your own blood” personally and which of us can breathe a sigh of relief knowing that it wasn’t directed at us?” is misleading. Deliberately so, it seems, in order to make it look like I was making excuses for insults. That is unfair.
Taken in context it was quite clear I was talking about that which could be mistaken for an insult – not that which is clearly an insult.
And, Ren has explained why she said it. How would you respond to those that you feel are attacking your friends, out of curiosity? Would you be on you best behavior in such an instance? I know I wouldn’t. If someone attacks those I care about, I will retalliate. If such a thing was unprovoked, then it’s clearly not cool. Ren has explained it was in response to what she saw as her friends being attacked.
And so I’m willing to let slide that which is said in anger. (not suggesting Ren needs care what I do, or think,etc). I’ve done that too.
Now – I don’t know what caused that response, so I don’t know if it was honestly warrented or not. However, the nonradfems here are telling us that they feel consistantly attacked. Accepting that, can we at least agree that perhaps that motivates a “circling of the wagons” as it were, when they perceive an attack?
The questions are – how do we avoid these misunderstandings and/or insults? Do we want to? Or do we want to continue this inane round-n-round?
Lya Kahlo // April 24, 2007 at 4:39 pm
WRT these: Faith and myself got a little love over at Traffic Jamming…
The Charlie/Ladyfest mess re; BDSM…cause it is so nice to call folks sick fucks and all (see threads at SparkeMatrix. Inc.Hippie, I shame the Matriarchy for more)
_______
I’d like to address these – but this is neither the time or place (and I don’t know when or where the right place might be). Suffice it to say that I absolutely agree that some of the things said are nasty and unneccessary. However, the subject matter is provocative. It pretty much incites heated debate. There are a lot of people harmed by the things that you (collectively) defend, and there will likely never be a friendly discussion about it.
In addition to letting slide that which is said in anger, I’m also willing to accept that there are some topics that are pretty much impossible to debate under any circumstances.
RenegadeEvolution // April 24, 2007 at 4:42 pm
Lya:
Fannyblood has signed a few of her statements.
Most of the rest are annoymous, but there are terms, styles of writing and other such things…as well as IP addresses and programs which allow me to see where traffic is coming from that makes me think (perhaps wrongly, yet the stats and graphs are there) that these are radical or radical leaning feminists.
Like I’ve always said, if you have something to say to me, use your name.
delphyne // April 24, 2007 at 4:45 pm
How would I respond? Well my friends and me have been on the receiving end of these insults and attacks for quite some time now and I’ve never said anything that came close to that Lya, that’s the whole point.
And I’m glad that you are able to let things slide that are said in anger, but it wasn’t directed at you was it, so maybe you wouldn’t be feeling quite so sanguine if it was.
“Taken in context it was quite clear I was talking about that which could be mistaken for an insult – not that which is clearly an insult.”
Yes but why not just talk about the insults. There’s been plenty of those. I actually provided the example where Kim quoted my words to show the attitude she “detested” (her word) in radical feminists. I’ve explained myself but she hasn’t responded so I don’t know if she’s still including me amongs those radicals who’ve attacked her. She’s never said who they are.
stormy // April 24, 2007 at 4:53 pm
Well, that is a stretch for you RE, you are NOT in the UK, and not in the UK BDSM groups that were ‘attacked’ in those posts. It’s not always about you, you know. Although I note you are now bestest buds with the UK BDSM crowd now.
And sorry to burst your narcissistic little bubble, but I don’t bother reading your blog on a regular basis, only when alerted to a post of ‘interest’. I am quite happy that you have now dropped the pretense of being a feminist, it must have been exhausting for you.
ms. jared // April 24, 2007 at 4:55 pm
one thing i’ve noticed while witnessing these ongoing flame wars is that every negative comment made on certain anti-radfem blogs is attributed to radfems whether or not it was actually made by a radfem. it seems like anytime there’s an “anonymous” comment made disparaging pro-pornies, it’s automatically assumed that it was made by a radfem. it has been my experience however, that very few radfems actually make over the top, hateful comments so maybe that’s part of the problem? offense is taken to comments that weren’t necessarily even written by radfems.
it really does seem like it’s all “fuck radfems” all the time and it’s exhausting. like stormy, i’d take many feminists and “expats” more seriously if they posted more about feminist issues, promoted ideas that work towards ending violence against women and advancing women’s status instead of only about how much radfems suck.
we get it. you don’t like the things radfems stand for. fortunately for you, radfems have little to no power in the world so you’re free to go about your business.
Lya Kahlo // April 24, 2007 at 5:05 pm
“Fannyblood has signed a few of her statements.”
Ah, yes. I have seen that name on your blog before. Is this someone who is incendiary on any blog they visit? Or is it directed specifically at you?
“Most of the rest are annoymous, but there are terms, styles of writing and other such things…as well as IP addresses and programs which allow me to see where traffic is coming from that makes me think (perhaps wrongly, yet the stats and graphs are there) that these are radical or radical leaning feminists.”
Hmm. Then, are these comments – in your estimation – frequently unprovoked, or are then in response to something on the blog, or something you may have posted elsewhere? This isn’t an attempt at excusing insults. I’m trying to determine when this happens.
——
“How would I respond? Well my friends and me have been on the receiving end of these insults and attacks for quite some time now and I’ve never said anything that came close to that Lya, that’s the whole point. ”
And it’s a point I agree with. I’ve also never seen anything near that. That doesn’t mean it hasn’t happen – just that we haven’t seen it.
“And I’m glad that you are able to let things slide that are said in anger, but it wasn’t directed at you was it, so maybe you wouldn’t be feeling quite so sanguine if it was.”
That statement was intended to suggest that perhaps we’re all taking too personally what is clearly going to have any affect on our lives whatsoever. Upthread Shannon asked the nonradfems how what radfems say affects their lives. I put the same question to you. Do you think she honestly hopes you die painfully? If in fact it was directed at you, because I simply don’t know who it was directed at.
I’m asking can we at least consider that some of this insult trading is also misunderstandings? That perhaps if we discuss it, we might find out that we all regret it?
“Yes but why not just talk about the insults. There’s been plenty of those.”
It’s clear what my intention was. I fail to see the point in rehasing it.
I can’t speak for Kim (not that you asked me too). Yes, there have been plenty of insults passed around. What I’m trying to figure out is – - are these insults that are traded back and forth based on a difference of opinion, misunderstandings, or personal vendettas?
Differences of opinion can be discussed without ad homs, for the most part. Misunderstandings can be addressed, explained and everyone forgiven. Personal vendettas I have no use for, and so if that’s all this ultimately comes down to I’d like to know so I know exactly what blogs to avoid.
delphyne // April 24, 2007 at 5:07 pm
I should be clearer, Lya, you seem to be suggesting that the main problem is misunderstandings. I think the main problem is that there is a contingent of anti-anti-porn feminists who go out of their way to bait and attack anti-porn feminists, both through out and out attacks and also through divide and conquer tactics such as being friendly to the rad fems who seem to be amenable whilst launching no holds barred attacks on those who aren’t. In that way they can feel quite justified in saying that some of us should die choking on our own blood. How serious do things on the internet have to get before that is an appropriate response?
delphyne // April 24, 2007 at 5:14 pm
“Do you think she honestly hopes you die painfully? If in fact it was directed at you, because I simply don’t know who it was directed at.”
Can you really not see the difference between personal insults and wishing violent death on someone? How many of us do you think are survivors of violence? How many of us do you think are triggered by that remark?
In fact it’s actually your response that is triggering me. That you’d actually ask me to justify feeling incredibly disturbed and threatened reading something like that directed at radical feminists.
Lya Kahlo // April 24, 2007 at 5:27 pm
“I should be clearer, Lya, you seem to be suggesting that the main problem is misunderstandings.”
Actually, I’m trying to figure out if its possible it’s misunderstandings that then lead to bait and attack instances. Or if this is just a bunch of people who like insulting each other.
I agree that there is a noticable animosity toward anti-porn feminists. There’s a lot of unfair, cruel and flat out false things said about us. And a lot of silly logical fallacies laid out as defense of porn. However, allow me at this point to suggest that it is likely the terminology used to describe those in it or into it, that causes a misunderstood, but perceived insult and therefore a nasty response.
In theTrafficjamming thread Ren mentioned for example, there was a poster who declared that all the women the post discussed were mentally/emotionally damaged. If I recall correctly, the poster offered nothing by way of reliable evidence. With out evidence, how could that be taken as anything but a needless insult?
This is not an excuse for the all the awful things said about anti-porn feminists.
Call me an optimist but I feel -to steal something the beleagured AP said recently – “we’ll hammer it all out eventually.”
See, imo, it doesn’t matter if you like porn or don’t – what matters is treating everyone like a human being. When you believe someone is attacking you – do you listen to what they have to say? Or do you retalliate? I retalliate. And nothing gets done, no one is heard and the beat goes on.
I’d like to see that change, if it can.
CoolAunt // April 24, 2007 at 5:37 pm
Oh, Jesus fucking Christ on rollerskates! Who is this Lya Pollyfuckinganna Rodney Fucking King Kahlo person and why can’t she/he see that the day after “choke on their own blood” was posted is a fucking day too late for “can’t we all just get along?”
CoolAunt // April 24, 2007 at 5:40 pm
And Jesus fucking Christ on water skis, I swore I’d never even bother to address a fucking sociopath, but the onus is on the one who posted “choke on their own blood” and not on Heart or anyfuckingbody else who repeated it.
(Wanders off mumbling: good gawd almighty! that’s just like my ex-boyfriend calling me a trouble-maker for pointing out his lies and not himself for being the fucking liar. fucking sociopaths. they’re all alike.)
Lya Kahlo // April 24, 2007 at 5:48 pm
Thank you, Cool Aunt for calling me a sociopath. Because trying to understand what the problem is, is clearly just like what your ex did.
Kim // April 24, 2007 at 5:49 pm
Stormy:
Me: ” I still have “unhinged” feeling towards the Op Wasp blog thing, namely as one quote of mine was yanked out of context. But I’ll get over it.)
You: I do not recall EVER quoting you (in any of my posts). I did quote another radfem in those posts, which I later removed at her request. So what is the quote that I took out of context?
I’m refering to the Operation Wasp blog — short lived, “Meeting of the Wasp” thing — not your blog.
Unless you mean you are the previously anon creator of the Op Wasp blog?
Otherwise, nope, not talking about you.
shannon // April 24, 2007 at 5:50 pm
Lya is just trying to iron things out. Ren, now, you know that you don’t like it when people say mean things to you, so maybe you should temper some of your comments so that it doesn’t appear that you want other people to die? I think it’s a mix of misunderstandings, different world views and well..I have to admit some people are fueling the fight by overreacting.
You see, for example, my world view is very psychologically influenced- being stuck in a stage is bad(feeling that you are special in all the world is typical for teenagers) and people can justify and rationalize their actions. So people might think I mean FALSE CONSCIOUSNESS!!! OMG! I HATE SEX!! when I really mean people are tricky and multilayered. Also, there may be some geniune misunderstandings. I have to admit that belledame really doesn’t help things because she spends too much time making a big deal over OMG rad fems! and that can fuel an argument.
CoolAunt // April 24, 2007 at 5:50 pm
Yes, Lya, because it’s all about you. You are the one who posted about radfems choking on their own blood, right? Oh, that wasn’t you? Well, there ya’ have it. You’re not the sociopath; you just defend the shit out of one.
shannon // April 24, 2007 at 5:52 pm
Now now, let’s cool down here. Let’s all be friends and stuff. No need to bring up people’s personal thingamagigs..
womensspace // April 24, 2007 at 5:52 pm
So long as Ren Ev feels free to say to feminist women, “Fall under a truck and choke on your own blood,” and self-identified feminists, like you, Kim, line up alongside misogynist male assholes to applaud and say, “You go girl,” there is no reason for optimism, not to argue with you, really, Lya, just saying. (I’ve missed seeing you around, too!)
Shannon, as to not complaining about people being mean but only mocking the stupid, I don’t think the line is all that clear at times. I think you calling me a “transphobe” repeatedly on your blog is something you may be thinking of as “mocking the stupid,” when maybe really it’s more that you defenses of woman only space are mean, but you’d rather “mock [what you will call] stupid]” than complain about someone being mean.
Defense of woman-only space is not transphobic,is not mean, is not stupid; is central to radical feminism and essential to the liberation of women. When you call me (or anyone, but you’ve singled me out for your own reasons, which really irritates the hell out of me, even though many other radfems hold the position I hold, just some are not willing to take the hits for it, and I am) names for it, you’re part of the problem as well, making the radfem/anti-radfem problem worse than it needs to be.
Ren Eve, I’m actually not all that unhappy that you went postal on all of us because at least it’s honest. Sucking up to people isn’t, and you do it too often and it is totally dishonest.
Said my piece.
Heart
womensspace // April 24, 2007 at 5:54 pm
Edit.
!^@$&!$&@&
I said to Shannon, ” I think you calling me a “transphobe” repeatedly on your blog is something you may be thinking of as “mocking the stupid,” when maybe really it’s more that you think defenses of woman-only space are mean, but you’d rather “mock [what you will call] ’stupid’” than complain about someone being mean.
Heart
Lya Kahlo // April 24, 2007 at 5:55 pm
“Can you really not see the difference between personal insults and wishing violent death on someone? How many of us do you think are survivors of violence? How many of us do you think are triggered by that remark?
In fact it’s actually your response that is triggering me. That you’d actually ask me to justify feeling incredibly disturbed and threatened reading something like that directed at radical feminists.”
Understand, I am not attempting to belittle you or your experiences. I am not taking triggering lightly. Its clear that such a statement can trigger. I’m not attempting to defend such a statement. It was clearly not a reasonable response.
I apologize if I did trigger. I hope it’s clear I was not attempting such a thing. And if it isn’t clear, then let me say that was not my intention.
Like I said upthread I’ve volunteered in a women’s shelter for 10 years. I’ve seen it all. I have worked with and have many many friends who are survivors of all manners of violence. I do understand triggering. Which means I also know that part of recovery is relearning how to live in a world full of both actual danger and shadows.
______
Let’s not pretend that this mess started with that comment. Let’s also not pretend that more name calling and baseless insults is going to change anything.
If you’re happy with the way things are, feel free not to join the discussion.
antiprincess // April 24, 2007 at 5:58 pm
coolaunt – Lya is female.
shannon // April 24, 2007 at 5:59 pm
I call you that because you said something offensive on brownfemi’s blog a long time ago, and what was it? I think you really did offend poor piny a lot. I’m not exactly the shining beacon of transenlightenment, but I think that transwomen are like women,although transmen..they are teh menz. Sorry about that transfolks. I don’t think it’s
‘mean’ I think it’s needlessly discriminatory, and not really that important to radical feminism. We can open up womanhood to more people but we can’t stop defending women against violence and exploitation.
Lya Kahlo // April 24, 2007 at 6:09 pm
Cool Aunt: I see. You’re not insulting me, you’re just insulting me. Thanks for clearing that up.
____
Shannnon: “Lya is just trying to iron things out.”
Right, but I fully expected responses like Cool Aunt’s eventually. It’s easy to misunderstand my intention, esp when entering the convo at a late stage. It’s not going to stop me from trying though.
Additionally – “We can open up womanhood to more people but we can’t stop defending women against violence and exploitation.”
You rock.
That said – why can’t we have it both ways. If there are those who don’t want transpeople involved they have a right to their own spaces. And those of us who do, have a right to ours. I don’t see why this should be a point a contention. But then, I’m a pollyanna, evidently.
____
Heart – I’ve missed reading you. I’ve missed everyone. Its good to be back.
____
AP: I thought “Lya” is an obviously female name, but people don’t seem to agree. I get that “he/she” thing a lot.
delphyne // April 24, 2007 at 6:11 pm
“If you’re happy with the way things are, feel free not to join the discussion.”
I’m not happy with the way things are but I’m not convinced that “why can’t we all get along” is the answer either. The anti-anti-porn peeps have been saying that for ages, whilst at the same time going after any rad fem who happens to be pissing them off that day. It’s disingenuous.
womensspace // April 24, 2007 at 6:14 pm
Yes, Shannon, it’s offensive to many to defend woman-only space. I will never stop doing that, though. No radical feminist I know, who is committed to women, will compromise there. It’s just, some won’t talk about it on their blogs or on others’ blogs, being all cowardly and everything — my not-humble opinion — playing the oh-so-nice and rational and non-mean radfems , when in fact, they are AFRAID to openly defend their position because of shit like being called a “transphobe” which is just nonsense. Because if they do talk about it, they will get skewered, tarred and feathered to the ends of the earth by all sorts of people who usually have no idea what the issues even are, they just go off because, say, piny got offended once over at bfp’s. That’s why we have problems like the ones evidenced in this thread, or one reason.
I never need to say an offensive word in order for “poor” piny to take offense. The existence of radical feminism offends poor Piny (and piny certainly isn’t alone in this) because radical feminists stand for certain things, like women first, like woman-only space, like ending pornography and prostitution and SM and gender. For people like piny, them’s fighting words. I’m offended by *that*.
Heart
womensspace // April 24, 2007 at 6:16 pm
The anti-anti-porn peeps have been saying that for ages, whilst at the same time going after any rad fem who happens to be pissing them off that day. It’s disingenuous.
Yes. Now I really said my piece.
Heart
Lya Kahlo // April 24, 2007 at 6:47 pm
That wasn’t directed at you, Delphyne. Apologies for not making it clear.
“I’m not happy with the way things are but I’m not convinced that “why can’t we all get along” is the answer either. The anti-anti-porn peeps have been saying that for ages, whilst at the same time going after any rad fem who happens to be pissing them off that day. It’s disingenuous.”
I agree. I started off this discussion being skeptical that radfems insult nonradfems to the same degree or at the same frequency that the opposite is true. I stand by that. It still seems that it’s them doing more insulting. However, since they are here saying that they are insulted and this is the reason for at least some of the insults, I think it’s a good idea to find out what is offensive. Because if they’re geniunely insulted, that’s bad. If they’re inventing reasons to be insulted and using that as an excuse to verbally beat up radfems, that’s worse. My personal jury is still out.
This isn’t about putting all the responsibility to “fix” this on rad fems. Or excusing the behavior and/or insults from the other side. I really just want to know what causes the infighting – and even if it isn’t “fixable”, then at least we can understand why it happens and perhaps pay far less attention to it. Because it seems like when in fighting happens, that’s pretty much all that’s talked about. That’s a tremendous waste of time.
Because, as Heart pointed out there are certain positions that will cause others to have issue with you no matter what. This is unavoidable.
Kim // April 24, 2007 at 6:54 pm
Stormy: I don’t want to fight with you. I never joined any “Stormy bashing campain” or whatever– you said I have twice now — I addressed that on my blog already.
Go read it, if you like, or not up to you.
I believe the post is called “To Stormy” or something. Hard to miss. The direct quote can be found in that post.
Once again if you are not the creator of the Op Wasp BLOG — not the wasp post, which I never even read — I’m not talking to you. If you are, which it seems now you are saying you are, frankly YES — that blog was creepy to me.
Stats, I’ve no problem with –JUST THAT BLOG.
“Hide my head in the sand?”
ME?
How .
I.
Wish.
Show me a pile of sand that will allow me to properly hide from the word when necessary and I will happily plunge in up to my shoulders.
You have a right to your opinion.
That’s all I have to say on this.
Delphine — I like you. I don’t consider you an “attacker.” I don’t agree with all of your points maybe –though it’s been a while since I’ve seen you around the blogsphere, so who knows — maybe we see eye to eye more than I think, I don’t know.
Finally “attack” is strong word.
I think I’ll stop using it.
Let me say this instead: in the past, folks who I used to like/liked me kinda when AWOL went I gave up rad fem, yes. But it’s not like these were real “friends,” so I don’t seethe in that much these days.
But in all honesty, no one has “attacked me” really, on my posts.
Granted.
I was accused once by a commenter elsewhere who thought I had no right to be there via my commenting at an “enemy” blog. I don’t want to name names or places because I don’t want to stir shit up.
Really — let’ s just fucking NOT, okay.
But other than that, mostly my anger comes from some of the snarkier commenters at IBTP (not so much with Twisty herself).
Or when I read a post — kinda like yours, Witchy — than insinuates I haven’t examined the issues properly because I’ve made the choice to do something another feminist thinks is not “feminist.”
Let me make this clear: I firmly believe in being true to the self FIRST.
I take “This above all:to thine own self be true” literally.
Obviously, please to a degree: I don’t advocate going out an having sex with a child if this being “true to youself.”
I really don’t want to go back to the Kaka Mak days but:
That blog was not kind to my Self in the long wrong.
Trust me when I say I examined everything from why I wear makeup to what I think of heels to labioplasty to “political” lesbianism etc.
And recently, porn.
Some of the things I — tried, I guess to believe in due to strong commitment to radical feminism didn’t feel good. Added to some growing anxiety I had. Wasn’t ME.
I learned from that.
And hey I nearly lost in-the-flesh friends over that blog. I DO know what it’s like, as a rad fem, to feel you can’t say what you feel and believe.
I had freinds tell me they decided to not read my blog anymore to preserve the freindship. That hurt too — because at the time anyway, I didn’t think I was writing anything but truth and why can’t I just be who am, you know?
I feel the same today — and I will fully admit I’m still working it all out, where on stand on all of this .
Obvious, no?
Keep in mind, folks — for all my prickliness when my intellect is questioned and for all my utter seriousness when it come to calling myself A Writer, I have a hx of “thinking aloud” on my blogs/comments.
I don’t have a problem submitting comments before proofing or thinking them through 100%.
