This post was deleted for a political reason?

November 4, 2004 10:57 AM

This post was deleted for the following reason: fuck zell miller
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood to etiquette/policy at 10:57 AM (127 comments total)

When mathowie killed the boob post, you said nothing.

Don't push your politics on me, Linnwood.
posted by trharlan at 11:00 AM on November 4, 2004

MetaFilter's not the Op/Ed page anymore.
posted by sebas at 11:01 AM on November 4, 2004

It's tempting to ask Matt to delete this MeTa post on the basis of: Fuck Steve_at_Linnwood.
posted by Shane at 11:08 AM on November 4, 2004

anymore?

Did I miss this memo?


like when mathowie said:

"And the bottom line of course, as always, is that discussion of politics on MetaFilter blows goats and I would sooner ban it entirely than stomach another Bush baaaaad! thread."

on September 6, 2003
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 11:10 AM on November 4, 2004

Hey! I know! I'll post an opinion article to MF so we can argue about it!
posted by adampsyche at 11:13 AM on November 4, 2004

I think the memo was here.
posted by luser at 11:13 AM on November 4, 2004

Heh. Heh heh. Heh-heh-ha-hahahaHAHAHAHAHA! I would have never seen this if you hadn't pointed it out, Steve, and I wouldn't have had the enjoyment of laughing so heartily this morning. So thank you!

And frankly, not to go all Free Market on your ass, but this is Matt's site. He's free to do whatever the hell he wants, including deleting a post because he's so fucking mad he can't see straight. And, of course, you're free to take your ball and go home business elsewhere.

Fuck Zell Miller. Hee!
posted by scody at 11:16 AM on November 4, 2004

Incoming memo for S@L here
posted by sebas at 11:17 AM on November 4, 2004

Actually, I think "fuck zell miller" expresses the MeFi zeitgeist perfectly. It certainly speaks for me.

The election is over, Steve - it's time to get back to universals. I don't think it's fair or intelligent, just because Matt was extraordinarily permissive during the election, to demand that he continue being so, considering how swamped we were and how passionately a lot of users desire a return to normality.

Are you a secret Stalinistt, btw? You've certainly disgraced conservative politics these last few days with your gross gloating, dictatorial glee and lack of thought. Thank you so much for giving all of us such a bad name.
posted by MiguelCardoso at 11:17 AM on November 4, 2004

Stalinistt?
No.
giving all of us such a bad name
I fail to see that we of the same stripe.

Maybe if it was:

"This post was deleted for the following reason: another op-ed"

or

"This post was deleted for the following reason: no more politics on Metafiler"


"fuck zell miller" doens't cut it for me.
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 11:25 AM on November 4, 2004

i liked the boob post

on preview: what's the difference between "fuck zell miller" and "sore loser"? honestly.
posted by mrgrimm at 11:28 AM on November 4, 2004

more specifically, you're objecting to the language of the reason for the deletion, not the deletion itself. what's your point? write an email if you wanna whine.

this issue has nothing to do with the community. you're basically asking Matt to change his personal posting behavior, right?
posted by mrgrimm at 11:31 AM on November 4, 2004

Typical right winger - you win the election and you still want to fight.

Maybe "Give it a fucking rest" would've been a better reason
posted by dodgygeezer at 11:32 AM on November 4, 2004

"fuck zell miller" doens't cut it for me.

Why don't you go to the customer service desk and get your money back? I understand the policies are very liberal here. heh
posted by luser at 11:33 AM on November 4, 2004

c'mon Steve, you know I really meant "please no more Op/Eds" but "Fuck Zell Miller" is so much more theraputic for me at the moment. Sorry if I reveal my bias but I'm human.

And it's fun to say.

If you need balance, here's how I also feel right now: Fuck Greg Palast. Fuck Tom Daschle. Fuck Michael Moore. Fuck Moveon.
posted by mathowie at 11:34 AM on November 4, 2004

I've seen 'em. you fuck 'em.
posted by jonmc at 11:34 AM on November 4, 2004

Cool! Go, Matt, Go!!
posted by timeistight at 11:38 AM on November 4, 2004

Fuck Rhona Mitra.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 11:38 AM on November 4, 2004

Fuck for forest.
posted by COBRA! at 11:39 AM on November 4, 2004

Fuck people who can't deal with the word fuck!
posted by lia at 11:45 AM on November 4, 2004

Fuck rich people and steal their money when they're not looking.
posted by mrgrimm at 11:45 AM on November 4, 2004

Fuck me gently with a chainsaw.
posted by jonmc at 11:46 AM on November 4, 2004

Fuck fuckity fuck fuck fuck.
posted by o2b at 11:48 AM on November 4, 2004

Fuck the fucking fuckers.
posted by dflemingdotorg at 11:51 AM on November 4, 2004

I wouldn't fuck Zell Miller with somebody else's pussy.
posted by Sidhedevil at 12:00 PM on November 4, 2004

and Sidhedevil wins! : >
posted by amberglow at 12:02 PM on November 4, 2004

Wah-waaa-wahhhh! Matt said rude things when he deleted a post! Waaaaaa!

