 |
|
|
It just pisses me off to no end that we are expected to live in this culture that objectifies us like we're inflatable dolls, has BEER COMMERCIALS WITH women in DOG collars on them (I will NEVER FORGET the one with that australian model with a goddamned dalmatian print dress simpering, "Take me for a wa-a-a-a-a-a-alk?" Ooh, how DARING), has books and movies and plays packed with rotten stereotypes of women in them, tells women that we have no sex drive or because we don't have the Sacred Substance Testosterone in our bodies that our sex drive is a permament faded photocopy of theirs --
We're expected to put up with this with the patience of Job with nary a peep, nary a complaint, nary a hint of anger or that we're filled up to our EYEBALLS with it, and suddenly when we dip our satirical toe in with one teensy little web page against a torrent of garbage about women from men, guys like this come sailing out of the atmosphere with a nuclear blast of self-righteous nose-in-the-air holier-than-thou crapola.
"How dare you create a False Image Of Our Gender!" says Mr. Righteous.
GIVE me air. How dare he expect sympathy from people who have been taking it in the ear for a thousand years -- with not one.
Single.
HINT of sympathy from guys like him. They hear about men ordering brides by MAIL and they go, "Oh that's too bad, *yawn* what's on TV?" They see billboards with a zillion women posing submissively on them and get apologist for it by saying, "Well, are you restricting their first amendment rights? They have the ri-i-i-ight to pose for those pictures, you know!" They thumb through their Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue and tell us we're being Sexist[tm] -- ooh, they learned a new word today! -- for bitching about the constant unstoppable tidal wave of female flesh presented for their enjoyment, and when a couple women put up a satirical web page, suddenly they're all indignant?
This is just one more example of letting it slide when it happens to women, but the second women start proving ourselves just as sexual as men, the sledgehammer lands straight on our heads and we get smashed down without mercy. Women's first amendment rights? Women's right to have fantasies about men? Get real, babe -- that's men's justification, not yours! The sledgehammer belongs on a female skull, not Bob Guccione's.
And then we get the line about how our fantasies are wrong because they're just as bad as male fantasies. No, it's not "just as bad." Do we have a multi-billion dollar pornography industry devoted to promoting our "pornographic fantasies" all over the place? Do we own the film industry? Do we see billboards for male lingerie shows with pretty pliant skinny little femmes dressed up for our delectation all over the place?
Do I see men with hair down to their waist posing in lace? Do I see billboards with skinny pliant little brunets in hip boots for me to drool over? Do I get to see half-naked men dancing and shimmying on TV for me? Do I see pouty beautiful men wearing next to nothing lying on car hoods and exorting me to buy beer? Do I walk past every fucking newstand in the world and see a million magazines telling me, "Yes, you have a potent and powerful sex drive, and we respect that, and will present you with passive men for your entertainment, men whose very existence is due to your hormones?"
NO. It's NOT equivalent. Male "pornographic fantasies" have the weight of the entire damned culture behind them. It's not "just as bad." Maybe if Mr. Self-Righteous flies to Vegas and sees a million taxicabs with submissive pliant male playthings posing all over their ad banners, then it might be "just as bad." But right now? Not a chance. Oh, don't tell me about stuff made for the gay male market. I don't want to hear about how I've got to coattail yet again on another male preference.
And don't give me that crap about how, if women wanted it, it'd be here. Go read our Reply To The News about men working at Hooters. The reason why there are no skinny, pretty femmes out there for women to enjoy isn't because straight and bi women have been too goddamned timid or uninterested to force the market to produce what we want. The reason is because men actively suppress images of attractive men for women. They are afraid, jealous, and cattier than any junior high cheerleader. Men stagger in fear from attractive men, and actively stamp out images of them. It doesn't matter what we want -- they will deliberately attempt to kill it off. Viciously, if need be.
After all -- what's the first epithet that's hurled at any man that women find sexy? "I bet he's a faggot." "He's probably gay." "Oh, all those guys are gay." Translation: I will continue to hammer down anything that you like to look at, while simultaneously expecting you to look great for me, and in the meantime, I intend to keep wearing whatever stinks least that I can pull out of my hamper every morning.
Oh, and if I do decide to start taking care of my appearance, I'll be sure to suck down steroids so I can look like what men consider positive in men, and deliberately make myself look as unlike what women want as possible.
I look every bit as good as the women in most of those garbage presentations of women that idiot droolers slobber over. When I feel like putting any effort into it, I look better. I've stopped traffic in tight dresses. But you know what? I hereby resolve that I ain't putting on one more stitch of spandex for a man until he wears some for me. In public. I'm not wearing 3" fuck-me pumps for another man until he's prepared to wear some for me. In public. I'm not going to shave my legs for another man until he does the same for me. PERIOD. And I'm not talking about crossdressers. I'm talking about men who have the goddamned guts to define heels and long hair and maybe even some eyeliner as part and parcel of masculinity.
How many men do you think would agree to that bargain?
How many men do you think would agree to do just once what I am expected to do with no recompense whatsoever?
Oh, am I being sexist? Objectifying?
For wanting a man to put effort into looking good for me when every goddamned guy I've ever encountered who has shown interest in me has done it because he like my exterior?
For not acting like some weird combination of Mother Theresa and Marilyn Chambers, graciously accepting all comers no matter what they look like, when they are all treating me like sex on a stick?
The mixed blessing of my physical exterior, as far as most men are concerned, is just another version of scrubbing the toilet. Something they are owed as a result of their chromosomal recipe, that isn't their job, and that they don't have to even think about doing. Something that, should you suggest they do it for you as unthinkingly as you are expected to do it for them, buys you a facial expression that makes you think you just sprouted another head. But if I don't dress like that, I can count the seconds until I'm asked, "Is that what you're wearing?" even by guys who pride themselves on how open minded and 90's they are.
There are few things on this Earth that a woman does that a man won't at least admit to a capacity for doing nowdays -- taking care of kids, changing diapers, running a vacuum, cooking. Except this. This is the line in the sand.
Tell me again that this is equality.
And like Faz said, I get blasted in the face day in and DAY OUT with men's sexual pornographic fantasies. Why the hell can't I add mine to the mix? What's WRONG with having pornographic fantasies, huh? Haven't guys been whining about how there's nothing wrong with "Hustler" for years, and now that we're adding our voice, suddenly, "THAT'S PORNOGRAPHIC!"
And if he's going to say, "Well, that's what YOU FEMINISTS have been saying!" then he obviously totally missed the point of this web site, which is that we don't agree with that, we're not second wave sixties feminists, and we differ over them about this.