I‘m back from the depths of flu-dom and ready to take on the world, or at least some of its most terrible and ridiculous aspects. I’m not quite at full strength yet, so posting may be a bit light for a few more days. But the flu is definitely on the way out. Thanks for your patience and support!
So does anyone want to discuss that picture up there at the top of the post? Everyone else is. Is Kellyanne Conway being weird and disrespectful to the oval office visitors, a delegation from historically black colleges and universities? Or is everybody being mean to her because OMG she was just trying to take a picture with her phone?
I’m going to go with “weird and disrespectful” but what do I know.
@DanHome:
The true hero of the book is clearly Vinculus. If there’s ever been a character in any book written with more obvious *joy* by the author, then I’d very much like to know about it. Vinculus is *my* hero, even if he’s not really the hero of the book.
@latsot
Not having the book to hand, I googled the Library at Hurtfew wikispace and refreshed my memory about Vinculus, and he seems marvellous. I will re-read the book shortly (it was on the shelf in a local book exchange yesterday and I didn’t grab it, but I might head back there tonight!). Should my opinions change dramatically – and they often do – I’ll find an appropriate moment to mention it!
DanHolme:
Is he a recalcitrant revenant?
@Moggie
He is, and very disrespectful; making him an irreverent recalcitrant revenant!
Thank you kupo. Much appreciated.
Does disagreement often get you called a sock, troll, concern troll, etc, in these parts? I don’t usually comment so I’m not sure of the culture.
@kupo
The more I play it, the more confident I feel about saying that would be worth it. Setting aside Dishonored 2 (which was great, but then I was expecting that anyway), I haven’t cared this much about a game’s story in a very long time. It hasn’t really kicked off yet ’cause I’m taking my sweet time (and it seems to be taking a rather RPG-y approach to it with a “slow and thorough” pacing – that’s a very good thing in my book though), yet I’m already engrossed in it and in that beautiful, beautiful world.
Normally I’d say “Look, giant robot dinosaurs, ’nuff said.” but this is way above and beyond. It’s friggin wonderful.
Kupo: You raise legitimate points, and do so from a place of respect and understanding, both of David and the site. And, of course, you weren’t the only one to do so.
Rach came in and immediately declared that David is not a feminist, that the site has inexorably changed, and oh, yes, that we’re all a cult. There’s an eon of difference between the two.
Go tell a man to be nice all the time
Yeah! No one here ever criticizes a man’s behavior, ever.
That’s what I’m getting from this picture.
“I’m not racist! All these black people are standing around me! If I was really racist, then they wouldn’t be in the same room as me, right???”
Yup. It’s a worse version of “I’m not racist, my friend (who is only here out of professional obligation and who I would never have over for any other reason) is black!”
Because the Oval Office is just that. An office.
Granted, there are many different types of offices and office climates, but there’s always an underlying code of conduct. There’s a code of conduct everywhere you go, even in your own home.
And even if it’s “normal” for Trump’s people to do this sort of thing, this isn’t a normal situation, is it? She’s doing it in the middle of a photoshoot.
Like, she could sit up and sit in a more professional way for a few seconds and go back to sitting the way she was, right? Why is she sitting like that during an obvious photoshoot?
Why do you get to decide that we’re out of line by saying that it might be rude for someone to sit like that in an office?
Because we do expect people who work for (unfortunately) our country’s leader to act with a certain level of professionalism, and this not only seems highly unprofessional, it’s just plain rude to the guests who are there.
If she really needed to be in the photo, she could have put her phone down for a second, sat upright with her feet on the floor, then she could have gone back to her phone once the photo was taken.
Rach, if you were a man you’d get the same damn treatment. If you don’t like it, then go concern troll elsewhere.
Yes, I agree with Kupo that you have a point in that maybe David’s focusing way too hard on Trump and not on misogyny anymore, and yeah, David’s a man and can and will miss misogyny (and sometimes perpetuate it) because he doesn’t have the lived experience of a woman.
Feminism is a learning process.
However, barging in here (and while claiming that you don’t post often) and claiming he’s not a feminist and we’re all a “cult” for not immediately jumping to agree with you despite your obvious concern trolling and name-calling is all really fucking rude and that’s not okay. You barged in here and were really rude, so you got snark. That shit’s not gender-exclusive.
Freemage also didn’t say you had to be “nice all the time”, he just pointed out that you were rude in this one instance. So stop trying to nail yourself to the cross.
There’s no women’s class consciousness here at WHTM, just libfem ‘individualism’ and nice, choice faux feminism.
Look at that photo, look at the article, and tell me this is a promotion of women’s liberation.
@Rach
What does that even mean?
You foolish humans fight amongst yourselves while octopi are planning to conquer the seas with the help of their flippered steeds.
@Rach
Again, you what ?
So what, Kellyanne Conway is a champion of women’s liberation now ?
I mean, I guess she did nail the “I can wear whatever I want” thing some time ago. Though some might argue that it was more about bad taste than freedom.
Not Conway but David’s article on her.
@Rach
How’re we to know your gender? This statement assumes we knew you weren’t male and treated you badly cos of that. Nah, fam…
Hey, uhm… does anybody know what the fuck that means? My academic understanding of feminist thought/theory is rather basic. Entirely my b. Might I ask for the cliff notes here. Cos I’m quite lost…
David’s article and his take on Conway have been adressed multiple times, before and after you barged in here making your claims.
He also walked back the part of what he said that made some of us give it a side-eye.
You on the other hand are making definite claims about his beliefs, his blog, and his and his readers’ legitimacy as “real feminists” while not adressing our answers to you and just cherry-picking anything you feel you can twist your way. I won’t even mention that “cult” thing ’cause that was just ridiculous.
And then you go on about our supposed double standard. Doesn’t that seem a bit off to you ?
Same back to you
@Rach
Aaand, we’re back to coy vaguery. The fuck does that mean? The “same” what back to John?
It means tu quoque.
Rach is trolling for the lulz.
She’s a damn boring troll. Makes me miss being called a ketchup-spewing heathen.
PI:
Maybe this article will help you see what many of us saw:
http://m.tmz.com/#article/2017/02/28/kellyanne-conway-couch-feet-knees-oval-office/
Conway is sitting funny to take a photo. That’s what many of us guessed: the TMZ article has a picture of her taking a photo. She’s taking a photo during a photo op. Scandalous!
Professional photographers are constantly shooting photos in hopes of nailing a good shot. Conway, if she’d been sitting demurely like a fine lady while photos were being taken, would have been stuck in her pose for the entire event.
Someone who disagrees without being nice is a troll. Okay. This is an echo chamber cult
We’re a cult now?
@Moggie
Yes a fellow Poppy fan!
@Rach
If you’re not going to explain yourself then why be here?