For fuck's sakes.
posted by five fresh fish at 12:03 PM on November 4, 2004

I'd fuck Zel Miller in the ass. His ass. If he was unwilling.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 12:04 PM on November 4, 2004

Steve_at_Linnwood: Matt's been pretty impartial in his deletions for the past two days. Now is not the time to be complaining. It's time to celebrate Drastic Matt. DM will be be good for the site. It's/He's what we've needed for a loooong time.

Also:

Fuck Meg Ryan & her surgically enhanced troutlips.
posted by dhoyt at 12:09 PM on November 4, 2004

How about "fuck Janet Sullivan" ?


I am more than fine with MetaFilter being apolitical. I look forward to it.
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 12:15 PM on November 4, 2004

Fuck Meg Ryan & her surgically enhanced troutlips.

If you insist.

"Bathe her and bring her to me....."
posted by jonmc at 12:20 PM on November 4, 2004

How about "fuck Janet Sullivan" ?

How about "fuck homophobic Christians"?
posted by mrgrimm at 12:28 PM on November 4, 2004

Don't fuck them. Make love to them.
posted by COBRA! at 12:43 PM on November 4, 2004

Or is that with?
posted by COBRA! at 12:43 PM on November 4, 2004

This post was deleted for the following reason: Op/Ed? More like Op/Dead!

Haha, I love this.
posted by Krrrlson at 12:48 PM on November 4, 2004

I am more than fine with MetaFilter being apolitical.

Everyone jumps to extremes. Again, I'll have to reiterate that it's not going apolitical as much as I would like (the rest of this week at least) to be be free of shrill partisan posts that smack of either sore losership or pompous gloating. Call it a-assholery if you will, not a complete blanket ban on anything remotely political.

The political signs on that dude's lawn were great, though they touch on politics. But it's interesting how he used them to convey a message, no matter what your political leaning is. If they were intricately painted pro-Bush signs I'd be rallying behind them just as much.
posted by mathowie at 12:50 PM on November 4, 2004 [1 favorite]

Fuck intricately painted pro-Bush signs!
posted by Armitage Shanks at 12:53 PM on November 4, 2004

I'm gonna need someone to pull out these splinters.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 1:01 PM on November 4, 2004

I'll take the one on the right please.

(not the "Right", mind you)
posted by milovoo at 1:25 PM on November 4, 2004

Fuck apolitical MetaFilter.
posted by strangeleftydoublethink at 1:25 PM on November 4, 2004

I bet you'd be able to fuck her in the ass, milovoo.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 1:26 PM on November 4, 2004

...if you asked nicely.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 1:26 PM on November 4, 2004

naaah, she reeks of "yes I do, but not with you."
posted by jonmc at 1:29 PM on November 4, 2004

Sorry if I reveal my bias but I'm human.

This post was deleted for the following reason: when the dude has facts, call me. until then, I'll pass

This post was deleted for the following reason: sore loser

Look, I don't care who won, but I do care that the process by which the winner is selected is thoroughly transparent. (This is a four year echo.) I voted for a guy that likely did not win. I'm okay with that. When the counts are certified and Bush has the plurality of votes or even just a majority of votes or even a minority of votes with enough electoral votes, then America has chosen its leader. Until that time, Bush is nothing more than the presumed winner. That is the way our system works. I would not participate if I did not have confidence in it.

Yet to pretend that this is over when all votes have not been counted is silly. My point is not pedantic, though it may be irrelevant. I don't expect the results to change, but the election process does not end when one candidate conceeds and the other claims victory. By margin of electoral votes, this is the third closest election in over 100 years. (The final count is as of yet undetermined, though it appears Bush will net a win with 286 votes while Kerry remains at 252.)

Transparency, accountability and non-partisanship are fundamental to the success of fair elections.
posted by sequential at 1:30 PM on November 4, 2004

You know, side note here, but as a straight male I'm confused with the collective sexual fawning over Wonkette. Yeah, she's attractive, but her constant babble about ass fucking doesn't give her appeal as a sexpot, it makes her annoying. I think she's a brilliant writer but I just don't get the whole lusting for her thing. Are there really just so few female bloggers that she's the centerfold for the digital left by default?
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 1:31 PM on November 4, 2004

I bet you'd be able to fuck her in the ass, milovoo.

Mmmmm. Sexy political smarty writer redhead with a cute butt ... that may in fact be my ultimate fantasy.
(but, I think she already has a boyfriend)

O.P - also, what jonmc said, plus she lives in DC, that's too far of a commute.
posted by milovoo at 1:32 PM on November 4, 2004

To the point of the post in general: Lighten up, Steve.

