Categories
announcements comments policy douchebaggery TROOOLLLL!!

Fingers and trolls

Are they or aren't they?

A couple quick things:

Due to recent increases in trollerly, I’m being a bit more cautious about whom I let comment freely here, and while I will let new commenters post, I will be keeping them on moderation until I’m convinced they’re sincere, and not creepy abusive assholes, etc. In general I will be a bit quicker on the moderate/ban button.

EDITED TO ADD: If you’re a new commenter and want to be taken off moderation more quickly, email me with some info about yourself so I know who you are. (This info will be kept confidential.)

If someone is acting egregiously in the comments, please email me about it.

And generally, keep safe. Be careful with personal info. There are angry assholes everywhere.

On a happier note: Remember that thing about Sandra Fluke and her (allegedly) lesbian fingers? PZ Myers has torn apart the dubious science behind relative-finger-length-gaydar.

122 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Moewicus
Moewicus
12 years ago

+1 to this argument. Although I think it’s pretty clear that a certain amount of sexual orientation is biologically innate–not just genetically, but even birth order seems to have an effect, although then again that might be social–it really shouldn’t matter whether it is or isn’t. A behavior that does not infringe on anyone’s rights or affect anyone else personally should not be anyone else’s moral issue or social concern, whether biologically determinant or “willed” by the cerebrum.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
12 years ago

I don’t get the not wanting irresponsible people to have birth control argument. If I consider someone irresponsible why the hell would I want them to have kids? That’s a terrible idea.

ozymandias42
ozymandias42
12 years ago

I hate the “born this way” argument.

I have tons of passing privilege, in terms of gender and sexuality. I could throw out my binder and put on skirts and bras and grow out my hair and stop telling people to call me “zie.” I could date monogamously. I could have nothing but vanilla sex ever again. And, yes, I could just date men.

In a very real sense, I CHOSE to be a kinky, poly, nonbinary queer.

I chose it because I love my girlfriend, and because girls make me wet. I chose it because the craving for kink dances across my skin like electricity. I chose it because nothing makes me feel safe and happy like threesome cuddles or walking to a movie hand in hand in hand in hand. I chose it because when someone calls me zie I feel like dancing.

I chose it because it motherfucking makes me happy, and it doesn’t hurt anyone else. Is there such an excess of joy in the world that we can afford to deny people it because some busybodies can’t be bothered to mind their own business?

I think in our culture there’s this huge strain of Puritan thinking… that something isn’t worthwhile to do JUST because it makes you happy. It has to be good, or noble, or pleasing to God, or befitting our evolutionary imperatives, or at the very least something you can’t choose and were forced to be by genetics.

FUCK THAT SHIT.

I chose to be queer. I chose it because it makes me happy. And fuck you if you want to treat me like shit on your shoe because of it.

Moewicus
Moewicus
12 years ago

Ozy’s awesome.

That is all.

M Dubz
M Dubz
12 years ago

@Ozy- That was fucking beautiful. I want to put it all over the internet. Would that be okay?

Jarrod
Jarrod
12 years ago

I think that there are two distinct ways that the word choose can be used in these kinds of discussions that might confuse what is being talked about.

In one sense, a weaker sense, I might “choose” to be a homosexual in the sense that I could, at any moment, not exhibit my homosexuality in various ways (such as not having sex with other men). Doing so would be stupid because having sex with other men makes me happy, but in some sense I could “choose” to just not be sexual. I don’t think that this is the way Terrible People tend to use the word choose in this discourse though.

The stronger sense of the word choose implies that at some point in my life I was responsible for making the decision that I would be a homosexual (which is bullshit). Assuming that I somehow did actually have the ability to choose my sexual identity in this way, then my action of having a particular sexual identity is something I am morally responsible for because I could have chosen to do otherwise. This is different from the first case because it doesn’t require me to repress my sexuality and it granted me, in the purest sense possible, the choice that I could have been a heterosexual if I wanted to.

I don’t think we should just give up the idea that “being this way” is a legitimate platform for defending queer sexuality because it implies that at some point I was responsible for having the strict choice of having my particular sexual identity. And besides the fact that this is just wrong*, it is harmful to me because it will make it harder for people who think that homosexuality is wrong to convince them that this is just the way I am and that I could not, in the purest sense of the word, be other than what I am. Frankly, I don’t give a fuck whether or not this is the most legitimate form of the argument (totally agree with Ozymandias in the sense that “it makes me happy” is good enough), so long as this distinction results in less people hating people who are not heterosexual. It may, for instance, help them reflect on the possibility that THEY THEMSELVES could have conceivably had a different sexual identity, and that since they wouldn’t want to be discriminated against themselves, they shouldn’t discriminate against me.

*note: about 10% of professional philosophers maybe would disagree with this claim under some circumstances.

If none of this makes sense, it is because it is 3 am and I am drunk.

