It's been a battle for far too long
What is my life.
roseredhoofbeat is a member of a feminist Mormon housewife group on Facebook. Despite being neither Mormon nor a housewife, I am also a member, mostly because she invited me, and because there are some legitimately interesting discussions on there. And also so that when she goes kaboom, I can clean up on aisle Katie, as I put it earlier.
So this picture got posted:
Things were going relatively well till a guy who I will hereafter refer to as Team Neckbeard showed up.
Team Neckbeard: I think women's skin is beautiful and I hate seeing it tarnished with tatoos
roseredhoofbeat, who I will hereafter refer to as Katie Kaboom, was not a fan of that comment, and told him so.
Katie Kaboom: That's brilliant, Terry. When you have a women's skin, I am sure you will be thrilled to be able to make the choice not to get it tattooed. I will enjoy the same agency in choosing to do whatever the hell I want with it.
In comes a female white knight, who will be referred to as Misty Goddamnpoint.
Misty Goddamnpoint: Katie, Terry wasn't saying that women shouldn't get tattoos, but that he doesn't like him, which is perfectly valid. Why so vitriolic?
Because that was totally hostile, amirite? Katie responds.
Katie Kaboom: Because my skin is not his skin, and he was not remarking about HIS personal prefrence for his skin, yet women's, therefore mine. It is possessive and inappropriate. He did not remark about men's skin being beautiful and above such "tarnish" or imply it would be ruined, which continues the long and repulsive tradition of men making rules that supposedly put women above men, while restricting what they can or are "supposed" to do. I vehemently dislike the othering of women in this manner.
Very eloquently, I might add. But Team Neckbeard is, well, a neckbeard, and naturally thinks she's one of them angry wimmen who's at war with the world.
Team Neckbeard: Whew! What a beating! Just wait until you give "personal preference" that I don't like. I guess the war is on! Oh and I don't like men's tatoos either!
Well, bless his heart.
The discussion carries on, with people taking jabs at our fearless heroine Katie Kaboom, including people telling her she's overreacting, she's being irrational, telling her she's being vitriolic and hostile for telling this guy that what he said was gross. It's dozens of comments long, and some of them are just colossally stupid. I cannot even with some of them. But several people were taking digs at Katie, and Misty Goddamnpoint was all up IN that discussion, until at last, Katie Kaboom, well, went KABOOM.
Katie Kaboom: Holy fucking shit. Okay. You wanna know what an angry feminist looks like? Break out your smelling salts.
Most of you wouldn't know real feminism if it bit you in the ass. You would not HAVE feminsm as we know and enjoy it if it weren't for first-wavers like Andrew Dworkin. I cannot believe that I have gotten the tone argument, the "feminists look for reasons to be mad" argument, completely misinterpeting the entire idea of privilege and institutional power, and a few others I am too inscenced to even remember the proper names for because it has been YEARS since I had to listen to such BULLSHIT, much less explain it to people. And from other supposed "feminists!" I am FAR from radical. I am FAR from hardcore.
I cannot fucking believe that on a feminist forum, a man leveled a threat against a woman, and not only did not even fucking say anything to defend me, but instead I got ganged up on even more by the other women and men of this forum. Explain to me how this is not threatening, creepy, and completely inappropriate, just in case you missed it:
"What a beating! Just wait until you give "personal preference" that I don't like. I guess the war is on! Oh, and I don't like men's tattoos either!"
How on EARTH does "just wait" not imply he's waiting to give me a "beating" of my own? How on earth is my comment worthy of "declaring war"? SERIOUSLY? I'm supposed to shut up and take that lying down because LOL SILLY WIMMENZ, THE MEN HAVE SPOKEN, SIT DOWN. Can you not see the RAMPANT internalized misogny ALL OVER this whole post? Can you not see the incredible amounts of male privilege being taken advantage of? Can you really, really not see this?
I am literally disgusted right now.
There. That was vitriolic, combative, and had my real attitude. See the difference?
Well said, Katie!
Misty Goddamnpoint Katie, I'm sorry, but I quit paying attention the second you claimed that most of us wouldn't know feminist if "it bit us in the ass."