Re Wonkette: Too skinny, and really nothing more than a glorified gossip columnist. Anyway, I've decided that neo-Hedonism isn't much more interesting than neo-Calvinism.
posted by lodurr at 1:34 PM on November 4, 2004

Are there really just so few female bloggers that she's the centerfold for the digital left by default?

I've always had a bit of a brain-on for Rebecca Blood, but I've no idea what she looks like.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 1:35 PM on November 4, 2004

Are there really just so few female bloggers that she's the centerfold for the digital left by default?

Can you name any of her competitors off the top of your head, jennicam retired, so cute redhead bloggers over 21 - I'm drawing a blank, but not for lack of interest? (obviously there are some here on MeFi, but mostly paired up already or living far away)
posted by milovoo at 1:39 PM on November 4, 2004

"I've always had a bit of a brain-on for Rebecca Blood, but I've no idea what she looks like."

You could always ask her for a pic.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 1:41 PM on November 4, 2004

or do a google image search.

posted by milovoo at 1:43 PM on November 4, 2004

I've always had a bit of a brain-on for Rebecca Blood, but I've no idea what she looks like.
You'd turn to dust.
posted by dodgygeezer at 1:43 PM on November 4, 2004

Can you name any of her competitors off the top of your head, jennicam retired, so cute redhead bloggers over 21 - I'm drawing a blank, but not for lack of interest? (obviously there are some here on MeFi, but mostly paired up already or living far away)

I happen to be a cute redheaded blogger who, like Rompin' Ronnie, is waaaaaay past 21.

However, I'm also paired up and living far away.
posted by timeistight at 1:43 PM on November 4, 2004

It is nice to say, Fuck Zell Miller. Yeah, fuck 'em up and down, fuck 'em all the way around, fuck 'em while he smiles, fuck 'em while he frowns.

But yeah, Sidhedevil's comment nearly split my sides.

Wonkette, never read her site, I've seen her interviewed once or twice and she really does come across as a glorified tabloid press monkey.

Re: Rebecca Blood, what is that? A cross between Wendy Williams and goth?
posted by fenriq at 1:46 PM on November 4, 2004

Rebecca Blood, what is that?

I don't know, but I like. I would probably turn to dust, though...
posted by lodurr at 1:50 PM on November 4, 2004

I think that matt should be held accountable to whatever random thing he's said in the past, especially in regard to this site. only then will we finally be able to
posted by mcsweetie at 1:51 PM on November 4, 2004

I think she's a brilliant writer but I just don't get the whole lusting for her thing.

Actually, I thought the one pretty much explained the other.
posted by moss at 1:52 PM on November 4, 2004

Yah, but she is pretty funny. And she's funny about stuff that people haven't had the guts in DC to be funny about. And, um, to my tastes, she's really friggin cute. I don't particularly have a thing for redheads, but I very, very, very much prefer "cute" to supermodel sexy/beautiful. And to my eyes, Wonkette is cute. And she's pretty smart. And I don't actually have a fetish for anal sex, but I'm pretty charmed by her willingness to be such a public figure, such a public female figure, that can make that a running joke. I'm, you know, sex-positive. If only more male columnists, besides Dan Savage, were willing to regularly joke about the pleasures of ass-fucking. Maybe a het columnist could talk about the joys of pegging. That'd be cool.

...although that might rile up the conservative base and cause us to lose another election. Maybe not.

Ah, hell, fuck it. That is, ass fuck it.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 1:54 PM on November 4, 2004

Not all things get funny with repetition EB.
posted by Krrrlson at 1:59 PM on November 4, 2004

Krrrlson:
Oh, well, I chose to suck a guy's dick so it's okay to burn me at the stake?
posted by Kwantsar at 2:14 PM on November 4, 2004

Oh, well, I chose to suck a guy's dick so it's okay to burn me at the stake?

Have they started already? Sheesh, I thought they would at least have the decency to wait until after the inauguration.
posted by milovoo at 2:18 PM on November 4, 2004

I agree with Steve!!!!! Seriously. But mostly because I think this is bullshit.
posted by jpoulos at 2:23 PM on November 4, 2004

...






Wait a minute. There were boobies?
posted by neckro23 at 2:34 PM on November 4, 2004

Not all things get funny with repetition.

This is the first time I have ever agreed with you, Krrlson. (I especially like the way you said "get funny," as opposed to "funnier.")

Stand by for an EmBolism on the health benefits of anal sex, the significance of Wonkette's family name, the political ramifications of Washingtonienne's fifteen minutes of fame, the price of tea in China, etc.
posted by adamgreenfield at 3:42 PM on November 4, 2004

Rebecca Blood, along with holgate and rodii, was a marvellous fellow member, helpful and generous, smart and principled, brave and witty, whose every post was always unexpected and challenging, definitely worth rereading. When she stopped participating - for reasons not unexpressed in this very thread, I must say - it was a great loss. Not "imho" - it just was.