Oh my god, that was longer than I expected it to be :s.

boomboom
boomboom
12 years ago

I was going to post a topic on this “Vanilla Sex” concept on the forum. It really is a very rude and presumptuous term. Sorry to get stumbled that point in the post… happens to the best of us…

Well on topic, the “I was born that way.” is not just an argument, it’s the truth for many and it’s in direct response to statements like, “You were not born that way.” It’s important to have those conversations because BS religious beliefs should be challenged at every turn. It’s just to add in, “but so what if I did? People that choose their sexual expression are allowed that choice, and they don’t subscribe to your mythological beliefs, and neither do I.”

But “Vanilla Sex” is an intentional slur. It’s meant to describe what something is not and characterize it in an flattering way. I don’t wish to be gaslighted on this with the response of “Oh but Vanilla is tasty, too.” That is besides the point, and we all know that whether it’s difficult to articulate or not. The implication is the zillions of other flavors. The limiting term cuts out the multifaceted subject and experience of human sexuality. There is no “Vanilla Sex” just people being passive aggressive bullies. CIS PIV brings about bone shaking orgasms and the possibilities are endless for closeness and intimacy. “Vanilla” describes nothing. It’s a way to put people down, and it’s just a term with no validity outside of that context.

boomboom
boomboom
12 years ago

I think people can figure out my typos, but man… why did I make so many?

*It’s just better to add in…

* UNflattering way.

my apologies.

blitzgal
12 years ago

For instance, if you paid attention you’d notice that the world “terrorist” is seldom used on Manboobz

This is exactly what I was going to say. Where are all of these people calling the keyboard commandos terrorists?

blitzgal
12 years ago

Just adding: perhaps this was aimed at the SPLC article. The SPLC doesn’t designate every group that they discuss “terrorists.” They discuss how the hateful rhetoric coming out of the group can and does lead to violence. But the SPLC article didn’t even go so far as to call the MRM a hate group just yet.

Holly Pervocracy
Holly Pervocracy
12 years ago

I just say “vanilla” for clarity because talking a lot about “sex which is not bad or uninteresting or unadventurous, but does not involve pain or domination or acts socially considered unusual” takes a really long time.

I know it’s not the politest word but without “vanilla” (or some brief equivalent, but it seems like you’d have a problem with “unkinky” too?), there’s no way to describe someone or something as kinky. “We’re all kinky in our way” is a concept that kinda disappears kinksters.

The sex I have is illegal in my state, has to be hidden from doctors, and makes me part of a particular subculture. Let me use a word for it.

Pecunium
12 years ago

I have a problem with the term “vanilla sex” too.

Because the implication of vanilla, as a modifier, is boring, dull.

I have a different problem with the way kinky seems to mean something akin to BDSM, but that’s a whole ‘nother subject.

boomboom
boomboom
12 years ago

To be clear, I have been in contact with that term in the most combative forms, and it’s been used as a slur. I would not have a problem with something like unkinky. But kinky is such an old word, and I’m glad it’s considered ok, but it is one that is like… implying there’s something not smooth. Which I guess could be fine. I’ll bet that someone could come up with a great term. I’ll have to think on it. Vanilla is to restricting and I’m sure that many many folk do not use it to put people down, but I’ve seen it used in the worst ways. And, also… don’t like it for the reasons mentioned.

And to be clear, I’m not personally offended by anyone here. This is an issue thing, and it’s been used worse elsewhere. 🙂

boomboom
boomboom
12 years ago

You guys WHERE is that article about the dude saying that little girls should have their voice boxes ripped out?

Buttman
Buttman
12 years ago

@lowquacks

Look at the reaction to people who say that people choose to be gay. It’s practically a hate crime to deny that people are born gay. All I’m saying is that it’s not so absurd that there would be some proof that people are born gay. I understand it’s a taboo subject and there are huge implications if researchers did discover a “gay gene”.

@ Sharculese

There is nothing funny about using McCarthyist tactics to label Father’s Rights groups as hate groups. This is a funny blog that shows the rants of anonymous dudes that wouldn’t say any such thing IRL. To use those rantings to smear entire organizations fighting for equal parenting is disgusting.

Starskita
Starskita
12 years ago

@ boomboom,

I’m sorry to hear that you’ve encountered Vanilla used as a slur. As a pretty “vanilla” person myself I don’t see it that way.

However, I propose “peppermint” as an alternative. This is my reasoning. I’ve tried other flavors of ice cream, but peppermint is my way way favorite and I am happy to have peppermint every time and I never get tired of it. There are 100 flavors, but I want peppermint. I’ll have a bite of yours (usually, unless it’s bubblegum or something I know I don’t like) if you want me to try something new, but so far, I always go back to peppermint, and I expect I always will.

I hope you can see the analogy with sex. To really stretch the metaphor, people with very strong, particular fetishes, might be “chocolate” or “caramel”, while people who like a variety of things at different time, might be multi-flavord ice cream.

To be more direct, maybe “common preferences” or “known preferences” versus “novelty-seeking” or “adventurous” or “uncommon preferences” (depending on the spin you want) would be better wording.

Starskita
Starskita
12 years ago

I can haz gud speling

multi-flavored

boomboom
boomboom
12 years ago

It still doesn’t describe the sex.
But nice post. Cheerz.