Sorry, but you don't get to decide who is and is not a feminist according to your qualifications. If you have a problem with something someone says, that's totally fine, but it's not okay to use feminism as a rationale for it and claim that the rest of us just don't know what feminism is. It's presumptuous and rude.
Sigh.Oh, Misty. Bless your fucking heart, you've not got the sense of a dungbeetle fart. And here we see a brief appearance by Misty's friend Chicken Little-Brains!
Chicken Little-Brains: Actually, Katie, I don't see the difference...I feel like that kind of "upset-ness" comes through in a lot of your comments...
I do think the whole "the war is on" crap and all was out of line. I think the person was initially expressing a personal preference for the other gender. You slammed him hard for that right away. Your comment seemed to leave no room for the other person maybe mis-communicating, choosing a wrong word, or whatever else. He was simply not allowed to like womens' skins without tattoos (though I'm sure women are allowed to like men muscular, or bald, or hairy-chested, or whatever else). From my perspective, you have a tendency to jump on something someone said and come down on comments in a very rude/insulting manner. It doesn't enhance dialogue, and it may be what makes people less interested in coming to your rescue. Just my 2 cents.
Okay. Cleanup on Aisle Katie. I HAD to go in there and fix some of this.
Nikki: Chicken, there is a difference between a man saying he finds women without tattoos more attractive and a man saying that tattoos tarnish a woman's skin. The first is, in fact, a personal preference in what he finds attractive in a partner. The second is gross and inappropriate because it implies that women are on a pedestal, something "pure" and untouchable that can be tarnished in the first place, which is every bit as problematic as implying that women are lesser beings. It ties into the Madonna/whore complex.
Misty Goddamnpoint: But what if you think tattoos tarnish anyone's skin and he just happened to be talking about women? At best, it's poor word choice, but intent is everything here and I highly, highly doubt that a participating member of this group would be implying something like that, Nikki.
You have so much to learn, Misty.
Nikki: Well, again, Misty, there's a problem there because REGARDLESS of whether you apply that standard to everyone, it's still implying that "this person is a thing that can be damaged", whether they mean it that way or not. And I find that kind of thinking really disturbing. I don't HAVE any tattoos, but I don't want some person telling me I'm TARNISHED if I get one. I'm still the same person, and MY choices with regards to MY body have no effect on you. Furthermore, intent isn't magical. Let me put it to you like this--let's say you and I are standing there talking and I accidentally trod upon your foot while you're wearing flipflops and I'm wearing the biggest, scariest spike heels you've ever seen. I may not have MEANT to hurt you, but I DID. It doesn't MATTER what someone's intent is. If you do something and someone says, "That hurts me", the correct thing to do is to correct your behavior, to get off their foot, so to speak--not to stand there and tell them that they're misinterpreting your spike heel being driven into their toes.
Misty Goddamnpoint: If you really want to give that much power to a word, be my guest, but I have more important things to be offended by.
Of course you do, that's why you're still arguing with me. Shitfire and damnation, why didn't I realize that?
Misty Goddamnpoint: And if you stepped on my foot and it was an accident, I sure as hell wouldn't post fifty comments berating you for something you didn't even mean to do.
Nikki: First of all, Misty, I was simply explaining WHY Katie is as upset as she is. It's fine if you're not upset by the initial comment or subsequent remarks. But if you want to increase your understanding of feminism, it's important to listen to women talking about feminism, regardless of how angry they are. Sometimes ESPECIALLY because of how angry they are. Furthermore, if I stepped on your foot and then KEPT ARGUING WITH YOU about how I wasn't stepping on your foot...you would be within your right to be angry. :)
She was getting sulky by then. VICTORY.
Misty Goddamnpoint: Nikki, I'm fine with Katie being upset. I'm not fine with her being rude, not allowing for any interpretation of a comment that most of us clearly saw in a very different way and then accusing the rest of us of not knowing what feminism is if it bit us in the ass because we don't see it her way.