Which is maybe stupid, putting my ever-in-progress thoughs out there.
Which also why they alwayz havvve typOs.
It works for me, though.
I think best via writting and getting feedback.
I’m not too worried about being perfect or “right” all the time these days.
This public examining of self that I’ve put myself through is rather “UNHINGED” in itself, perhaps, as you know, I’m just a person who is prone lately to anxiety while still reeling from loosing my two beloved cats in 4 months.
In other words, I’m no one.
My emotions can run the gamet.
Which doesn’t discredit me, I hope.
I’m just blogging and thinking aloud.
Anyone is free to think what they wish.
Sorry for the Crazy Autobiography.
Over and out…
Kim // April 24, 2007 at 6:57 pm
“and self-identified feminists, like you, Kim, line up alongside misogynist male assholes to applaud and say, “You go girl,”
???
Male assholes?
Me, telling them to “go?”
What?
Oh forget it.
Pony // April 24, 2007 at 7:01 pm
“See, imo, it doesn’t matter if you like porn or don’t – what matters is treating everyone like a human being.”
What a mouthful of oxymoron.
It’s never going to be “it doesn’t matter” to radical feminists. Sex slavery does matter. Pornography and prostitution are sex slavery, and the debasement and abuse of women is never going to ‘not matter’.
This is the line in the sand, and no one who holds this up as choice, male or female, gets past that line in the sand.
Kim // April 24, 2007 at 7:04 pm
Is this an “attack” then, what Heart said?
She jumps to the thread from out of no where, singles me out by name, and accuses me of the above?
Hmmmm.
I feel “attacked.”
Heart, is that good enought for you — no sarcasm meant — I feel attacked and unhappy about that?
How do you feel, as a self-described woman “comitted to women” I feel attacked and singled out for this attack.
No evidence — just feelings.
Does that count as anything?
…Wanders off in search of a pile of sand
stormy // April 24, 2007 at 7:06 pm
For the record, no I was NOT the creator of the Op Wasp blog, I found it via an incoming link to my blog. Please do not insinuate that I am.
If I recall correctly, on the OpWasp blog I called for a truce, and to remove all ‘attack on other feminists posts’ (from both sides), and I was basically laughed out of the water (from the nonradfems as we seem to be calling them now). In fact, there is a thread here at Witchy’s where they justify why they should continue to keep posting anti-radfem hate posts.
So Lya, the truce concept has been tried, and failed. There is no ‘misunderstanding’, they wish to continue slagging off radfems for their own agenda, and that is to divide radfems and make them an ineffective group.
As delphyne points out, it is the nonradfems that whine “why can’t we all get along” but like to follow that up with post-after-post of radfem bashing. In a nutshell, that for me, is “why we cannot get along”.
Edited to add (because your comment has come up in the meantime Lya) that it may appear there is more bashing on this thread because we are fucking sick of it, the volumes of ‘ridicule the radfem’ posts.
Personally, I want nothing to do with them, but they keep coming to blogs that I visit, that is why they and their behaviour, are on my radar.
Kim // April 24, 2007 at 7:09 pm
Gaa.
This typo is too much for even me:
“How do you feel, as a self-described woman “comitted to women” I feel attacked and singled out for this attack.”
Corrected: How do you feel, as a self-described woman who is “commited to women” that I feel attacked and singled out for attack with your comment?
womensspace // April 24, 2007 at 7:15 pm
Okay, I need to clean one thing up, argh. I should not be suggesting that a radical feminist who has NOT defended woman-only space on her blog was being cowardly. That’s not true. Women only space is more central an issue to some radfems than to others and is more a focus to some than to others, because it’s more a real-life issue to some than it is to others; i.e., those of us who have very much valued woman-only space IRL and find it is being threatened or denied to us outright by people who don’t think we should have it and have the power to deny it to us.
Then, sometimes you have to choose the things you are going to take the hits for at any given moment. If you are taking a buttload of hits for being anti-pornography/anti-prostitution/anti-SM, sometimes you just aren’t really up for taking defense-of-woman-only-space hits, especially at the same time, and that is totally understandable.
What is guaranteed is this: if you take a very firm and uncompromising stand against pornography, prostitution, sadomasochism, and for woman-only space, you will take a buttload of hits. JUST for taking those stands. I don’t care if you lay awake nights trying to think of ways to be diplomatic or phrase things just right or whatever. You will take the hits from self-identified progressives and feminists, and you will take the hits from a huge proportion of the entire surrounding culture as well, for taking anyof those position. What’s scary is, when you take a stand against pornography and prostitution and SM, especially, sometimes you come across the radar of really scary people, people who are basically thugs, but they are rich thugs, powerful thugs. That’s what makes statements like, “Choke on your own blood” so serious. There are people in the world who would be happy if some of us *did* choke on our own blood and who could make it happen, as well. To hear that sentiment applauded by feminist women is, for that and other reasons, pretty tough.
Heart
stormy // April 24, 2007 at 7:20 pm
From Kim’s blog, (sorry to side track here):
My analysis of your comments was based on what I had seen posted at RE’s blog, where I could not believe that you were ‘joining in’. I could probably find the comments again if I could be bothered. I have little recollection of anything at the OpWasp blog, as it just turned into another radfem bashing venue.
womensspace // April 24, 2007 at 7:24 pm
Kim, Ren told radical feminists to” fall under a truck and die choking on our own blood”.
You, alongside men who came out of the woodwork, said the rough equivalent of “you go girl,” to Ren, in my mind, when you responded:
and then
With the applause of pro-porn, pro-SM, pro-prostitution, anti-radfem, anti-woman, male assholes Soulhuntre.
If that’s not what you thought you were doing, what did you think you were doing?
How did you manage to overlook “fall under a truck and die choking on your own blood”?
Heart
Faith // April 24, 2007 at 7:37 pm
“While I agree with much of your comment, Faith, the false equivalence it paints is somewhat off-putting. WW didn’t launch the attack, she simply responded in defense of her deeply-held beliefs. Big difference there, IMO.”
My comment wasn’t directed at Witchy-Woo. It was directed towards the whole stinking mess which is the feminist blogosphere of late.
v // April 24, 2007 at 7:38 pm
or the telling anyone to go pound anything into their ass? its a bit insensitive, at the very least, but i wouldve hoped that you, kim, would be a little bit more aware of comments like that, tbh.
Lya Kahlo // April 24, 2007 at 7:55 pm
Great. A big pile of strawmen. Let’s burn them, shall we? I didn’t say sex slavery, porn or prostitution don’t matter. I didn’t say the debasement and abuse of women doesn’t matter. And the only reason you pretend that I did is so you can make your completely useless statements.
What I did say was there’s no excuse for treating other people like crap based on a difference of opinion. I chose porn or anti-porn because that’s a big divide.
Your strawman ultimately fails because you’d be hard pressed to find anyone who *does* support sex slavery, forced prostitution, etc etc etc.
stormy // April 24, 2007 at 8:01 pm
“It was directed towards the whole stinking mess which is the feminist blogosphere of late.”
The solution is simple, no mixing.
One of the main areas of radical feminism is the analysis of pornstitution and how it contributes to women’s oppression. For those who call themselves feminists and be promoting this as ‘choice’ for women — this is a fundamental clash of objectives and philosophy, so what on earth is the point of being bestest buddies with a group who seek to undermine you? That goes for them too — what is your point being chummy with radfems when they seek to curtail all this ‘choice’ you promote. Pointless.
This is not ‘in fighting’ because we are not fighting for the same things — and I’m talking in a major way, of what and how to achieve equality. [Stormy, note to self, perhaps throw in the snide remark of how little they post about feminism anyway, but bummer, RE isn't claiming to be a feminist any more...]
Arantxa // April 24, 2007 at 8:01 pm
Lya, are you making a distinction between prostitution and forced prostitution?
Arantxa // April 24, 2007 at 8:03 pm
Stormy, I’m in total agreement. This is not in fighting. In fighting is when you have arguments with people who are politicially aligned.
Lya Kahlo // April 24, 2007 at 8:10 pm
“So Lya, the truce concept has been tried, and failed. There is no ‘misunderstanding’, they wish to continue slagging off radfems for their own agenda, and that is to divide radfems and make them an ineffective group.
As delphyne points out, it is the nonradfems that whine “why can’t we all get along” but like to follow that up with post-after-post of radfem bashing. In a nutshell, that for me, is “why we cannot get along”. ”
I see. And as the evidence is gathered this does hold true. I had no idea what the Op wasp blog was or when an attempt at a truce was made.
But I was never saying that radfems bash more often. I intended to say just the opposite.
____
“What’s scary is, when you take a stand against pornography and prostitution and SM, especially, sometimes you come across the radar of really scary people, people who are basically thugs, but they are rich thugs, powerful thugs. That’s what makes statements like, “Choke on your own blood” so serious. There are people in the world who would be happy if some of us *did* choke on our own blood and who could make it happen, as well. To hear that sentiment applauded by feminist women is, for that and other reasons, pretty tough.”
This is something I had not considered before. I had assumed that because the anti-porn movement is incredibly less powerful than the “yay porn!” people that we fell beneath their radar.
TO be clear, I was never applauding the sentiment.
_____
Alright. I now understand the reluctance for a truce. What I still don’t understand is why is there such a need to bash radfems? They consider us “crazy” “mean” “powerless” – so why spend so much time talking about us? If they dislike us so much, why come to so many radfem blogs? I don’t understand.
____
“are you making a distinction between prostitution and forced prostitution?”
Yes, because as Stormy pointed out some consider it a legitmate “choice”. Please don’t mistake that as my saying it is.
Additionally – that is a good point about infighting. The word suggests one is fighting with those on the same side. It seems fairly clear that few of them fall into that cateogory.
Faith // April 24, 2007 at 8:10 pm
“Faith and myself got a little love over at Traffic Jamming…”
For the record, I largely identify as Radical. There are a few issues that are sticklers for me, but, overall, I lean far more towards the Radical’s view of matters than the opposite side’s view. It’s largely the venom that I see thrown around that has kept me from taking the leap and going whole hog so to speak. The fact that I am largely radical and most definitely anti-most to all of the porn in production makes it even more odd to me that a Radical so blatantly attacked me over at TraffickJamming. It’s also the sort of viciousness that Anti-Princess received and the slamming of all things related to BDSM that also makes me pull back a bit.
I can not and will not be part of such viciousness. And also for the record, I do not take part in the slamming of the Radicals as a whole either. I’ve made one post on my blog when I was quite upset way back in January after a bad incident but that was all. And even that post wasn’t directed at all Radicals, only the ones that, well, pissed me off.
stormy // April 24, 2007 at 8:15 pm
“This is not in fighting. In fighting is when you have arguments with people who are politicially aligned.”
Cheers, you have succinctly said what I was trying to say.
Faith // April 24, 2007 at 8:46 pm
“The solution is simple, no mixing.”
Well, that’s perhaps a good idea. The problem I see is when dealing with people who don’t agree 100% with one side or the other. It seems rather silly to tell someone who is willing to work side-by-side with certain feminists – even if they don’t agree with them 100% on every single issue – that they can’t be involved. Especially considering the fact that Radical Feminism isn’t exactly the most popular philosophy on the planet, but most certainly is important in many ways and most certainly does need a platform.
stormy // April 24, 2007 at 8:50 pm
Especially considering the fact that Radical Feminism isn’t exactly the most popular philosophy on the planet…
Sure thing, let’s dilute it down to love porn — that will make it more popular.
This is not a MINOR difference of opinion/philosophy, it is the MAJOR one between radfems and YAY-porn ’sexpos’ fun feminists.
Faith // April 24, 2007 at 8:54 pm
“Sure thing, let’s dilute it down to love porn — that will make it more popular…This is not a MINOR difference of opinion/philosophy, it is the MAJOR one between radfems and YAY-porn ’sexpos’ fun feminists.”
Oh, good gravy. You so completely missed my point. I was not referring to a difference in the YAY porn side and the Radical Feminist side. I was referring to those of us who are anti-porn and who are well over 90% Radical, but are still not entirely sure about certain issues.
That’s what I meant.
Kim // April 24, 2007 at 8:56 pm
You didn’t answer my other question, Heart.
But going forward:
“But this is why we love you, Ren, partly anyway.
At least why I do.
Even though you’re kick-ass strong, confident and whatever else I threw into your J.Window, you FEEL, man.
Add “passion” to that Widow. ”
I said. The problem? I stand by it 100%.
“Ah, just tell ‘em go pound beef stew up their asses.” I said also.
A joke.
A joke based on a little theme I’ve had going w/Ren based on her buying a can of beef stew and hurling it a car that nearly hit her and my JOKE of a post about being excluded from past Carnivals of Feminists and hurling “Go pound grapes up your ass!” in the blogsphere in a not-serious, purposefully childlike sour grapes attitude.
This is getting typical, Heart.
Ignore my more visceral question and go for the one that best illustrates your point.
For a while there I thought maybe understandings could be reached but it seems to be boiling down to splitting hairs and put each other on the stand.
I write a WHOLE BIG LONG comment up there, kind of like getting all human and what not with ya’ll, try to show where I’m at, try be fair and open.
Instead Stormy appears to have decided to hate me no matter what and Heart jumps in.
What’s this?
Ren’s no fun to pick on anymore?
Whatever, gals.
PROGRESS could have been here.
For those of you who care about such things beyond blog wars.
And you wonder why I question the intent of some rad fems?
Pounding beef stew up my own ass is a better sounding alternative than hanging around this gigantic, stinking dead horse any longer.
My thanks to those of you who were civil and earnest in your intent to get somewhere with the mess. Carry on.
stormy // April 24, 2007 at 8:58 pm
OK, I shall withdraw the sarcasm then.
It is usually a question of age and experience. Most of you are fairly young, and book learning is not the only learning.
Kim // April 24, 2007 at 8:59 pm
PS. There’s your evidence, Lya. Do you see?
fannyblood // April 24, 2007 at 9:00 pm
“Ah, just tell ‘em go pound beef stew up their asses.” I said also.
And you called me creepy … ?!
stormy // April 24, 2007 at 9:05 pm
“Instead Stormy appears to have decided to hate me no matter what”
That is a bullshit passive-aggressive statement, and you know it.
My original question was WHY you participated in stormybashing because your buddies were doing it (circa Jan/Feb). That is not the same as hating you no matter what. Later I clarified/questioned the ‘quoting me [Kim] out of context’, which was nothing to do with me at all.
I actually don’t ‘hate’ anyone, not even my abusive ex — and there is more than enough reason there. I have to be thankful that he taught me first hand about passive-aggressive games — he was a master at it!
Arantxa // April 24, 2007 at 9:10 pm
Faith, that 100% figure of agreement seems a bit exaggerated and seems to imply that someone here has said that she, or others, can not work with persons who do not agree with them 100% on every single issue.
A person who cannot work side-by-side with others because they don’t agree with them 100% on every single issue is without a doubt an unreasonable person. Your comment implies that women who have boundaries are unreasonable.
Faith, what you seem to be saying is that women who oppose organised exploitation of women cannot afford to lose allies over minor differences seeing that their politics are so unpopular. It’s as if you are saying that women should make concession, given how unpopular their plight is.
Faith // April 24, 2007 at 9:18 pm
“Your comment implies that women who have boundaries are unreasonable…Faith, what you seem to be saying is that women who oppose organised exploitation of women cannot afford to lose allies over minor differences seeing that their politics are so unpopular. It’s as if you are saying that women should make concession, given how unpopular their plight is.”
Um, no, it seems that you prefer to read it that way. I’m not arguing that anyone should make concessions to their belief. My question was or is basically exactly how those of us who are not 100% Radical feminist fit into this mess?
Arantxa // April 24, 2007 at 9:19 pm
Thing is, those ‘minor’ issues are really a great big deal. Minor issues seem to be things like ‘is porn bad?’ or ‘is prostitution really all that bad?’. Well, those are not things that we should squeeze into the [insert small number]% that we are supposed to negotiate. At whose expense? No compromises. Leave the disagreements for truly minor things like where to hold the next meeting or what colour to use for the flyers.
Faith // April 24, 2007 at 9:25 pm
“Minor issues seem to be things like ‘is porn bad?’ or ‘is prostitution really all that bad?’.”
No, not for me. How many times do I have to state it? I’m anti-porn and anti-prostitution. I am not, however, anti-all BDSM. I am not going to go into my feelings surrounding BDSM here. I fully agree that there are many issues that need to be addressed in the BDSM community. I absolutely will not, however, participate in shaming of all those who participate in anything that resembles kinky sex in the privacy of their own bedrooms. And even though I’m adamantly anti-marriage for myself, I am loath to tell ALL women that they can’t marry a man under any circumstances.
delphyne // April 24, 2007 at 9:29 pm
“And even though I’m adamantly anti-marriage for myself, I am loath to tell ALL women that they can’t marry a man under any circumstances.”
Has that ever really happened? Seriously.
How does thinking marriage is an oppressive institution that doesn’t serve women’s interests get turned into TELLING women that they can’t marry a man.
Even if there are these rad fems out there telling women not to get married so fucking what? I haven’t seen them picketing weddings. Have you?
Arantxa // April 24, 2007 at 9:32 pm
OK, so if you’re not arguing that anyone should make concessions where human rights are concerned, where exactly are they supposed to make concessions given that it ’seems rather silly to tell someone who is willing to work side-by-side with certain feminists – even if they don’t agree with them 100% on every single issue’.
There is a fundamental difference between those who see the sex industry as anti-woman and those who think it merely needs sanitising.
Faith // April 24, 2007 at 9:35 pm
Ok, is there a particular reason that everyone here seems to be on attack mode? I – in case you haven’t noticed – am not.
“Even if there are these rad fems out there telling women not to get married so fucking what? I haven’t seen them picketing weddings. Have you?”
I agree that marriage is often and even possibly most of the time oppressive. I still, however, can not see myself telling other women that they can’t marry. And no, I have not seen any feminist “picketing weddings”. I have witnessed some being quite vicious towards women who are married or are considering marriage.
Faith // April 24, 2007 at 9:37 pm
“There is a fundamental difference between those who see the sex industry as anti-woman and those who think it merely needs sanitising.”
I -am not- talking about the sex industry.
delphyne // April 24, 2007 at 9:39 pm
“I still, however, can not see myself telling other women that they can’t marry.”
Good.
“And no, I have not seen any feminist “picketing weddings”. I have witnessed some being quite vicious towards women who are married or are considering marriage.”
Here on the internet? Because that’s the community we’re talking about at the moment.
Arantxa // April 24, 2007 at 9:39 pm
Faith, you don’t have to state anything any specific number of times because it’s not about you. Has anyone suggested you need shame all those who participate in anything that resembles kinky sex in the privacy of their own bedrooms? Has anyone suggested you need shame anyone at all? And what’s with this whole privacy of one’s own bedroom? That’s where most of are raped. Is the bedroom out of boundaries?
Faith // April 24, 2007 at 9:42 pm
Arantxa,
I’m not even attempting to respond. You aren’t discussing. You are for some strange reason trying to undermine every thing I say.
And this is what always happens in these discussions.
delphyne // April 24, 2007 at 9:44 pm
“Ok, is there a particular reason that everyone here seems to be on attack mode? I – in case you haven’t noticed – am not.”
I was going to mention my tone. It’s frustration. I really am incredibly tired of hearing stereotypes of radical feminists, like we tell all women they can’t get married to men, which simply aren’t true.
I think it’s actually sexist. Exangelena said something similar further up the thread – that these caricatures quite closely match what sexists say about feminists.
Pony // April 24, 2007 at 9:48 pm
I neither know nor care what a strawman is, and I’m not ‘pretending’ you said anything. You said it. If it wasn’t what you intended to say, I’ll accept that. I think it was just more bullshit politeness; make nicey nice, be polite about the things that don’t matter, but hey, lets not rock the boat re the women who are sex slaves in pornography and prostitution.
No Delphyne, as you know, there’s are no categories of prostitution. And anyone who says there is, is suffering Stockholm Syndrome or an MRA apologist.
If that’s not your stance, say so.
#
Lya Kahlo // Apr 24th 2007 at 7:55 pm
Great. A big pile of strawmen. Let’s burn them, shall we? I didn’t say sex slavery, porn or prostitution don’t matter. I didn’t say the debasement and abuse of women doesn’t matter. And the only reason you pretend that I did is so you can make your completely useless statements.
What I did say was there’s no excuse for treating other people like crap based on a difference of opinion. I chose porn or anti-porn because that’s a big divide.
Your strawman ultimately fails because you’d be hard pressed to find anyone who *does* support sex slavery, forced prostitution, etc etc etc.
Arantxa // April 24, 2007 at 9:52 pm
Faith, I am questioning the points you are making and in particular the way you are adding weight to the charicature Delphyne mentions above. Do you realise that this is what you are doing? Thing is, Faith, you are not attempting to respond to me, but I am attempting to respond to you because you seem like someone worth engaging with.
shannon // April 24, 2007 at 9:53 pm
I’m snarky because I am really tired. Heart(and some to Lya), I’m not saying that one is a bad person for wanting woman born only space, I just don’t see how one can do it without needlessly discriminating against transwomen.
Now, Faith, now, I’m usually pretty cool if someone wants to practice BDSM in their own home. I just don’t really think it’s feminist. To me, not feminist doesn’t mean ‘bad’, it’s just not contributing much to the liberation of women that’s all!
