You know, I’ve seen a lot of repulsive things recently. Half an episode of Bridezillas, this ad for pap awareness, a Red Bull commercial about a little boy going to a strip club; but it took this movie trailer, which interrupted a perfectly enjoyable evening of Bones reruns, to get me out of my blogging hiatus. I couldn’t find the exact trailer that sparked my Hulk rage, but this should do nicely. Ladies and gentleman, allow me to present The Ugly Truth.
Here’s the information I have gleaned about the plot of this film from the trailer: Abby is an attractive, intelligent, ambitious, accomplished woman who wants the same thing in a partner. In her role as television producer, she is introduced to Mike, a Repulsoid from the planet Repulsor who was given a television show in order to spread his enlightening perspective on sex relations. That perspective? Men are entitled to constant boners, if a woman is not contributing to the making of one or more of those boners she may as well never have been born, boners can only be created by Beauty2K compliant women who know their fucking place, women should be grateful when given the chance to bestow boners upon any member of the male sex, and men can only relate to women on a boner-receiving level. Even though Abby is Beauty2K compliant, her attempts to be an actual human being instead of a boner-producing machine have kept her from being able to achieve the greatest experience a woman can hope to achieve: finding a man who wants to get boners from her on a regular basis. Mike, ever the altruist, takes her under his wing and teaches her how to appeal to the homogenous mass known as men by wearing cupless bras, fellating hot dogs, and straddling the line between virgin and whore in order to produce better boners. Abby starts out thinking that it’s possible to find a man who loves and respects her for who she is instead of how great her tits are, and at first she is resistant to Mike’s Tao of the Boner. However, as time goes on, she comes to embrace the Tao of the Boner and recognize that the idea that men can regard women as fully human is a myth, a by product of our PC society. It may not be pretty, but men are biologically programmed to treat women like shit, and women are biologically programmed to like it.
Now, I haven’t seen this movie, so who knows? Maybe it could surprise me. Maybe at the end Abby realizes that she no longer wishes to be regarded as a place in which to hide a salami and runs off with her assistant to join a lesbian separatist commune and Mike spontaneous combusts. Anything is possible. Somehow, though, I doubt this.
And you know the interesting thing? The Ugly Truth was written by women. Three self-loathing women. Why is it that so many women so enjoy media that insults them and holds them back, to the extent that many of them will go so far as to create the kind of trash that contributes to their oppression? We’re all socialized in the same misogynistic culture and for many women, these values outweigh their own experience of not being two-dimensional cum dumpsters. These values are so ingrained, in fact, that not only do many women believe them, but they believe that they somehow benefit from them. It’s the Doctrine of Separate Spheres, but with a sexy, 21st century twist involving stilletos and brightly-colored alcoholic beverages! Unlike the self-loathing women of say, the middle ages, self-loathing women from the nineteenth century on have accepted the idea that they are not fully human, but instead of resigning themselves to their drudgery, they have been convinced that they somehow benefit from their inhumanity. In The Ugly Truth, women may not be fully human, but through the power of their tits, they can influence people who are: men! So really, it’s women who have the power! Am I right, ladies?
The Ugly Truth is an insult to any person capable of intelligent thought. It is an insult to women because it defines their worth in relation to men and puts no stock in the value of their humanity. It is an insult to men because it says that they are no more than overly-entitled dicks on legs, incapable of emotion or thoughtfulness, no better than male turkeys who’ll go so low as to court a wooden turkey head on a stick. It is insulting to intersexed people because it denies their existence. It is insulting to members of other species because humans are purportedly supposed to be the smart ones. And above all, it is a firm reminder of why I should just watch my favorite shows on DVD instead of putting myself through the misery of commercials.
Filed under: disgusting moments, media, misogyny, movies, pc, she likes it! | 3 Comments
Rage: It’s what I’m filled with
Mr. Crankosaur frequents a forum on a website with primarily male membership that has nothing to do with social or political issues that occasionally features threads on social and political issues. As you can imagine, things can get pretty grotesque. This morning he had up a thread on the new Gallup polls which have more Americans identifying with the erroneous term “pro-life” than pro-choice. It was like a car wreck! I had to look! And here’s what lead me to cause some property damage:
“Seriously, why should a human life’s choice to life be decided by some woman who couldn’t control herself?”
