Daddy D's "ex-lesbian" mouthpiece: L Word entices women to consider homosex

Interesting, one little word change can totally expose the falseness

women with opposite-sex attraction often experience a string of broken relationships, substance abuse and emotional volatility. "I personally experienced such in my own life," she said. "I saw it all around me in the lives of other women."

And you know, I've seen this before the L-Word show ever aired.  And I've seen it in men too, not just women - is str8 male fantasy about lesbianism to blame?

I really wish there was a law requiring these professional hate groups to post exactly how much money each article, tv appearance or "breathlessly reporting" email brings in to their organization.

It's the whole reason they downplay hate crime legislation - the fear that we might be able to get some of the money they generate.  I've often wondered - since they use me and my "lifestyle" to raise funds - shouldn't I be able to get a royalty or something?

---

by: Scott_NC @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 12:18:02 PM CST

Great response,

Scott.

---

by: Holly Capote @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 14:23:21 PM CST

[ Parent ]

OMG, She is Right!

And she has inspired me to write my own piece, this time regarding that hideous lair into better-than-thou Christian lifestyles, Seventh Heaven:

"As someone who lived as a Christian for almost thirty years, I know from firsthand experience that there is another side of the Christian lifestyle, and it is anything but glamorous. Instead, those caught up in the Left Behind-reading, Harry Potter bashing, GLBT harrassing, Mega-church building lifestyle often experience a string of empty, broken relationships, delusions of grandeur and emotional volatility. I personally experienced such in my own life, I saw it all around me in the lives of other people.  Please, don't let the Camdens lure you in.  You won't get a big mini-mansion in the suburbs if you throw yourself to the Big Guy in the Sky.  Please, please, think for yourself."

I hope she doesn't mind I borrowed so freely.  But hey, if Ann Coulter can make a career out of it, then so can I.

---

by: JoshWatermanMN @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 12:19:36 PM CST

Err, I meant "lure," not "lair."

Damn Christian homeskooling!

---

by: JoshWatermanMN @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 12:20:59 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Lure works just as well - you know how these Pharisees operate

always trying to shove their lifestyle choice down our throats and lure new victims recruits since they can't just pro-create them with any guarantee that they'll choose the KKKristian lifestyle when they grow up. 

They really need to be stopped for the sake of the children.  Please make your tax deductible donation to......

---

by: Scott_NC @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 12:30:26 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Another gem.

---

by: Holly Capote @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 14:23:37 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Harry Potter bashing,

Apparently the bashing Harry Potter took has left scars on portrayer Daniel Radclyffe's psyche as he has chosen to appear in "Equus" on the London stage in February in a role that requires full frontal nudity. Unfortunately the photos on the People and OMG websites are cropped just north of paradise. One thing is sure - all those games of quidditch left Daniel in superb shape.

LMAO

---

by: Alan down in Florida @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 14:32:12 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Let's see...

I only watched this show a few times starting last season but so far it hasn't caused me to want to boink another woman.  It hasn't made me want to boink Dallas Roberts either, maybe I should watch more episodes?  ;^)

My America includes LGBT families.

---

by: Mena @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 12:30:18 PM CST

Seriously, she really is right

I watched one episode of L-Word and I was ready to jump in the sack with lesbian women.  As a heterosexual male, I feel so violated.

Oddly enough, when I wa sa fan of Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, it never made me want to sleep with men.  Must have been Kressly's fault.  He's cute, but his taste in clothes is from hunger.

But Thom could decorate my house anytime.

---

by: DBK @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 12:31:49 PM CST

Yep, she is correct more than she knows...

Being a gay man, when I watched I found myself wanting to be a lesbian. I want to go out, have a sex change and find a woman to make sweet love to!!

Now, let me go wash my mouth out with soap...uh hands...*quivers*

---

by: Pta @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 13:02:47 PM CST

[ Parent ]

the only reason...

the only reason she thinks the L word makes women want to have hot lesbian sex?

BECAUSE SHES STILL A LESBIAN.

---

by: segmentation fault @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 13:23:37 PM CST

Amen to that.

---

by: Holly Capote @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 14:24:44 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Drama? Hardly.

"My life raking leaves and picking up dog biscuits at the grocery store with the missus does not a drama make."

I hear you there, Pam. Nothing overly dramatic about mucking out the barn or painting the outside of our home. No hand-wring occurs when we go pick up some tilapia filets for dinner and then settle down to watch CSI.

Ms. Freyer's remark about broken relationships can be just as easily pinned on heterosexual relationships--doesn't she understand that when you put two human beings together in a relationship it doesn't always work out?  I hate it when these folks try and make it seem like broken relationships are the exclusive domain of gays and lesbians.

"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move."

Douglas Adams - 'The Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy'  

---

by: Val @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 13:45:53 PM CST

Yeah ...

I'm with seg. fault here ...

I mean, you are supposedly an 'ex-lesbian' (an aside, sorry, no such fucking thing, either you are a lesbian, or you aren't and never really were, there is no 'ex'), you think everything to do with being lesbian is evil and disgusting ... yet you watch the L-Word?

She doth protest a tad too much methinks ...

Not to mention she seems to have noticed how glamorous and hot and sexy the lesbians on the L-Word are (mmmmm, Bette ... mmmm), so apparently she seems a tad riveted to the show.

Someone needs to also tell her to work on the lesbian hair :)

(Slightly OT, but thank goodness this season has gotten better from the abombination that was last season ... ugh ... tho can someone PLEASE shoot Max ... (and Jenny - but that is a given) oh, and can someone explain to Papi's writers what the words 'cliched' and 'stereotype' mean? Thank you)

---

by: Sarah in Chicago @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 13:52:13 PM CST

Why, Sarah...

Jenny's my favorite!  Please don't shoot her, pretty please...

Please shoot Ms. Fryrear instead.  (What a name!)

Social outrage is power protecting itself; it is not morality. -- Andrea Dworkin

---

by: RachelPhilPa @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 17:57:58 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Sorry Rachel ...

... but Jenny has been a whiney little manic self-absorbed bitch since the series started *grin* ... her only redeeming bit was going off at Tina in the past episode for breaking Bette's heart and going all fucking straight ...