Arantxa // April 24, 2007 at 10:00 pm
Shannon, if you can’t see how women only spaces can exist without discriminating against transwomen that does not mean that women only spaces should are not important. Right? Also, I think your saying that women only spaces are discriminatory against transwomen carries some underlying assumptions, namely that women only spaces discriminate against transwomen.
stormy // April 24, 2007 at 10:10 pm
Faith: “Ok, is there a particular reason that everyone here seems to be on attack mode? I – in case you haven’t noticed – am not.”
delphyne: “I was going to mention my tone. It’s frustration. “
Yes, my tone too is also borne out of frustration. In my pathetic defence, I really did not get to defend myself against the relentless attacks at the beginning of the year, I had to vent.
Faith, I did not see that Arantxa was attacking you, she was debating you on points. Those points are quite fundamental to the radfem position. It was certainly not a personal attack.
I will add that “the privacy of someone’s bedrooms” is frequently uttered by pro-porn BDSMers, primarily to make us all ’scared’ that Big Brother Government is going to police ’sex lives’. Perhaps if they could tax it, they would.
Faith // April 24, 2007 at 10:15 pm
Shannon,
Again, no offense, but I can’t see any reason to respond. I don’t believe all BDSM is bad. I’ve had quite wonderful experiences with it myself. There absolutely are practices that need to be addressed and there absolutely are legions of men out there using BDSM as an excuse to abuse. But it isn’t all bad, nor all oppressive.
Faith // April 24, 2007 at 10:20 pm
“Faith, I am questioning the points you are making and in particular the way you are adding weight to the charicature Delphyne mentions above. ”
I’m only attempting to explain my feelings and experiences concerning Radical Feminism. I’m not attacking or caricaturizing. I’m trying to learn and listen if anything else. But that’s quite difficult to do when one feels like they are under attack because the other people are frustrated, pissed-off, etc.
I might come back later, but I’ve really had enough for the time being. That isn’t intended to sound confrontational either, just honest. I’m mentally exhausted.
Phemisaurus Terribilis // April 24, 2007 at 10:22 pm
Is this one of those ‘can’t see the forest for the trees’ situations?
octogalore // April 25, 2007 at 1:20 am
Exangelena — appreciate your thoughtful response and style of dialogue.
I agree with you that “recognizing privilege is useful and changes the way you look at things.” I disagree that “I think that the fact I have privilege – due to some random, meaningless combination of genetics and lifestyle – sucks.” I think the fact that others don’t have similar starting advantages sucks. I don’t think you need to take on an apologetic air, and I believe that the focus should be on helping others to get these advantages rather than bemoaning the fact that we may have them.
“I would be a ‘sparkle pony feminist’ if I said things like ‘tee hee! I’m such a bad feminist, I’m thin!’ or ‘I’m not going to be a radical feminist anymore because some radical feminist said I was too thin!’”
Well, again it’s semantics. The term was originally coined for non-radfem women who are feminists but also occasionally embrace life’s sparkles and believe it’s possible to take pole-dancing and still own the F word. Personally, I’ve never taken pole dancing, but that’s only because I learned on the job. At the same time, if there was a lobotomizer attached to the pole, turning me into someone who expressed herself with phrases like “tee hee,” I must’ve been spinning so fast I missed it.
Similarly, I believe others to whom the SPF label has been applied are similarly non-ditzy. Nor have we felt that being thin, if we happen to be (and, notice: I don’t feel the need to provide my size or prettiness level here because I don’t believe either are relevant), makes us “bad feminists” or that being told we’re too thin by rad fems (a ridiculous straw-accusation) would be a reason to depart from a philosophy.
That said, a lot of this is semantics and I think that in person, we likely would quickly get past the wording to find common ground.
shannon // April 25, 2007 at 1:30 am
Transpeople feel oppressed by those spaces, and the truth is that I haven’t heard much to the contrary. I’m just saying explain why they are not oppressive then. You have to balance the benefits vs the negatives, and making people feel oppressed, possibly understandably, is a pretty big risk for me.
Annoyance: I hate argument by exception. Just because it’s not all bad doesn’t make it a victory for all women everywhere.
RenegadeEvolution // April 25, 2007 at 2:12 am
Good lord..
Heart: Hey, yeah, you…
“What’s scary is, when you take a stand against pornography and prostitution and SM, especially, sometimes you come across the radar of really scary people, people who are basically thugs, but they are rich thugs, powerful thugs. That’s what makes statements like, “Choke on your own blood” so serious. There are people in the world who would be happy if some of us *did* choke on our own blood and who could make it happen, as well. To hear that sentiment applauded by feminist women is, for that and other reasons, pretty tough.”
My choke statement? HAD NOTHING TO DO with porn or sex work, it HAD to do with women being ATTACKED…ON YOUR BLOG, amid OTHER places. READ THE WHOLE POST before going for the tagline, really. Nice half assed picture you TRY to paint there….and I have NEVER been a suck up…sorry if YOU mistake Civil for Suck Up, but they are WORLDS apart.
And FFS leave Lya alone, she’s on YOUR side!
I was ANGRY, livid at the way AP and others were being treated, so yeah, I said that….
And I still smirk about the lack of outrage when people gloss over the hate and bile throw this way. ONE, exactly ONE rad fem ever stood up for ANY one of us when someone said something out of line, really out of line, to any of us, and she got TRASHED for it. Examine that.
Hell, great example of who is on the path to war here and who isn’t. My first statement here, I spoke true on how I feel about WW and said “cut Andrea some slack”…short version. Then who got attacked, and who did the attacking?
Sorry if you and others JUST can’t come to terms with that.
exangelena // April 25, 2007 at 2:15 am
Hey octagalore:
Thanks for responding
“I disagree that ‘I think that the fact I have privilege – due to some random, meaningless combination of genetics and lifestyle – sucks.’ I think the fact that others don’t have similar starting advantages sucks. I don’t think you need to take on an apologetic air, and I believe that the focus should be on helping others to get these advantages rather than bemoaning the fact that we may have them.”
I don’t know if I phrased it correctly, but I don’t think that the fact of my *being* a size four is bad, I think that the system giving me privilege because of my body size is bad. As for helping others to get these advantages, I’m not sure what you mean. Some women can never be a size four and others would have to make themselves sick to get that way. Even if everyone lost weight – hey, look at Hollywood – the “fat girls” are a size six or four and the thin ones are a size zero.
I guess the part where comparing my body weight to pole dancing is because pole dancing is a choice of a job* that you make, whereas I’m slender because I’m slender. I do what I can to be feminist about it – I don’t try to flirt with men or get favors from them because I am thin, I don’t make fun of women who are fat, I am opposed to the diet industry, etc. If you have a job as a stripper, you are actively participating in an industry*; me, I’m just a slender girl who attends university full time, works part time, spends much of her time studying, etc., which has nothing to do with my body size.
*For now, I’m trying to make this judgment-neutral.
Renegade Evolution:
“BFP and BlackAmazon almost any and every time the address race or class”
while I hate to speak for Shannon, both Shannon and I are nonwhite and not heiresses, and we often agree with radfems, even with our experiences as nonwhite, non-wealthy women. For example, Shannon has often blogged about hating the racism in porn. I could write at length about how I believe the cult of femininity and beauty is most harmful to poor women and women of color.
Shannon – I’ll try not to start the Trans Wars, but I don’t necessarily think that women born women space is bad in itself. I think it’s bad when they start saying crap about transpeople. For example, I’m Asian, and if black women wanted a “Black Women Space” versus a “Women of Color Space”, I wouldn’t be offended outright.
shannon // April 25, 2007 at 2:26 am
I am class privileged, although I am black. I think people need to say that they want to talk about say, the issues of childbearing that us born women have, and maybe in only a certain group or space, and articulate the reasons without saying anything bad about transpeople.
I’m sorry you feel attacked Ren, but I’m saying I hear you.
RenegadeEvolution // April 25, 2007 at 2:27 am
Shannon…hear what you want. The truth shows attacks from both sides.
RenegadeEvolution // April 25, 2007 at 2:41 am
here then, part of what made me mad-
(from WomensSpace)
antiprincess
“I trust you will take this post back to your friends Jill. “(quoting Pony, after Pony made yet ANOTHER untrue assumption about me)
how do you know “her friends” aren’t already here? I read this blog all the time.
on 17 Apr 2007 at 6:17 pm29 chasingmoksha-
Antiprincess, you really need to keep your two face ass out of here. You have some nerve. If you want to suck porn’s ass then try doing it somewhere else.
on 17 Apr 2007 at 7:54 pm30 RenegadeEvolution
Pony, if you have something to say to me, just do it. My door is open. I allow Rad Fem comments on my blog. I have no real beef with Heart personally, no need make her blog the place for this. You’ve pulled some real crap tactics with me, and yeah, I don’t care for it and would love to hash it out as it were, but this is not the place.
Thanks for the space for this paragraph, Heart.
Later.
-Ren
on 17 Apr 2007 at 10:10 pm31 antiprincess-
well, if Heart would rather I didn’t comment, I’m sure she’ll take appropriate action (as she has in the past). I know you mean to be helpful, but Heart’s a big girl and can deal with me as she sees fit.
but you can’t possibly mean to say that I should not be reading WSTM, do you? only that I should not be commenting, yeah?
how do you propose to prevent me from reading?
as regards the two faces on my ample ass – actually, you don’t have a case here. if I’d said “oh Pony, you’re so brave! Speak truth to power! go sister!”, and then went back to my blog (or other blogs) and said “oh I can’t stand that Pony! I wish she’d go stick her head in a jellyfish!” – that would be two faced.
which, I gotta admit, is a character flaw I sometimes exhibit, though I try hard not to.
What I did was point out that all sorts of people read this blog, even people who aren’t strongly anti-porn. It’s not like the contents of this comment thread are somehow restricted to only anti-porn eyes (and Jill). it’s not like Jill has to report back to headquarters (HA!) for people to be made aware of the comments.
I don’t think my reading WSTM makes me two-faced. but you’re certainly entitled to your opinion.
on 17 Apr 2007 at 10:41 pm32 Sam
“When you openly target a specific person as you have with Robyn Few without knowing the facts, and making a strong personal attack out of it.”
I know the facts just fine. Robyn Few admitted she stopped personally prostituting several years before her conviction for using a phone to conspire interstate acts of other women’s prostitution. In Toledo, when she angrily insisted she was not arrested on pimping charges I asked what her conviction was for and she said, “Conspiracy.”
“Conspiracy to what?” I asked. She looked at me blankly and said nothing for a few seconds, then she returned to issuing spittle-flecked threats to sue me for libel. Conspiring to blow up the government is called treason, and conspiring to prostitute more than a dozen women across state lines is called pimping and trafficking.
How do you figure I made “personal” the social and political problems I see with a convicted pimp playing an oppressed victim to a misogynist media that enthusiastically gives her opportunities to explain why men paying for sex with prostituted women is actually good for women?
“It is a battle between two attorneys each representing their respective clients”
In this case, Few’s attorney told her she should be grateful she was not given more jail time since her very serious convictions allowed for much more than a few months in jail. Maybe the judge is like me, sympathetic to Few’s lifelong exploitation but unable to let her get away with continuing the cycle of abuse by making victims of other women.
“You made it a personal issue by your own admission.”
I don’t remember doing that. I remember writing online that Robyn Few is a convicted pimp and then going to a conference to connect with likeminded anti-pornstitution folks looking for sister activists and feminist community.
on 17 Apr 2007 at 11:57 pm33 chasingmoksha
Oh, drop the innocent act antiprincess. I doubt that anyone besides your cohorts is taking your defending argument seriously. It is evident, —you are evident. You show up at blogs when there is anti-BDSM written about and when there is anti-PORN, and when your precious patriarchy loving patriarchal submissives are being clobbered or I should say when a mirror is held to their face and the image ain’t as pretty as they want it to be.
No one can prevent you from reading here. Actually, I’m sure people would prefer that you read here in the hopes that something will finally wake up in your porn-loving brain. But unlike some of the more generous feminists here, I think your case is hopeless, but I tread lightly because even though you are hopeless I will not abuse you like the men you so love to support are willing to after watching porn. However, I am also not willing to play the meek little feminist who opens her arms to every woman and allow your ilk to get away with what you do best, especially not in the house of a feminist (Heart) who works her ass off for the good of feminism. You need to be called out for what you are and that is a little feminist-saboteur. And yes by all means if it was left up to me, you would not get to comment here, EVER. This community is a privilege to be part of, but instead of recognizing that privilege, you spit on it with your sycophantic drooling for patriarchy’s tool—-pornography.
on 18 Apr 2007 at 12:41 am34 Faith
“I think your case is hopeless, but I tread lightly because even though you are hopeless I will not abuse you like the men you so love to support are willing to after watching porn.”
You call this “treading lightly”? Funny, it seems just a touch abusive to me.
on 18 Apr 2007 at 12:56 am35 chasingmoksha
Treading lightly for people who think nothing of the rape and abuse of women in porn and how that rape and abuse spills over to society. Yes, I do consider it to be treading lightly. What is abuse, is people who obviously have no motive but to defend porn to come to a feminist blog and try and take it over to gain whatever they want to gain. That is the abuse. That is the abuse that needs to be highlighted and stomped, STOMPED out. The passive aggressive technique has subverted feminism long enough. It is time to call it for what it is. It is derailment. As long as the attention is diverted porn and porn lovers and supporters get to keep on their merry way. So try and shame me with your abuse. I know abuse and calling a duck a duck is NOT abuse, but advocating PORN is abuse. How funny is that? How funny is supporting PORN? Side splitting.
on 18 Apr 2007 at 2:26 am36 antiprincess
chasingmoksha – do you even bother to read my blog? do you even know what my experiences have been?
other than that, I don’t know what to say.
—
Yeah, because Antiprincess and myself were SUCH the assholes there…
RenegadeEvolution // April 25, 2007 at 2:56 am
“Well, that is a stretch for you RE, you are NOT in the UK, and not in the UK BDSM groups that were ‘attacked’ in those posts. It’s not always about you, you know. Although I note you are now bestest buds with the UK BDSM crowd now.”
Stormy- you actually have no idea what my connection to the UK is or who I know there or who I talk to there, do you? Right then. Still, calling people sick fucks is classy, isn’t it?
“And sorry to burst your narcissistic little bubble, but I don’t bother reading your blog on a regular basis, only when alerted to a post of ‘interest’. I am quite happy that you have now dropped the pretense of being a feminist, it must have been exhausting for you.”
Stormy, I would be PERFECTLY HAPPY if we never mentioned one another again. I’ve noted though, the last three or four times, I’ve said nothing to, at, or NEAR you and you’ve jumped on it with the venom. Let my repeat myself for the THIRD TIME in so many months…I am perfectly happy to pretend you don’t exisit.
Heart // April 25, 2007 at 5:00 am
Following is what I commented on the thread Ren Ev is selectively quoting from:
Here is the link to the thread so everyone can read it for herself.
And regardless what I wrote in the comment I’ve pasted here — I stand by it and reassert it — violent imagery is a boundary, and especially for women, and especially for women who are survivors of violence. If you give a shit, you aren’t going to tell them, us, to choke to death on our own blood. That is way over the top.
It doesn’t matter, Ren Ev, that that thread was not about porn specifically. That issue, and the SM issue, and the prostitution issue, are the issues that are underneath all of these bullshit attacks.
Heart
exangelena // April 25, 2007 at 6:04 am
shannon -
“I am class privileged, although I am black.”
Sorry if I made any assumptions
I mentioned it about 100 posts ago, but it ANNOYS THE HELL OUT OF ME when anti-radfems imply that radical feminists don’t care about race and class, or that all radical feminists are rich white women.
Eh, perhaps I should change my name to Nonwhite Radfem
Arantxa // April 25, 2007 at 6:19 am
Shannon, you seem to be saying that that oppression is a feeling; that making somebody feel bad is to oppress them. I don’t doubt for a minute that some transwomen’s feelings are hurt by the existence of women only spaces. This does not mean that they are being oppressed. This is not what the word oppression means. Oppression is not simply a word to be used to mean something a lot worse than making someone feel bad.
Arantxa // April 25, 2007 at 6:47 am
Renegade Evolution, sometimes people go too far. There are limits to what is and what isn’t acceptable. You have certainly crossed the line of what I, personally, think is acceptable conduct online.
You are responsible for your own behaviour. You are the person that chooses to say the things you say. While the events you refer to might be the reason for your behaviour they do not justify said behaviour.
Many of us commenting here have been the targets of online abuse and have seen our friends (by friends I mean women that we socialise with and/or work with in person) receive the same treatment. None of us have expressed our displeasure or hurt in the violent and agressive way that you have. At the end of the day, you chose those words because you have it in you to speak in that way to women. This is about you and the way you think and act. Your actions speak for you.
RenegadeEvolution // April 25, 2007 at 12:04 pm
Heart- I never said you were the abusive one to AP in that thread. However, I’ve never seen you come down on the violent messages spouted on your own blog (such as those about all males be subjected to forced casteration…)
You know, what I said wasn’t at all nice, I admit that. I can’t take it back so no use trying.
However, I will say when Alisalives, who commented on my blog, and the resulting treatment there spawned Laurelin to write a post about the “pro-porn” side, well, not to many of you took any issue with her when she suggested I “choke on it”. I also know several months back when I wrote about hate speech, or as I’ve posted comments made along the way, not to many of you seemed to express any shock and horror when whomever hit up my place with the sincere wishes that myself and various others get aids and die, or that someone stated all sex workers and homosexuals deserved to have their throats cut, so on so forth.
Now, truthfully, I don’t want any of you to die choking on your own blood. It was a nasty thing to say, something I would not really wish on anyone, and I appologize for the sentence. I was pissed when I wrote it, and I was pissed to see the way the statement was passed around and posted, sans context, which was not porn, or sex work, but rather the way I saw women bloggers being treated. It was not the right way to express my anger over the issue, and I admit that.
But I suspect that means nothing.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 12:06 pm
Oh RE — so kind of you to defend Mz AP, who seems more than capable of holding her own:
21 Apr 07 AP:
feet2thefire.blogspot.com/2007/04/in-recognition-of-my-blogiversary-here.html
And to the ‘well meaning’ radfems and fence-sitting radfems who seem to be fucking blind whenever a member of Team YAY-porn slags off a radfem, do they call her on it? No, but sidle up with this one-side world view:
Faith [my bolding emphasis]:
I should have thrown this in here earlier, but…
I’m another one who will be sad to see you go. You’ve been nothing but nice to me and I see no reason for the treatment you’ve received. If you really want to quit blogging, fine. But please don’t quit just because of all the bullshit…Remember they -want- you to quit. If you really want to say “fuck you”, the best way to accomplish that is to keep doing exactly what you are doing.
Fallingstar:
Hi AP. Yes, I come from ‘the other side’ as it were, but I just want you to know that some of us DO value your voice.
I think it’s important to value diversity, and listen to each other. Sometimes people can be closed minded and have tunnel vision, especially when they have very strong feelings about what they believe or advocate.
I really try to stay out of all the slanging matches and angry misunderstandings etc. Also I don’t think every radfem or progressive feminist is the same, we are all individuals. Up to everyone whether they agree or disagree with each other.
It’s hard for me to, for example, understand pro-porn arguments as I am decidedly anti-porn. But I can understand that some porn isn’t all the particular violent, objectifying kind (another debate for another time methinks).
But I don’t think it’s right to dismiss or be angry with women who have chosen particular things in their lives. I don’t think it’s right to call women ‘whores’ or think of some women ‘beneath’ us. Because THAT IS unsisterly and doesn’t give props to individual choices and personalities – aka, not everyone is the same. We can’t force anyone to believe something and have to agree to differ on certain things.
So please don’t go – it’s your blog and your choice.
Laura:
AP,
As I think I’ve said before, you always strike me as going far far out of your way to understand other positions, to not be agressive, to listen and put your points across in a well thought out, constructive and non-threatening manner. You have a clear interest in debating with others in an honest and open way. The people who see you as some devious passive agressive porn peddlar are deluded, blinkered and nasty quite frankly.
I too am at a loss to understand how “women-centred” can encompass such hatred and nastiness. It’s hypocritical and depressing.
Do what you gotta do, take care, and thanks for your voice.
Kim’s comment was directed at other comments within the thread, but also ignored AP’s remarks.
In each and every radfem bashing thread I have had the (dis)pleasure to read, I note that so-called enlightened radfems who wish to be a ‘friend to all’ NEVER EVER call out the pornies for anti-radfem remarks, but will ALWAYS call out radfems for any anti-pornie remarks. It says a lot for your ‘impartiality’.
As I haven’t visited AP’s blog in a loooong time, I do note that for 2007 she has laid off slagging off radfems, so my apologies for assuming you had just carried on doing that from 2006. I stand corrected.
Ah, back to RE:
Having gone back to the BDSM thread at Charlie’s, I can find no actual direct quote where I, Charlie, or anyone else used the phrase “sick fucks” – please cite your reference. If I said it, I’ll own it – but if I didn’t say it as you imply, then you owe me a retraction for the inference above.
Also, please cite your references for: “Let my repeat myself for the THIRD TIME in so many months…I am perfectly happy to pretend you don’t exisit.” mainly because I need a laugh.
[warning; radfem humour imminent]: *hands on hips* “fine by me!” LOL
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 12:10 pm
RE’s latest comment appeared as I posted my last.
Now, truthfully, I don’t want any of you to die choking on your own blood. It was a nasty thing to say, something I would not really wish on anyone, and I appologize for the sentence.
Hey RE, if you are really, really sincere about all this, how about removing EACH and EVERY ONE of your radfem-bashing posts from your blog.
You would then have my word that I would not “jump[ed] on it with the venom”.
therealUK // April 25, 2007 at 12:13 pm
you seem to be saying that that oppression is a feeling; that making somebody feel bad is to oppress them … This does not mean that they are being oppressed. This is not what the word oppression means.
Yes, exactly.