Nikki: Lauren, I get why you're upset. You think she was rude. You're allowed to think that. But let's look at what happened, shall we? Katie saw a comment that upset her. She responded and explained why she was upset, and she was a little sarcastic, but frankly, not very hostile at all. She was accused of being vitriolic and hostile, and accused of declaring war. Rather than stopping and thinking about what she was saying, people simply got confrontational. That's not really a good way to have a dialogue. To be perfectly honest, if I said "Hey, this is a problem for me" and was met with "WHY SO HOSTILE?!" when I was not, in fact, being particularly hostile, I'd have a hard time reining in my temper as well, and I have the patience of a damn saint--I work with kids! ;) I think maybe you're feeling a little defensive, and that's okay--it's common in feminist and other social-justice discussions for people to be angry and to not understand each other. Changing society and fighting prejudice isn't easy. :)
Team Neckbeard: I said nothing about a woman being tarnished! I enjoy looking at women's skin and a tatoo doesn't enhance what I like.
Okay, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. You probably have absolutely no idea why what you said was wrong. I will educate you. I will refrain from calling down a divine reckoning of southern asswhooping.
Nikki: Terry, I realize you probably didn't mean anything offensive by your comments, and that you probably don't understand why they were met with hostility. The reason it's problematic for a guy to say things like that is because of male privilege. Men are socialized to think that they're owed women, and that they have the right to determine what is and is not acceptable for the women around them. It's often a very subtle thing, but it's very much present in our society. I mean, you can look at something as simple as most genre fiction--the guy almost always "gets" the girl. And comments like "I enjoy looking at women's skin and a tatoo doesn't enhance what I like." implies that you are somehow owed the opportunity to look at a woman's skin. Again, I realize that you probably didn't even think about it in that context, but that's kind of what social justice is ABOUT--breaking down the subtle prejudicial currents in our social fabric and examining them. It doesn't mean you're a bad guy--it just means you need to think about these things, as do we all. :)
***********************
It ended there. I'm pretty sure that means I won the argument about vagina tattoos. Which, just. How is that even my life? I'm kind of amazed.
And yes, if I sound condescending in places...I was trying to. I was going for that kind of condescension that communicates that you think the person you're talking to is too stupid to find their own ass with a GPS and a team of search and rescue dogs, but is so polite about it you can't do anything but grind your teeth. Never say I don't do nice things for you, roseredhoofbeat.
roseredhoofbeat is a member of a feminist Mormon housewife group on Facebook. Despite being neither Mormon nor a housewife, I am also a member, mostly because she invited me, and because there are some legitimately interesting discussions on there. And also so that when she goes kaboom, I can clean up on aisle Katie, as I put it earlier.
So this picture got posted:
Things were going relatively well till a guy who I will hereafter refer to as Team Neckbeard showed up.
Team Neckbeard: I think women's skin is beautiful and I hate seeing it tarnished with tatoos
roseredhoofbeat, who I will hereafter refer to as Katie Kaboom, was not a fan of that comment, and told him so.
Katie Kaboom: That's brilliant, Terry. When you have a women's skin, I am sure you will be thrilled to be able to make the choice not to get it tattooed. I will enjoy the same agency in choosing to do whatever the hell I want with it.
In comes a female white knight, who will be referred to as Misty Goddamnpoint.
Misty Goddamnpoint: Katie, Terry wasn't saying that women shouldn't get tattoos, but that he doesn't like him, which is perfectly valid. Why so vitriolic?
Because that was totally hostile, amirite? Katie responds.
Katie Kaboom: Because my skin is not his skin, and he was not remarking about HIS personal prefrence for his skin, yet women's, therefore mine. It is possessive and inappropriate. He did not remark about men's skin being beautiful and above such "tarnish" or imply it would be ruined, which continues the long and repulsive tradition of men making rules that supposedly put women above men, while restricting what they can or are "supposed" to do. I vehemently dislike the othering of women in this manner.
Very eloquently, I might add. But Team Neckbeard is, well, a neckbeard, and naturally thinks she's one of them angry wimmen who's at war with the world.
Team Neckbeard: Whew! What a beating! Just wait until you give "personal preference" that I don't like. I guess the war is on! Oh and I don't like men's tatoos either!
Well, bless his heart.