---

by: Sarah in Chicago @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 18:12:09 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I'm shocked you would applaud blatent biphobia...

especially from you Sarah in Chicago. 

I really don't like The L Word, but every Sunday night my girlfriend and our friends gather round at our apartment.  Hearing Jenny's (of all people) rant about how Tina can't hang out with them because she is a dirty bisexual elicited a reaction of "What the fuck?!?!" to "Oh no she didn't!" to "Fuck this show" from all 7 of us.  4 of whom are bisexuals, 3 of whom are in relationships with women for 2-6 years respectively. 

The L Word can't write bisexuals for shit (or transpeople or people of color or consistant characters...).  Alice started the show as a theorhetical bisexual, but the show never touched on any bi issues with her and her comments this season make it clear that she's seen the light and is a 'real' lesbian now.  Jenny was potentially bisexual, but storyline was dropped like a hot potato after season 1, and so was Kit's short fling with Ivan and bi-related issues.  Then out of no where, Tina is a bisexual (she doesn't actually say bisexual mind you) AND she is not just bi, she is every bad stereotype that lesbians have about bi women all rolled into one.  She left Bette for a man, she gets hetero privledge, she cheated and is generally a bad person... and all the characters can attack her for proving herself a trecherous bisexual.  And that is what passes for bi representation on the only show to portray queer women's lives, just more ignorance and avoidence of real bi issues, with a nice heap of plot-justifyable disgust for bisexuals.

There was absolutely no call for the kind of ignorance, prejudice, and outright biphobia that Jenny was spousing in last weeks episode.  I'm really disapointed that you would cheer that on instead of calling it what it is: bigotry.

---

by: SarahS @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 22:49:46 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Um...

I feel like I'm sticking my hand in a hornets nest for even commenting on this thread. 

I've only watched the show a couple of times.  For a variety of obvious reasons, I find it rather difficult to get into. 

I always thought that the Tina being "bad bi stereotypes" was done as an explanation to the non-queer crowd as to where biphobia comes from.  However, I'm not sure that it's done in a terribly 'bifriendly' way. 

---

by: dan l @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 01:25:56 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Oh please ...

... Tina fucking had it coming ... you're right, the show can't write bisexual characters for shit, and that's where I think Tina had that shit rightly coming from Jenny (even though I detest her character). She's a bitch, and her bisexuality shouldn't have anything to do with it.

Tina leaps from being married to Bette to straight-dom in one swoop and expects that nothing should change about her place within a group of women that are connected through friendship around being queer (yes, even Kit), even though her existence as queer has shifted. Regardless of how she does or does not identify, having her cake and eating it too is not something she should expect.

Inclusion within the group because she is bi? Sure, of course. Inclusion within the group because she is bi even though she is being a horrid bitch? Fuck that. Inclusion within the group in the same way as previous even though one's position in such has changed? Hell no.

It's not about who you fuck, don't give a shit about that, but to expect that things don't change or won't be different? Nope.

---

by: Sarah in Chicago @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 09:08:02 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Reminded me of "Go Fish"

While watching that scene in the last episode on the basketball court, I couldn't help but think of the movie "Go Fish."  I had a hard enough time watching that movie, but when the group ganged up on the woman who slept with a man, I thought "god, this sucks!"

As I've grown older, I think I've gotten over some of my angst about bisexuality.  I've never really "gotten it" because I can't imagine EVER sleeping with a man, but who am I to judge who someone else sleeps with.  One of my best friends (SOOOO gay! and getting married to his partner in June) slept with a woman once.

On the other hand, I do think it's nuts for the Tina character to think that nothing should change.  I mean, um, hello...you cheated on your long-time partner and the other mother of your child with a man (bad enough if it had been a woman, but DAMN!) and you think nothing should change.  She's lucky she hasn't had her ass kicked.  If I was Bette I wouldn't be able to stay in the same room with her without wanting to kill her.

Fucking someone is one thing and that I can ALMOST understand, but giving up the life you had with your partner for a life of privileged heterosexuality, yet expecting everyone to be cool with it, is another.  It's low down and simply naive.

---

by: callie @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 09:58:03 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Yikes.

This is a loaded issue.  As I already stated, I've never seen L Word, so I can't comment on the characters, but I have seen antipathy towards bi-girls and the assertion that being left for a man hurts more than being left for another woman.  Whereas I appreciate the passion in your position, Callie, I suspect that there are unaddressed issues in lesbians raging about a bi-woman who pair-bonds with a boy.

---

by: Holly Capote @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 10:12:49 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Ah ...

... not to disagree with you here hon, but getting left for a man DOES hurt more than being left for a woman. That's just the way things are. It's about denial of identity and privilege.

Maybe I know I am a little biphobic, and I also know it is something I work on. Yes, there is biphobia in the lesbian community, and yes it is something we need to work on most certainly. But don't suggest that I equate some bi woman who has ended up with a guy, with the struggles we as lesbians go through to simply have our relationships.
 

---

by: Sarah in Chicago @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 10:27:47 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Sarah,

I'm always fine when you disagree with me, for you do it with such compassion and tenderness.  I'm not suggesting that it doesn't hurt more to be left for a man.  My experiences supports this assertion.  What I am suggesting is that that hurt hasn't been fully unpacked.  Whereas I am persuaded by the position that a bi-girl moves from Otherness to privilege in choosing a man, I think that there's more to it.  Choosing a man can uncage rage.  It's my sense that more than the dynamics of privilege power that rage.

---

by: Holly Capote @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 10:34:07 AM CST

[ Parent ]

This could be a whole other thread!

There's so much to discuss on it that it doesn't do justice to it to leave it down in a lost thread.

I think any infidelity is painful, esp. when it comes from someone you've committed yourself to.  For some women though, I think the double-whammy is when they feel like they've not only been cheated on but lied to as well.

Maybe I'm heavy on honesty these days, but I think it's not a shattering if you know your partner has attraction to both sexes.  My first gf told me that she had been with guys before and that she still found them attractive.  She even joked to my face about some guy passing by being "hot."  Needless to say, I didn't have a lot of faith in her fidelity.

My partner's first gf though NEVER, EVER gave her any indication that she was attracted to men, even went so far as to do the whole "yuck, nasty" attitude when men were even brought up (now I recognize this as the "lady doth protest too much" attitude), but when you're young you take it at face value.  She did and her gf simply stopped talking to her one day and about a week later she was dating the son of the dept. chair.