RenegadeEvolution // April 25, 2007 at 12:21 pm
Stormy:
No. I am sorry about the violent sentence. I am not sorry about anything else I’ve said. Once again, like you did with AP actually, you are demanding someone remove their thoughts, words, and feelings to “make it up to you”. I have nothing to make up to you. I’ve been bashed plenty myself, really, sorry if no one wants to admit that and it is easier to lay the blame all at my feet, but sorry, it’s not going to happen. And I do beleive there is at least one instance right on this very blog where I stated at least once I was perfectly content for the two of us just to ignore eachother, the thread that turned into the mess about my logo even AFTER I removed the link and appologizing to Bea for offeding her with it.
I am sincere about not wishing violence upon you and sincere about my appology for my violent statement. I am also sincere in standing by other things I’ve said and yes, still sincere about being angry over the way I see others treated by people who never, ever seem to appologize for it.
So no, I won’t be pulling posts.
Lya Kahlo // April 25, 2007 at 12:30 pm
“Is this one of those ‘can’t see the forest for the trees’ situations?”
I think so. There’s a lot of long running grudges going on here, apparently. On the one side we have radfems arguing that certain things are hurting other people. And on the other side have a group who’s entire arguement can be boiled down who “I don’t care, my orgasm is more important” followed by a string of insults, baseless accusations and a chorus of cheerleaders who beg for more. Radfems answer back (in a noticably less hostile manner) and get more shit in return.
Bah. It’s all nonsense.
P.s. Kim. Yes, I do see. I see that your friends decided the best course of action is write more flambaiting posts accusing radfems of more garbage. I see clearly. And I do not understand what you are defending.
womensspace // April 25, 2007 at 1:28 pm
I’ve never seen you come down on the violent messages spouted on your own blog (such as those about all males be subjected to forced casteration…)
Where did anyone say, on my blog, that “all males” should be subjected to “forced [castration]“? Paste the link, please, and I’ll take a look.
When feminist women are talking about males — males, males, males, you know, those people in the world who are the ones who rape, incest, molest, batter, assault, objectify, exploit the world’s females, the group whose oppressive, brutal behaviors gave rise to that movement in the world which is known “feminism” — and especially when we are talking about specific heinous instances of misogynist brutality, damn right, I won’t censor what women say about male perpetrators out of rage and grief towards their oppressors. When where we’re talking about, say, gang rapes and tortures of teenage girls which are videoed and passed around, men raping and torturing their wives and capturing it on their cell phone cameras, men making and circulating porn of their rapes of women during wartime, men who create “girl love” web sites where they tell other molesters of girls where to find child victims, men who kill their girlfriends, dismember them, and roast their body parts on the barbecue, and so on, women are going to give voice to their rage about that.
When’s the last time you read about any woman “castrating” any man, much less “all men”?
When’s the last time you heard about a woman being thrown under a truck and choking to death on her own blood, or the rough equivalent? We hear about that kind of thing happening every day to women.
Do you see that there is a qualitative difference between these two sentiments?
The first sentiment is about oppressed persons’ grief, rage and frustration, the second sounds like a threat *against* oppressed persons, of the kind with which, as women, we are all too familiar, and which many of us have actually experienced.
Expressions of outrage against the brutalities of oppressors are one thing; don’t normally censor that kind of thing. But anti-porn/anti-prostitution/anti-BDSM feminists are not *anybody’s* oppressors. Making somebody mad isn’t “oppressing” them. Hurting someone’s feelings isn’t “oppressing” them. Disagreeing with someone isn’t “oppressing” anyone, neither are analyses, criticisms, or arguments oppressing anyone. There is a difference, as Arantxa has said, between feeling miffed and actually *being* oppressed. Somehow, Ren, you, and others, don’t get that and blog as though radical feminists are somehow “your oppressors,” all the while kicking it with the actually male oppressors who are too often among you, enjoying the benefits of your confusion.
Having said all that, I’m glad you’ve apologized. Thank you.
Heart
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 1:38 pm
Yeah, I can see why you are reluctant to remove the anti-radfem posts, potentially it could mean 25% of your blog content.
That aside, I removed my posts — so it is still a reasonable request for you and the posse to do the same.
As for the ‘making it up to me’, I can only respond with where, when, how? Oh that’s right, invisibly! YAY! I feel much better now, gee thanx.
[RE might wish to do a note to self: apologising to Bea for doing something to her, is not exactly the same as apologising to Stormy for doing something else to her. Add also that "I am not sorry about anything else I’ve said" is not apologising. Nor is saying you've apologised without actually apologising.]
Going forward: I won’t be saying anything against AP, unless she recomences her old blogging ways. Although rad-bashing comments left by her on other blogs still count.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 1:44 pm
I forgot to mention:
…being angry over the way I see others treated by people who never, ever seem to appologize for it.
Yep, well my apology to AP for mistakenly believing that she was still continually making a ton of anti-rad posts as she had done in the past, couldn’t really be counted could it?
Gawd you can twist things in the world according to RE.
Faith // April 25, 2007 at 2:02 pm
” keep doing exactly what you are doing.”
Stormy,
I was only talking about -blogging-, not slagging off on Radical Feminists. Either way, she has every right to keep blogging and stating how she feels towards the other bloggers who have treated her poorly. I also defended Charliegrrl’s right to not be harassed by pro-BDSMer’s and to stand by her anti-porn beliefs. I also defended Bea’s right to call her blog “Dead Men Don’t Rape”. I have this silly idea of trying to be decent and respectful to virtually all women considering that I understand how fucking horrible we’ve all been treated while living under patriarchal rule.
It’s called compassion.
jo22 // April 25, 2007 at 2:15 pm
I don’t understand, RE, why you think you have been “bashed” by radical feminists. You create pornography and advocate it as a legitimate career choice for women, all the while telling people how tough you are for surviving in such a misogynistic industry. It seems more important to you that people don’t think you’re a victim than the fact that so many women are abused in porn. The way you present the porn industry is dangerous for women and your priorities reveal your selfishness. If calling you up on these things is bashing you, then, well.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 2:19 pm
Faith, given that you wish to straddle the fence, shouldn’t you be calling out both sides, not just the one?
I apologise that I misinterpreted your words.
Perhaps you can now see how it can be also taken as supporting radfem bashing when your sentiment appeared in a thread that was in fact, radbashing?
Faith // April 25, 2007 at 2:43 pm
“Faith, given that you wish to straddle the fence, shouldn’t you be calling out both sides, not just the one?”
I’ve stated clearly at other places (and I’m not going digging for it…) that I see poor behavior on both sides on the fence. I don’t see much reason to call out the poor behavior for two reasons:
1) it’s always pretty damn obvious when it’s occurring.
2) other bloggers will be sure to call it out.
I stood up for A.P. because what C.M. did was vicious and came out of nowhere. I agree with Heart that women get pissed off and say things they shouldn’t say. That’s true and completely acceptable. What I never see is an -apology-. An apology for poor behavior goes a loooong fucking way.
I’m really not sure what to say. I’ve been nice to women like R.E. because even though I don’t agree with her occupation – she is still a human being -. I also understand how she has been treated by other people and I’m not going to engage in similar behavior. I’m not going to shame her for what she does. I’m not going to call her an enabler, a tool of the patriarchy, sexbot, or any other such nonsense. As far as I’m concerned, that would make me no different than the misogynists. I don’t agree with her on most things and I can barely read her blog because of the comments directed towards the Rad. Fems lately and because of the male commenters, but I’m not going to turn my back on -her- completely and treat her like a big heaping pile of shit.
A bit of understanding can go a helluve long way too…
jo22 // April 25, 2007 at 2:56 pm
Who has shamed RE for what she does? Feminists don’t shame women for being in porn or prostitution, but it’s not a good thing to speak of those industries in terms of “well I do all right so it’s all ok” thereby effectively dismissing the realities of most women involved.
Lya Kahlo // April 25, 2007 at 2:57 pm
“It seems more important to you that people don’t think you’re a victim than the fact that so many women are abused in porn. ”
Bingo. To amend what I said before – the entire argument can be boiled down to “my shit is more important”.
If you look around her archives you’ll find a post or two about how “constant” victims should just “shut up” already – mixed in among the constant posts about her being a victim of mean/jealous/crazy women that she hates.
That’s almost poetic in it’s hypocrisy.
____
“but I’m not going to turn my back on -her- completely and treat her like a big heaping pile of shit.”
Did someone say she should be treated like shit? Or have they been trying to explain (to me, as well) how this is not just radfems being mean?
Faith // April 25, 2007 at 3:12 pm
“Did someone say she should be treated like shit? Or have they been trying to explain (to me, as well) how this is not just radfems being mean?”
She -has- been treated like shit. It isn’t a matter of anyone saying she should be treated like shit.
And I’m not sure what you are asking exactly. If you are asking how the other side is “being mean”, I think that’s pretty obvious if you want to go look around yourself.
I’m not going to go pulling out specific examples because it will do nothing but fan flames that we should be trying to put out.
This whole thing is mindboggling and mentally exhausting. Not to mention a tremendous waste of time….
shannon // April 25, 2007 at 3:26 pm
I don’t think oppression is a feeling- I’m willing to tell people who believe in reverse classism or that rad fems are the real oppressers of women to [redacted for offensiveness] but I also think we should listen to people who are actually oppressed for their opinion about their oppression, since I don’t have the actual experience of being trans(I’m a woman, I was born that way,etc).
I also think that we should have a viewpoint in feminism that is more about all women. We may enjoy certain things, but that doesn’t make them good for all women ever.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 3:28 pm
She -has- been treated like shit.
Soooo, *nothing* whatsoever to do with 25% of blog content last week being radfem-bashing — it all just *happens* mysteriously — what, because we are the mean nasties?
RE and crew will only be nice to you whilst you suck up to them. Take our host, Witchy, nice for months on end, then *bam* scores pole position in AP’s “Fuck you” list.
As Jo22 says, no radfem is nasty to her because of what she does for a living — it is the promotion of an ‘industry’ that is rife with exploitation and abuse of women, even if she personally is doing ok with it. But it is actually all the radfem bashing that causes the ’shit’ BACK at her.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 3:30 pm
BTW, with regards to the “Fuck you” list, I was saddened that I only made sixth position. Here I was thinking I was the ‘big bad’.
Faith // April 25, 2007 at 3:35 pm
Stormy,
I’m not going to get into a chicken or egg debate. I’m just not going to do it.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 3:50 pm
Chicken and egg?
Who went to whose blog(s) in the first place?
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 3:50 pm
Chicken and egg?
Who went to who’s blog(s) in the first place?
delphyne // April 25, 2007 at 3:59 pm
“I stood up for A.P. because what C.M. did was vicious and came out of nowhere.”
Well it was angry and rude yes, but it didn’t come out of nowhere. Antiprincess has been doing the disingenuous “I’m only asking questions” act for ages now on rad fem blogs, whilst at the same time hanging round with people who seem to have made it their life’s work (Belledame and RE, to a lesser extent) to go after radical feminists. I’ve never seen her stop them or say “I want to work with these people so can you tone down the attacks?”. Anybody who gets irritated or aggrieved immediately gets painted as the evil meanie who was totally horrible to antiprincess.
I mean I’ve been avoiding her for months now for that very reason. I actually left the internet for a while because I couldn’t stand the shit her and her buddies were pulling against rad fems, but somehow it always gets turned round into antiprincess being the victim. And I still got a big “FUCK YOU” from her and was right in the middle of her (s)hitlist.
Here’s the thread that made me not trust her, all the way back last April.
http://feet2thefire.blogspot.com/2006_04_01_archive.html
You’ll see Belledame right in the middle talking about trolling rad fem blogs -
https://www2.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=27223451&postID=114642876766459298
delphyne // April 25, 2007 at 4:02 pm
Oh yeah, and you’re all offended at what Chasingmonka said to AP, but I seem to have seen some really horrible things said about CM on the anti-anti-porn blogs. So maybe part of CM’s anger was down to that.
fannyblood // April 25, 2007 at 4:06 pm
“As Jo22 says, no radfem is nasty to her because of what she does for a living — it is the promotion of an ‘industry’ that is rife with exploitation and abuse of women, even if she personally is doing ok with it. ”
‘ok’ translating as “i hate human’s” that is, right?
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 4:15 pm
And I still got a big “FUCK YOU” from her and was right in the middle of her (s)hitlist.
Ah delphyne, at least you made No.4
signed
saddened No.6
Faith // April 25, 2007 at 4:19 pm
Delphyne,
I’m not going to keep speaking for Anti-Princess or R.E. I’m also not going to speak for Belle. They are all capable of speaking for themselves and I’m sure they are likely all reading. I was simply explaining myself since I was thrown in the middle. Unlike many of the people here apparently, I am not as emotionally attached to this debate. Unless people are willing to apologize and do their best to not say things they shouldn’t say anymore continuing with this is, as I’ve said, a tremendous waste of time.
witchywoo // April 25, 2007 at 4:25 pm
“This whole thing is mindboggling and mentally exhausting. Not to mention a tremendous waste of time….”
I agree it’s mindboggling but I’m not sure it’s a tremendous waste of time. There are obviously long-standing resentments and maybe airing them might move things on a bit – even if it just results in both ’sides’ agreeing not to talk to, or about, one another as individuals but to simply concentrate on the issues.
This argument isn’t all about RE. It’s about the wilfull dishonesty in misrepresentations of radical feminism by those who either 1) don’t understand it or 2) have an axe to grind. One of the resulting effects of those misrepresentations is personal attacks.
I don’t know who the ‘radfems’ are who’ve personally attacked RE for doing what she does for a living but it strikes me that, whoever they are, they’re not actually radical feminists. I spent ages over a couple of days explaining radfem analysis of the sex work/body image issue at, I think it was, RE’s blog in an attempt to refute the assumption that radfems hate sex workers that was made after an anonymous commenter had left some personal bile directed towards RE there and it was assumed that that person was a radfem.
Who knows… when it’s seemingly so easy to ‘be’ a radfem one minute and then hate everything to do with ‘radical feminism’ the next, who knows what an anonymous commenters politics are or how honest that commenter is?
All I know is the responses to this post so far tell me that I’m not the only one who’s pissed off with all the backbiting. I’m not for one minute casting myself as ‘Ms Innocent’ – I know I’ve said some things I’ve been ashamed of when I’ve calmed down and, in those cases, I’ve apologised – but I have never, and would never call any woman a whore, just like I’d never call a woman ’slut’, ’slapper’, ‘bitch’, ‘cunt’, etc. Just so’s you know…
RenegadeEvolution // April 25, 2007 at 4:26 pm
Hey, since we’re all on about this at the moment…Pony sure as hell has said some nasty shit about me, yes indeed. FannyBlood herself has added more than her fair share of snark to posts that had Nothing At All to do with bashing rad fems, sex work, or porn. I don’t recall ever treating Jo22 in a nasty manner even if I do not agree with her on a great many things, or other various Radical Feminists, for that matter.
And Fanny, my job has very little to do with why I don’t like people.
There are things people overlook for whatever reasons, thats fine. See what you want, fine. Think what you want, that is also fine. Complain about anti-rad fem sentiments, that’s fine. I am sure we will continue about the anti “sparkle pony”/”sexbot”/bdsm posts easily found on radical blogs. Different opinions abound and all. People get pissed off all around and all, forever and even, ad infinitum, til the end of time, amen.
This is just futile. I said something violent, I applogized for it, I explained my reasons for doing so.
This has what all to do with Andrea’s feelings and Witchy’s response, again? You know, that topic I tried to stick to?
Yeah. Nothing. Like I said, futile.
Lya Kahlo // April 25, 2007 at 4:26 pm
“She -has- been treated like shit.”
And she has treated others like shit. Occasionally when their big offense was writing a post on their own blogs that didn’t have anything to do with her or her friends. Were I you, I would stop pretending she is a great big victim. I have a feeling she wouldn’t like that.
“This whole thing is mindboggling and mentally exhausting. Not to mention a tremendous waste of time….”
Second verse same as the first.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 4:27 pm
‘ok’ translating as “i hate human’s” that is, right?
Apparently so. As she works in a ’service industry’ one would have thought the punters would have sensed this deep-down hatred of ‘humans’ (excl the posse).
I also note the decrepancy between “we feminists are the ones that love women more [than those hairy ones]” and I hate humans. Funny, because I thought that wimms made up just over half the humans. *shrug*
Liz // April 25, 2007 at 4:32 pm
Stormy:
The comment I made was in good faith (the comment I made at AP’s). Now, I rarely engage with the other side (aka pro-porn side), but I felt I had to say something, okay? Because, like so many others, I have HAD ENOUGH of everyone picking arguments and being pissed off with each other and I KNOW that a lot of people have been hurt, including yourself.
I, a young woman, have only just recently discovered how much I love feminism, and how much I agree with RADICAL feminist sentiments and arguments. And I am sorry to say that I’m feeling seriously disillusioned with certain people’s idea of sisterhood. It hurts me and a few others that if we don’t agree with certain things, we are marginalised and lumped as being ‘on the fence’ or not able to deal in absolutes.
Like Faith says, I don’t think it’s right for either side to engage in venomous comments and I do think that Ren Ev and several others have crossed the line (repeatedly). I resent you using my comment as a means for illustrating your argument with Ren Ev and whoever else.
AP is not Ren Ev even if she associates with her. I don’t like going over to Ren Ev’s and when I do, it is normally to defend Charlie’s use of lads mags pictures on her blog (which ren ev regards as abuse of free speech).
I loathe Ren Ev’s allowing certain trolls and MRA’s to comment, many of whom have made some terrible statements about women and feminists. But I am not defending anyone calling ANY woman a sexbot, whore or any other misogynistic name, even if you really don’t like that person.
I don’t understand why, just for defending Laura, you have so much against me and other young feminists who are only trying to find our feet and are still developing our thoughts on radical feminism. I’m sorry if you feel you have a problem with me, just because I feel that taking part in certain blaming matches and angry words and blogwars can be futile as everyone ends up feeling hurt and frustrated.
I’m sorry, but no matter how strong people are, they eventually break and feel disillusioned if pushed hard enough.
RenegadeEvolution // April 25, 2007 at 4:33 pm
Lya: I think the point here is a few people are saying LOT’S of people on both sides have been treated badly and have treated others badly in return? I’ve said as much…it appears Witchy has as well…
Yep, we can ALL be assholes, imagine that?
Is it that hard to nod and say “Yep, on occasion we can ALL be assholes?”
Witchy (and other rad fems) seemingly get annoyed at the mischaracterization of radical feminists. Some of us over on this side get annoyed with the assumption we just blindly support the sex industry without question or thought. It’s annoying , stressful and angering all around. And yeah, can make people act like assholes.
All of ‘em.
witchywoo // April 25, 2007 at 4:37 pm
Sexbot (n.)
A term used to criticise the patriarchally defined standard of female sexual attractiveness – not the women/girls who ‘achieve’ it (either by accident or design).
fannyblood // April 25, 2007 at 4:38 pm
“I also note the decrepancy between “we feminists are the ones that love women more [than those hairy ones]” and I hate humans. Funny, because I thought that wimms made up just over half the humans. *shrug*”
Exactly.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 4:41 pm
I resent you using my comment as a means for illustrating your argument with Ren Ev and whoever else.
Actually, quoting those commets, was an illustration of how ‘fence sitters’ like yourself choose only to call radfems on bad behaviour, and never YAY-porners. And you are still doing it, even now, *stormy bad* *pornies unfairly treated*.
The thing is, most of the radfems have already blacklisted the pornies from their blogs, and it is actually you ‘fence sitters’ that are actually STOPPING a clear division. Most of us are very happy to stay away from YAY-porners, forever!
Liz // April 25, 2007 at 4:45 pm
Also, I really really resent your remarks about ’so called enlightened feminists’. Obviously, I’m not as experienced and not as long standing as you and Witchy Woo etc but I am still learning. You don’t have to comment on people’s blogs to be against all the remarks that have been made by Ren Ev and other pro-porn feminists about rad fems and feminists. I don’t always have a lot of time on my hands to constantly check what’s going on and I also find it hard to even update my blog sometimes. So I wish you wouldn’t jump to conclusions
delphyne // April 25, 2007 at 4:49 pm
“I’m not going to keep speaking for Anti-Princess or R.E. I’m also not going to speak for Belle.”
Yeah but you did speak for CM, Faith. You said her remark was out of the blue. Right or wrong, rude or not, it didn’t come out of the blue, there’s a whole history of attacks and bad feeling behind it as far as I can see. You keep making statements about this without anything to back them up.
RenegadeEvolution // April 25, 2007 at 4:50 pm
‘“I also note the decrepancy between “we feminists are the ones that love women more [than those hairy ones]” and I hate humans. Funny, because I thought that wimms made up just over half the humans. *shrug*”
Exactly.’
One, I have NEVER critisized a woman, feminist or otherwise for her looks, body hair, whatever…oh, wait, once said I thought Kate Moss was a little too skinny. That would be my extent of critisizing women for their bodies or clothes or any other such thing….so let’s not run around acting like I make a habit of calling people hairy or whatever else, because it does not happen.
And my statements about acceptance are based on, well, pretty much what I see to be the fact that non-radical leaning feminists seem to be more accepting of diverse opinions. I am not saying that is 100% true, it just certainly seems that way. I don’t see me TELLING people the SHOULD do porn. I don’t see Belledame TELLING people they should be into BDSM. I see more “well, I dig it, and think consenting folks who dig it should be allowed to do it”, but there is no “telling”. There is more, from what I’ve seen, tolerance, on the non-radical leaning side…and I just don’t think a fair amount of tolerance is a bad thing. Shrug. I never claimed to LOVE women more, I said their was more tolerance on the “sex-pos” side…and I still beleive that to be true.