Her blog has been essential for years.
posted by MiguelCardoso at 3:49 PM on November 4, 2004

I miss rodii.
posted by gleuschk at 3:54 PM on November 4, 2004

This anal sex, it vibrates?
posted by Sidhedevil at 4:01 PM on November 4, 2004

Rebecca Blood, along with holgate and rodii, was a marvellous fellow member, helpful and generous.

She's that way IRL too. The world could use more like her.
posted by adamgreenfield at 4:17 PM on November 4, 2004

Ever get the feeling that people bring deleted posts to MeTa so that more people will see them?

Fuck Zell Miller.
posted by Space Coyote at 4:53 PM on November 4, 2004

When she stopped participating - for reasons not unexpressed in this very thread, I must say - it was a great loss.

Yup. I'm a little ashamed. I meant no disrespect in my initial comment, but I've been thinking afterwards that this could be seen as exactly the kind of boyzone shit that made her drop mefi.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 5:17 PM on November 4, 2004

It's much less boyzoney that it was tho, i think.
posted by amberglow at 5:49 PM on November 4, 2004

I am more than fine with MetaFilter being apolitical. I look forward to it.

~double chuckle~

But be gentle with little Stevie. He and his ilk are experiencing ongoing cognitive dissonance about what "moral values" and "integrity" really mean.
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 5:53 PM on November 4, 2004

It's much less boyzoney that it was tho, i think.

I just laughed myself silly. You're kidding right? This at the tail end of a discussion mentioning boobies, wanting to fuck Wonkette, and discussing female bloggers like their packaged on a shelf for taking?

I love Mefi, I do. But please don't delude yourselves into thinking this site is anything but a boyzone.
posted by FunkyHelix at 7:55 PM on November 4, 2004

compared to 2002 it totally is, i think.
posted by amberglow at 8:34 PM on November 4, 2004

I'm with FunkyHelix.

A couple months ago I made a post in the green about how I'd yet to see a popular thread with a link to a page with a photo of a female on it where someone didn't say something crass (I believe I referred to "I'd hit it."). I got an email from someone saying I was way too sensitive so I've since been paying closer attention. Unfortunately, I was right. And this thread offers further proof.
posted by dobbs at 8:37 PM on November 4, 2004

You get a strangehold on all three branches of government and you're still moping, Steve. What's it going to take to make you happy?
posted by rcade at 8:50 PM on November 4, 2004

Hey Dr. Flower, what happened the "reckoning" for my "spoiled, selfish, xenophobic, banal worldview" that you said was coming?

I'm still waiting for the "fucking whirlwind" that I "reaped."
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 9:39 PM on November 4, 2004

Keep waiting, Steve-o. It's a-comin'. It's a-comin'.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:42 PM on November 4, 2004

hahaha Keep telling yourself that...
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 9:43 PM on November 4, 2004

What a fucking whirlwind of a thread - I can't remember if the original point was fucking Zell Miller or Wonkette. But I do remember that Kwantsar chooses to suck a guy's dick. That much has stayed with me. OK.
posted by soyjoy at 9:45 PM on November 4, 2004

soyjoy-- I think Kwantsar is repeating the words of Ethereal_Bligh, in a dim-witted attempt to mock him
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 10:05 PM on November 4, 2004

Steve and his Republicanesque need for instant gratification. Fuck Steve.
posted by casarkos at 11:05 PM on November 4, 2004

You get a strangehold on all three branches of government

Heh. Excellent Freudian slip!
posted by rushmc at 11:06 PM on November 4, 2004

I'm still waiting for the "fucking whirlwind" that I "reaped."

Give it a few more dead soldiers. It'll sink in eventually.
posted by Cyrano at 11:40 PM on November 4, 2004

i second the the thought - fuck zell miller and anyone who thinks his lizardy worship of the the fear mongers is good for this country.
posted by specialk420 at 11:45 PM on November 4, 2004

hahaha Keep telling yourself that...

You misunderstand. I'm telling you.

Either way, we shall see.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 12:47 AM on November 5, 2004

Will someone fuck Donna Pescow? PLEASE? She's been waiting since the birth of disco.
posted by WolfDaddy at 4:26 AM on November 5, 2004

First, what exactly is the epithet "boyzone" supposed to convey? We've got more than a few female members, and several of them are participating in this thread. So, what's the substance of the snark?

Second, the woman known as Wonkette has made both her sexuality and (to a lesser degree) her looks integral components of her online presence. Dissing this thread as "boyzone" material (again with that word!) because people comment on sexual orientation in a sexual way seems pretty disingenuous to me.
posted by Irontom at 4:53 AM on November 5, 2004

Look! It's not a boyzone, which is a stupid word anyway. We uh, have girls. And anyway, that chick is so asking for it.

Mhmm. Okay, sparky.
posted by FunkyHelix at 6:23 AM on November 5, 2004

Irontom, you're failing to model the impressions and reactions of those other than yourself accurately. It's a failure of empathy, and I think, when writ large, it's one of the factors that leads onlookers to feel like this is a sausage party.