Honesty makes the pain of infidelity go down easier, IMO.

And speaking of the L word, that Jenny character has some freakin' nerve to talk.  The first season she kept trying to exorcise her lezzie demon by boning her boyfriend.

---

by: callie @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 10:34:48 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Callie,

I think you're changing.  If I'm right, I'm wondering if it's impending parenthood. 

From my cyber-distance, you strike me as becoming more introspective.  I called you a warrior princess the other day, but now I'm thinking that you're more of a warrior poet: a samurai.  No lie. 

And you're right about this topic needing its own thread.

Pam?

Wanna?

I'm also wondering if there's a corollary for the guys, for this topic has been reduced to the gals.  Fellas, have you ever had a partner leave you for a woman and does it hurt more?  Does it uncage rage?

---

by: Holly Capote @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 10:40:32 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Hmmmm ...

I don't think you could quite equate those hon, as leaving a man for a woman and a woman for a man has different power, privilege and resistance issues going hon. Not to mention the negation of relationship validity that comes with being left for a man.

Or are you talking for GAY men?

---

by: Sarah in Chicago @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 10:58:53 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I don't know that it was my intent to equate them.

I was trained to observe in conflict and note patterns.  This conversation has been reduced to women.  Even with an invitation, no men have reentered.  This might be explained by different dynamics, as you outlined above, or it might be explained by something altogether different. 

I suggested that queer women haven't fully unpacked this issue.  What I'm about to suggest is coming out of my ass more than my mouth, so if it's crap, consider the source:

Every community has its markers.  I was in a high school yesterday where many of the girls conformed by wearing flip flops on a 7 degree day.  They endured discomfort to belong.  Because the reaction of rage among lesbians to an ex loving a man is so ubiquitous and given that every group is in reality an amalgam of individuals affecting sameness, I wonder if being enraged at a mate leaving one for a man isn't a community marker, a way to say, "Hey, I know the rules and this is one of them."

Sarah, if you go to a movie with 5 seemingly similar folks, they'll have 5 dissimilar reactions.  But if you watch 5 lesbians react to their partner leaving them for a man, you're likely to see the same reaction.  That just doesn't happen unless there's some incentive, like conformity.  I don't suggest this to replace your cogent position about privilege, but rather to supplement it. 

---

by: Holly Capote @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 11:11:31 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Wow...amazing where this thread has gone!

I don't think that issues around bisexuality vs. gay/lesbian can be put in black and white terms.  I think that all of the comments here have some valid points.  I can understand that when a person chooses to take advantage of a privilege, that s/he might no longer be welcome in a group that does not have that privilege.  But I also see how various communities define themselves so rigidly, that they enforce conformity just as brutally as the larger community that oppresses them.  For example, the Feminist Sex Wars of the 1980's, and the current debate on the inclusion of trans people in the women's community, where there seems to be no middle ground.

That being said...Let's remember who cheated first in that relationship - it was Bette who cheated on Tina (end of first season), and it was Bette, reacting to Tina's rage, that forced Tina to have sex against her will.  The relationship was totally broken by that, and could never have been put back together.  And I seem to remember that when Tina moved back in, they had a (probably poorly negotiated) agreement regarding an open relationship.

On a more personal level, I find myself identifying strongly with Jenny.  Her history is not that different from mine, including childhood abuse, and cutting.  So, I suppose I have a kinder view of that character.  And let's not be so harsh about her boinking both men and women for a while...coming out is not like throwing a switch.  I went through months where I flipped back and forth between genderqueer-ness and transwoman-ness as I was going through a lot of conflicts.  Would this not happen to at least some lesbians (and gay men) as they come out, especially if they come from a family that shamed them over their sexual orientation?

Social outrage is power protecting itself; it is not morality. -- Andrea Dworkin

---

by: RachelPhilPa @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 12:23:41 PM CST

[ Parent ]

All good points, Rachel.

I wasn't trying to be harsh to the Jenny character for sleeping with men and women.  I was just pointing out the hypocrisy of the character and perhaps what so many of us can fall into and that is forgetting where we've been and the crap we've gone through.  Perhaps Jenny's reaction was not so atypical as it was typical.  We can pass judgment easily on another person for the same sins we've committed.

I tend to identify with the Bette character (even though I'm not the cheating type, and yes, she was first guilty of that).  Except for the biracial characteristic, I'm similar to her.  I came from an incredibly demanding, perfectionistic, religiously conservative home, and I admire how Bette holds her head high and refuses to submit to shame for who she is.  But that thickheadedness also keeps her from admitting she's made mistakes.  Mistakes that may have cost her her relationship.

The issues around bisexuality in our community is not black & white.  As a community and as individuals, we have a lot of soul-searching to do on this.  We need to come to terms with it as desperately as we need to face trans issues and racial issues.  Until then, we can't demand of society what we can't exemplify ourselves (unity, openness, acceptance).

---

by: callie @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 12:41:02 PM CST

[ Parent ]

See, Callie,

you are a warrior poet.

---

by: Holly Capote @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 12:48:43 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Thought you'd appreciate that, Holly. :)

And thanks!

---

by: callie @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 12:49:45 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Oh, I do, I do!

I truly think you're becoming more reflective.  And you emote more and more broadly: not just a warrior's rage, but a poet's understanding.  Is anyone in your meat world noting such changes?  And do you think that impending parenthood is pushing such changes, if I'm descrying clearly?  It is said, you know, that parenthood utterly changes a person, so I'm wondering if change is already upon you...and in you.

---

by: Holly Capote @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 13:03:39 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Callie, I know I just put you on the spot and I'm asking you to be...

...self-reflective squared when I urge you to reflect on your self-reflection.  So, if you'd rather not conjecture, that's fine.

Hugs and kisses,

Holly

---

by: Holly Capote @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 13:09:15 PM CST

[ Parent ]

No, that's cool, Holly.