Now, once again, Stormy, I am more than happy to pretend we never crossed paths, that we do not exist in one another’s universes, but, for that to work at all, you really do need to stop taking every available opportunity…
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 4:50 pm
And yet you still don’t seem to get the implications in the overall political rhelm.
BTW:
I’m sorry, but no matter how strong people are, they eventually break and feel disillusioned if pushed hard enough.
Is this some kind of veiled threat that you will cross the floor to pro-porn?
Liz // April 25, 2007 at 4:50 pm
You know what. I’m really sorry, Witchy, I really really like you and other radical feminists, but I don’t know if I can take this any more. I feel really unhappy because yes, I may be called a fence sitter, but I have my own issues to deal with as well as being a feminist. Because that’s just it, isn’t it? That you all think that people like me aren’t good enough.
Liz // April 25, 2007 at 4:52 pm
No it isn’t. What do you take me for????
I have always been and always will be anti porn, okay? I don’t engage with pro-porn people.
Liz // April 25, 2007 at 4:54 pm
Have you even bothered to read my blog, Stormy?
I’ve had my own personal brushes with porn and could never be pro porn. Nobody on the pro-porn side reads or comments at my blog.
I think what this is, is just that you want to blame me and Laura and young women like us because you don’t trust us.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 4:56 pm
Well, at least Liz thinks I’m the ‘Big Bad’ of radical feminism, that is something I suppose.
It is not a question of ‘not being good enough’ but showing your commitment. If you are not commited, and continue to either praise or overlook pornies for radfem bashing, then no, I don’t have time for you. I am not the ‘earth mother’ type. You will actually find some of the published radfems more hardline than me on the commitment issue.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 4:57 pm
[we keep cross posting, and even I'm getting confused here]
Faith // April 25, 2007 at 4:58 pm
“Were I you, I would stop pretending she is a great big victim. I have a feeling she wouldn’t like that.”
I’m pretending she’s a great, big victim? Where exactly did I do that?
octogalore // April 25, 2007 at 5:00 pm
Jo22: “You create pornography and advocate it as a legitimate career choice for women, all the while telling people how tough you are for surviving in such a misogynistic industry. It seems more important to you that people don’t think you’re a victim than the fact that so many women are abused in porn.”
Can you back up where porn as a career choice has been advocated? About all I’ve seen has been a discussion of why Ren chose it. Further, I think “I’m not a victim” and “many women are abused in porn” are statements that can be made, and have been made, simultaneously and without contradiction.
How, exactly, do you think Ren’s career choice contributes to other women being abused in porn? Do you think if she chose another career, that would improve anyone’s lot? Supply and demand, folks– guess which is the driver.
Faith // April 25, 2007 at 5:01 pm
“Most of us are very happy to stay away from YAY-porners, forever!”
Stormy,
Ok, then do that…what exactly is stopping you?
Liz // April 25, 2007 at 5:02 pm
Ha. I don’t think you’re the big bad, just endlessly stubborn and very strong willed. And that can be demoralising for anyone who gets in your way.
I’m just a very open minded person, and I kind of wish to be accepting, even if I don’t always agree with people. I accept that you’re not the earth mother type (and neither am I) but I feel that perhaps you have been a little insensitive to people who really are on the rad fem side.
If I want to offer some support to people (aka Laura, AP, Witchy, whoever is feeling unhappy at that particular moment) I will do it. I accept that AP and Ren Ev have both been very offensive, but so have other people.
witchywoo // April 25, 2007 at 5:02 pm
“Because that’s just it, isn’t it? That you all think that people like me aren’t good enough.”
For me personally, Liz – I appreciate your honesty and value your hopefulness. Being a Wizened Old Crone™ (
) it does me good to hear the passion of young radfem women. Kind of restores mine a bit, when it’s flagging, yunno?
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 5:05 pm
Now, once again, Stormy, I am more than happy to pretend we never crossed paths, that we do not exist in one another’s universes, but, for that to work at all, you really do need to stop taking every available opportunity…
Yeah, again I see — this is really the first time I have been so direct in my criticism of you and your actions, so it would suit your purposes for me to be shut up.
The thing is RE, you may have stopped me blogging, but that was baaaad strategy on your part. This gives me time to do silly things like analyse the content of your blog. I am more dangerous this way. You might have thought long term rather than revelling in the seven-week character assasination.
Faith // April 25, 2007 at 5:05 pm
“You keep making statements about this without anything to back them up.”
Well, that would be because unlike many of the people here who seem to want to keep beating a dead horse over and over and over and over and over again, I’m quite content to just say, “hey, we all fucked up. now can we just move on?”
Liz // April 25, 2007 at 5:06 pm
Ah, thank you. Your wisdom is inspirational
Faith // April 25, 2007 at 5:08 pm
“but I have never, and would never call any woman a whore, just like I’d never call a woman ’slut’, ’slapper’, ‘bitch’, ‘cunt’, etc. Just so’s you know…”
No, Witchy, I wouldn’t expect that you would. I’ve personally never seen you say anything that I believed was out of line.
RenegadeEvolution // April 25, 2007 at 5:09 pm
Stormy-
And here I thought you didn’t read my blog? And don’t blame you quiting your blog on me, I forced you to do nothing. You made that choice, I was hardly standing there with a gun saying “type and I’ll shoot”. Actually, in truth, you’ve attributed a lot more sway, whatever, than I have.
Now, if you want to make this a grudge match, fine, but I hardly see that helping anything, really.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 5:10 pm
Faith:
Ok, then do that…what exactly is stopping you?
As explained previously, fence sitters (that insist I treat them with the same trust) and radblogs who will allow their pornie comments to go through (no offence Witchy, but she also knows that I did not comment here for quite some time because of that policy).
I’m also a separatist, so that should go a long way to explaining why I think commitment to radfeminism is a ‘big deal’.
Faith // April 25, 2007 at 5:11 pm
“Well, at least Liz thinks I’m the ‘Big Bad’ of radical feminism, that is something I suppose”
Stormy,
It really seems like you -want- to be the “Big Bad” of radical feminism. At least in this thread.
delphyne // April 25, 2007 at 5:12 pm
“Well, that would be because unlike many of the people here who seem to want to keep beating a dead horse over and over and over and over and over again, I’m quite content to just say, “hey, we all fucked up. now can we just move on?””
I think it has more to do with the fact that you have a very skewed picture of what is actually going on here. So skewed that reality in fact doesn’t back you up.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 5:13 pm
RE:
And here I thought you didn’t read my blog?
Actually on in the last week or two, and ‘read’ would not be the word I would use — ’scan’ is more accurate.
BTW, your ’stat’ of 75% of traffic coming from radfems? As I share my ISP with, I don’t know, 10s of thousands of others, how exactly do you determine which ones are radical feminists?
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 5:15 pm
only in the last week or two.
*slaps fingers* proof read stormy!
Faith // April 25, 2007 at 5:17 pm
Delphyne,
My take on reality is just fine, thanks.
RenegadeEvolution // April 25, 2007 at 5:18 pm
Stormy, well, see, my incoming source traffic, a lot of it has been spawned off of Laurelins, Genderberg, and well, here….generally the haunts of rad fems, no? Search terms lean in that direction as well. Not that it much matters either…scan til you’re hearts content if that is how you want to spend time. Your choice, after all.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 5:26 pm
RE: If I have the time or inclination, I may just survey your blog on a weekly basis — and shall let you know if your posts slip dangerously below 25% slagging off radfems.
Just being of service.
Pony // April 25, 2007 at 5:28 pm
Liz
I’ve tried to read your blog, wanting to comment after seeing your addy here and there, over the past year. But I can’t read type on a black background so I give up and leave.
I don’t think anyone can really; it’s a graphics no-no.
So if you’d change to black print, or dark blue, on a white background (like WW has) you might get more readers. One for sure.
Lya Kahlo // April 25, 2007 at 5:31 pm
“Ok, then do that…what exactly is stopping you?”
Hmm. Could it be that pro porners keep showing up at radfem blogs to bait them? Nah! It’s stormy’s fault.
_______
Ugh. I so did not want to have to talk about porn. But, since you did:
“How, exactly, do you think Ren’s career choice contributes to other women being abused in porn? Do you think if she chose another career, that would improve anyone’s lot? Supply and demand, folks– guess which is the driver.”
Now that’s a talented dodge. How *doesn’t* that type of career choice contribute the abuse of other women – in porn or not? Being involved in porn that normalizes and eroticises humilation, disgusting abuse, degradation of women isn’t contributing? Do you this exists in a vaccuum? Do you think people viewing this are not being led to believe that this is sex and that women like being abused? That hurting, insulting and humilating women isn’t sexy?
Take a tour around Nopornnorthhampton.org. (*trigger warning*) Then come back and tell me it’s not contributing. To repeat something vera said at IBTP (originally posted by some rando at Traffic Jamming): people see the men tortured at Aru Gharib and they’re horrified. People see women tortured in brutal porn and it’s sexy!
To be clear: They did not started it (the abuse), they may not intend to fan the flames of it but do not pretend they are not helping it along.
All that is demanded does not mandate a supply.
octogalore // April 25, 2007 at 5:32 pm
Evangelena: “As for helping others to get these advantages, I’m not sure what you mean. Some women can never be a size four and others would have to make themselves sick to get that way.”
You mentioned advantages of genetics and lifestyle, not thinness per se. Genetics re health and weight is not all about DNA but also being born into a family in which one gets good nutrition from birth and good exercise habits (overlapping with the lifestyle issue). This influences ones metabolism, tendency towards illness, etc. Not everyone is or should be a size 4, and I am not advocating a global campaign to promote thinness as the ideal – I think this would obviously be quite destructive. There are plenty of healthy larger women who look and feel great. Instead, concerning ourselves with how to deal with global poverty and how to contribute on an individual and collective basis our time and money seems to be a better solution than worrying about the privilege we derive from a fit body.
“I guess the part where comparing my body weight to pole dancing is because pole dancing is a choice of a job* that you make, whereas I’m slender because I’m slender. I do what I can to be feminist about it – I don’t try to flirt with men or get favors from them because I am thin, I don’t make fun of women who are fat, I am opposed to the diet industry, etc. If you have a job as a stripper, you are actively participating in an industry*; me, I’m just a slender girl who attends university full time, works part time, spends much of her time studying, etc., which has nothing to do with my body size.”
I’m not exactly sure what you are saying here – is it that it’s more feminist to be “just a slender girl” who gets that way innocently through working and studying, than a woman who chooses a pole-dancing career, or vacation from a career, in which she stays thin corruptly by actually exercising and may use her physical package, which includes having a fit body, to get “favors” from men?
Let’s leave aside the issues of referring to a college-age woman as a “girl” (possibly that has been “reclaimed”) and the suggestion that a career as a stripper or sex worker is detrimental to women collectively (which I’ve discussed ad nauseum here and elsewhere), and let’s focus on the “favors” issue. Why, exactly, is it bad to profit from one’s attributes, physical or otherwise?
After all, most of us profit daily from seeing, which some people cannot do. Whenever we run up a flight of stairs, we’re profiting from a “privilege” not everyone has. Whenever we attend college, same deal.
Similarly, it’s pretty natural for people to respond, and possibly “favor,” those to whom we’re attracted. I know I do it. I recently gave a speech at a legal event and wound up getting into a long conversation afterwards, and taking on a search assignment, from a partner who was among the more attractive and charismatic there. Was it wrong for him to profit from this?
When you interview for jobs out of college, you can bet that the way you present yourself is going to be a factor in offers you get, and I wouldn’t recommend that you turn down those offers because they might not be available to others with a less effective presentation.
It’s not, ultimately, more “feminist” or ethical to walk away from opportunities that we get or work for, despite these not being universally available, and despite that being unfair. We can, IMO, make much more of a difference working to increase the availability of such advantages, than making the symbolic, and futile, gesture of walking away from them.
Pony // April 25, 2007 at 5:32 pm
Those hits are your traffic going to Rad Fem blogs and then back to you.
Octogalore it’s a good thing you’ve got a day job swinging your tits around, because you’d make such a piss poor lawyer. Rule one: don’t ask any question for which the answer isn’t known, or isn’t in your benefit.
Liz // April 25, 2007 at 5:37 pm
Ah, okay Pony. I’ll change the layout asap (it’s time for a change anyway as I’ve had the same layout for a looong time!).
RenegadeEvolution // April 25, 2007 at 5:40 pm
Lya:
Question…
I’ve been commenting here for awhile, and tis the only Rad Fem Blog I ever really comment on at all. WW knows she has a standing invite to tell me to take off whenever she likes…but how was my initial comment here on this thread:’
“Witchy: blow outs or not, I still..well…respect you…but seeing what Andrea said made me think, and wonder, and feel, and say I, as far as feminism goes, at least by many standards, am an expatriate. We can’t all do it your way…and its not that I don;t, hell, that most of ‘us’ don’t respect or understand your way, we just can’t do it…it’s not “true” for us. And I think that is the fairest way to phrase it. I realize Radical Feminism is like, well, home for you. It isn’t for a lot of us. That doesn’t make us bad people, it makes us…grr…other. Different. Not where you are…
I think Andrea is good people. I am tired of seeing good people hurt, you know?”
mean nasty, baiting, whatever, in any way? Did I slam rad fems in that comment? Did I say “Radical Feminism is wrong and you all suck” did I really way anything other than “WW, i respect you, but I can understand why Andrea doesn’t feel the Rad Fem in her soul, and that i did not like seeing her hurt’? Where is the Horrible Evil in that comment on this Rad Fem blog?
Faith // April 25, 2007 at 5:46 pm
“Hmm. Could it be that pro porners keep showing up at radfem blogs to bait them? Nah! It’s stormy’s fault.”
I never said it was anyone’s fault. But if people aren’t going to kiss and make up, then it makes more sense to just step away. We aren’t making any progress here because no one is willing to accept a bit of humility and try to get along or simply part ways. This is never going to end with all the bickering. It will only end if everyone involved is willing to work – instead of attack and fling shit around – or go their separate ways. Right now it’s nothing other than a match of who’s the bigger villian which is absurd.
Lya Kahlo // April 25, 2007 at 5:46 pm
I’m not sure I understand the question. That post isn’t baiting, and neither did I say it was. I didn’t say it was you trolling radfem blogs either.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 5:48 pm
Good point about the trackbacks Pony.
RE, here’s a thing, perhaps we will have one of our Top Secret Evol Radfem meetings and decide not to pick on the others, but just concentrate on you instead? That should appeal to your narcissism, plus the added bonus of ‘everyone picking on you’ will then have an air of truth.
Since you put yourself in the position of being the nemesis of the radfems, I shall put myself in the position of being yours. All’s fair. LOL
octogalore // April 25, 2007 at 5:52 pm
Lya: no dodge intended, thanks. It’s a technical reality: the demand for porn is a measurable quantity. There are bean counters in back rooms charting it as we speak.
Your statements about the kind of porn Ren does and how it affects people, and sending me to various anti-porn sites, are emotional arguments – not technical ones. I’m not trying to engage on an emotional level. I agree with you, anyone who views non-consensual acts towards women as sexy is sick. But that’s not the argument I am making.
Saying “they are helping [the abuse] along” is a conclusion, not proof, nor rebuttal of what I said.
Think about the reality of what you’re saying. Ren drops out of the porn industry, and ten other women do too. Then what? The bean counters know how much of a certain kind of porn is being purchased or viewed, and what the derivative is in terms of whether the rate is increasing, decreasing, whatever. They will provide this information to the corporate honchos, who will determine how much supply to put on the market. At that point, the casting folks will hire as necessary, and believe me, the conditions of poverty in our world plus the nature of the comparator jobs out there will provide more women auditioning for these parts than there are parts to fill.
The problem is the nature of the comparator jobs and the underlying poverty … NOT whatever decision Ren or other women make. The latter does not have one iota of effect on the result. The only effect it could have is that the woman subbing for Ren might not be as able to freely choose to be doing what she’s doing. And that’s it, folks.
Throwing out directives or links to torture isn’t going to change these underlying facts, Lya, I’m afraid. The implication of Ren or other women in her shoes is a very unfortunate distraction from the real underlying issues here.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 5:54 pm
Lya said, and I really laughed:
Hmm. Could it be that pro porners keep showing up at radfem blogs to bait them? Nah! It’s stormy’s fault.
Yup. *hand up*.
Faith, I am taking the piss (English expression for making fun of) out of the whole thing. But you have trouble seeing the overall picture. I do actually see it beyond myself.
My hairy legs come with sense of humour ‘as standard’.
witchywoo // April 25, 2007 at 5:55 pm
“We aren’t making any progress here because no one is willing to accept a bit of humility and try to get along or simply part ways.”
You can’t hurry the process, Faith. There are a few people here taking the opportunity to thrash things out and that takes time.
Lya Kahlo // April 25, 2007 at 5:56 pm
“I never said it was anyone’s fault”
That’s true and apologies. It did look like I was saying you had. That was intended to mean that Stormy visiting blogs to gather info is hardly the same thing as trolling.
“Right now it’s nothing other than a match of who’s the bigger villian which is absurd.”
Agreed. At this point I’m willing to say that it’s not even a wide spread problem – it seems more like it’s a small bunch of people with some long running grudges.
RenegadeEvolution // April 25, 2007 at 5:56 pm
Stormy; Whatever.
Faith: I think you’re right.
octogalore // April 25, 2007 at 6:04 pm
“Octogalore it’s a good thing you’ve got a day job swinging your tits around, because you’d make such a piss poor lawyer. Rule one: don’t ask any question for which the answer isn’t known, or isn’t in your benefit.”
Pony, thought your reading comp was up to snuff. I’m not involved in the tits nor the torts games, currently, although I do work in the legal field in a business function. I’d advise you not to get into an LSATs comparison with me, nor comparison as to our records in litigation on motions we’ve prepared and argued, as neither, I’m afraid, would be “in (sic.) your benefit.”
Out of my considerable respect for Witchy, I have tried to keep comments here respectful and on point. I think your comments to me here and elsewhere have been beyond the pale, and because of the factual inaccuracies in your last post, I feel compelled to respond. However, out of respect to our host, this is the last time I will respond here to any comments you make of a personal nature.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 6:13 pm
RE: Stormy; Whatever.
ZOMG, RE has lost touch with her ‘inner henchwoman’. *oh noes*
Never fear! Stormy is here!
Just helping you reach that radfem-bashing quota for next week.
RenegadeEvolution // April 25, 2007 at 6:21 pm
My inner henchwoman is just fine, thanks. Point is, I do think Faith is right. I’ve been pretty nasty and disrespectful to “radical feminists”…and in truth, agree about ANYTHING with them or not, I don’t think “radical feminists” are BAD people. In fact, I can think of a few I would say are aces. Others, not so much. So, that in mind, I don’t really need to bash on “radical feminists”, because the “radical feminists” don’t deserve it as a group. I disagree with some tenants, many of them, of radical feminism. Okay, fine. Big deal. But “radical feminists” can think what they want. Good for them and all. So no, no real need to bash the community know as “Radical Feminists”…
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 6:27 pm
So, finally are you going to STOP ?!
Or just sub-contract it out to your posse?
Pony // April 25, 2007 at 6:36 pm
Oh no please keep commenting (several Bond movie tarts names). I’m so effin in need of comic relief. I’m just killing myself laughing at your every pretentious ponderous turgid post.
Who can keep up with your multi-profession short life? Not you that’s for sure, as was pointed out on IBTP, you lost the This is My Life story board several times.
This has been so fun WW. Let’s do it sometime again real soon.
delphyne // April 25, 2007 at 6:40 pm
“Good for them and all. So no, no real need to bash the community know as “Radical Feminists””
Well we’ve always been aware that there are some radical feminists you like. The point is are you going to stop going after the rad fems you don’t like?
I’d be quite happy to agree to never to talk to or about you and the people list as friends at your blog again. Would your group be prepared to do the same about us? In fact I think it would be harder for Belledame to stop than you.
Lya Kahlo // April 25, 2007 at 6:40 pm
“a technical reality: the demand for porn is a measurable quantity. ”
Yeah. That’s not what I was calling a dodge.
“Your statements about the kind of porn Ren does and how it affects people, and sending me to various anti-porn sites, are emotional arguments – not technical ones.”
Now THAT is (also) a dodge. You dismiss my points – without having looked at the citation, I see – so you can pretend they’re wrong. Excuse me if I yawm at the utter tediousness of such a dodge.
Since you failed to address anything I said and instead have decided that nonsense scenarios based what I didn’t argue was the best way to go, forgive me if I don’t respond. When you’re ready to talk about the topic, let me know.
shannon // April 25, 2007 at 7:16 pm
I don’t think belledame will ever stop, and it’s somehow sad? Also, ren, have you or have you not ever said things in support of pornography?
Also, let’s not make fun of people who swing their tits around.
RenegadeEvolution // April 25, 2007 at 7:37 pm
Shannon:
“Also, ren, have you or have you not ever said things in support of pornography?”
Sure I have…I think porn made by consenting people is fine.
Delphyne- Having a problem with individuals is an age old affliction for all people, talking about those problems with those people is as well. I’m not saying I won’t ever go off on a person, in fact, I am pretty sure I will, but I will refrain from blaming it on “radical feminists”.
octogalore // April 25, 2007 at 7:37 pm
Lya: I’m familiar with the NoPornNorthampton site, and what I’m disputing is not the effects of porn, which that site discusses (although I think we’d disagree there), but the effects of a porn performer remaining in or exiting the industry. I believe the latter is zero, and haven’t seen any discussion to the contrary.
delphyne // April 25, 2007 at 7:43 pm
So it’s pretty much business as usual then, RE, except with a change in nomenclature?