Please try a little harder.
posted by adamgreenfield at 6:37 AM on November 5, 2004

I'd like to give points to Wolfdaddy, for evoking poor Miz Pescow (Saturday Night Fever was as sad a movie as I believe I've ever seen), and adam "the pariah" greenfield, for the quite-stealworthy phrase "a failure of empathy," which happens way too often in here.

Just felt those two items merited mention.

Now everyone, get the handbasket back on the rails and climb back in. We've got Zell Millers to fuck!
posted by chicobangs at 6:46 AM on November 5, 2004

... what exactly is the epithet "boyzone" supposed to convey?

Back when it started, the boyzone beef was about guys talking on MetaFilter in ways that made some women uncomfortable to participate.
posted by rcade at 8:18 AM on November 5, 2004

I wish you people would make up your collective minds about whether this place is supposed to be a public space with respect for other genders, races, body types and religions, or whether it's a make-yourself-useful-and-then-demand-respect-for-your-freakiness meritocracy.

I can be sensitive and concerned if that's preferred, but since it usually gets shot down quickly, I was sticking with the free-for-all option. If there is anyone out there who was offended that I said "I'll take the one on the right" regarding Wonkette (and all the subsequent talk of butt-sex), I sincerely apologize.
posted by milovoo at 8:37 AM on November 5, 2004

milovoo, MeFi people do the one-way respect thing: they demand the right to be respected without wishing to be burdened with the responsibility to respect others.
posted by SpaceCadet at 8:49 AM on November 5, 2004

rcade - thanks for the explanation.

Funky - I didnt say it wasn't a "boyzone" I said I didn't understand clearly what the epithet signifies. Now, thanks to rcade, I do.

To you and adam both, let me ask this: How, exactly, is juvenile sexual content a strictly "boy" trait? Sidhedevil was declared an early winner in the silliness going on up above, and I am under the impression that user is female, from other posts.

Also, it seems pretty low to tar me with the "she was asking for it" brush when all I said was that I thought it was disingenous to expect people not to make comments of a sexual nature about someone who has made her sexuality an integral part of her online presence. You'd be entitled to that kind of shit if I had said something along the lines of "she deserves to be anally raped because she's obviously a slut from her blog". Which, I might point out, is pretty far from what I said.

Finally, as to whether I am "failing to model the impressions and reactions of those other than yourself accurately", I am not. I now understand exactly what the slur is, and I reject it, because it's crap.

Calling adult males "boys" is caculatedly dismissive and derogatory. Insinuating that only men engage in juvenile and/or sexual conversation is sexist and delusionary. The whole concept insinuates that only women and those men who always act in a fashion that never makes any woman anywhere uncomfortable can be considered adults.
posted by Irontom at 9:12 AM on November 5, 2004

dismissive and derogatory

Dude, you're taking offense to the "boyzone" comment? How about the whole "fucking that woman in the ass" part? A tad derogatory, no?

If anything is offensive in this thread, it's the ass-fucking comment, which was enough to make me scowl, and I'm a dude. But then I always sort of place ass-fucking in the realm of physical abuse, and that's not some personal hang-up against non-lubed sex but honestly I hear jerky guys say this on the streets, at the skateparks, and in the music stores, stuff like "I'm totally gonna fuck her in the ass" and it's a power play, a put down, and an oppressive/submissive control thing, and it's ugly when guys talk like that. It approaches physical control and abuse in that context.

So I thought it was pretty fucked up when someone looks at a picture of a cute woman and says something like duuuude, you should totally fuck her in the ass!

That's fucked up.
posted by mathowie at 10:05 AM on November 5, 2004

wonkette: "Seriously, there is no one who would rather talk about ass-fucking more than us, but even we're having a hard time understanding why this subject is fit for debate on the senate floor."

wonkette: "And we hope she still has a job. A real one. Not the ass-fucking one. (That's really more of a profitable hobby.)"

Come on, man. It's her raison d'etre.

EB was even saying that he has nothing against "pegging", which if I'm up on my slang would be anal-sex for straight men. If it's not for you that's fine, but many other people do not view it with such distain and do not necessarily include the violent associations.

(#1 - you skate? Cool, I had no idea.)
posted by milovoo at 10:47 AM on November 5, 2004

Hey #1, do you know who she is? There is a context for why all this happened. Wonkette is, as she proudly highlights:

• "Profanity-laced and sex-obsessed...[a] vain, young, trash-mouthed skank."
• "Gossipy, raunchy, potty-mouthed."
• "A foulmouthed, inaccurate, opinionated little vixen."
• "Wonkette's arrival on the steps of the Capitol is a quiet victory for creeping National Enquirer values."

Did it strike you as being even the littlest bit weird that Ethereal Bligh was the one who made the crack about fucking her in the ass?