I don't mind at all.  Every time I started to delve into this, I was distracted by something.  (work is from the devil :)

Anyhoo, yes, I think that being a to-be parent has had some kind of impact on me.  Maybe it has made me more reflective and given me inspiration that I didn't have before.  Take the thread up about Mary Cheney.  I've gotten my dithers in a twist, more at Dick than Mary, because I CANNOT fathom putting any kind of politics, money, or association above the well-being of a child.  Even if our child grows up to be a murderer, I would probably rail against the inhumane treatment of prisoners because it's instinctive to protect that which we love.

It also gets me in a knot over the GLBT community fighting over what is and is not important in our civil rights struggle.  I get pissed off more at our community for us telling each other to be patient, be quiet, be safe than I do when those outside of our community do.  They don't always get it, but we should.  We should realize that one right can't and shouldn't be sacrified on the altar of another.  We must stand together.

---

by: callie @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 14:30:00 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Thanks for the reply, Callie.

Now, when I sleep tonight, I hope to have this dream:

You step into an elevator.  There's only one other woman in the car.  You're preoccupied, so you don't look at her.  But between the 14th and 15th floors, the elevator jams...for 20 minutes.  Only then do you realize that the other woman is Mary Cheney. 

And I get to be a fly on the wall.

---

by: Holly Capote @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 14:38:34 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Looking up, arms crossed

WHat is it with people like Fryrear (an unfortunate name...) and LaBarbera in their publicity shots.  Arms crossed.  Looking up at an oblique angle.  Is there only one photographer for these folks, and she's really, really tall?

Lurleen on Twitter

---

by: Lurleen @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 14:04:20 PM CST

Photo Angles

"WHat is it with people like Fryrear (an unfortunate name...) and LaBarbera in their publicity shots.  Arms crossed.  Looking up at an oblique angle.  Is there only one photographer for these folks, and she's really, really tall? "

Well in Melissa's case, her chin waddle looks impossibly like a vagina so she needs to be photographed from that angle, lest it distract from her holy message.

You can't convert the lesbians if they're staring at the lady garden on your neck.

---

by: Scott @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 14:22:58 PM CST

[ Parent ]

The L Word is all positive?

Is this not the same program in which two women decide to have a child together, and one ends up running off with a man? In which a FTM transgender person was dumped for being a freak? Where just in the last episode one of the characters had sex with her friend's married boss, knowing perfectly well that she didn't love the married woman, and likely would mislead her?

Oh yeah, that is a great example of how glamorous the lesbian "lifestyle" is.

---

by: CPT_Doom @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 14:07:41 PM CST

No-one's life is perfection...

Look at any community - straight, bi, trans, what have you...and there's people with issues.  People do cheat on each other; people do dump each other; people do really crappy things to each other.

I really don't think it's fair to single out the lesbian community when these are universal issues.

I do agree, though, that the L-word's treatment of trans issues is pretty insulting.  Anybody remember Lisa, the "lesbian-identified male" from the first season?  It's almost as if they used Janice Raymond as their consultant on trans issues.

Social outrage is power protecting itself; it is not morality. -- Andrea Dworkin

---

by: RachelPhilPa @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 18:08:37 PM CST

[ Parent ]

That's the point

Don't mistake me - my point is, anyone who thinks the characters on the "L Word" represent some completely glamorous representation of lesbians are not watching the show that closely - it's a soap opera, so of course there are huge problems in everyone's life - it's like someone arguing that "Queer as Folk" will make straight men turn gay because it was such a positive representation of gay men. Yeah, give me a show with a bunch of men with body image issues, commitment phobia, drug addiction/overdoses, and HIV issues, that'll make gay life look soooo good, all those straight men will turn immediately.

---

by: CPT_Doom @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 18:51:02 PM CST

[ Parent ]

my mom

watches the L word. I knew it she is a lesbian!!! First sign she likes lucky charms. Second sign she has rainbow pajama bottoms. Third sign favorit color purple. Now this. I'll sit her down and tell her I love her no matter what she chooses.

---

by: Shane @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 14:12:58 PM CST

Something about Melissa

I know three Melissa's (two are gay, one is bi).  Hmmmm, must be something about that name.

Anyhoo, love this little line:  "The L Word will lead women to hit the sack with gals."  Yeah, because they think it's HAWWWTTT!

Besides, the L word is not very representative of lesbians.  That's no more representative of us than All My Children or Desperate Housewives is of straights.

If she wants to see a fucked up lesbian relationship that fits her belief system, then maybe she should watch the new FX show "Dirt."  The two women only go at it after they shoot up.  One even keeps running back to her ex-boyfriend trying to give him a bj.  Maybe that would suit her more.

Doubt it, I never remember getting turned on over het sex, but women...yeah.  Guess that explains why I'm a lesbian.  Go figure!

---

by: callie @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 14:31:31 PM CST

IF HETEROSEXUALITY IS SO NATURAL AND SUPERIOR...

Why are Fundies so frightened that merely being exposed to it will cause straight men and women to run off and jump into the bed of the first gay or lesbian they run across?

All I can guess if straight sex was as unsatisfying to my partners as it was to me is they might be right to be scared.

---

by: Alan down in Florida @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 14:38:33 PM CST

*nods*

Definitely! They speak to "Natural Law" and all that .. and yet for something supposedly natural, right and eternal, for all their protesting, it seems AWFULLY fragile apparently ...

---

by: Sarah in Chicago @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 14:41:26 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Sarah,

I always felt the same way about the fundy response to evolution.  If their faith is so strong, then why must they attack a contrary notion? 

Sarah, as a feminist, you are familiar with the notion of masculinity as "that which is not feminine," rather than something with a freestanding identity.  Perhaps fundamentalism works in the same way, with the same chronic refutation of all that isn't ideologically fundamental, such as evolution and homosexuality.  You know how boys police behavior with accusations of "You're a girl!" and "Pussy!" for boys with range.  This constant bleating about homosexuality and evolution seems similar.

---

by: Holly Capote @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 14:47:42 PM CST

[ Parent ]

*smile*

Actually Holly, yeah, we refer to masculinity as 'brittle' because it crumbles easily and requires constant work to preserve it.

However with Fundamentalism we have a mindset issue ... it's the collision between pluralistic mindsets and absolutist mindsets.

For those of us that are pluralistic, the existence of other perspectives, beliefs and truths have no impact on own views, and we are not challenged by such. Hell, we see a multiplicity of such as a recognition of the complexity and grey in the world (think of how we view issues like 'marriage').