SSSIHWIO#1!~~~!!!!!! ARGHWE!#EFJ! Oh my God, I… I don’t know where to start. The idea that women are the only ones responsible for becoming pregnant? That having sex is somehow akin to being WILD AND CRAZY and OUT OF CONTROL? That women are not to be categorized as human?! Oh no. Somebody needs to get cut.
A lot of the other arguments fell into the “Worst Case Scenario” camp. You know what I mean. “Abortion is bad, okay? But I mean, what if she’s mentally challenged and twelve years old and becomes impreganted on a full moon after her dad is bitten by a werewolf and rapes her in his mutated state? In the case of werewolf incest rape, I think it might be okay.”
Any argument against abortion is anti-woman. Period. I don’t give a shit what it is. I don’t care how cute and cuddly and gurgly babies allegedly are. When a fetus is inside a woman, it is not a person. When a woman is pregnant with a fetus, she is a person. Alleging that fetuses have rights as people is just another way to deny the personhood of women, hence the aforementioned comment. The fact that a sub-human woman would dare to attempt to impersonate a human being is what got that douche angry; it has nothing to do with the fetus at all. She stepped out of line, she gets punished, and the fact that women may be able to avoid this punishment and go about their lives like real people is infuriating to him. If a woman becomes pregnant, her personhood is deemed of less importance to the personhood of whatever is growing inside her. Her personhood is defined in relation to her relationships with others and her ability to make new people, not, as in the case of men, by virtue of being a person. Arguing against a woman’s right to have an abortion is arguing against the existence of a woman’s personhood. It is defining her by her reproductive functioning alone. It is anti-woman. End of story.
Filed under: abortion, misogyny, reproductive choice, reproductive freedoms | 2 Comments
Another strip club has been found to have an underage girl working in it and another media outlet is covering the story like it’s some kind of pulp movie about when bad girls go wrong. Just look at the picture that the Cleveland Scene ran for its cover story:
Oh yeah, baby, you’re a naughty barely-menstruating little girl, aren’t you? If that’s not bad enough, this picture was accompanied by the words, “Don’t stand so close to me”, referencing the Police song about a dangerously sexual student who just makes it so hard for her teacher not to bang her, what with her having boobs and a vagina and all. Those middle-schoolers, man, they’ll get you in trouble. They’re all walking around, starting to go through puberty and all, but when you try and rape one of them all of a sudden the PC police try to make you out to be the bad guy! What’s a guy supposed to do? The 14-year-old wasn’t the only underage girl found working at the club when it was busted, which is hardly surprising, but there’s really no outrage about skeezy men getting dry humped by a high school girl because I mean, come on, she’s 17! She should know better! And who wouldn’t want to be dry humped by a high school junior? But a 14-year-old? That’s just wrong. Unless she’s wearing a schoolgirl uniform… Then it’s pretty hot.
The two underage girls are being charged with “committing illegal acts in a sexually oriented business”, which seems a little like blaming a McDonald’s worker for making shitty food. It’s McDonald’s. That’s what they do. It’s not the worker’s fault the food is bad. One might argue that the worker doesn’t have to work at McDonald’s, but then one might be a complete moron. Somebody has to work at McDonald’s. There’s a demand for shitty food, just like there’s a demand for the sexual degradation of teenagers. That’s what I find so hilariously awful about this article. The question raised is why a 14-year-old would be working at strip club. Really? Is that a trick question? You can’t figure out why a strip club would hire a 14-year-old? The answer is because men want to see a 14-year-old at a strip club. I find it hard to believe the owners didn’t know she was so young, considering that the article says she didn’t dance nude or perform lap dances like the other women working there. Obviously they just didn’t care. Their customers wanted to see young-looking girls, they provided that, and yes, they’ll be in trouble for a little while, but it’ll all pass. People are already blaming the girl, saying things like, “Her presence in the club…. was not a nightmare scenario of the young girl being seduced or held captive in the club.” Because no one held a gun to her head or promised her a pony, she was obviously acting of her own free will. She didn’t decide to strip because our society glamorizes women’s sexual degradation or judges women’s value by their fuckability, no. She decided to strip because she is a dirty, naughty little minx. The Play House obviously just gave her an outlet to let her wild sexuality run free. They were practically doing her a favor! Who’s the real victim in all this?