Read her blog - anal sex comes up in about 1 in 4 of her postings. So, it's not just some random picture of a cute woman. It's a picture of a woman who has made anal sex part of her online persona - that's why EB's joke is (for once) funny. My guess is that she'd be amused by all this outrage on her behalf.

[on preview] what milovoo said
posted by Irontom at 10:58 AM on November 5, 2004

I know she jokes about ass-fucking all the time, I read her site religiously. It's just that I find two guys looking at a woman and talking about ass-fucking to be a violent thing, and that's from hearing frat boys say it and skater guys say it for years. I know EB meant it in jest a bit, to play off the persona she presents on her site, but it still rubs me the wrong way, in the sense of how men use it as a power play.

I don't have any hangups about "pegging" personally, it's all about the context. Even with wonkette's history of assplay jokes, I find the playful response that someone should try fucking her in the ass to be more offensive than the term "boyzone."
posted by mathowie at 11:03 AM on November 5, 2004

I guess I read it as ...

I bet you'd be able to fuck her in the ass (in the unlikely event that she were ever to choose to have any sort of sex with you at all).

instead of ...

I bet you'd be able to fuck her in the ass (by force, against her will).

Fair enough, Probably safest to avoid altogether.
posted by milovoo at 11:12 AM on November 5, 2004

soyjoy-- I think Kwantsar is repeating the words of Ethereal_Bligh

Really? Huh. OK, if you say so. So now what I am taking away from all this is that Kwantsar chooses to suck a guy's dick and to repeat the words of Ethereal_Bligh. OK.
posted by soyjoy at 12:33 PM on November 5, 2004

ok, after rape haikus, i take my statement back.
posted by amberglow at 12:40 PM on November 5, 2004

So, all a woman has to do is mention what kind of sex she likes and that makes it okay for guys to draft scenarios (fantasies, insults, whatever) involving her? Am I understanding that right? She enjoys anal sex so it's morally okay to state you'd like to use her in this way? She likes N sex therefore she's mine to have N sex with.

Do you not see how that is "boyzone" (great word!)? Do you not see how that belittles the woman and makes it dangerous for her to even talk about sex?

And, at what point do you draw the line? She mentions ass fucking so it's okay. Gotcha. She mentions facials, so, okay, I'd hit it. She says she enjoys sex--gotcha, I can say I'd bang her and will even bring pictures of her into the thread. Making out, okay, I'd mack with her. Oh, she hasn't said which kind of sex she prefers... but she's straight. She's mine!
posted by dobbs at 12:42 PM on November 5, 2004

And, at what point do you draw the line?

Dobbs, I generally agree with and respect your opinions and I get your point, but isn't lusting after celebs pretty much a universal behavior. I have female friends who have explained at great lengths the things they would like to do to a naked Jude Law, Brad Pitt or Iggy Pop (go figure), or write lengthy homoerotic fanfic about Spike and Angel from Buffy. In real life they are well-behaved and polite and, I would guess, very unlikely to actually do any of the things they fantasize about (without permission). I'm all for sensitive new age guy sensitivity, but isn't this kind of a slippery slope argument that ignores how real people talk and behave? Is anyone really put out by the (tame by internet standards) MeFi levels of sexual opinion?

And what Amberglow said - I believe that rape haiku is pretty darned ugly, and if that's the bottom of this slope then maybe we should all agree to stick to the higher ground.
posted by milovoo at 1:26 PM on November 5, 2004

I don't consider having sex with a women "using" her. Perhaps that you do indicates why you think this is a problem. And I posted a follow-up comment ("if you asked her nicely") specifically to be clear, mostly for those who may not be familiar with wonkette's persona, that, you know, there was the assumption of happy consent.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 1:31 PM on November 5, 2004

milovoo, I'd agree with you if it was the occasional one-off on mefi, but it's not. It's not the exception that proves the rule, it is the rule.

As for women talking about things so it should be okay for men, also: I see where you're coming from. The vast majority of my friends are female (I really only have two close male friends) and they do talk like that on occasion. However, please, point out any instances whatsoever of the women on mefi doing it. I'm not saying it's never happened--just that I've never seen it happen. If it has, kindly point out a link.

My "problem" with this issue on mefi is that many women have pointed out the boyzone thing and the men just shrug or say "huh?". I've never seen any women respond with a shrug or huh. Do you see what I'm saying?

Is anyone really put out by the (tame by internet standards) MeFi levels of sexual opinion?

Well, someone already mentioned that was the reason Rebecca's not here anymore (I don't know if that's true so don't take me to task on it). If that's the case, then there's one person. I would not be surprised if there's more. (Hell, Funkyhelix has commented on it at least twice in the last 24 hours alone.)

I don't consider having sex with a women "using" her. Perhaps that you do indicates why you think this is a problem.

This is the part where I tell you you're an ass, EB. I never said having sex with someone was using them. You're either being unbelievably daft or consciously putting words in my mouth.

I said: She enjoys anal sex so it's morally okay to state you'd like to use her in this way?