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 8:10 pm
I’m not saying I won’t ever go off on a person, in fact, I am pretty sure I will, but I will refrain from blaming it on “radical feminists”.
I agree with delphyne, so what exactly is the change/concession? Personal attacks to continue, but you just won’t say that they are ‘radical feminists’, even though everybody knows who they are anyway? And doubtless you will link to the post, as per usual.
I (and others) have been insisting for months that you STOP. Just stop doing it. But you seem to have a pathalogical *need* to keep trashing radfems.
Your insincere apologies after trashing someone also don’t fly, as you leave up the hateposts anyway. This is a cycle, it goes on and on. You occasionally vary the tune by ‘defending’ AP from ‘attacks’, when she is capable of holding her ground (ah, perhaps RE thinks that AP is incompetent?).
Lya Kahlo // April 25, 2007 at 8:22 pm
“I agree with you, anyone who views non-consensual acts towards women as sexy is sick. But that’s not the argument I am making.”
I have to ask were you being deliberately obtuse here? How is it possible that is what you took away from my post?
“what I’m disputing is not the effects of porn, which that site discusses (although I think we’d disagree there)”
What color is the sky in Never Never land?
” but the effects of a porn performer remaining in or exiting the industry. I believe the latter is zero, and haven’t seen any discussion to the contrary.”
I see. You didn’t want an answer to the question that I answered: “How, exactly, do you think Ren’s career choice contributes to other women being abused in porn?”, but to the next question.
I did address it. To put it another way: simply because something is in demand, does not mean it is a demand that has a right to be filled. The problem is not only poverty, but also the people who believe they are entitled to watch women humilated, degraded and abused on film for their sexual enjoyment. Porn companies fill, and exaserbate this demand – to our collective detriment. You’re right that should women get up and leave the work that other women – potentially less willing – would be herded in to fill the demand. You’re ignoring the fact that it’s not a demand that has any right to be filled. But I suppose that is to be expected if you’re of the “porn is my right!” variety.
RenegadeEvolution // April 25, 2007 at 8:28 pm
Stormy, Delphyne… You know, I don’t particularly care about your opinion on the matter, really. Admit to it or not, your side, some of your allies, you yourselves, so on, so forth, have done a fair amount of trashing yourselves. You don’t get to play innocent here. Sorry, it doesn’t fly. At least I admit I’ve done it rather than throw up the “well, but, see…” defense all the time, or better yet, deny it altogether. Sure, you can site some of the things I’ve said as way out of line and hateful…some of them are. Yet, when your allies do the same thing to others, even when those statements are lies or unsupported accusations as well…
:::crickets:::
So, see, here is the difference. I am sitting here owning up to my bad behavior and admitting I have said some really shitty things, because I have. Yet, do I see the same admittance, even the barest acknowledgement of such behavior from anyone except Witchy and Heart? Who have hardly been the worst about it? No, I don’t. That says something.
And no, nice try, but I do not think AP is incompetent. I think she got shit on by folks and it pissed me off.
delphyne // April 25, 2007 at 8:54 pm
I’m not sure what you want me in particular to own up to Renegade Evolution. I think I was rude to you once when you said that the rape of two porn stars said something about them as performers, since then nothing. In fact I think I actually said that it was wrong for someone to call you a sexist insult. Which it is. You don’t deserve that. I told AP to fuck off when I thought she was trolling under a different name, since then, nothing. And I think I’ve called Belledame a twit behind her back. That’s about it.
I think there have been insults on both sides, I’m not going to deny that, although I also think what’s been coming from your side has been much more vicious, concerted and ongoing. Whether you agree with that or not what I’m saying is will you leave us alone if we agree to leave you alone?
Where does this stop? Because at least from what you are saying her is that it doesn’t.
delphyne // April 25, 2007 at 8:54 pm
“saying here”
Pony // April 25, 2007 at 8:58 pm
Nothing. Absolutely nothing anyone, any radical feminist, has said to you, or about you, is on the same level as your implied death threats and the psychotic rants of your hate filled abuse and invective which you write post after post, and have since you made your new blog. And as another poster has said, it’s all been saved and documented.
The little jibes and snipes traded back and forth between us, other ‘us’, are not even in the same ballpark.
RenegadeEvolution // April 25, 2007 at 9:24 pm
Pony: You really don’t have room to talk on vicious, rude and insulting. Sure everything I’ve said has been saved and documented, it’s right there in my blog. But just for a second here, look at the way you’ve treated a whole helluva lot of people…say, even here at WW’s. Some non rad folk comment civilly on something, you sweap on in and make personal insults… Octogalore being a fine example in this thread. You make up accusations, spew a ton of hate yourself, and say some damn vicious things. I made a violent statement, (not a death threat, a violent statment), you wander about the blog realm calling women stupid, ugly, insane, so on, so forth, flat out or in so many words, which hate to say it, for some women is just as personal, triggering and abusive as any violent statement. So, yeah, pot, meet kettle, let’s both wear black shall we?
Delphyne, my issues with behavior are not with you. Other people seem to have some problems with you, me? Not so much.
Wait, here we go…I have problems with Pony, Stormy & Fannyblood, and I think both Ginmar and Chasingmoksha have said some pretty nasty shit to folks-but not me. There we have it. Those three names, right there, are the ones you may or may not see me mention when ranting about viciousness on “your” side and all that other lovely stuff. Not “radical feminists”, not “some radical feminists”, those three, because call out and rant on about how shitty and mean and vicious I have been, a lot of folk would say you’re behavior is often no better, perhaps even worse…but I cop to it, and put it right out there for everyone to see, and don’t, when convinent, pretend like it never happened.
Pony // April 25, 2007 at 9:38 pm
There it is: why there is no end here but the beginning. Ren Ev actually believes that admitting to her implied death threat {abusive, bullying and potentially criminal behaviour) absolves her of any wrong.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 9:43 pm
YAY! Promotion to No.2!
So I am prolifically vicious am I? Apart from two BeeGate posts, which I removed, where is this wealth of venom I supposedly spit at you — besides here, where I have let fly.
Does that even stack up against the seven-week smear campaign by you and your posse?
When I had my blog, did I continually take things that you and the posse had blogged, take out of context, ridicule, lie, twist things?
Sorry, but no dice. I have a hell of a lot of ground to cover before I can anywhere near equal you and your lot.
Pony // April 25, 2007 at 9:59 pm
Pathetic really, thinking Delphyne is going to fall for that divide and conquer song and dance.
chasingmoksha // April 25, 2007 at 9:59 pm
Witchywoo, please forgive my inaugural comment. I was hoping that when it happened it would be on a more productive plane, but obvious by your stats, you know that I have been following this thread from the beginning and I feel compel to speak. I must say whoever made that comment about the fence sitting pierced me straight in the heart. Not fussing about it or anything, just saying. I hope I am not a fence sitter. I know my blog may look like a fence sitter but my blog was not created for feminist activism, but instead to help me with my “phonological awareness” disability. I have no problem reading or seeing, but I have issues with speaking and writing sounds. “how” becomes “out”, etc and my brain races faster than my articulation. Anyway, my blog is my outlet and I cannot deny I am a radical feminist. Actually, I find the “radical” modifier to be redundant because to me what constitutes radical feminism is what I always thought was feminism. Stormy (I put you first to make up for your 6th place standing), Witchywoo, Heart, Uppity biscuit, Dead Men Don’t Rape, and Sparklematrix and others have always been larger than life for me, hence I have been reserve with my commenting.
I have always stated that sincere kindness is my kryptonite and Heart has been very kind to me therefore I am more at ease with her (not saying anyone else I mention have not been kind).
Anyway, in an attempt to say my peace/piece, here are a few thoughts. I am not one to sit for the long haul so I shall say now that when I see it is no longer useful to participate, I will cease to participate.
RenegadeEvolution, I have never commented on your blog before, EVER! To be honest I never even knew you existed until you followed a comment thread at R.Mildred’s. The one where Ravenm insisted on owning sentences that did not apply to her. After you commented and stated that you did not agree with what was said about me, I went to your blog and read a few entries. It was a time that you had just came back from spitting in a man’s face who paid you to do it along with the sex he paid you for. I did not agree with your occupation, your prostitution, however, I did not feel a need to censure you. I am not of the type. Perhaps why I have never been a holy roller. I do not believe in going to people and telling them about themselves, but I do most certainly believe in telling them about themselves if they ask or come in my face. You have attempted to bring me into your drama, at minimum four times. I only searched your blog using “chasingmoksha.” There may be more links with just “moksha” “C.M.” “c.moksha” or whatever else, but just the “chasingmoksha” turned up a whopping four links.
http://renegadeevolution.blogspot.com/2007/04/for-record.html#links
http://renegadeevolution.blogspot.com/2007/03/some-people.html#links
http://renegadeevolution.blogspot.com/2007/03/blow-out.html#links
http://renegadeevolution.blogspot.com/2007/03/whats-this-race-post.html#links
Why? It is a mystery, because as I stated I have never, NEVER mentioned or acknowledged your existence. Nothing about You, a mention of you, an allusion to you, nothing remotely about you can be found on my blog. Nothing. Perhaps this is the “below contempt” accusation you feel. I find that rather negative. I would word it as you being of no interest to me. Even after you linked me to your blog, I still ignored you. Hoping your infatuation or need of my recognizing you would eventually go away. But it has not. You now have to try to incite me using Antiprincess as a proxy. Attempting to defend AP is a joke, really, a joke, but not a ha ha ha funny joke, but a pathetic wake up in twenty years and remember with complete embarrassment joke. Just like your blog, you cannot find me at AP’s blog. I remember reading a few entries last fall but no more because she did not hold my attention, not my cup of tea. If I commented, I do not remember, or it was some polite comment. Unlike her busting up into my blog, incidentally the only two times were when I talked about surprise surprise, BDSM and porn. These two below links, plus only showing her face at Heart’s when the topic is similar is in fact what one can call a PATTERN!
http://chasingmoksha.blogspot.com/2007/02/bdsm-attempts-subversion.html#links
http://chasingmoksha.blogspot.com/2007/03/alas.html#links
Holding a mirror to her face and making her see how she has a pattern sucking porn is nothing, NOTHING compared to enjoying the thought of seeing someone choke on their blood while dying. Big difference. And as I proved, we have not given tit for tat evenly. Ren 4, Chasingmoksha 0. AP 2, Chasingmoksha 0. If this is equal, then it would be what those neocons call fuzzy math.
I honestly believe with all of my heart that you need to see a psychiatrist. Take that as an insult if you want, it is not my intent, it my extension of sisterhood recommending that you get some help, preferable by a female therapist, one who is not caught up in submitting to the patriarchy. Personally, I feel sorry for you. I am afraid for you. I am scare for you. I am afraid that if, IF, the day ever comes that you really really wake up and realize the magnitude of your behavior it will be more than you can handle. I am concern, because as much as you pretend to be strong, as much as you pretend to be this henchwoman, or whatever it is, your behavior says something else. Your behavior says that you need constant reaffirmation. Your behavior says that you need reassurance, kudos, cheerleaders. I am scare for you because one day may come when a man who pays you for your prostitution will rape, beat and then murder you. I do not find that scenario far-fetched. If he is in the market for prostitution, he is capable of doing anything and murdering a woman, a prostitute would be nothing to him. Actually, many serial killers target prostitutes. And, you may use some sort of categorization to view those prostitutes as street prostitutes and different from the type of prostitute that you are, and to an extent, there are some differences, but to a lunatic serial killer the difference only lies in the access to said prostitute.
RE, it is not your job to address any possible wrongs inflicted on others. That whole captn-sav-a-damesl-in-distress is a patriarchal construct. The attention and heroism that is showered on him for saving someone from an environment that he creates will not be showered on you, EVER! You can try with all your might to jam the square peg in a round hole but it will not fit, it will not work out for you.
I was fine with ignoring you and would appreciate if you never mentioned or alluded to or linked to me again, but I am afraid it is impossibility, because as I said, you and others like you need validation instead of listening to the voice in your internal compass that is telling you that your position is not good.
There, I have addressed you now. Now you can go back to your tribe, stir up a big old poor Ren, “Chasingmoksha is so mean to me”, and get some reaffirmation and some sleep. It will not happen again. Unlike the peacemakers here, I simply do not have the time. I rather spend it on a prostitute who was coerced into prostitution, and wants to get a new life than one who engages in “preferable adaptability.”
Speaking of tribes, I find it so counterproductive to focus so much on what other blogger say in THEIR blogs. Back in the fall when Jessica and Amanda and Lindsey was being bashed I saw the point, I saw their mistakes, then I started noticing that one group could hardly concentrate on anything else but what other bloggers said/did. It became too much to bear. It became soil and I am glad I am no longer part of it. I like focusing on my toxins and how people like me deal with their toxins. I don’t like just giving my toxins to others. I do love people. Note, I LOVE people, I love the earth, I love women.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 10:04 pm
Yeah Pony, her ‘weakness in the herd’ radar must be completely off today.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 10:06 pm
Oops Pony, I forgot to preface the last comment with: “Big Bad No.2 to Big Bad No.1 — are you receiving me, over.”
RenegadeEvolution // April 25, 2007 at 10:07 pm
I don’t think Delphyne is going to fall for anything. She has not been particularly nasty to me, so I said as much. Admitting to anything does not absolve one of anything, but you can’t even admit it…
and Stormy, don’t sell yourself short like that, you’ve been plenty awful yourself, really.
RenegadeEvolution // April 25, 2007 at 10:16 pm
CM:
Fair enough, I-personally- will never speak to or of you again. Not a problem. And thanks for the concern, but you can keep it.
witchywoo // April 25, 2007 at 10:17 pm
Chasingmoksha – welcome
I’m pleased you’re here.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 10:21 pm
Yep, I have.
But I have reached the point of no more tolerance for your little games.
Now the gloves are off Miriam, or Violent Jay, or whatever…
…want me to keep digging?
Because the only way a sociopath will let go and leave the target alone is if the target makes it NOT worth their while. So, whilst you refuse to stop slagging off radfems, I will continue to dig.
RenegadeEvolution // April 25, 2007 at 10:31 pm
Stormy;
What, because outing me, stalking me, providing my information for public view is such the right thing to do? Really, is it? My legal address, families home number, all that, is that next? Think that is not threatening, perhaps a little endangering? Way out of bounds? Something I would never do and have actually blogged against? Wow, actual threats and intimidation. I’m impressed.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 10:33 pm
Stormy (I put you first to make up for your 6th place standing)
Thanks for putting me highly on ‘good’ list Chasingmoksha, nice to see you about. Actually I am jockeying for the position of Evol Radfem No.1 .
It all seems to be going to plan — have worked my way from a lowly No.6 all the ways up to No.2.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 10:38 pm
What, because outing me, stalking me, providing my information for public view is such the right thing to do?
It is all information that you, or those around you have posted in blogland. I said nothing about your family information. I do not post information that is not publicly available, and in this case, I am using (well, rather collating) the information you have posted about yourself. Being a narcissist really does have disadvantages you know.
So what will actually MAKE you STOP slagging off radfems?
Shall I show them the photo, the one without the black eye strips?
Amber // April 25, 2007 at 10:48 pm
Ooooookay this is getting SERIOUSLY fucked up and bizarre. Stormy… wtf???
Interesting in light of Devious Diva’s recent ordeal, too…
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 10:54 pm
Let the henchwoman make the deal herself.
chasingmoksha // April 25, 2007 at 11:01 pm
Renegade Evolution, you cared for none of these things when you allowed my blog post to be highlighted in your blog. The very post that I felt a man was “raping” my blog. How is the threat, the feeling of a threat different when it is happening to you but not when it is happening to people you do not agree with? I honestly doubt Stormy would ever “out” you. She is too much of a feminist. (Even though, surprise surprise, what you are doing is illegal unless you live in Nevada, and one of those MRA Christian Holy Rollers who read your blog may decide to report you to the police, because prostitution is illegal.) However, I see merit in her “threat”. It shows just how vulnerable we all are, hence, a reason we should not fight and instead tackle the real enemy, men. Because there are a hundred men waiting to do harm to a female, compared to one woman with a remote thought.
And I have noted how you so casually refuse to express remorse for your one-sided attacks on me. I have proven your attacks, your obsession, yet no apology, no nothing. You feel justify I guess, something you cannot possible empathize when others respond in kind. Let me read where you say it is even Stevens, all is bad,, all is the same, all is equal and all of that garbage. It will be a great big laugh.
delphyne // April 25, 2007 at 11:01 pm
Stormy, we can’t make her stop going after rad fems, we can only point out what is going on and as RE and her pals don’t want to call a truce, leave them to it.
Pony // April 25, 2007 at 11:04 pm
I think I’m on record as having admitted it Ren. And again here, by saying snipes and jibes. That you can’t see the difference between what we ALL do (snipes and jibes) and what you do, is seriously seriously frightening.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 11:14 pm
I for one am totally sick of her attacks.
It is leverage, as she refuses to stop doing it of her own accord.
Hell, her first post was anti-radicalfeminism. I’m not even through the first month and Pony already has a spot.
So far, her first month of the blog looks like it has the customary 25% radbashing.
Besides, as I said, all information is, with the exception of “Miriam”, by her own postings and uploadings to the internet. (Miriam was on her blog in the comments) As I said, being an out of control narcissist does have its disadvantages. I merely collate and highlight in handy format.
stormy // April 25, 2007 at 11:34 pm
Results are in for the first month of RE’s blog.
A total of 13 posts, two were anti-radicalfeminism (general), two were anti-radicalfeminists (one general, one specific).
That is 31%.
I shame the Henchwoman.
This is NOT just an occasional attack on radical feminists or radical feminism, but the majority subject of her blog.
I haven’t even analysed all the comments yet, that can wait until another day. But even in the first month the posse were getting a taste for it.
Arantxa // April 25, 2007 at 11:43 pm
People usually desist when rewards are withdrawn. As long as we are willing to host comments from persons who are invested in derailing online discussions between feminist we are going to have this problem – the problem being our willingness to engage with those who seek to disrupt or, rather, our inability to lay down boundaries. That’s how I see it.
chasingmoksha // April 25, 2007 at 11:47 pm
In a weird narcissistic bizarre world, radical feminists have become the archetypal stand- in for the Catholic Priests, the archetypal Catholic Priest before he became the archetypal child molester. Long ago, okay not that long ago, perhaps circa 1975, the demonization of women was the fixation of the power she has in her potential sex appeal, her alluring and mystical seducing powers. Therefore, the archetype of the woman attempting to seduce the Catholic priest became an archetype. Since Catholic Priests are no longer the object of this archetypal woman’s seduction, hence validating the sexual appeal of said narcissistic woman, thus making her the number one most desired Helen of Troy woman in the land, she must focus her aim at another more impenetrable (no pun intended) target, —Radical Feminists. If the narcissist sex positive female seduces Radical feminists, she has in fact conquered the unconquered and can claim her title. If the radical feminists tell her what she is doing is okay, she is affirmed. Until then she roams the dusty hallow hallways shooting arrows at any and all suspecting and unsuspecting targets hoping that one may reap the crown.
Engaging in psycho-babble literature type b.s. is so fun. HAH!
Yes I agree, Arantxa, ignoring is best. I now regret adding to the attention.
RenegadeEvolution // April 25, 2007 at 11:50 pm
Stormy-
I am going to work now. I will ponder your ultamatium.
delphyne // April 25, 2007 at 11:56 pm
“the problem being our willingness to engage with those who seek to disrupt or, rather, our inability to lay down boundaries. That’s how I see it.”
I see it that way too.
stormy // April 26, 2007 at 12:31 am
“the problem being our willingness to engage with those who seek to disrupt or, rather, our inability to lay down boundaries. That’s how I see it.”
Yup.
exangelena // April 26, 2007 at 2:05 am
octagalore:
“Why, exactly, is it bad to profit from one’s attributes, physical or otherwise?”
Because women are constantly judged and criticized for our bodies. Via misogyny and the patriarchy we are reduced to ONLY our bodies. If someone treats me well because he thinks that I look hot, then I am accepting being evaluated and indeed valued on my body alone. (And yes, there’s a difference between someone thinking that you look hot and that you have a good personality.)
With men, it’s different, because they’re assumed to have more going on than just their bodies, looks are probably the icing on the cake *shrugs*. I’ll admit that I don’t know a lot about disability issues, so I won’t attempt to say much about that.
I’m stealing a comment courtesy of LMYC at IBTP via Genderberg
“Babs, your story makes me think of why I won’t take advantage of what I look like, and why I think that the only answer to the following qusetion:
“Can’t I wear short skirts to work to get a promotion and still be a feminist?”
is NO.
‘”Once you take sexism and the male “birthright” to classify women by fuckability and make it work in your favor, you have a vested interest in keeping it around. Period. Full stop. You are selling arms to the occupiers. If (don’t laugh out loud but bear with me here) men ever stop using sexist standards to measure a woman’s human worth, your standard of living will drop and you’ll have to work a little harder — real work, actually intellectually distinguishing yourself — to get ahead. You might have to show real ROI figures to your boss, you might have to work harder on your accounts, perform your work better, if you can’t just flash a little leg and get ahead.
That means that you will begin to regard feminism, equality, and other women as your enemies.”
And as for my semantic choices? I don’t agonize over my comments and I’m not an English major, so sometimes, like the “girl” comment, it’s a false alarm. I’m not trying to make a statement.
shannon // April 26, 2007 at 2:34 am
I’m against outing. Please don’t out anybody! And please be nice to the mentally ill! I’m going to be out here freaking out now!
shannon // April 26, 2007 at 2:36 am
Oh yea, and the shit stirrers, please don’t stir any shit. This causes big problems and stuff! I think I’ve regressed totally!
belledame222 // April 26, 2007 at 3:10 am
Jesus fucking Christ.