As soon as females are deemed fuckable by society, they’re declared free game for anyone who wants them in any way and the victim blaming starts in full-force. Society has been sexualizing young girls for God knows how long, because society has been sexualizing naivitee and stupidity and docility in women for God knows how long, all qualities associated with younger, less-experienced females. However, with the earlier onset of puberty, younger and younger girls are having to put up with the thoroughly dehumanizing effects of male desire without being emotionally or cognitively prepared to deal with it, and the mystical boner-inducing qualities of their changing bodies provide enough evidence to society as a whole that they WANT it. That they ASKED for it. By being in possession of a sexual body, they prove themselves prepared to be regarded as nothing more than a sexual being. It’s a thoroughly fucked up situation that no one deserves to be put into, and it’s one that girls are being subjected to at younger and younger ages. A fourteen-year-old at a strip club is not an anomaly. It is a perfectly logical occurence in a society in which sexualized fourteen-year-olds are the norm. The sooner people stop deluding themselves into thinking it’s not and start trying to face the problem head-on the better, otherwise people will continue to think it’s a symptom of a few over-sexualized young girls and a few over-zealous perverts in the bushes instead of being symptomatic of some of the primary values of our patriarchal society.
Filed under: creeper, misogyny, she likes it!, victim blaming | Leave a Comment
Quote of the day
“If a guy can’t rape his wife, who’s he gonna rape?” Wayne Anthony Ross, lawyer, “fathers’ rights” supporter, and nominee for Alaska attorney general.
My answer: Um, nobody? Read more on Palin’s anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-Native American, pro-Klan choice here.
Filed under: dumbs, misogyny, politics, rape | Leave a Comment
I would venture to say that most men would rather be considered good looking than ugly. However, so little of a man’s personhood is linked to his appearance that most men will not go much out of their way to improve it. For many men, even if they would like to be better looking, what exactly “better looking” means is difficult to ascertain. Men are not used to objectifying themselves in the same way that women are, and since men are typically defined by more than their sexual characteristics, the very definition of “good looking man” is hard to pin down. Men are not used to seeing themselves as the other, and there is no real standard to which they can compare themselves. Therefore, I see a man’s desire to be good looking as analogous to those, “What would you do for a Klondike Bar?” commercials. Klondike Bars are pretty delicious, this is true, but going without one is not such an earth-shattering crisis than anyone in those commercials is willing to make too much of a sacrifice for one. They are willing to make the small sacrifice of minor embarassment, but it is small, it is minor, it is not ongoing, and when it is over, they have the Klondike Bar and they are done.
For women, on the other hand, the question of what they will do to be attractive is not so trivial. Being good looking and being ugly is not merely a matter of eating ice cream or not eating ice cream, but could be said to be a matter of life and death. To be a woman is to have one’s selfhood defined almost entirely by one’s sexuality, and if one is not attractive, one effectively becomes invisible, an abberation to be ignored. In order to grasp onto the tiny shred of humanity women are allowed to possess in a patriarchal society, one must fulfil the duty of Decorative Boner-Maker to the best of one’s abilities. It is thus no wonder so many women sacrifice so much of their life in order to be “sexy”; the alternative is social death.
Consider the extremes to which female celebrities will go to maintain their appearance. Over at Shapely Prose, Sweet Machine discussed an article from the Daily Mail which had one of their reporters training with the trainer of celebrities like Madonna and Gwyneth Paltrow. The experience reads something like torture: grueling workouts that wear her down to the point where she is too weak and listless to do anything but train: her body becomes her life. Recently, I saw a tabloid purporting to offer tips from the professional dancers on Dancing with the Stars on how they keep their bodies so boner-inducing. I didn’t look at the article, but the blurb next to one of the women said that she forgoes all carbs except orange juice. Anyone who has ever dieted knows how consumed one’s mind becomes with food when one is not “allowed” to eat it. Multiply that by an entire food group and you get an idea of how much of this woman’s mental energy is devoted to thinking about her body. Of course, I can’t say for sure that this is the experience she has had, but I know enough to say that if it isn’t, she is an exception to the rule. It has been the experience of countless other women who make the same ridiculous omissions in their diet that she has. I think Courtney Martin does a good job of detailing this waste of energy in Perfect Girls, Starving Daughters, which exposes just how much time many women spend obsessing about their body and how it serves to further their disenfranchisement, putting them at a disadvantage compared to men who do not have these pressing thoughts and obsessions. For men, being good looking is a fortunate accident, not something to spend too much time on, while for women, it is a calling.