Now, unless I'm mistaken, none of you have had sex with Wonkette so I thought it pretty obvious that I was using the word "use"' as in "using her here on mefi for your amusement". In case that wasn't clear in my previous post, I hope it is now.

there was the assumption of happy consent.

Again, that's part of my point. A woman saying she enjoys (or prefers) anal sex is not analogous to saying that she enjoys being fucked up the ass by strangers or, more specifically, enjoys being talked about being fucked up the ass by strangers.

I like getting blowjobs. Saying that doesn't mean I want each and every one of you sucking my cock. My statement doesn't nullify my expectation of respect. Wonkette's power or freedom to admit she enjoys anal sex should not be an excuse for others to belittle her.
posted by dobbs at 2:09 PM on November 5, 2004

It's not belittling. I don't think Wonkette thinks it's belitting. I have good reason to think that Wonkette doesn't think it's belittling.

Your chivalrous rush to protect the delicate sensibilities that you, against all indications, assume she has makes me question your motives and unconscious view of women.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 2:23 PM on November 5, 2004

I'm not saying it's never happened--just that I've never seen it happen. If it has, kindly point out a link.

I gave it the old school try, but the closest I can get is this tame fanfic thread (surprise, surprise) with a few celeb fantasies implied. All-in-all, I don't know, I'm would support more frank discussions of sexuality and sexy stuff, but not at the cost of anyone being uncomfortable (or any normal contributing members anyway - I could care less what a few repressed nutjobs think). I wish this were discussed more as an issue to either fix or not fix, instead of just a shrug and a "It sucks, but I guess that's the best we can do". I actually have very little respect for the folks who go off in a huff when MeFi is not exactly to their liking instead of being the squeaky wheel of improvement.

I guess we are just rehashing this discussion from about 2 years ago.

Randomly related: sometimes I read threewayaction as a yin to this site's occasional yang. Useful if you want to see what a "girlzone" would be like - pretty much the same.
posted by milovoo at 3:30 PM on November 5, 2004

EB, just please shut it for once. We know all about your ever-so-enlightened, infinitely evolved postsexuality.

From where I sit, boyzone is precisely about a failure of empathy, a failure to pick up on the cues that determine whether sexual flirtation and banter are perceived as delightful or oppressive.

It's just that, to me, those cues only rarely say, hey, go for it. Deployed anywhere else, it's cloying. It stinks of privilege.

One thing it has nothing whatsoever to do with is the bruising of delicate sensibilities - my own could not be less delicate, I'm a top and under the right circumstances I'm comfortable with a degree of force, humiliation and the exertion of pain that would turn most of you right off.

But that's at the right moment, with someone who has consented to it and is getting off on it as much as I am. And that is the crux of boyzone: it's a cordon you impose on the experience of others, without their consent.
posted by adamgreenfield at 3:30 PM on November 5, 2004

My chivalrous rush? The delicate sensibilities of others? My unconscious views of women? Where do you get this stuff?

Please, I'm dying to know what you think my motivations are. You obviously have an opinion. Lets hear it.

milovoo: I'm would support more frank discussions of sexuality and sexy stuff...

Well, that's my complaint, you see. The threads I'm talking about--which help present this place as a boyzone--have nothing to do with sex. I'm all for for open discourse about sex and sexuality--hell, for 2 years I ran a site called Victory Shag from which I mailed thousands of strangers intimate details about my love and sex life. I have no problems discussing sex, sexuality, whatever.

My complaint (which I assume is similar to that of others who cry boyzone) is that threads that have absolutely nothing to do with sex often have comments that jab and condescend by dragging sex into the discussion. For instance, today: a thread about people apologizing for Bush getting elected. It features this comment. Granted, it's pretty innocuous. BUT, it is pathetic that to find that comment all I had to do was randomly click front page links until I found a site that had a photo of a cute girl on it. I then went in the thread knowing that someone would comment on her appearance and what he'd like to do with her rather than discuss the site itself.

Try it yourself. Of the three or so FPPs today that link to sites with women on them (blender girl, super hero people, we're sorry), each of them has comments on the woman's appearance. Is someone in particular being hurt? Probably not. However, it's really unfortunate that it's nearly impossible (actually, not nearly, it is impossible) to link to a site with an attractive woman on it and someone not chime in about "hitting it" or whatever. Hell, if the woman's unattractive, we'll get comments about that, too.

Maybe this is par for the course for you. You're fine with it. That's your right. However, it bothers me. It bothers others. People have commented on it before. We're dismissed as "too sensitive" and not living in the real world. When we're sick of it, we go away. (And then behind our backs we're criticized for not being the squeaky wheel.) It's a lose-lose situation.

People say that it's gotten better since 2002. I disagree. I think most people just don't notice it because those who got tired of it up and left or keep our traps shut.
posted by dobbs at 5:28 PM on November 5, 2004

The boyzone factor has gotten a lot better, but MeFi tends to be like a club house, with the advantage of being relatively anonymous. There's often a level of inside joke type commenting that I see most misinterpreted.