The discussion carries on, with people taking jabs at our fearless heroine Katie Kaboom, including people telling her she's overreacting, she's being irrational, telling her she's being vitriolic and hostile for telling this guy that what he said was gross. It's dozens of comments long, and some of them are just colossally stupid. I cannot even with some of them. But several people were taking digs at Katie, and Misty Goddamnpoint was all up IN that discussion, until at last, Katie Kaboom, well, went KABOOM.
Katie Kaboom: Holy fucking shit. Okay. You wanna know what an angry feminist looks like? Break out your smelling salts.
Most of you wouldn't know real feminism if it bit you in the ass. You would not HAVE feminsm as we know and enjoy it if it weren't for first-wavers like Andrew Dworkin. I cannot believe that I have gotten the tone argument, the "feminists look for reasons to be mad" argument, completely misinterpeting the entire idea of privilege and institutional power, and a few others I am too inscenced to even remember the proper names for because it has been YEARS since I had to listen to such BULLSHIT, much less explain it to people. And from other supposed "feminists!" I am FAR from radical. I am FAR from hardcore.
I cannot fucking believe that on a feminist forum, a man leveled a threat against a woman, and not only did not even fucking say anything to defend me, but instead I got ganged up on even more by the other women and men of this forum. Explain to me how this is not threatening, creepy, and completely inappropriate, just in case you missed it:
"What a beating! Just wait until you give "personal preference" that I don't like. I guess the war is on! Oh, and I don't like men's tattoos either!"
How on EARTH does "just wait" not imply he's waiting to give me a "beating" of my own? How on earth is my comment worthy of "declaring war"? SERIOUSLY? I'm supposed to shut up and take that lying down because LOL SILLY WIMMENZ, THE MEN HAVE SPOKEN, SIT DOWN. Can you not see the RAMPANT internalized misogny ALL OVER this whole post? Can you not see the incredible amounts of male privilege being taken advantage of? Can you really, really not see this?
I am literally disgusted right now.
There. That was vitriolic, combative, and had my real attitude. See the difference?
Well said, Katie!
Misty Goddamnpoint Katie, I'm sorry, but I quit paying attention the second you claimed that most of us wouldn't know feminist if "it bit us in the ass."
Sorry, but you don't get to decide who is and is not a feminist according to your qualifications. If you have a problem with something someone says, that's totally fine, but it's not okay to use feminism as a rationale for it and claim that the rest of us just don't know what feminism is. It's presumptuous and rude.
Sigh.Oh, Misty. Bless your fucking heart, you've not got the sense of a dungbeetle fart. And here we see a brief appearance by Misty's friend Chicken Little-Brains!
Chicken Little-Brains: Actually, Katie, I don't see the difference...I feel like that kind of "upset-ness" comes through in a lot of your comments...
I do think the whole "the war is on" crap and all was out of line. I think the person was initially expressing a personal preference for the other gender. You slammed him hard for that right away. Your comment seemed to leave no room for the other person maybe mis-communicating, choosing a wrong word, or whatever else. He was simply not allowed to like womens' skins without tattoos (though I'm sure women are allowed to like men muscular, or bald, or hairy-chested, or whatever else). From my perspective, you have a tendency to jump on something someone said and come down on comments in a very rude/insulting manner. It doesn't enhance dialogue, and it may be what makes people less interested in coming to your rescue. Just my 2 cents.
Okay. Cleanup on Aisle Katie. I HAD to go in there and fix some of this.
Nikki: Chicken, there is a difference between a man saying he finds women without tattoos more attractive and a man saying that tattoos tarnish a woman's skin. The first is, in fact, a personal preference in what he finds attractive in a partner. The second is gross and inappropriate because it implies that women are on a pedestal, something "pure" and untouchable that can be tarnished in the first place, which is every bit as problematic as implying that women are lesser beings. It ties into the Madonna/whore complex.
Misty Goddamnpoint: But what if you think tattoos tarnish anyone's skin and he just happened to be talking about women? At best, it's poor word choice, but intent is everything here and I highly, highly doubt that a participating member of this group would be implying something like that, Nikki.
You have so much to learn, Misty.