Not only do women sacrifice their lives in the sense that their lives become subsumed with this striving for attractiveness, but they are often willing to risk death if it means it will make them better looking. This is the basis of the entire cosmetic surgery industry. Although the dangers of cosmetic surgery are woefully underreported, to the point that many women are likely to be unaware of the risk they are putting themselves in by having it done, the fact remains that many women are willing to undergo major surgery in order to prolong or improve their attractiveness. A disturbing portion do die or suffer complications. However, even if more women knew the dangers of cosmetic surgery, it is likely that many would still have it done. When faced with the options of the inevitable social death that comes with lessening attractiveness and the possibility of physical death from a practice that will stave it off, women will be willing to take the risk of physical death, and all because our personhood is dependent on something as transitory as the state of our body. Until women are defined as human beings in their own right and not in their sexual relations to men, this will continue to be the case.
Filed under: body image, fat phobia, gender roles, misogyny | 7 Comments
Still in hibernation
I have been M.I.A. for a while, and I apologize. I have had a generous helping of writers’ block and have been preoccupied with school, work, moving, and baby mama drama. Please be patient with me. Until then, I thought this piece from The Onion hit the nail on the head, so to speak, and I think you will too.
Filed under: life n' such | Leave a Comment
Ever notice how whenever someone starts crying about their right to free speech being impinged, that person is almost invariably a white guy? And how what they are actually crying about usually has very little to do with free speech and more with wanting to have the privilege to say and do whatever hateful things they want in regards to members of subordinate groups? Yeah, I thought you had.
This is something that’s been bothering me for a while, but reading about the online harassment faced by software programmer Kathy Sierra has really made salient to me what a load of bullshit this “free speech” argument is. Allow me to recap the story for you: Kathy Sierra is a software programmer who has recently been the target of hate speech and threats of violence, including lynching, throat-slitting, and rape. Because of this hate speech, and subsequent postings of her personal information, she has cancelled public appearances out of fear for her safety. The owners of the blogs which perpetrated this hate speech are coming under a certain degree of fire, as one might expect. But instead of admitting to being douchenozzles of the highest calibur and apologizing and vowing to never blog again, they are acting like they are the victims. One, Chris Locke, complained about having “been judged by the angry mob out there” and criticized Sierra for having the audacity to feel unsafe when facing death threats, saying, “I think her response, as it pertains to anything I personally wrote, was unjustified — but highly effective — character assassination. As a result, I’m sure I’ll be explaining for years to come that I’m not really an ax murderer and child molester. Nice work.” Another blogger defended Locke, bemoaning that, “A cry of misogynism pretty much shuts off debate…. The bloggers are behaving like a lynch mob, or a US president, looking for someone to string up, or a country to invade. Sierra is upset, traumatized, even; but it’s Locke’s reputation which will be, possibly quite unfairly, soiled by her accusation.”
To paraphrase Homer Simpson, so now we’re judging people based on things they’ve done? Real classy. Free speech is good. Free speech is necessary. But what free speech is not is the right to express whatever hateful, vitriolic bullshit that comes to mind without facing any consequences. Once a person gets to be past, oh, let’s be generous and say eight years old, a person is expected to take into account the effects their actions will have on others. Chris Locke appears to be well over eight years old and ostensibly should know better. A person may not face any legal sanctions for the things that they say, but there are still social sanctions in place, and people have as much right to defend themselves and their beliefs and the person and beliefs of others as they have to verbally piss all over them. If you act like an asshole, you’ll get treated like an asshole, and don’t try to act like a victim because your actions turn out to have consequences. For a long ass time, white men were able to do whatever the fuck they wanted to members of subordinate groups, but we have since won the right to fully exercise our own right to free speech, and we are fully within those rights to call someone out for being a total douche. This isn’t really about free speech at all: this is about longing for those bygone days when girls were girls and men could piss all over them simply by virtue of their being men and no one would say a thing about it. That is not a right, it is a privilege, and it’s a privilege that no one should be able to exercise.
Filed under: dumbs, feminism, misogyny, pc, sexism, victim blaming, violence | 4 Comments
Too fat to love
I am insanely busy and really don’t have much time to post, but I just saw like, 19 ads for Bulging Brides on the Fine Living Network or some other bullshit channel and I really need to Hulk out about it.