However, for an absolutist mindset, there is only one Way, one Truth, one Reality. The mere existence of a different belief or perspective is an implicit statement saying that their own belief is wrong. There can only be one way of doing something, and theirs is it. Hence they must eradicate all other perspectives. It's the epitome of intolerance. In fact, 'tolerance' is an anathema to this mindset.

It's still brittle of course, but the reasons for it's brittle fragile nature are different. Or at least that's how I see things.

This is what I argue about when people try to position us as the opposite side of the coin from them, trying to convert them, for instance. But we aren't. We really don't care what they believe, so long as they just don't force it on others. The same can not be said for them.

---

by: Sarah in Chicago @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 15:02:55 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Sarah, this is a beautiful paragraph:

"However, for an absolutist mindset, there is only one Way, one Truth, one Reality. The mere existence of a different belief or perspective is an implicit statement saying that their own belief is wrong. There can only be one way of doing something, and theirs is it. Hence they must eradicate all other perspectives. It's the epitome of intolerance. In fact, 'tolerance' is an anathema to this mindset."

Fuck the dissertation.  Submit that.  No more.  It's as compact, brilliant, clear, and cutting as a diamond.

I edited 5 Ivy League dissertations and after mining that slag heap of steaming syllables for traces of gold (mixing metaphors here, but shit and slag are both apt for disserations), I'd love for academics to reduce their argument to a string of sentences no more than the pearls on a necklace.
 

---

by: Holly Capote @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 15:47:44 PM CST

[ Parent ]

*blush*

I wish I could hon ... I wish I could. Plus I wish I could believe I was good enough, or intelligent enough.

---

by: Sarah in Chicago @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 15:54:42 PM CST

[ Parent ]

You are. You are.

Do you attend the University of Chicago?  Northwestern?  Do tell. 

---

by: Holly Capote @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 16:46:56 PM CST

[ Parent ]

University of Illinois at Chicago

Where there are more than just white people :)

---

by: Sarah in Chicago @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 16:49:21 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Ahhh, the Big Ten. Groovy.

I'm a Big Tenner too: a Buckeye.  My 6 sibs also attended O.S.U. and my parents too.  There's a lot to be said for "more than just white people."  One of my fave places in the whole world is Harvard's Kennedy School of Gov't.  They NEVER talk about diversity because it's so diverse.  You walk into its Atrium and you'll hear 10 different languages.  It is Heaven.

Of course, for Rush Limbaugh, it would be Hell.

He'd huff and puff and sputter, "Th-th-this is America and we speak American here!  American, I say!"

---

by: Holly Capote @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 17:07:00 PM CST

[ Parent ]

*nods*

I love it, this is one of the most diverse schools in the nation ... I've taught classes where the white students are in the minority numerically.

And, I have to say, teaching kids of colour who already have an ability to think critically about the world around them thanks to the realisation that the world isn't quite set up for them, is great ... not that I want to teach mind you.

---

by: Sarah in Chicago @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 17:13:02 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yeah, it's fun...

...to have kids with gumption and wisdom in the room. 

If not teach, then what?

---

by: Holly Capote @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 17:25:12 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I'm thinking ...

... something law enforcement/ethnic-conflict/minority-conflict related ... hopefully in Canada.

---

by: Sarah in Chicago @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 17:37:52 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Oh, yeah!

I remember your saying that once.  I LOVE Canada!!!

Please, if you're ever an officer and I'm Canada, pull me over!  Don't worry about the charge, but if you absolutely need one, "Suspicion of being a goof" will do, as it's apt.  And since I'm often feeling frisky, you'll have to frisk me. 

---

by: Holly Capote @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 17:48:12 PM CST

[ Parent ]

lol

But you're always a goof Holly :)

Though yeah, I love Canada too ... hopefully won't be too long now.

---

by: Sarah in Chicago @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 18:01:06 PM CST

[ Parent ]

From a MAN'S Point Of View

Masculinity is not as brittle as you'd like to make it out to be. Interestingly enough the majority of is men are secure in their own heterosexuality and do not feel threatened by homosexuals (unless prodded by their religion). However that still leaves a whole lot of mooks making a whole lot of noise (and doing some bashing) to convince the outside world that they are, as Laurie Anderson would say, "mas macho."  I'd bet that if a study was ever made there'd be a great correlation between these guys and the straight guys who find lesbian sex a turn on. It's their projection of their own same-sex desire into a format that is more "socially acceptable."

But what do I know? Heck, I was so stupid that it wasn't until I realized I was gay in my late 20s that the fact that the women in my dreams and fantasies all had penises finally had an explanation. D'uh.

---

by: Alan down in Florida @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 15:52:59 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Btw

Alan, we aren't talking about men's sense of their individual manhood. We are talking about the social construct of masculinity as a group identity narrative.

---

by: Sarah in Chicago @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 15:56:16 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Sense of their individual manhood

although the quickest way to make a man of any orientation lose his erection is to laugh at him naked. We're all brittle in that sense.

---

by: Alan down in Florida @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 11:03:18 AM CST

[ Parent ]

That's so reductive as to qualify as bigotry or male bashing.

---

by: Alan down in Florida @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 11:08:46 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Damn, Alan, you're a scrapper.

I hope you know that Sarah is the Welterweight Champion of the Cyber-World.

Sarah, you've taken a couple shots in the last 24.  I want you to know how glad I am that you're posting again at the Blend and how much I admire your mind and trust your heart.

---

by: Holly Capote @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 11:15:24 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I Am Unique

and way out of the mainstream and I refuse to be lumped into a context or concept or construction. My difference is all I have left - let me hold on to at least that.

---

by: Alan down in Florida @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 16:20:42 PM CST

[ Parent ]

*hugs*

Thanks Holly hon, you're always really sweet ... and don't worry about me hon ... after what I went through coming out way back when, not much gets to me now :)

I'd like to think I am fairly aware of my faults and I am trying to work on them *smile* so having someone point them out to me doesn't really rock me THAT much *grin* Admittedly, I do have my insecurities, so hey ...

Of course, I do consider a part of what I said above to be valid of course, if bisexuals want to be solid members of the queer community, they need to police their own as much as we need to work on our own stupidities and phobias regarding bisexuals.