My mra guy that interacts with me on my videos and me-his has posted an SPLC video.
I’m looking for the voicebox article, that dude that says little girl’s voiceboxes should be ripped out. I found one reference to it here, but I thought there was a post by David about the whole thing and linkage to the quoteage? Ergh can’t find it.

ithiliana
12 years ago

Re: “vanilla” vs. “kink”

I’m fairly sure that the word is used as a slur (similar to “breeders”) in some places–however, I am equally sure that the minority (numerically) communities that use the word as a slur have never had the social/insttutional power to arrest or institutionalize or in other ways punish people who engage in the practice.

Whereas the dominant majority who define heternormative sex as “normal” and everything else as “abnormal” (aka: deviant, perverted, illegal, immoral, and all the same thing, aka: homosexuality=pedophilia=bestiality) have had that power. So considering how context matters, I’m not sure that I see the usage of vanilla as that much worse than “cis” (which a lot of cis people freak out about and see as a slur and demand to have such ‘shaming’ language stopped when they first run into it). Ditto, white people who get insulted at being named “white” because omg so racist!

*shrugs* I see vanilla as a more vernacular term for heternormative sex (and people are linguistically lazy–the fewer syllables the better!–that’s why chairperson never caught on, but chair did, as a way to avoid chairMAN). Can it be used as a slur? Anything can. But as Holly says: The sex I have is illegal in my state, has to be hidden from doctors, and makes me part of a particular subculture. Let me use a word for it. If people who practice vanilla sex aren’t at risk for getting arrested or fired, then the nature of the slur is different.

Living in Texas, I can tell you that there are all sorts of sexual practices that can get one arrested (google Texas and dildos, and check out the Texas sodomy law that went all the way to the Supreme Court, etc.)

Some parts of fandom use the phrase “vanilla is a kink too” which is problematic in the way Holly notes-but it’s also true that it’s a way to oppose the binary of normal/good/heterosexual vs. abnormal/bad/homosexual that’s so enshrined in the cultural narratives. It’s a problematic one, but yeah, there’s nothing funnier than reading a heterosexual declaiming dramatically about how oppressed they are by slash fiction.

ithiliana
12 years ago

@Starskita and Boomboom: I’m actually rather against any sort of food analogy being used in relationship to any human behaviors, choices, etc. since there are gendered and raced and classed associations with food.

boomboom
boomboom
12 years ago

Hello ithalana, it’s used as a slur- as prude and frigid in arguments on the internet when someone wants to attack other person on an unrelated topic,(example for unrelated adhom: like if someone argues like an evil Puritan that sex workers deserve protection via condoms in pornography… ).and there have already been good reasons given as to why it’s wrong. It definitely does not describe sex, again… and it says “boring”. Shrug all you like I’m perfectly aware of the context, how it makes you feel is not very interesting to me. My sex is not one flavor, nor is it lacking in variety because of what it’s not. Like I said.

I think what you said about food and sex is very interesting and I wonder if you have any good links for that.

Holly Pervocracy
Holly Pervocracy
12 years ago

Boomboom – Question: Would you be okay with “unkinky”?

Is it the word “vanilla” itself you object to, or there being any distinction at all between kinky and not-kinky?

The first I can understand and I admit I’ve pretty much just fallen into the common usage, but the second, NO. Being kinky to the degree where you could get banned from working with children if your employer knew and you have to take steps not to get your partner accused of domestic violence is a whole nother thing to “but I have really enthusiastic PIV sex!”

ckitching
ckitching
12 years ago

Okay, so PZ has cleared her of the charge of being a lesbian with science! I still don’t see anyone addressing the concern that she may be a pirate. Are we certain she doesn’t have a peg leg, eyepatch and parrot on her shoulder? Can anyone prove that she doesn’t roam the seven seas looking for ships to plunder booty from?

ithiliana
12 years ago

@Boomboom: how it make you feel as an individual is not interesting to me either–I’m more interested in the systemic issues. Individuals who are privileged always feel put upon by being ‘named’ or labelled in any way, and tend to feel persecuted. It’s a boring phenomenon, and I’m not interested in talking with anybody who is only interested in their own precious feelings about it.

Vanilla is not automatically a slur, nor is there any logical connection between it and prudery or frigidity (which are also patriarchal slurs often used against women). I don’t use it myself, but that’s because of the food issue I mentioned above.

If you want to read about food being raced and gendered, here is a link to google results:

https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1ARAB_enUS452US452&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=raced+and+gendered+food

ithiliana
12 years ago

@Holly: speaking in terms of linguistic usages, “unkinky” is interesting because its structure assumes “kink” is the normal (i.e. not modified) usage, and “UNkinky” is the special case because of modification. Therefore I predict that heternormative people will be grumpy about UNkinky as well.

What do you think of the usage I see around of queer heterosexual? (For the people who are heterosexual but not heterosexist–i.e. into various types of practices often described as kinky or perverse, but only in heterosexual context). There was a wife-swapping group (and I think anything called wife-swapping is heteosexist patriarchal bullshit to the max) in a small town in Texas who were being harassed, and the woman arrested for selling dildos was doing so to married women in her own home (undercover cops). So I’m quite happy to see a distinction between heteronormative and heterosxual, and I’m not sure about the “everybody is queer” either for the same reason as “everybody is kinky.”