Women are told that if only they spend enough money on stuffed chicken breasts and place settings, their wedding will be the most magical day of their lives and they will be princesses for a day and really, isn’t that every 27 year old accountant/elementary school teacher/HR rep’s dream? To be a pwetty, pwetty pwincess? Weddings aren’t about the joining of two people who love each other or whatever other bullshit people try to delude themselves into thinking; they are an over-the-top, idealized celebration of patriarchy in its microcosmic form. When planning a wedding, women are made to concern themselves with trivialities like seating charts and the exact shade of midnight blue their bridesmaids’ dresses will be while their fiances are free to go about business as usual, only with the occasional tux fitting or cake tasting, all leading up to a bachelor party in which they will be fully encouraged to comodify the bodies of other women on their last night of “freedom”. In order for this day to be perfect in its devotion to the partriarchy, the bride cannot merely show up, her happy, smiling self. No, she needs to personify the “feminine” qualities of meek submissiveness by taking up as little space as possible. If she doesn’t? Then she has to suffer. And that’s where Bulging Brides comes in. Let’s roll the clip.
I cannot barely describe how insulted I am by this. There is so much wrong here, and in such a small amount of time, a mere two minutes! First of all, the “Bulging Bride” does not appear to be bulging by any definition outside the world of runway modeling. She is what would be referred to as being a “healthy weight” by people who like to pretend their fat hatred stems from concern about health. We see her flying in the face of her trainers by daring to ENJOY HERSELF at her bachelorette party, where we see several clips of her doing things as audacious as EATING and DRINKING! The scandal! Silly bitch, don’t you know that eating is for fat girls? And we all know that no man is capable of loving a fat girl. It’s just the way they have evolved over time. You can’t change nature.
Of course, we can’t let a woman get away with having a good time, so her trainer, Douchey McMuscles, shows up at her house at 6:30 the next morning for “payback”. He tells the women on the way to their mystery location that they are going to fufill a lifelong fantasy. Ugh. I should have known what was coming. It’s time for poledancing lessons! Yes, because it is every woman’s fantasy to be reduced to their boner-inducing capabilities. That’s why sex workers are among some of the most well-respected and influential people in society! I will admit that at one point I didn’t think that pole dancing lessons were the worst thing in the world. I mean, I like dancing, but I also have a tendency to move in awkward jerks that leave me bumping into things. Thus, dance classes have always seemed like they would be fun and energizing and might help me control my spastic movements. But having seen pole dancing lessons? Are they kidding? How can anyone delude themselves into calling that a “workout”? Slowly moving your ass in a circular motion does not make for good cardio, I’m sorry. That is ridiculous. They actually teach them how to give lap dances. Are you kidding me? Does that really need to be taught? I can teach you how to give a lap dance in one sentence: Take off your clothes and hump a dude sitting in a chair. There! Lap dance lesson complete. Now pay up.
Ostensibly, her “payback” workout should be something long, arduous, and capable of burning off a lot of calories. But no, this show isn’t actually about losing weight. It is about women learning to be “the perfect bride”, which will initiate them into a life of suffering and service to their families, as demonstrated when the bride’s future husband comes in to reap the rewards of her 6:30AM, spinny, hangoverey workout and receive an embarassing, public lap dance. Yay weddings!
The message that these women are given is not that their dress is the wrong size, but that their body is the wrong size. The trainers insult them, calling them “chubsters” and “bulging brides”. The episode descriptions are similarly mean-spirted. Take this one for an episode called “No Pain, No Gain”: “Sharon’s a former figure skater whose figure has been expanding ever since going to college and then having a baby. She has to slim way down in order to fit into her dress, but will her laziness keep her bulging in all the wrong places?” It’s not that she should have ordered the dress in a different size or that she’s too busy planning a wedding and taking care of a child or that hey, having babies has a tendency to put a few pounds on you. The whole reason the dress doesn’t fit is because she’s lazy.
I couldn’t find too many clips, but if you want to see more of this atrocity, I recommend watching Sarah Haskins take on bridal shows on Target Women. Then at least your tears of sadness will merge with tears of laughter!
Filed under: body image, fat phobia, gender roles, media, misogyny, victim blaming | 7 Comments
…in which I puke on myself
I was on the Details website the other day, having been pulled in by a repulsive picture accompanying a similarly repulsive article on how super rich guys have to cut back on their number of mistresses during these hard economic times, when I found an even bigger gem: Welcome Back, Asshole, a fluff piece about the triumphant return of male chauvinism, accompanied by a few repulsive pictures of its own:
The article begins with the tragic story of Dave, who is “a devoted spouse and a doting father to the three young children”. The poor bastard. Dave, this tragic figure on par with Oedipus Rex or King Lear, went to college during the “p.c. era”, which forced him to repress all his manly-man urges. But they could not stay under wraps forever, oh no, and now he allows these manly-man urges to release themselves into the mouths of masseuses who may or may not be but probably have been forced to serve in “massage parlors” against their wills for the sexual pleasure of POOR POOR DAVE.