Stormcloud: you’re not well. Seriously: you think someone “slagging off radfems” is sufficient excuse to make trouble for them in their -personal- life? -Outing.- Like, as in, stalking.Like, as in, what a whole bunch of women bloggers are being threatened with. Like as in what pretty much everyone has agreed is explicitly -not- okay.
Witchy: you okay with this? I seem to remember you explicitly saying that you were NOT behind “outing” the last time the subject came up; I can dig up -that- quote, at least, as long as we’re digging.
This shit isn’t funny anymore. Stirred or unstirred.
Mr. Morgan // April 26, 2007 at 4:29 am
“ultamatium”
I are serious cat, this is serious thread.
octogalore // April 26, 2007 at 4:30 am
Adding another strong opposition to outing. There is no justification for that. Refusal to engage is one thing. Trying to counter bark with bite, where the bark was an emotional reaction without real teeth but the bite could be deadly, is just not kosher.
octogalore // April 26, 2007 at 5:08 am
Exangelena, all very well stated. However, profiting from attributes is not equivalent to relying on, or even trading on, those attributes to get ahead professionally. I’m talking about the natural result of when someone is attracted to someone else, male or female. Have you treated men, or women if that’s your direction, differently based on this? I’d be surprised if not. Similarly, in a job context even, there are situations where you may get a different result based on physical presentation. That’s a different situation from deliberately showing skin to advance, which I agree isn’t a very feminist thing to do, or even a very effective one for long-term success.
I’m a big proponent of women being able to point to the scoreboard when necessary, and by scoreboard I mean revenues, not T&A. I make pitches to clients frequently and believe me, when it comes to justifying why they should use our firm, I haul out my deal record, not my tits. But if presenting a certain way helps clients envision how we’d present to potential sources of business for them, I’m certainly not going to tell them they can’t look at that as a factor. In your case, you’ll never know whether being slim, well-groomed, able-bodied, etc. are factors in your eventual employment, and I hope you don’t delve too hard into this.
exangelena // April 26, 2007 at 6:38 am
octagalore:
“I’m talking about the natural result of when someone is attracted to someone else, male or female. Have you treated men, or women if that’s your direction, differently based on this? I’d be surprised if not.”
Quoth Heartless Bitches International:
“Does the sight of an incredibly handsome man turn you off, because too many of them have room-temperature IQ’s, and obnoxious or non-existent personalities?”
I worked in retail for over a year and I made a lot of money off of it. I’ll be up front that it was very important I had to dress “nicely” (and sometimes in a prescribed uniform), but it wasn’t about T&A. There were lots of women at both places I worked who were much older or heavier or plainer than me, but if they dressed up well and did their job, that was fine.
In my current job which has nothing to do with appearance, I find it slightly annoying that my co-workers who dress trendier and are prettier and thinner than me sometimes get treated better.
Sorry for derailing.
I don’t know about the latest blog wars, or about all the stalking and threats and outing, so I’m in the dark here for the most part.
Arantxa // April 26, 2007 at 8:03 am
I’ll enlighten you, Exangelena. There is a certain double standard applied by anti-feminists whereby all the nasty stuff they visit upon us is easily justified and excusable whereas anything feminists express that is less than polite is called ‘threats’, ’stalking’, ‘outing’, ‘hate speech’ etc.
witchywoo // April 26, 2007 at 9:04 am
BD – you’re quite right, I’m not a supporter of ‘outing’ and I can point you directly to the comment you’re thinking of if you like, to save you digging.
I see you’re wheeling out the old “unwell” assessment again. You do that quite a lot. Why is that? (That’s a question about your response – not about the things that provoke it.)
“This shit isn’t funny anymore.”
At last! This shit has never been “funny”. Has the penny finally dropped now?
fannyblood // April 26, 2007 at 9:39 am
“you may or may not see me mention when ranting about viciousness on “your” side and all that other lovely stuff. ”
Vicious? RE, that is a slight exaggeration of the truth wouldn’t you agree? I have been sarcastic but VICIOUS? That is a LIE.
Kim // April 26, 2007 at 10:03 am
Is Ren being blackmailed?
“Stop writing anti-rad fem posts or I shall release information I found on the web that you likely don’t want others to see?”
How far DOES this threat go and who’s next?
If I write a thread questioning the actions of the radical feminist blogsphere, might you go digging on me as you’ve made it clear you don’t care for me either? Or AP? Or Octo? One by one, threaten anyone who’s written a post you don’t like with stalking them online and post these findings?
Then what — call my job?
Post my street addy?
I need to know what sort of blackmailing is happening here.
This is getting WAY out of hand, folks.
I understand there are sensitive issues at hand and tempers are running high, but I think everyone needs to take a deep breath here.
v // April 26, 2007 at 1:41 pm
all this stuff about outing is so one sided. some of the non radfems have spent months and months saying how the radfems are all middle class spoiled white women, constantly treating us all like unless we out ourselves we have no right to speak let alone be heard. ive seen comment after comment about heart and her past, comment after comment speculating about bea or witchy and their own past and present personal lives. does outing work differently if you force a person to out themselves through constant attack, discrediting, belittling, malicious speculation?
i dont think it does.
Pony // April 26, 2007 at 1:53 pm
Then of course, there are the women posting here who were quite happy to be part of the threat of outing Genderberg sexual abuse and sexual assault survivors, and the feminists posting here who are Genderberg sexual abuse and sexual assault survivors who have had to live with this threat.
Kim // April 26, 2007 at 1:57 pm
Pony: WHO would do that?
I would like to know as that would be a horrible thing to do indeed.
v // April 26, 2007 at 1:58 pm
this whole thread started with andrea. hasnt andrea revealed information from private emails sent to her before? hasnt she passed on information from a private forum before? isnt the deliberate passing on of private information an ‘outing’? but andrea is ‘good people’. uh huh. why all the double standards here?
ive heard about a billion times “women who arent in sex work dont have a right to comment on it”. that, to me, straight away, forces those who are or have been into a position where they are only allowed to speak if they out themselves.
perhaps those who protest any outing of ren should think a little bit harder on their own fucking behaviour here. because outing and attempted outing and the alienation and abuse of women who refuse to out themselves have been going on for months and months.
and then even when women do out themselves the abuse continues. when one woman talked about rape, what came later? laughing and mocking of her, a total discrediting of everything she said cos, hell that girl is damaged. thats why shes a radical feminist, because she is so damaged she has been brainwashed, because her ‘individual’ ‘bad experience’ has fucked her up so much the only identity she has is of victim and the only friends she can make are victims too and the only politics she believes in is ‘victim politics’.
you people are some fucking hypocrites, truly.
Pony // April 26, 2007 at 2:01 pm
And (it’s dawn) by sexual abuse and sexual assault (as the radical feminists know) I mean sex slavery (prostitution and pornograohy) survivors who posted their painful secrets in solidarity with their sisters on Genderberg and are threatened with outing by others posting here.
laurelin // April 26, 2007 at 2:02 pm
v- as usual, you have hit the nail firmly on the head. Thank you.
Pony // April 26, 2007 at 2:14 pm
Just having to say it is so triggering I am sobbing.
I mean sexual abuse, sexual assault, rape and batery, pornography and prostitution survivros whom have had their pain threatened with outing, by this sick grouip, Ren and her friends have happily threatened all these women with outing. Then, added to it with vicious, terrifying implied physical threat.
And you want to know what KIM YOU DESPICABLE piece of exrcrement?
Pony // April 26, 2007 at 2:14 pm
Just having to say it is so triggering I am sobbing.
I mean sexual abuse, sexual assault, rape and batery, pornography and prostitution survivros whom have had their pain threatened with outing, by this sick grouip, Ren and her friends have happily threatened all these women with outing. Then, added to it with vicious, terrifying implied physical threat.
And you want to know what KIM?
shannon // April 26, 2007 at 2:21 pm
I do agree that the insults against the mentally ill do need to stop from the anti rad fem side. Is it really Ok to insult an oppressed group if they are not the type of people you’d like? Now, we should still not out people, even if the anti rad fems have been outing people, insulting people, and generally embarrassing the name of womanhood. Even though it’s hard, we should take the higher road.
shannon // April 26, 2007 at 2:22 pm
Now, Ren, and Belle, is what Pony says true? If so, you should be ashamed of yourselves.
RenegadeEvolution // April 26, 2007 at 2:27 pm
Well, if this is where we are then this is where we are. I can either swear to never say nasty or critical word about radical feminism, or more specifically radical feminists, or even certain radical feminists, and comply with whatever other demands Stormy has now, or later, or whenever, or she will publish the information she has gathered on me for everyone to see, including part of my name, un-edited photos I had stored elsewhere for work reasons (images possibly triggering, contain identifying marks, which would, No Doubt, be used by her Without My Consent and without payment, and which she does not own), and whatever else she’s dug up. In short, she’s blackmailing me, and threatening doing what she can to out me, a tactic known as intimidation, which, if effective, would be coercive and silencing.
How does one respond to that, really? I could say, okay, fine, you win, but I never know when something I might say randomly might cross the line and void the deal. I could say that use of images owned by other people without their consent and really, for no educational purposes whatsoever is more than a little sketchy. I can’t obviously trust her to hold up her side of the bargain now, can I?
I can’t, because frankly, for all my alleged narcissism, sociopathy, so on, so forth, whatever other insults or mental illness’s you want to throw in my general direction, I can’t comprehend doing this to someone else, even if the information was already out there. A lot of information, from home addresses to credit card numbers can be found out there “in the public” domain. I don’t, for lack of a better word, believe in outing people, no matter how much I might dislike them…because those people usually have other people in their lives that I do not know, nor do I know how it would affect them. I’ve even blogged against it, actually. And I’ve never done it or threatened to do it to anyone here.
My violent statement was bad, I get that. Stormy, what you are doing here is a threat. I’ve said previously in this thread that I would lay off the bashing because I have been harsh, and often wrong, over-zealous, mean, vicious, whatever other term you want to use. I said there were three people who I specifically thought had been just as nasty myself. And I think they have. No one here has to agree…hell, I never demanded that anyone agree with me…but that is how I feel about it and what I think, not that it matters what I feel or think, or has it ever for the most part when it comes to this sort of thing, nor would it probably ever matter in the future either, because in the opinions of most folks here…I am the worst, the most guilty party, and one of you has decided these means are okay…and is prepared, rather gleefully, to publish and dig for more.
So now I have Stormy’s Ultimatum, threat, blackmail, coercive means to get me to shut up hanging over my head, right there, in black and white as it were. It’s obvious I can’t trust her. Having gone this far to stop me, I have no reason to think she’s a woman of her word. I am not even claiming the word feminist at this point, I really have no desire to use it, and for all my foul deeds, I’ve never attempted to harm someone by putting them in this position. I discussed the matter with people who do matter to me, people I trust; a good long time friend, the significant other, other folks who know me and how this sort of thing goes, even got a note or two from some decidedly neutral corners regarding the matter…and after the “crap, that is blackmail” sentiments were finished, the primary advice seemed to be… “Well Ren, you can never speak your mind, on anything, or allow you commenters to speak freely without worrying if this woman will be offended and go through with her threat or not, employ the same tactic on others, you can constantly be wondering about it, or you can do your thing, let her spill what she’s got, most of which, widely known or not, was public, even though she has no right or legal claim to display your photos, and see if she keeps digging, at which point, make it a legal issue,” or I could “just walk away”.
But I am not sure if I can just walk away at this point, hell, I am not sure if I can do either. I’ve never been big on threats, blackmail, and attempted silencing and intimidation to start with. I’ve never threatened to out someone in any way because it’s a rotten thing to do not just to the person, but the people in their lives as well, and I can never know when Stormy would just decide for one reason or another to do it anyway, and I cannot take or trust her at her word…not now, not any time ever again. How do I just walk away when at this point, no matter what she might say, I can never know what thing might be said, which will be attributed to me and an attack on “radical feminists” and she will do what I suspect she is planning on doing anyway? There are no assurances for me, whatsoever, that Stormy would keep up her side of the bargain. None at all.
I said I would lay off on bashing rad feminism and radical feminists, but if anything and everything I ever say is held to a standard of guilt or innocence by a woman who thinks this is all fine and dandy, I’d live in fear of ever offering my opinion again, and that is not fair, it is not right, no matter how much anyone disagrees or what nasty things they say.
I don’t think women, even me, should have to live under fear of a threat. You are making that happen, personally, right now.
So, I guess this is where I stand on the matter, because a lot of people are right and this has just gotten out of hand: I won’t personally say word one to or about another radical feminist blogger unless asked for my opinion or invited to comment in her space. If linked or quoted, I do think I have the right to give my side or defend myself. Large feminist/women’s issues, I do think I have a right to comment or write about them or critique/analyze them, but I will avoid bashing. Books and noted authors/speakers, I think I should be able to do the same, but I will avoid bashing them. I am not responsible for the attitudes and words of those who comment on my blog, those words and attitudes belong to them, and I have never claimed to run a women’s only/safe space. I have the right to talk about my job and defend my choice to do it. I also won’t delete anything I’ve said previously, because erasing it does nothing, but I will refrain from personal attacks/ the “bashing” of radical feminists in the future…because really, it gets us where? Here. I will, however, for the record, state that I disagree with the threat of outing anyone, because it causes them fear, and affects not only them, but other people in their lives. I can’t trust you to be a woman of your word, Stormy, none of “us” can. Would you like it if some men, who are often bashed on Radical Blogs, did something like this to you? If I, or someone from UK feminist circles or anywhere, did it to you? Would any of you? Point is, I suppose, I will refrain from “bashing”, but I am not going to let you silence me via threats and black mail, but I will do what I’ve said here and hope that I you honestly think about your tactics here and how you would like it if they were applied to you. I will also be posting this, and linking the thread…after all, everyone is standing by what they’ve said here, yes? I personally suspect you will go ahead and do it anyway, that other than stopping my blog and deleting the whole thing nothing would satisfy you (after all, you’ve been a bit vague about what exactly it is that you wanted.)
But if you back off, then, sure, I am done. I won’t be tearing any Radical Feminist up for their actions, even if it might be warranted. I will blog about Other Things. You will not see a “radical feminist/radical feminism” post out of me again. If those terms are agreeable to you, let me know. If not, let me know, and so be it.
After all, you have no real need to pay attention to anything that I say anyway, I am no longer claiming to be a feminist blogger.
Pony- I’ve never threatened to out or outed anyone. Anything I’ve posted from Genderberg was sent to me by a Genderberg member and was about me directly. It’s happened on two occasions. If you want to say others of my group have threatened to do this, fine. Give names of the guilty and question them, but I am not one of them. I’ve never been apart of Genderberg, I’ve never outed or threatened to out anyone from that forum or any similar to it. You do know, I am fairly certain, that I myself am a victim of physical abuse…there are photos on my blog, actually…it didn’t come at the hands of a man, but it came nonetheless. I do actually feel pain, all kinds of it, and now I am in the threatened position. I’ve never leveled this sort of a threat at anyone. Not you, not Sam, not any Radical Feminist out there. I have not. So don’t blame me for something I have not done.
Shannon- See my above statement to Pony. Nor do I make a habit of bashing people for having mental illnesses. You might also note who throughout this thread has been accused of/bashed for allegedly being insane?
Anything else, anyone?
Kim // April 26, 2007 at 2:36 pm
“And you want to know what KIM YOU DESPICABLE piece of exrcrement?”
Okay, this has gone way too far.
I NEVER ASKED YOU DESCRIBE WHAT/ASKED YOU TO SPEAK OF THINGS THAT UPSET YOU.
I would never, ever, do that.
I asked “Who,” has threatened to leak private information about this, as to me that would be horrible and I would want to know so I could avoid these people.
Why am a piece of shit for asking that?
WHAT is the matter with you, Pony?
My God — if it makes you feel better, I’m nearly shaking at your anger and that fact that I’ve just been called A” DESPICABLE PIECE OF EXCRETMENT” by someone I don’ t even know.
Talk about “triggering.” Those of you who know me also know I’ve got my own issues.
This anger spewed at me triggers my own issues and it’s not a good idea for me to hang around here a second longer.
This is way too upsetting for me.
I am officially out of this, for my own health.
I would appreciate it if I was not discussed and I would greatly appreciate being left alone at my blog or where I may choose to comment.
Thank you in advance for honoring this request.
Pony // April 26, 2007 at 2:44 pm
Any comment about mental illness is stating fact, not ridiculing. Fact, because reference to mental illness regarding Ren Ev comes right off her blog. So please stop conflating an out there archived by google statement of FACT made by Ren Ev, with ridicule. Nothing anyone says about Ren Ev here has come from anywhere but her own keyboard.
Pony // April 26, 2007 at 2:49 pm
Give me a fucking break Kim. I’ll add dishonest, disingenuous and incapable of seeing anything but your own hangnail in comparison to the real and possible incurable wounds you and your friends have caused. I hope you learn from this finally, that what you’ve been doing on your blog and at Ren Ev’s especially, is indeed despicable. No you get no break from me, for what you’ve been part of, quite happily and proudly, right up until today.
Liz // April 26, 2007 at 2:49 pm
V, I think I have to agree with you – I’ve noticed that pro-porn/MRA’s etc actually speculate about the private lives of rad-fems and feminists. I don’t think I’ve noticed any speculating (about real names, outing etc) going on with rad-fems, in fact I think that we are much more aware of the harm that ‘outing’ can do. I think Stormy is probably talking about damaging information that she may have gathered rather than name/addresses etc. Perhaps?
Also, Chasingmoksha – I am quite sure you haven’t been stirring anything or have said anything to ren ev, so I really don’t know why ren ev has such a grudge. She just seems to generally be against radfems. The philosophy, the ideas behind it. And I think she has been very vitriolic and nasty about a lot of people, constantly, throughout her blogging career.
Although its admirable to perhaps feel she sh0uld stick up for certain people, at the same time, its not right to take a personal crusade against everyone. I do think she maybe wants more followers, more people to read her site etc, to agree with her.
I have been accused of being a fence sitter, and I’m sorry, just because I choose not to constantly get involved in either side’s anger, doesn’t mean that I don’t notice all the comments and feel angry/hurt myself.
I know there has been some nastiness from both sides, but like Stormy says, she took down certain posts and has apologised. I don’t see RenEv attempting to smooth things over by taking down posts and apologising on her blog.
Yes, she can do what she likes with her blog, but I remain very sceptical about her willingness to apologise, especially when she allows some VERY nasty comments through from trolls and MRA’s, despite my bringing this up in the post she made about Charlie (her ladsmags pics) and the slideshow.
If anything, her blog is a fantastic example of how much misogyny and vitriol there is out there for feminists and radical feminism. I’ve felt very very hurt and angry about a lot of the comments she allows through and about a lot of the posts she has made about people I respect and think are important in the rad-fem blogosphere, even if occasionally they say things I may not always agree with.
We don’t always have to agree, yunno? Just as long as we agree on the specifics (ie. pornstitution harms women, and so on). Fannyblood – I notice that you are just a generally sarcastic person, and the things that you say often come from a genuinely curious place (like the comments you have tried to get thru at andreas asking how her viewpoint has changed so quickly).
Witchy – I do think Andrea has a few problems, especially since she has been leaking information given to her/said to her in confidence. I don’t think her definition of feminism is one that I agree with, it has a lot of kinks. Like, you don’t need to feel you have to change everything about yourself. You can examine these things, and then maybe move on and accept the reasons you might do these particular things.
I like make-up, and I have said a few times on my blog that I use it generally to express myself in a certain way, to create moods etc. I don’t feel uncomfortable wearing my own skin, but many women do and can’t leave the house without makeup on.
That is part of what we want to change – to help women feel comfortable in their own bodies, to not bow down to fascist body standards. I have felt uncomfortable a few times examining my own privilege and my habits, but have come to peace with many of them, and yet feel radical feminism is important.
Well…sorry for the massively long comment!
v // April 26, 2007 at 2:50 pm
yeh, ren, i got to say – that was a totally manipulative speech that completely bypassed accepting any fucking responsibility whatsoever for the way you personally, let alone any of your friends, have made any of us feel. apparently only how you think, what you feel, matter. fuck the rest of us eh.
i love how you’ve taken actual actions of outing and victimisation of radfems, mostly at this point the private information taken from genderberg and sent to you and others, plus the outright lies such as that witchy would ever ever call any woman a whore, and the forcing people to out themselves or be silenced, and the humiliation of women who do out themselves, the constant picking over of every detail of our lives we have been brave enough to reveal (and here im really thinking of heart because shit people, you have raked through her life details and talked and talked and talked about them, for weeks and weeks, mocking her, talking about how fucked up she is, speculating as to her motives by constantly referring to whatever youve dug up, all that crap). and actually ive seen some of you (plural) bully other commenters apart accusing them of being heart in disguise. but thats not outing! are you all so dense?
all those above are actual attacks on radfems perpetrated over and over again by ‘your side’, but somehow you, ren, just tried to spin it round into how fucking victimised you are because someone finally threatened to do to you what you lot have been doing for months and months.
belledamme, ffs, you comment about a hundred times daily everywhere and are proud of your dossier of information on all the radfems. if ever anyone wants to chuck out an accusation, you’re there with your little book, pulling out quotes from threads far and wide and older than the hills. what stormy has said she’d do is exactly what you already do. why the double standards? you people kick up a fuss when andreas old posts are quoted, but you dont treat any radfems with the respectful behaviour you expect. you expect special treatment and thus far youve been getting it.