---

by: Sarah in Chicago @ Fri Feb 02, 2007 at 09:13:50 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Yeah, hurt is relative.

I wish I were more like you.  When I was young, I could deflect more hurt than I can today.  It sounds like you're better at deflecting hurt as a result of being hurt when you came out.  It toughened you.  I feel more tender, rather than tougher.

---

by: Holly Capote @ Fri Feb 02, 2007 at 09:28:24 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Oh ...

Holly hon, I'm not THAT tough ... I don't LIKE to be told about my faults, as I am not all that together, lol ... but I am tougher than I used to be when I was younger thanks to all that shite.

Still, I do prefer to enjoy my nice little rose-coloured reality without too much disturbance :)

---

by: Sarah in Chicago @ Fri Feb 02, 2007 at 09:59:38 AM CST

[ Parent ]

*snort*

Look, if you can't grasp the basic distinction between individual level constructions and systemic structural level social understandings, then I wonder at your ability to do even remotely basic analysis of society.

---

by: Sarah in Chicago @ Fri Feb 02, 2007 at 09:07:18 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Personally....

And that is why Sarah is always on my invite list for dinner parties. 

---

by: dan l @ Fri Feb 02, 2007 at 09:25:08 AM CST

[ Parent ]

*snort*

And if you can't grasp the basic distinction between systemic structural level social understandings and their reductive pigeon-holing of individuals into types, then I wonder at your credibility in doing even basic analysis of society. Especially when your attitude is so dismissive and condescending to people who don't buy into your analysis. It's no wonder you are so successful defending yourself. You obvious have alienated many friends and potential allies with your didactic, elitist, overthought and overwrought analysis of society.

You ignore the trees for the forest. See I can do remotely basic analysis.

I guarantee you I am just as intelligent as you and understand how the world works just as well as you do. And my guess is that our underlying attitudes are probably very similar. However, I do not take it personally when people disagree with me. In fact, I like it, it provokes discourse and oftentimes I learn things.

As I have said elsewhere, if I were right all of the time I'd either be my mother or God, and there's not enough Xanax and Immodium to get me through the day.

---

by: Alan down in Florida @ Fri Feb 02, 2007 at 11:25:42 AM CST

[ Parent ]

lol

I didn't say a word about your intelligence level in the slightest, so if you read that into that, it says more about your own projection than anything you think I said.

You made an accusation of me that isn't correct, so I replied. I didn't disagree with your opinion, I merely said your level of looking at things was not where we were at. This is not my fault, merely that we discussing in a different context.

Furthermore, analysis at a contextual structural level is a societal explanation, focusing solely on the individual does not a systematic analysis make. Despite your use of the forest metaphor, it doesn't really apply in this case I am afraid to say.

But, my intention is not to convince you of my position. This is what I do for a living, so I really don't need your validation.

---

by: Sarah in Chicago @ Fri Feb 02, 2007 at 11:40:18 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Well I'm sorry...

"And if you can't grasp the basic distinction"

"then I wonder at your credibility in doing even basic analysis"

Boy that sure sounds to me to be question my intellectual abilities and intelligence. Oh yeah, and then there was...

"your level of looking at things was not where we were at."

Which sure sounds like condescension to me.

As for projection that's contextual, system psychobabble.
Just as you don't need my validation, I do not need yours either. And the fact that you do it for a living has no bearing on the issue whatsoever.

My point is that your system anaylysis (the forest) is reductive in its dismissal of individuality (the trees).

---

by: Alan down in Florida @ Fri Feb 02, 2007 at 14:58:17 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Wow Alan!!!

No Alan.  I think you're wrong.  Your masculinity is quite brittle - obviously if the moment you're told you're wrong by a woman (quite eloquently, I might add) now you're running around hurling the personal insults. 

Quick reality check for you - I'm a straight, white, male republican.  She's never alienated me.  If I'm not put off by her, I think anybody who is might be a bit....sensitive. 

Honestly brother, the argument you're making has a premise that is way off base. 

---

by: dan l @ Fri Feb 02, 2007 at 11:49:58 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Brother Dan

How condescending and presumptive your comment "obviously if the moment you're told you're wrong by a woman...you're running around hurling the personal insults" is, which is not only sexist (I could care less where on the gender spectrum she is - it has no bearing on her intelligence or ability to make her case) but also personally insulting to me in saying my masculinity is brittle based on a completely false assumption (that my masculinity is threatened by being told I'm wrong by a woman. Trust me, I care for my 86 year old mother and am told I am wrong more times a day than either of us can count on our fingers so I'm well used to it).

"Quick reality check for you - I'm a straight, white, male republican.  She's never alienated me.  If I'm not put off by her, I think anybody who is might be a bit....sensitive."

Quick reality check for you Dan - I'm a gay, white, male Democrat. Clearly there is a basic difference between our realities sir. I don't pretend to know anything about you, your history or beliefs so I try to not make any assumptions. This is clearly not true of you.

As for your never having been alienated by Sarah. Congratulations. Guess what - neither have I. I have nothing but the greatest respect for her, her intelligence and ability to eloquently express herself. These are all qualities I treasure in an individual.

All that my original point was to point out that by using systemic analysis that revolves around groups and dismisses the individuality of the people in the group is reductive and leaves itself open to alienating those members of the group who do not personally reflect the attitudes and behaviors being ascribed to the group by the analysis. 

Finally...let's talk context for a second. You make the following statement "If I'm not put off by her, I think anybody who is might be a bit....sensitive." Guess what Dan, much like yesterday's kerfuffle over Joseph Biden and his use of the word "clean" in referring to Barack Obama which many took to be an insult, I consider that your elipsis prior to the word sensitive turns the word into a pejorative. As a straight man you might know that for years the word "sensitive" has been a code word for homosexual, particularly referring to effeminate seeming children or those of us who were more interested in art and reading than we were at sports.

So our differing realities make us react differently to the word sensitive. Although I find much of your remarks to be personally insulting considering you don't know me from Adam, I will give you the benefit of the doubt here. Your contexts and my contexts are not the same.

And BTW, there's nothing wrong with being sensitive. I'd rather be sensitive to individuals than callously lumping them into a social construct. 

---

by: Alan down in Florida @ Fri Feb 02, 2007 at 15:30:29 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Alan, you're doing a rare thing in caring...

