Posted on Saturday, October 16, 2010 by Garland Grey
I Fuck While Feminist by making decisions about who I won’t fuck. If I’m going to support the right of women to control their own bodies, their own lives, and be equal partners in their relationships, I need to respect myself enough to label some men as unfuckable. For me, this starts with a recognition of the ways in which problematic narratives about sex, race, and gender permeate gay culture.
Posted on Saturday, October 16, 2010 by Sady
Oh, Fucking While Feminist. What does it MEAN??? Such is the discussion amongst the ladies today. In my personal experience, Fucking While Feminist is pretty much like doing any other thing While Feminist: Going to the grocery store, napping, napping before going to the grocery store, etc. It’s pretty much like usual, except that if you notice any unfairness in the procedure, you are going to complain MUCH MORE READILY AND LOUDLY than you would otherwise.
(Continued)
Posted on Friday, October 15, 2010 by Sady

That I feel Don Draper is not just a bad person, but THE WORST. But that is hyperbole. He hasn’t actually committed genocide (AS FAR AS WE KNOW). But still: If you would like to read a list of reasons about why I feel Pete’s face here is a totally appropriate reaction to knowing this dude (PETE CAMPBELL IS IN A POSITION TO LECTURE YOU ABOUT SELFISHNESS. YOU HAVE BECOME THE WORST), you are welcome.
Posted on Wednesday, October 13, 2010 by Garland Grey
Beatdown, things are getting dire. The country is crumbling all around us, test scores are falling, the unemployment rate is rising off of the graph, and everywhere people are waiting for a miracle. And do you want to know what I blame? The feminism. I blame it for everything. Destruction of the nuclear family? Feminism. Rampant crime in the streets? Feminism. Disrespect to elders, shortening attention spans, women zipping around in motorcars without their husbands walking ahead with a lantern, warning others a lady motorist is terrorizing the countryside?
Feminism.
Luckily, there is one man on the Internet with whom your no-bra-wearing, “Our Bodies, Ourselves” Women’s Lib crap holds no water. His name is Joe. He is the Dad-isms guy.
(Continued)
Posted on Monday, October 11, 2010 by Garland Grey
…may not end up being the title of this weekly advice column.
I am terrible at titles; I always want to do something high concept with too many disparate elements, and it hardly ever comes together. To wit! I wanted a name for TBTYHTLYL that would be equal parts silly kitsch and serious business (and whose acronym didn’t look like an inventory of unused announcements board letters.) So your mission, if you choose to accept it, is to suggest a new title for this advice column. You also get to help me answer these questions, give any advice you may have, and let me know if I’m just completely wrong! The position is unpaid; you start immediately.
(Continued)
Posted on Monday, October 11, 2010 by Sady
“No one should ever refer to another person, even privately, as the political equivalent of a for-profit sex worker.”
When necessary, one should make the necessary clarification that the other person behaves in the manner of a non-profit sex worker. Seriously, “it’s not polite to call ladies whores” is a fairly simple sentence to type.
Posted on Friday, October 8, 2010 by Sady
“But we weren’t mad at Ted Hughes,” certain of you ladies will doubtless tell me. And to you I say: Yes, you are! And stop it! For a man has written a newspaper blog post about what bitches you are all being!
For, you see, the world is now in possession of a Ted Hughes poem about Plath. This poem, says The Man Behind The Blog Post, “shows how intense Hughes’s pain and guilt was at her suicide.” That is… debatable, actually? Beside the point! For “however deep the pain, it won’t be enough for the deranged group among Plath’s fans; the sort who were responsible for vandalising her grave to remove Hughes’s name.”
I mean, yeah, the gravestone-vandalizing was counterproductive and wrong. Which I think every marginally reasonable person in the world agrees with. But also, this dude has such a stellar point, overall! I mean, all Ted Hughes did was pick up a gal with a history of suicidal depression and massive abandonment issues relating to The Dudes, marry her, abandon her (whoops!) in the cruelest manner possible, leave her with the responsibility of caring for two small children which as I understand it is incredibly hard and stressful even if you’re not clinically depressed and dealing with a recent traumatic abandonment that has re-opened that big old treasure trove of Your Issues and set them loose to devour your brain like Dad-shaped zombies, and then, following her totally spontaneous and out-of-nowhere and in-no-way-foreseeable-to-the-point-of-being-almost-inevitable-given-these-specific-circumstances suicide, go around re-editing manuscripts so that they excluded the poems about hating him and getting rid of diaries surrounding the circumstances of their break and her death, much in the manner of a man who has but recently thrown a lit match into a pile of oily rags being all, “well, it really is a shame that the house spontaneously combusted this way! Nothing we could have done to prevent it, I suppose. What a tragedy. Let’s not assign blame here; this is a private matter.” I mean, you guys: What could people possibly be mad at Ted Hughes for? WHAT DID HE DO WRONG????
(Continued)
Posted on Wednesday, October 6, 2010 by Garland Grey
There is a phrase I EXTREMELY dislike that I see otherwise intelligent people using in arguments: “go die in a fire.” I dislike it not because it lowers the tone of the discourse – that’s the only reason I’m even on the Internet – but because it is such a personal attack. Using phrases like that might be intensely gratifying, but if you allow these people to turn you into something ugly, you have let them beat you.
HAVING SAID ALL THAT, Bill Donohue should shut the fuck up forever, or at least stop issuing press releases:
On September 28, the Chicago Tribune reported that “former Chicago priest and convicted sex offender Daniel McCormick sexually abused him [Doe] while he was a grammar school student.” We then learn that the student was really a middle-school student, in the eighth grade, when the abuse began. The abuse reportedly continued for five years. According to the lawsuit, “McCormack inappropriately sexually touched, hugged, rubbed and/or abused Doe.”
It’s time to ask some tough questions. Why did this young man not object earlier? Why did he allow the “abuse” to continue until he was 18? The use of the quotes is deliberate: the charge against the former priest is not rape, but rubbing.
(Continued)
Posted on Tuesday, October 5, 2010 by Sady
Oh, hey! It turns out The British are up to something both pleasant and amusing, for the ladies. It is a “feminist postcard art auction,” with images intended to demonstrate something or other about the state of contemporary feminism. So far, so well-intentioned. Thumbs up, The British!
But have you ever wondered, ladies, what a DUDE ARTIST might contribute to such an auction? Specifically, whether or not he could find a way to make the point that feminism has rendered everything terrible? And also, whether he could work a cum shot into it? Because if your answers are “maybe,” “no,” and “oh, Jesus Christmas, really???!?” I have got your answer! (Fair warning: Your answer is NSFW.) (Because he put a cum shot in it.)
(Continued)