must say i don’t like your tone. ... what’s happened to all the garble garble we saw earlier? maybe we caught you at a lucky time last week
thought i'd ricky-rewind a bit to this all-out, copper-bottomed classic, worth seeing in full glory again:
'Yes clearly that's why it's okay to call a normal sized girl fat (would you really aim that at a man? Would you assume that it would be an insult in quite the same way? That is misogyny) and ask flyboy, not the person who really dug in to you (that would be me), but flyboy if he set me on you. And now instead of a normal, angry woman who doesn't want a man to speak for her and is irate because someone assumed a man did, I am a hysterical suffragist?
I'm not hysterical ? but I am a feminist. I'm not sitting here and taking this bullshit. You haven't bothered to excuse yourself for a comment that was originally totally out of order and in fact you've made it worse and worse by treating me like some mindless dolt. Well I'm not giving up, I'm not mindless, I'm not hopeless and I still think you're an appalling misogynist because you've done nothing to dissuade me of the fact. Actually you've made it worse. You think trying to beat me down with 'hysterical suffragist' comments is going to shut me up? Welcome to 2004, we're not little women anymore and accusations of hysteria just scream even more misogyny or did you miss that little bit of history where every woman who asked for the right to vote was accused of hysteria?
See, your arguments don't put you in a favourable light gambit. Just keep digging your masculine hole. Eventually you're going to make the other females come out to kick you and I'm small enough to admit I'm going to enjoy it.'
difficult to know where to begin. i've been a bit too busy to respond this week, much as i've enjoyed seeing the strangled fragments of cool being blown
everywhere. (and the limericks, though i do think haus should have written his in portugese)
i don't understand the meaning of the first bit in parentheses so i'll skip it, and the sentence immediately after as it's too clumsy to try clambering over. the last sentence in paragraph 1, poor dear, you seem to have forgotten you're only doing this thanks to flyboy's (or is it all men's?) psychic powers, you're not a normal angry woman at all, you're a mind-slave. after that it does drag a little, gets a bit ssspitty, but comes right back in with 'welcome to 2004' - like i imagine it would be having bruno brookes 'lay the smack down on my ass'. (nice late nineties reslo terminology too. very hip.) that it was provoked by an accusation like 'hysterical suffragist' in, when was it again?, is just priceless. History is invoked in an entirely unsupportable way and the whole thing wraps up back on form with the last paragraph, 'masculine hole', that's right, and the final, rousing W.I call to arms that in no way plays up to stereotyped gender roles.
so, other than anna's talent for self-parody, what have we got? a tentative affirmation that people like to choose to interpret postings on the blith somewhat literally? that brains abandon ship if the moody-bone gets banged? he says this = he means this = he is this?
i think that's a rather easy negotiation to have made with the textual content of a website flame-thing. if half of the gathered have decided that i am a mysygynyst then i think i can continue to live with the weight of an invisible label, and offer no apology for any previous choice of words in this thread. i can, after all, continue to live quite happily (in fact, given the funnies this thread's thrown up, more happily than before) with the misconception. therefore, i maintain that calling an attention seeker ‘fatty fatty bloat bloat’ or something like that is a pretty good way to get them to blush. lesson best to take from this: if you call an attention seeker a fatty and the oppression-starved chattering classes won’t let it slide without calling gender jihad,
fuck them. |