Pony // April 26, 2007 at 2:55 pm
You are so without any shred of conscience or understanding of the pathology of your behaviour RenEV that there is no point, as is evidenced in this whole thread, in trying to discuss what you have done with you.
RenegadeEvolution // April 26, 2007 at 2:58 pm
V:
I’ve applogized a few times, here and elsewhere, and the response has been it doesn’t matter.
I never said witchy called anyone a whore, that comment did not come from me.
I’ve said I will stop bashing radical feminists/radical feminism, and I will. I was under the impression that is what Stormy and others wanted? I’ve agreed to do it.
And I personally have never outed anyone from genderberg.
Liz // April 26, 2007 at 3:00 pm
Also – I know certain people don’t like me offering support to people they consider ‘on the other side’. I will say right here and now – it really is my decision who I offer my support to, because we are human beings and if you feel a certain way about things, then you are allowed to act on them occasionally. I would do the same for a rad fem, as I have for AP, despite the things she has said, or will say. I’ve given my support to Laura before because I feel that she has been quite misunderstood a few times. She dances to her own tune, as do I – and I think it’s interesting to have your own take on particular things. It’s refreshing to read the things that she writes, whether or not you agree with them.
RenegadeEvolution // April 26, 2007 at 3:01 pm
Pony: Let’s leave pathology out of it for a moment. Fact is I have been attributed with saying a lot of things I’ve not said. Other people have said them. I am being accused of doing many things I’ve not done. Other people have done them. I have repeatedly owned up to what I have said and done. I have also agreed to stop bashing you. Me saying “I didn’t do/say that” isn’t bashing.
v // April 26, 2007 at 3:11 pm
Ren
“I’ve applogized a few times, here and elsewhere, and the response has been it doesn’t matter.”
No, the response has been that your apologies lack sincerity, or sometimes even that they lack an apology.
“I never said witchy called anyone a whore, that comment did not come from me.”
No, it came from Andrea, who is as a liar.
“And I personally have never outed anyone from genderberg.”
You took private information that was stolen from genderberg and sent to you, and discussed it publicly, on your blog. I think you have posted some of it up havent you? Without names maybe, but noone is under any illusion who said what.
You have done this Ren, and you wont fucking cop to it. And thats why noone is taking your apologies sincerely, because you just refuse to see what you have done that might cause anybody to want an apology for in the first place.
Pony // April 26, 2007 at 3:15 pm
You have said, on your blog, which mental illnesses you have. Period. You have said it.
You are the orchestrator of threatening other women, vulnerable other women, related to Genderberg, and not related to Genderberg. For some time, but this last with Andrea, or whoever I don’t know exactly who, was of your making. I actually feel sorry for Kim and Andrea and a couple others who have been manipulated into being part of this unconsciounable yes unconscionable in the true meaning of the word, behaviour.
RenegadeEvolution // April 26, 2007 at 3:19 pm
I said directly above that two statements from genderberg, which were about me, are on my blog. I would say that is an admittance to having done so. I “copped to it” right there. One of those statements was not exactly pleasant, the other was an outright erronous speculation, both mentioned me by name. They were sent to me, I posted them. Copped to, right here, and above.
And I cannot make anyone feel anything about my level of sincerity. I’ve admitted I’ve done wrong. Flat out. I Have Done Some Shitty Things. I’ve applogized for many of them. I have also agree to stop bashing rad fems.
It’s all right there, in black and white.
RenegadeEvolution // April 26, 2007 at 3:24 pm
Pony:
Yep, I have, on my very own blog. I am a diagnosed anti-social. With OCD, and sure enough, one psychologist in my youth suggested I might be a sociopath. A few have disagreed since, but said yep, probably anti-social, certainly mid-range OCD.
And I would like proof of how I’ve managed to orchestrate all of this behavior of other women? Andrea, Kim, whomever else think, write, and speak for themselves. I’ve forced no one to do anything.
v // April 26, 2007 at 3:24 pm
who sent them to you ren?
RenegadeEvolution // April 26, 2007 at 3:27 pm
V: why should I tell you that? enough digging has been done through my comment sections apparently that you all should have that answer. I don’t believe in “outing”.
v // April 26, 2007 at 3:34 pm
well, you seem to believe that you were entitled to information from a private forum because you got a mention, and that you were then entitled to post it up in public and discuss it publicly.
i reckon the people who were outed by you in that way have a right to know who it was that originally stole those private posts and passed them on, and i actually think every one of us who is a member of genderberg has a right to know who it was and what else they have been leaking out. because it is supposed to be a private, safe space for us.
v // April 26, 2007 at 3:41 pm
and yes, i do believe it was andrea, because she has been caught doing exactly that in the past. but there is always a possibility it is someone else.
are you going to tell me that this dishonest, abusive person, deserves your protection and silence more than we deserve some sort of safe space where we can discuss abuse as well as other issues?
v // April 26, 2007 at 3:42 pm
i mean ren – you just spent paragraphs and paragraphs calling stormy dishonest and questioning whether she can be trusted, but here you are protecting the identity of someone we all know is dishonest and cant be trusted. because its different when you do it, right?
this is joke.
RenegadeEvolution // April 26, 2007 at 3:45 pm
V: Do I deserve outing? No one does. And I said, the information is available, but I don’t feel the need to hand it to you. I don’ t even KNOW the person, as it were, they posted the info, this most recent bit, the one from the private forum, in comments somewhere on my blog. I do not believe Andrea was even ALLOWED on g’berg at the time.
exangelena // April 26, 2007 at 3:47 pm
Arantxa – ok, thanks, I’m a little less confused now
v- “some of the non radfems have spent months and months saying how the radfems are all middle class spoiled white women”
Can we throw that on the pile of strawfeminists to be burned? Please? Because I’m accused of it all the time.
I can’t say that I visit sex positive feminist blogs terribly often, let alone comment there (wouldn’t want to troll and probably not wanted there anyway). However the few times I have, I have often seen approving comments from nonfeminist or even sexist men applauding the take-downs of radfems. If you are feminist, that doesn’t seem like a good thing at all. If I had a radical feminist blog and I criticized raunch culture or sex positive feminism, and a bunch of fundamentalist men showed up approvingly and called sex positive feminists “sluts”, I wouldn’t approve of that and neither would most radical feminists, I suspect.
shannon // April 26, 2007 at 3:49 pm
Ren, about the mental illnesses I meant in general. Now, the truth is that we can only build trust through our actions. If we try to be trustworthy and stand by our promises, perhaps people will trust us. But on the other hand, some may never trust you. Then again, knowing that you have worked hard towards integrity has to be worth something. I apologize for linking to ren’s post about genderberg on my blog. I was stupid and thoughtless. However, we can all seek to make amends, even if we can’t take back what we have done.
v // April 26, 2007 at 3:49 pm
you want to give a link to that please?
because if youre really that concerned about outing, youll help us make sure that our space at genderberg is private and is safe, and that we arent under constant threat of outings like this that purposefully silence us and abuse out trust.
RenegadeEvolution // April 26, 2007 at 3:58 pm
v; you know, if I had some assurances that would keep me from being outed, I might do it. If I had some assurances that would keep me from worrying that similar things might not be done to any other person, belle, amber, kim, so on, I might do it. but I don’t have those. today I got this in my comments:
“Anonymous said…
Talk about silencing.
I’m sorry that they’ve made you their latest victim.
I know these people and your information has already been passed around. It will pop up somewhere anyway. This is what they do.”
Could it be someone just trying to stir shit and fan flames, sure. But it could also be true, and I don’t know for certain which is fact and which is fiction. Could be that I am already outed, as it were, and it will only get spread around and worse. People are trying to silence me (and others, by example) as it were right now. And I DON’T LIKE or AGREE with any of it.
Make sense? At all?
Shannon- No problem, you’ve done nothing to me, I have no issue with you.
v // April 26, 2007 at 4:05 pm
well here i am arguing with you ren, a regular at genderberg no less, and i can tell you, if that info is doing the rounds, i havent seen it. i know that a couple of people discuss you amongst themselves, in private, by email i imagine, and i have no doubt that you and your friends do similar.
but if it helps, at all, no ‘outing’ info about you is being sent round, or if it is i havent seen it.
still, at least i know your priorities now. you want to make some sort of bargain, that in return for our safety at genderberg you are given some sort of special treatment?
nice. real nice.
RenegadeEvolution // April 26, 2007 at 4:10 pm
No V, thats not it. Not at all. I think outing is wrong. Period. I don’t expect special treatment from you or anyone else, but if people are willing to do this to me, some of them knowing I’ve been outed in other ways by other people and how Great That Was, you can BET I am concerned that if folks are willing to do it to me, they might also be more than willing to do it to others “who go to far” when the mood suits them. People who blog a lot more about their families, and personal lives, and such things. I actually take YOU at your word when you say it’s not out there, as it were. But no, this isn’t about special treatment for me, it is about this sort of thing NOT happening to anyone.
delphyne // April 26, 2007 at 4:13 pm
I also haven’t seen information about RE being passed around, nor would I want to. I agree with almost everything v has said here, thank you for saying it so clearly v.
However I do think that Ren deserves assurances that her personal information will not be outed, whether it is in the public domain already or not. She deserves it full stop, and shouldn’t have to need to use the info she has about the genderberg leak as a bargaining chip. If her and her buddies have been bandying around personal information about rad fems, the answer isn’t to threaten to do the same to them but to confront the original behaviour.
Pony // April 26, 2007 at 4:20 pm
You are the one who has been threatening to out. Private information about you going around. Then I’ve been left out of the loop. I doubt it.
But that you have been made to think about this ONLY when you have seen what you have already done MIGHT be done to you is a huge “object lesson” to refer to the title of this thread. An object lesson you still don’t seem to get.
I’m finished here now though I may read. I can only hope with time, you will eventually get it.
stormy // April 26, 2007 at 4:25 pm
RE:
Perfect, except for the loophole that you will allow the posse to continue.
This was exactly what was wanted, your agreement to stop doing it.
Ignoring the dispersions as to my trustworthiness, because as several commenters have guessed, it was largely EXTREME scrutiny of posts and post content. That microscopic scrutiny you would not be able to handle RE, because so many, let’s call them, anomalies, exist. It was to be a magnification of what you have been doing to radfem bloggers over the last 10 months — a taste of your own medicine. Poetic justice. In spite of your little twist, it is not victimisation when a target strikes back at the aggressor, it is payback. Did you (and your posse) really think you could continue to harass, stalk, and ridicule radfem bloggers indefinitely, without some sort of retaliation?
It is now a case of each group staying on their respective sides of the invisible cyberwall I have just constructed, with both sides ignoring each other.
RE, you have made the agreement, now stick to, and stop trying to wiggle out or find loopholes.
v // April 26, 2007 at 4:27 pm
“No V, thats not it. Not at all. I think outing is wrong. Period.”
And I agree. Its why I personally havent said shit about andreas previous antics, when i really fucking wanted to at times, and then I got so fucking fucked off seeing her lie about witchy like that.
But that is what I am asking you for right now ren. I dont care how much you or anyone else might mock it, genderberg is a private space where those of us who are anti porn can gather and talk about whatever we need to, and that space needs to be safe for us to be able to do that. Im really fucking appalled and gutted that anything was taken from there and emailed around. It doesnt matter how many posts you got or what they were about, right now what we have is a bunch of people, including me, worried about what we might have said about ourselves, not about you, and what else might have been saved off or sent off or fuck knows what.
So Im asking you again, please, who sent you those emails? You have to know if they did it to us they arent the sort of person you can trust either, surely?
And I do remember that you went through an outing recently. It was fucked up and i felt for you. Im asking for you to have a bit of empathy for me and for the rest of us too.
Pony // April 26, 2007 at 4:32 pm
I’ve just read something posted at the same time as my last comment.
Ren Ev: post it. Let’s see the full comment and ISP number.
Post it.
delphyne // April 26, 2007 at 4:35 pm
I’d appreciate it if you’d tell us who it was as well RE.
RenegadeEvolution // April 26, 2007 at 4:41 pm
Pony- I’d need to know what you’re talking about?
RenegadeEvolution // April 26, 2007 at 4:44 pm
Stormy:
I cannot and will not tell OTHER PEOPLE what they can and cannot say, “my posse” or otherwise. I said I won’t, so I won’t. I am speaking for NO ONE ELSE. But this sort of thing isn’t justice, it’s vindictive, plain and simple. And if you expect me to tell other women, “my posse” or whatever, not to say what they want? Forget it. Out away. I can’t MAKE them do anything, nor would I try to. You made this “about me”, so leave “them” out of it. They get their free speech and say even over me being outed ANY day of the WEEK.
V, Delphyne: Well, see, I would email V, if you are cool with that, the link you’ve asked for, but now, after reading Stormy’s assertion that my Outing Won’t happen only if I tell other women what to do, what to say, so on, and silence them…no. I said I would not bash rad-fems, and I won’t, but I am not imposing standards on other people, its not worth me not being outed. If me stopping it is good enough, then fine. If not? No. And I know you’d both appreciate it. I know Genderberg deserves it’s privacy. So do I. So does any other woman (even those in my so-called posse). I’d need Stormy’s assurances that MY stopping will stop her outing, and giving up that link would, well, get her to not pull this with “other women”.
I think that is fair….I’ve had it with this ugliness, and I think a lot of you have as well.
v // April 26, 2007 at 4:47 pm
ren – your latest post, in only eleven comments, has notched up a number of insults already, mostly aimed at stormy, and including the following blatantly misogynist and anti feminist comments:
“off her fucking head”
“fems, esp radfems, are extremely Stalinesque in silencing dissent.”
“Fuck her right in the ear”
“harpies”
are you even awake ren? this argument at witchys is 350+ comments long and none of it is as misogynist and anti feminist and dehumanisiong and insulting as just eleven comments on your blog manage to be about us.
are you even listening?
RenegadeEvolution // April 26, 2007 at 4:51 pm
V: I just said I would stop, and I have. I have ALSO said I am NOT in the business of telling OTHER people what to say. People are UPSET by the outing topic, period. I can’t MAKE people say or not say things. I CAN do so with myself. And I have NEVER, EVER been a fan of censorship or telling others what to say, directed at me, or anyone else, and that is the way I run MY blog. Hell, there has been PLENTY of hate thrown at me there too, and I post it, because I believe in free speech. Even if I will moderate my own.
delphyne // April 26, 2007 at 4:57 pm
I’ve got to say the irony of you talking about freedom of speech when Heart and others were given such a hard time for what ChasingMoshka said to AP on her blog is hard to miss RE. Heart’s responsible but you’re not. Hey ho.
v // April 26, 2007 at 4:59 pm
i would not want you to censor your blog, myself. that was not my request, ever. what i was trying to do is show you, for all the nasty nasty stuff we are all accused of, its not us doing it, there are threats right there in your comment thread ffs!!
“If they think you we’re bad. Wait, just wait.”
then theres the cyber stalking sort of activity that youre aghast at stormy doing to you that you (plural) does to us all the fucking time!
“I just read the entire thread over at Witchy’s (and made a snapshot copy for posterity, too).”
tony kennerson is such a fucking misogynist shit, i cant believe you even consider him a friend.
“fascist absexuals” are we? shows what little you know, muppet.
i cant believe after all this talking you still dont see what is right under your nose. its depressing.
v // April 26, 2007 at 5:00 pm
yeh delphyne, that too, that too. the double standards are totally beyond belief.
Pony // April 26, 2007 at 5:02 pm
Bullshit. You just do not get the disconnect between what you SAY you do, and what you actually DO. You think what you do doesn’t matter, as long as you SAY the opposite.
You SAY you are a supporter of free speech. You are not. You DO what you can to shut down free speech by constant harrassment.and threats.
You’re a complete manipulator and hypocrite, and I can say with surely that what you display here are hallmarks of the mental illnesses you have said you have.
RenegadeEvolution // April 26, 2007 at 5:05 pm
V, D: we don’t need to get back to name calling and who called what whom, where, when, why, whatever. We’ve been there. If you’ve noted, I don’t even have “feminist” anywhere in my blog bio, let alone my title anymore. My blog is no longer a feminist blog. And yeah, I see it. At my place and elsewhere. Once again, my comment thread, I’ve made one comment on it. No bashing. As requested. But why is this suddenly about my comment thread? It’s not a feminist blog anymore. I am not bashing. I’ve done what was requested (and what is reasonable) of me.
Outing?
chasingmoksha // April 26, 2007 at 5:07 pm
Yet Ren is still allowing Lies, LIES, LIES on her blog. I just went there, in the comment section, my name is clearly stated as saying that I have attacked REN. PROVE IT!!!!! I barely knew she existed much less bothered to attack her. Here is a clue, I don’t bother with certain people. Allowing people to lie on your blog REN is just like you saying it. You are allowing the attack.
And it added her friends were attacked by me as well. Prove that too. Who? AP? LMAO! Telling her that her pattern of supporting PORN is not welcome at a femnist site is an attack?
Wow, it just proves how some people either think real attacks or nothing, or they have never felt a real attack.
Self examination=Attack
Self reflection=Attack in their bizzaro porn world.
RenegadeEvolution // April 26, 2007 at 5:07 pm
Thanks for the diagnois, Pony. I am not trying to silence anyone, here or elsewhere. I don’t control what others say nor feel any desire too. You give me way more power than I actually have.
RenegadeEvolution // April 26, 2007 at 5:08 pm
CM: I would also allow you to defend yourself there.
chasingmoksha // April 26, 2007 at 5:10 pm
tony kennerson is such a fucking misogynist shit, i cant believe you even consider him a friend.
Proven by his attacks on women. He is always right there to attack any woman who talks about his precious porn. Plus he lies. He said I attacked Ren, I am waiting for the proof.
RenegadeEvolution // April 26, 2007 at 5:12 pm
CM: I will say this here, and there to Anthony- to the best of my knowledge, you’ve never attacked me or said much in the way of anything to me.
chasingmoksha // April 26, 2007 at 5:13 pm
You don’t get it REN. I don’t want to go to your blog, EVER! So why not try leaving my name out of your blog, including others bringing my name to you. That is how you allow attacks. You did not dispute him when he said I attacked you, therefore you are consenting, agreeing. That is the part you do not get, you refuse to get. I should not have to defend myself at your blog if you did not allow attacks.
RenegadeEvolution // April 26, 2007 at 5:15 pm
I just disputed him, CM.
stormy // April 26, 2007 at 5:16 pm
yeah, yeah RE.
What is the fucking hardship in NOT slagging off radbloggers? Oh, such a major fucking sacrifice you have made — that baaaad Stormy is a censor! Yet in your comments, plainly, is the “OK posse, carry on without me *wink*”.
If you lot actually *need* to slag off radfems, consider a private forum, just don’t keep maintaining and fuelling these fucking blogwars.
You are ranting and raving like I demanded that you give up sex for life. Nope, fuck an entire football team if that takes your fancy.
Now tell me again, what part of “stop slagging off radfem bloggers” do you NOT actually understand?
v // April 26, 2007 at 5:17 pm
whether you define yourself or your blog as feminist isnt my concern ren. what im trying to do is point out the total fucking hypocrisy! i mean stormy has threatened to reveal information she has collected about you that you have already revealed one way or another in public online already. that, to you, is silencing, outing, victimisation. anthony kennerson says he saves all our posts here for ‘posterity’, which means exactly the same thing, but what he is doing is apparently NOT silencing, outing, victimisation. why not? whats the big difference ren? what about all the constant dragging up of comments that ginmar, heart, delphyne, stormy, etc, have made in the years past? how is that any different? what makes it so fucking different when its happening to you?
you know my email i think. its resisterance at yahoo dot co dot uk. i would like for you please to tell me who it is that has outed us at genderberg, and if they sent you anything else, or if you know that they have sent any other information elsewhere so i can try and track that down.
this whole fucking thing is so fucking depressing.
RenegadeEvolution // April 26, 2007 at 5:18 pm
Stormy, I will stop. I won’t tell other people what to say or do.
So, where are we?
stormy // April 26, 2007 at 5:18 pm
[apologies in part, cross posted with RE's concession to pulling up a misogynist commenter]
stormy // April 26, 2007 at 5:21 pm
“So, where are we?”
You and yours leave us alone, we leave you alone.
Amber // April 26, 2007 at 5:22 pm
Newsflash V: there’s no such thing as a private email. Courts have upheld this. Anyone who believes email to be private is ignorant about how the internet works.
Lya Kahlo // April 26, 2007 at 5:23 pm
Just a quick round up – we’re now terrorists, threatening ren with violence.
Apparently it’s true because a few pornstick dudes said it. And their right about everything.
So the hysterical accusations and insults haven’t stopped.
same exact hypocritcal shit, brand new day.
delphyne // April 26, 2007 at 5:23 pm
It is a bit hard on RE that she is taking all the heat here. She’s right that she can’t control her friends and there’s a good number of them who just can’t STFU about rad fems so we could talk about their behaviour too. I don’t think they need any encouragement from RE to do their thing. In fact people like Belledame were trolling rad fem blogs long before RE started hers.
RenegadeEvolution // April 26, 2007 at 5:25 pm
stormy- you know as well as I do no one person can be responsible for the words of others. You issued the outing (you). I said I would stop (me). I will. I am more than happy to leave you and other rad fems alone. Sure, I’d appreciate the same consideration, but that is not the thing here. The information, is. I said I would stop. You asked Me to stop. I will. But I can and will only be responsible for my words, just as in truth, you alone are responsible for yours.
v // April 26, 2007 at 5:30 pm
amber – “Newsflash V: there’s no such thing as a private email. Courts