My, where is the world’s smallest violin when you need it?
The thing is, the article does give a fairly accurate depiction of the state of masculinity in our society today. The author even got some quotes from Michael Kimmel, editor of the sociological journal Men and Masculinities, author of the recent book Guyland, one of the prevailing experts on masculinity, subject of one of my brain crushes, and all-around tubular person. To use the language of Talcott Parsons, our society is moving from one based on ascription, or personal attributes, to achievement, or… you know, the things people actually do in order to prove their worth. Men, particularly white, middle-class men, are finding that male privilege just doesn’t mean what it used to, but they can still recall a time when it meant a whole lot more, if not in their own past, then in their fathers’ or grandfathers’. They feel like they have been stripped of something to which they are entitled, and it pisses them off. However, the article, of course, says nothing about entitlement or privilege and actually deigns to use the word “postfeminist” and presents normal human dickishness as part of some ancient drive that only presents itself on the Y-chromosone. Sigh. We’re not going to be in a post-feminist age until we’re in a post-partriarchal age, and acting like a dick is not the sole province of men who are fed up with treating women like human beings and aren’t going to take it any more. People, both men and women, act like dicks because they are tired or cranky or selfish or just because they’re dicks, and it has nothing to do with some kind of hideously oppressive society that is keeping white men from their natural right to treat other people as less than human. I’ve used the pie analogy once and I’ll use it again: white, middle-class men are finding that they have a smaller share of the pie than their fathers did. Their fathers never deserved the amount of pie they had to begin with, but men today don’t see that, they just see pie that isn’t on their plate, and it’s making them pouty. They aren’t to be pitied any more than a spoiled kid throwing a tantrum in a Toys R Us because his parents won’t buy him a Wii, even though they aren’t even in stock. Life was never meant to be easy and for the majority of people throughout history it hasn’t been. That anyone who is privileged enough to be living in the United States with a job, a happy family, and a college education to think they are somehow pitiable, and that anyone could agree with them, is frankly a little sickening.
Hence the dry cleaning I’m going to have to take in tomorrow. I just hope it doesn’t stain.
Filed under: "science", dumbs, gender roles, media, pc, victim blaming | 3 Comments
Search
-
Blogroll
- Art at the Auction
- Beyond Feminism
- Bitch Ph.D.
- Dirty, Rotten Feminist
- Editoralizing the Editors
- Female Impersonator
- Feministing
- Fuck Politeness
- Girls read comics (and they’re pissed)
- Gorgon Poisons
- Hell on Hairy Legs
- I Blame the Patriarchy
- just to fill the space
- Me and My Army
- Menstrual Poetry
- mmm, brains!
- Mortality’s Thoughts
- No Cookies For Me
- Oh, You’re a FEMINIST?
- Racialicious
- Rage Against the Man-chine
- Shakesville
- Shapely Prose
- The Apostate
- The Feminist Underground
- The Lurking Canary
- unconventional beauty
- What Ladder?
- XXBlaze
Recent Entries
- Disgusting Moments in Film: The Ugly Truth
- Rage: It’s what I’m filled with
- Have you heard the one about the underage girl at a strip club?
- Quote of the day
- What would you do for a Klondike Bar?
- Still in hibernation
- I have the right to free speech too, asswipe
- Too fat to love
- …in which I puke on myself
- Happy sanctioned prostitution day!
- It’s gonna be a good day
Categories
- "science" (5)
- abortion (4)
- ad rage (9)
- body image (4)
- book club (2)
- books (3)
- class (2)
- college (2)
- crass consumerism (2)
- creeper (11)
- disgusting moments (5)
- dumbs (12)
- fashion (2)
- fat phobia (4)
- feminism (20)
- fun (1)
- gender roles (21)
- GLBT (3)
- global feminism (1)
- life n' such (7)
- media (13)
- misogyny (27)
- movies (7)
- paternalism (1)
- pc (4)
- politics (14)
- porn (4)
- race (3)
- rape (17)
- reproductive choice (3)
- reproductive freedoms (2)
- sausage fest (3)
- sex (5)
- sexism (13)
- she likes it! (10)
- television (7)
- Uncategorized (8)
- victim blaming (15)
- vintage sexism (5)
- violence (6)
- wage slave (4)