...for your mother.  And it sounds like a hard thing, if she's critical of you despite all your care.  I'll think a good thought for the two of you.

---

by: Holly Capote @ Fri Feb 02, 2007 at 15:52:06 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Thank You Very Much Holly. I Appreciate It.

---

by: Alan down in Florida @ Fri Feb 02, 2007 at 15:56:05 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Just telling the truth,

Pumpkin.

---

by: Holly Capote @ Fri Feb 02, 2007 at 16:46:50 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Of course....

Yes.  Because I'm clearly an presumptive individual!!  Just ask anybody!!

Your actual quote:

Especially when your attitude is so dismissive and condescending to people who don't buy into your analysis. It's no wonder you are so successful defending yourself. You obvious have alienated many friends and potential allies with your didactic, elitist, overthought and overwrought analysis of society.

You questioned a woman on whether or not she maintains positive social standing for the simple reason that she just took a big wet bite out of your pseudo intellectual ass, which would be rough equivalent of saying: 

You're just a man hating gurly! None of the boys will ever like you.  How are you ever going to have friends with all of your 'independent thinking'? 

Frankly, you can take that shit and place it squarely back in the frat house. 

And on to this little gem: 

k context for a second. You make the following statement "If I'm not put off by her, I think anybody who is might be a bit....sensitive." Guess what Dan, much like yesterday's kerfuffle over Joseph Biden and his use of the word "clean" in referring to Barack Obama which many took to be an insult, I consider that your elipsis prior to the word sensitive turns the word into a pejorative. As a straight man you might know that for years the word "sensitive" has been a code word for homosexual, particularly referring to effeminate seeming children or those of us who were more interested in art and reading than we were at sports.

Um.  No. Interesting that, in your clearly extensive exploration into the context of my statement in which you derive that I'm using code words for 'homosexual' slurs, you seem to conveniently ignore that a major feature of the discussion was Sarah. Or, just as you so nicely dismissed her with "your a woman, keep it up and nobody is going to like you", does she just not count? 

---

by: dan l @ Sat Feb 03, 2007 at 00:42:08 AM CST

[ Parent ]

WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?

"Or, just as you so nicely dismissed her with "your a woman, keep it up and nobody is going to like you", does she just not count?"

Are you taking quotes out of thin air or are you just being presumptive again?

I never once dismissed Sarah on the basis of her gender. Point of fact is that I was the one dismissed by Sarah which is what prompted my rebuttal.

"you seem to conveniently ignore that a major feature of the discussion was Sarah."

No you seem to conveniently ignore that you attacked me under false assumptions on Sarah's behalf, perhaps because she will always have a place at your dinner table. Sarah has publicly written in this blog that she can defend herself, a comment which led to my comment. Is your passionate defense perhaps your own dismissal of Sarah's ability to take care of herself since she's just a woman (a false piece of dismissiveness that you accused me of).
Once you attacked me the conversation became about you.

"Interesting that, in your clearly extensive exploration into the context of my statement in which you derive that I'm using code words for 'homosexual' slurs,"

You're the one that raised the issue of context. And I replied that our contexts are different, which means our views of the world are different. You're the one that chose to place the elipsis prior the word sensitive. Was that your blogging equivalent of a verbalized pause? Did you need the time to find the right word? I was pointing out that, just as some people were offended by Joe Biden's using the word "clean" in referring to Barack Obama even though the word has a completely different context to most people, in my context as a former gay child and current gay man I know the word sensitive in a different context, which I explained in my post, than you as a straight man might be aware of. And your use of the elipsis to separate it from the rest of your statement said to me that you weren't using it within a positive context.

"You questioned a woman on whether or not she maintains positive social standing for the simple reason that she just took a big wet bite out of your pseudo intellectual ass,"

And where did any of this occur? I did not question any woman about maintaining a positive social standing - I offered an opinion as to why she has become so good at defending herself - something a person generally develops over time by having to repeatedly defend themselves, regardless of their gender. The only place gender enters into this conversation really is that I disagreed with her positing a social system that lumps all masculinity into one convenient lump, disregarding the varying spectrum of masculinities displayed by men which I said I considered reductive and possibly even male bashing. It was at this point Sarah went on the attack, dismissing my ability to grasp even basic concepts. Am I not allowed to disagree with what Sarah feels are basic concepts. Her attack on me was not gender-based - it was you in your admittedly presumptive manner that painted me with an anti-woman brush which was not true in that post nor is it true in this post. And then you go and create a quote for me and tell me to "take that shit and leave it at the frat house." I've never set foot in a frat house nor am I the kind of person who would even consider joining a fraternity. Since you're the Republican white male child maybe I should infer that this whole section is just you projecting your attitudes on to me? 

"a big wet bite out of your pseudo intellectual ass,"

Sarah did no such thing. She defended herself and as I said I have nothing but admiration for her. As for my pseudo intellectual ass, I'm not even going to dignify that with a response. If that's your idea of intelligent discourse...

I've wasted too much time on you. I have to go prepare breakfast for my 86 year old mother who, in case you have to be reminded, is a woman.
 

---

by: Alan down in Florida @ Sat Feb 03, 2007 at 10:34:33 AM CST

[ Parent ]

You know Alan, it's kind of funny....

It seems to me that your only defenses when you're clearly wrong are:

"It's just because I'm gay, isn't it?"

and

"Well, I take care of my mom"

don't forget

"I'm just as smart as all of you"

Of course, i do think it's slick that your defense for your misogyny is "Well, my mom is a woman" instead of the ever trite "I have friends that are [MEMBERS OF GROUP I JUST INSULTED]". 

+5 for departure from the usual defense
-50 for sticking with the usual offense. 

---

by: dan l @ Sat Feb 03, 2007 at 10:46:10 AM CST

[ Parent ]

You know what Dan

If it makes you happy to think that I am a misogynist and a whiny defensive gay...go right ahead.

You've already proven you're not worth wasting time over. I don't need your approval nor do I ask for it.

Have the life you deserve.

---

by: Alan down in Florida @ Sat Feb 03, 2007 at 11:07:20 AM CST

[ Parent ]

heh

Man with your backpedaling skills, you should consider a career in cycling. 

