We Know Where You Live

Posts Tagged ‘Feminism’

Butch up!

In Don Dissociate, Uncategorized on April 27, 2009 at 7:28 pm

I was informed last week by this gentleman that the effeminate will not inherit God’s kingdom. No, its not enough simply being straight these days; any man or boy who has not soundly rejected every trait, characteristic, manner and behavior that might inadvertently remind God of women does so at the risk of his eternal soul.

To make matters worse, the sorts of characteristic considered effeminate vary over time and across cultures. While there’s no telling whose rules God expects us to follow, that ambiguity does leave room for a few loopholes. I implore you, my brothers, to either destroy or re-appropriate all potentially feminine characteristics before it’s too late.

Here’s a few suggestions to get the ball rolling.


1. Cologne, scented shampoos or body wash

Can you seriously afford to stand before God and admit you love to smell pretty for $70 a bottle?

What can be done?: Congress passes a law banning the sale of perfumed products to women. It may also be prudent to prevent them from bathing but once a week. In time, smelling nice will be exclusively associated with masculinity, and women will be referred to only as the “smelly ones” if they are referred to at all.

Conclusion: with our %79 male majority in Congress, this seems like a lay-up.

2. Empathy


Think long and hard about your immortal soul next time you cry at the end of Jerry Maguire.

What can be done?: Reclaiming empathy as a masculine quality will be trickier than you think. Giving a crap how another person feels means less preoccupation with ourselves. And, next thing you know our kids can’t play smear the queer in their backyards, and we can’t post nudes of our ex-girlfriends online. Videogames of many sorts are also out of the question.

Conclusion: Best to just rid ourselves of empathy altogether. It really takes the fun out of dominance.

3. Dancing

waltz bootyd11

A man dances only when bullets are shot at his feet. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a queer in need of some instructive smearing.

What can be done?: Already in motion! Over the years the art of dance has devolved from complex maneuvers in elegant ballrooms to standing still, smacking our groins against the backsides of women whose faces we never have to see sober.

One notable exception – the end-zone dance (see: Dominance).

Solution: Don’t worry, gentlemen. We’ve got this.



MIZZOU’s Queer Issues

In Don Dissociate on April 14, 2009 at 1:00 am

From The Maneater:

“A Missouri Students Association referendum to include “gender identity and expression” into the organization’s non-discrimination clause passed Wednesday with 82 percent of the vote.”

Yoko thinks this is terrible. She swears if transsexuals “go all mainstream” she’ll go back to being a boy. Nobody wants that.

I voted for the referendum, of course, marking April 6th as the first time I voted for anything related to student government in my long, long academic career, and it’s kind of interesting to know that 2,297 others agreed with me enough to do the same. Although, now I walk through the crowds on campus pre-occupied with who they were (that guy… that girl… not that guy).

But, mostly I wanted to revisit the wording of it on the ballot. Admittedly, I have no idea of the structure or responsibilities of MSA, but isn’t

there someone responsible for ensuring that the wording of referendums are as unbiased as possible? The actual words on the ballot were as follows:

Do you support adding “gender identity and expression” into Article XII (the Statement of Non-Discrimination) of the Missouri Students Association’s constitution in order to protect gender non-conforming students from facing discrimination and to support the larger effort to offer equal opportunity to all students?

Given the language of the question, a vote of “No.” directly implies that you are actually in favor of discrimmination! It simply articulates the “pro” side of the argument without, I feel, really addressing anything as substantive from the views of the opposition.It’s ironic, because to be frank the opposition did as much or more to ensure this vote passed. Marcus Bowen’s article ignorantly blasting the idea was the first expousure a lot of people I know ever had of it. He gave a real, punchable face to precisely the problem he refused to even acknowledge. He deserves our thanks, just not sincerely:

Marcus Bowen's very punchable face

So, who are the 483 pricks who voted “No.”?

– Don Dissociate

Gay Iraq and the Homophobic Feminist

In Uncategorized on April 9, 2009 at 7:04 pm

I made the mistake of reading the news today, because, you never know this month, Texas could have been celebrating its first gay wedding (since the marriage of tight jeans and cowboy boots). Instead, I took a trip half around the world to see the other side of things.

Queer Iraqis dropping like flies. 25 dead men and boys in Sadr City.

Now we all know there are no queers in Iran, but if the U.S. were to irrationally invade them promising a nation of liberty, I imagine we’d see a few pop up here and there. That’s what Americans do. Spread our ideology and turn the world gay. Ironically, this time its a republican’s fault.*

Strangely, the first place my mind went having read this was to a white, American woman I spoke with at a bar a few weeks ago. She and I bonded over schooling some drunk chauvinist on the finer points of feminism until I made the thoughtless mistake of going on a tangent about a related queer issue.

“Oh, I’m not really about that stuff,” she said. She was a feminist, but also “sort of a Christian, or whatever,” so all that gay “stuff” had to stay off-limits.

For fuck’s sake! Queer issues ARE Feminist issues!

Domination, subjugation, the patriarchy and all that whack noise is all about control – controlling your gender to define what you can and cannot be.

In fact, I’ll take it a step further:

The strength of a patriarchy lies not in how it controls its women. It’s not the clothes women are permitted to wear, or barely legal bodies sold on billboards. It’s not what women are allowed to say or coerced into thinking. The true strength of a patriarchy lies not in the subjugation of women at all. Subjugation is a goal, and the most visible part of the bigger picture. For a patriarchy to gain footing, to endure through the ages, through progressivism and liberalism and dirty-guilty looks from newly less-oppressive societies, the patriarchy counts on the cooperation of its men. Obvious really. Patriarchy is maintained by strict control by men over men.

In Iraq today we see that control taking front stage: families murdering their own with the blessing of their religious personalities; death squads and apathetic police. For what? A form of justice that makes hacking off the arms of apple thieves seem civil by comparison. Because manhood is everything. When you see this sort of violence you aren’t witnessing personal intolerance, but an ignorant, calamitous defense of a dogma that is millennia deep and global in scope.

Vermont legalized gay marriage a couple days ago. Iowa did so last week. It would be nice to think that my country is above all this. But in 2007 (the most recent available FBI data) there were 1265 hate crimes committed in the U.S. on the basis of sexual orientation.

So, feminists, you fucking wonderful faith-inspiring, commie-loving, goddess-damned brothers and sister O’ mine… the next time you choose not to care about queer issues, take a second to think about whom you’re throwing in your hats with.

– Don Dissociate