Blocking her (or anyone) didn't seem like your style, but I had to wonder. I mean, you said, "[illogicaltroll*] - go away," as one item in a comment replying to each of several people... and we haven't heard a peep out of her since. The other alternatives are that you said go, and she went, or that she got bored (or realized she was fighting out of her weight, or whatever) at an amusingly opportune moment, the first of which is psychologically unlikely, and the second is statistically anomalous.
You don't (yet, anyway) have a fully-constructed personal feminist ideology, penicentric or otherwise - that's not a slam; personal ideologies, the effective ones anyway, grow over time out of experiences (some of the stupidest things in feminism come of fullblown theoretical ideologies being pulled out of asses). I think you held your own pretty well.
Hey, I know that language problem - well, a similar one. When I was young, "hot" was still used to mean "horny". Now it really does mean "sexually attractive", but the transition was way too much about, "That person is sexually attractive, therefore s/he must have a high sex drive." (Gender-neutral language, because it was an equal-opportunity narcissism, at least in my neck of the woods.) Come to think of it, this relates to the difference between "sexual" and "sexualized" (which Figleaf took note of a couple of weeks back) - "X is hot because s/he makes me feel hot" is sexualization, without reference to hir sexuality, though all too much reference to hir sweet hoochie rear.
Like Lilairen, I'm not withholding sex from piggish men "until"; I'm just plain not fucking piggish men. That includes the ones that regularly and habitually put my needs before their own. So I apparently have more layers in my screening process; presumably I know something about how much trouble is involved. Twisty's "go through all that trouble" makes me think either she isn't willing to put much effort into it at all, or that the "all that trouble" might just come of not knowing to screen out the passive-aggressive Nice Guys(tm).
As I believe you've discovered, she doesn't even speak for all anti-sex-pos radfems - here she is talking with apparent approval of porn that objectifies men, yet when you went in that direction, you got chewed out. (The moral of the story is that even The Sisterhood consists of individual human beings, each with her own particular set of needs and goals and principles. Tee-hee.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-03-28 06:33 am (UTC)You don't (yet, anyway) have a fully-constructed personal feminist ideology, penicentric or otherwise - that's not a slam; personal ideologies, the effective ones anyway, grow over time out of experiences (some of the stupidest things in feminism come of fullblown theoretical ideologies being pulled out of asses). I think you held your own pretty well.
Hey, I know that language problem - well, a similar one. When I was young, "hot" was still used to mean "horny". Now it really does mean "sexually attractive", but the transition was way too much about, "That person is sexually attractive, therefore s/he must have a high sex drive." (Gender-neutral language, because it was an equal-opportunity narcissism, at least in my neck of the woods.) Come to think of it, this relates to the difference between "sexual" and "sexualized" (which Figleaf took note of a couple of weeks back) - "X is hot because s/he makes me feel hot" is sexualization, without reference to hir sexuality, though all too much reference to hir sweet hoochie rear.
Like Lilairen, I'm not withholding sex from piggish men "until"; I'm just plain not fucking piggish men. That includes the ones that regularly and habitually put my needs before their own. So I apparently have more layers in my screening process; presumably I know something about how much trouble is involved. Twisty's "go through all that trouble" makes me think either she isn't willing to put much effort into it at all, or that the "all that trouble" might just come of not knowing to screen out the passive-aggressive Nice Guys(tm).
As I believe you've discovered, she doesn't even speak for all anti-sex-pos radfems - here she is talking with apparent approval of porn that objectifies men, yet when you went in that direction, you got chewed out. (The moral of the story is that even The Sisterhood consists of individual human beings, each with her own particular set of needs and goals and principles. Tee-hee.)
Sunflower