---

by: dan l @ Sat Feb 03, 2007 at 11:46:49 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Has Melissa Discovered HGTV? Yet?

OMG - I see G&Ls on thar all the time!

Melissa shouldn't stay up so late watching SHO's L Word, she's slippin backwards fantasizing about life she's missing out on. Her ex-gay counselor should monitor Melissa's late night practices -or- is the counselor there watching the show too???

---

by: RogernDC @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 15:17:30 PM CST

The glamorous life

Well, I'm not a lesbian, but I think I live a rather glamorous life, as anyone who's ever read my website knows.  And I've never seen the "L Word" or "Queer as Folk".  However, I have to admit to having watched a few episodes of "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy", but I was running to Europe, going to the theater, having brunches, etc. long before that show was even on.

---

by: johnnyleen @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 15:18:44 PM CST

She speaks the truth!

I know.

I am a gay man who watched a tivo'd L Word just a few days ago.  Lo and behold, I found myself eerily close to seeking a sex change operation, moving to Portland, OR and filling my closet with the one thing it is missing  -  flannel shirts.

The power of those damn lesbos is amazing!

---

by: JoelBklyn @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 15:30:22 PM CST

Obsessed

Because Melissa and her ex-gay ilk are obsessed with their own denied sexuality, their imaginations become overheated and warped.  Because she can't stop thinking of the self she's denying, and because she has to demonize that self in order to KEEP denying it, she and Hartline and the rest (as well as total self-haters like LaBarbera) dream up all these lurid fantasies they're simultaneously drawn to and repelled by.  They can't bring themselves to imagine normal people who live their lives each day like EVERYBODY ELSE, WHO JUST HAPPEN TO BE GAY.  How sad and pathetic for them.

---

by: ExHack @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 16:57:19 PM CST

I'm plagarizing an old joke, but here goes:

This will be my last posting at the Blend.  I watched "Sister Act" this afternoon and now I have this irresistible urge to become a nun.  I'll take my vows this evening and henceforth be known as Sister Mary Mary.  If only someone had warned me that watching nuns made one become a nun!

No longer yours,

Sister Mary Mary

---

by: Holly Capote @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 17:11:09 PM CST

Anyone else out there feel sorry for Miss Melissa?

Imagine watching the L Word week after week and feeling one thing, but feeling compelled to say another.  It sounds like Hell.  It's a closet of sorts: an inside out closet.

---

by: Holly Capote @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 17:50:36 PM CST

I know I feel for Miss Melissa

I'm a gay man, but when I watch the L Word, I so much want to taste the forbidden fruit.  I know exactly what she's feeling.

---

by: metalsguy @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 20:06:27 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Which forbidden fruit is that?

Having sex with a woman is not forbidden to you as a man, gay or not. Having sex with a lesbian would probably get you a free scholarship to the Exodus Ministries.

---

by: Alan down in Florida @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 11:05:49 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Ms. Fryrear

I saw this woman speak at a conference.  She mentioned that she considers the fact that she was wearing pantyhose one of the greatest testimonies to God's power.  The comment was made tongue-in-cheek, but it definitely clued me in to the real evil against which Focus on the Family wants to protect us; heaven forbid a woman should explore anything outside of the traditional, sociologically coded gender roles which she has been assigned!  What's that, Mary?  You say you want to be a preacher?  I'm sorry, little Mary, but that's a boy job!  Why don't you go to Bible school and look for a nice preacher to marry instead?

I'm sorry, but I have to believe that "God's power" can achieve something more credible than lending Ms. Fryrear the power to wear pantyhose.

And of course watching the L Word makes women more likely to have lesbian sex.  But why is that a problem?  A show like this creates space and understanding for closeted women to come out.  Personally, Sound of Music served that function for me.  I've always had the biggest crush on Julie Andrews . . .

"From error to error, one discovers the entire truth."
   - Sigmund Freud

---

by: trihardist @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 20:36:13 PM CST

What's weird about pantyhose = straight chick as a social...

...construct is that's it's so recent.  Go back in time a hundred years and your typical pantyhose-wearing woman of today is a slut.  You don't even have to cross a century.  You can cross an ocean and encounter the same "slut" sensibility.  If Ms. Fryrear's femininity, even in jest, depends upon lycra, her heterosexuality and femininity are as thin as pantyhose.

But you're right about gender roles.  They cling to them.  Rather, they cling to the latest incarnation of gender roles, for they're always in flux. 

---

by: Holly Capote @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 20:52:49 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Pantyhose

Holly, I don't own a single pair and I don't think that, with the exception of the nylons that my mother has to wear to keep the swelling in her legs to a minimum, anyone in my family owns a pair.  My theory?  None of us are patient enough to deal with the damn things.  They are a pain in the ass to get on, especially after showering, they get damaged way too easily, and they are ridiculously tight.  None of us have the patience to deal with fundie religiousosity either.  Ms. Fryrear apparently has much more patience than any of us.

My America includes LGBT families.

---

by: Mena @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 13:11:47 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Mena, you know what I like?

Cotton tights?  Ever worn them?  They're comfy and warm and a good pair will last for decades.  I bought a few pair from a clearance table set up outside of a dancers' supply store and they wear like steel belted radials.

---

by: Holly Capote @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 13:32:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Interesting idea

I never thought of that.  Tights are a lot more comfortable, at least with the ones that I have worn (not cotton).  Most of the time I just find it easier to wear pants and nylons that don't go all the way up.

My America includes LGBT families.

---

by: Mena @ Thu Feb 01, 2007 at 17:46:48 PM CST

[ Parent ]

This is silly.

L Word entices women to consider homosex

From the more than a few women--generally a little older--that I have spoken to, it is more often times than not men who entice women to consider homosex.  They had been married, but got fed up dealing with men. 

The L Word had nothing to do with it.

BTW, the name "Fryrear" raises some interesting images.  The name is made up, isn't it?

---

by: raj @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 22:03:17 PM CST

The Glamourous Life

Oh, come on! We're totally glamorous! I mean, I was home with a migraine and slept all day while my girlfriend played City of Heroes in bed next to me in her flannel duck pajamas. The cat even climbed up to sit on my bladder! What's not glamorous about that?!

---

by: Darkrose @ Wed Jan 31, 2007 at 22:17:39 PM CST