Nikki: Well, again, Misty, there's a problem there because REGARDLESS of whether you apply that standard to everyone, it's still implying that "this person is a thing that can be damaged", whether they mean it that way or not. And I find that kind of thinking really disturbing. I don't HAVE any tattoos, but I don't want some person telling me I'm TARNISHED if I get one. I'm still the same person, and MY choices with regards to MY body have no effect on you. Furthermore, intent isn't magical. Let me put it to you like this--let's say you and I are standing there talking and I accidentally trod upon your foot while you're wearing flipflops and I'm wearing the biggest, scariest spike heels you've ever seen. I may not have MEANT to hurt you, but I DID. It doesn't MATTER what someone's intent is. If you do something and someone says, "That hurts me", the correct thing to do is to correct your behavior, to get off their foot, so to speak--not to stand there and tell them that they're misinterpreting your spike heel being driven into their toes.
Misty Goddamnpoint: If you really want to give that much power to a word, be my guest, but I have more important things to be offended by.
Of course you do, that's why you're still arguing with me. Shitfire and damnation, why didn't I realize that?
Misty Goddamnpoint: And if you stepped on my foot and it was an accident, I sure as hell wouldn't post fifty comments berating you for something you didn't even mean to do.
Nikki: First of all, Misty, I was simply explaining WHY Katie is as upset as she is. It's fine if you're not upset by the initial comment or subsequent remarks. But if you want to increase your understanding of feminism, it's important to listen to women talking about feminism, regardless of how angry they are. Sometimes ESPECIALLY because of how angry they are. Furthermore, if I stepped on your foot and then KEPT ARGUING WITH YOU about how I wasn't stepping on your foot...you would be within your right to be angry. :)
She was getting sulky by then. VICTORY.
Misty Goddamnpoint: Nikki, I'm fine with Katie being upset. I'm not fine with her being rude, not allowing for any interpretation of a comment that most of us clearly saw in a very different way and then accusing the rest of us of not knowing what feminism is if it bit us in the ass because we don't see it her way.
Nikki: Lauren, I get why you're upset. You think she was rude. You're allowed to think that. But let's look at what happened, shall we? Katie saw a comment that upset her. She responded and explained why she was upset, and she was a little sarcastic, but frankly, not very hostile at all. She was accused of being vitriolic and hostile, and accused of declaring war. Rather than stopping and thinking about what she was saying, people simply got confrontational. That's not really a good way to have a dialogue. To be perfectly honest, if I said "Hey, this is a problem for me" and was met with "WHY SO HOSTILE?!" when I was not, in fact, being particularly hostile, I'd have a hard time reining in my temper as well, and I have the patience of a damn saint--I work with kids! ;) I think maybe you're feeling a little defensive, and that's okay--it's common in feminist and other social-justice discussions for people to be angry and to not understand each other. Changing society and fighting prejudice isn't easy. :)
Team Neckbeard: I said nothing about a woman being tarnished! I enjoy looking at women's skin and a tatoo doesn't enhance what I like.
Okay, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. You probably have absolutely no idea why what you said was wrong. I will educate you. I will refrain from calling down a divine reckoning of southern asswhooping.
Nikki: Terry, I realize you probably didn't mean anything offensive by your comments, and that you probably don't understand why they were met with hostility. The reason it's problematic for a guy to say things like that is because of male privilege. Men are socialized to think that they're owed women, and that they have the right to determine what is and is not acceptable for the women around them. It's often a very subtle thing, but it's very much present in our society. I mean, you can look at something as simple as most genre fiction--the guy almost always "gets" the girl. And comments like "I enjoy looking at women's skin and a tatoo doesn't enhance what I like." implies that you are somehow owed the opportunity to look at a woman's skin. Again, I realize that you probably didn't even think about it in that context, but that's kind of what social justice is ABOUT--breaking down the subtle prejudicial currents in our social fabric and examining them. It doesn't mean you're a bad guy--it just means you need to think about these things, as do we all. :)
***********************
It ended there. I'm pretty sure that means I won the argument about vagina tattoos. Which, just. How is that even my life? I'm kind of amazed.
And yes, if I sound condescending in places...I was trying to. I was going for that kind of condescension that communicates that you think the person you're talking to is too stupid to find their own ass with a GPS and a team of search and rescue dogs, but is so polite about it you can't do anything but grind your teeth. Never say I don't do nice things for you, roseredhoofbeat.