Is there more testosterone here than estrogen? Surely. But that's not necessarily a bad thing. I mean, as long as it's not dripping down the walls or anything icky. (And there have been some posts and some people that really are icky.)

The important thing to remember is that while a handful of boys are just that, most of the guys on this site are men, and they behave as such and don't deserve to be painted with the "boy brush". The boys, on the other hand, could stand a good smack, some of them. By the same token, things here are generally civilized compared to *real* boyzones like Fark.

Last but certainly not least: Fuck Zell Miller.
posted by dejah420 at 8:33 PM on November 5, 2004

So, all a woman has to do is mention what kind of sex she likes and that makes it okay for guys to draft scenarios (fantasies, insults, whatever) involving her?

The question shouldn't be whether it's okay to fantasize about someone under any circumstances (quite clearly it IS, despite whatever hangups you are evincing: what happens within one's own mind is one's own business); the question should be, is it appropriate to verbalize such fantasies on Metafilter.

I vote no.
posted by rushmc at 8:57 PM on November 5, 2004

Right, rushmc, that's what I meant.
posted by dobbs at 10:17 PM on November 5, 2004

Also, fuck Zell Miller.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:34 PM on November 5, 2004

I like getting blowjobs. Saying that doesn't mean I want each and every one of you sucking my cock.

Of course not. Only Kwantsar. I distinctly remember at some point him saying "I chose to suck a guy's dick."
posted by soyjoy at 11:04 PM on November 5, 2004

the boyzone factor is a tad bit better than it was a few years ago, but unfortunately all my female friends who are members have abandoned this place - not so fun for me since i have a lot less people to discuss topics with now. personally i don't get offended per se, but i end up looking down on some of my fellow members, and i really don't enjoy that. luckily i find there's more than enough groovy men around here to make up for the goofballs. something that can't be said about most large internet communities.
posted by t r a c y at 11:31 PM on November 5, 2004

dobbs: "all I had to do was randomly click front page links until I found a site that had a photo of a cute girl on it. I then went in the thread knowing that someone would comment on her appearance and what he'd like to do with her rather than discuss the site itself."

I have noticed this, and it's one of the most predictable things about the site... And as dobbs mentions later, comments are also made about a woman's perceived unattractiveness. Knee-jerk objectification is definitely boyzone. But as t r a c y says, we also have some heroes here, which I why I stay. I've also noticed that sans photos or other explicit clues as to gender, most guys will assume that a member is male, while it seems to me that most of the female members are pretty good at figuring out who's what. Maybe this is because we're in the minority and therefore more alert to sussing out our MeFi sisters?
posted by taz at 1:54 AM on November 6, 2004

Your chivalrous rush to protect the delicate sensibilities that you, against all indications, assume she has makes me question your motives and unconscious view of women.

EB, that's ridiculous and beneath you. What is it about this topic that sends normally sensible people right around the bend? I completely agree with dobbs; I used to try to make the same point but gave up because the reaction is overwhelmingly "oh, knock off the politically correct crap." It's perfectly clear that MeFi is a boyzone (as defined), as clear as it is that it's intolerant of conservatives. Neither truth is welcome, for obvious reasons. "Mirror, mirror, on the wall..."
posted by languagehat at 9:07 AM on November 6, 2004

It's perfectly clear that MeFi is a boyzone (as defined), as clear as it is that it's intolerant of conservatives. Neither truth is welcome, for obvious reasons.

OK, so here's what I don't get ... why can the two downtrodden groups you describe, not defend themselves in the various threads? Isn't every single member here capable of creating a post that can refute any other member with facts or persuasive argument? Do the conservatives and [whomever is offended by the "boyzone"] feel unequal in some way? I just don't see how someone can claim to be a victim when this whole site is just one big level ASCII playing field.

(but also, I'm not disagreeing with you, rushmc or dobbs on most of your points, just wondering about the "theory" of it)
posted by milovoo at 6:04 PM on November 6, 2004

Languagehat: it was mean of me, you're right. Not a defense but an explanation: I was annoyed. For all the reasons I've discussed, not to mention the context that adamgreenfield provides with his mocking of me, I'm sensitive to sexism and sexual violence and harrassment of women. However, I'm also sex-positive and I emphatically don't think that sex+women somehow always equals harassment. I truly do believe that there's a residual, chivalrous, well-intentioned but nevertheless unconscious sexism displayed by a large number of men that rush to defend the honor of women they think have been "disprespected". Wonkette has a very sexual public persona, her joking about the joys of ass-fucking is so outre (relative to conventional morality) that it's hard for me to see that she could not possibly be anything other than very sex-positive and could not possible think that anyone joking about her public persona in this fashion would be offensive.

As I say in the other thread, context is very important in this type of matter. And I also said "guilty until proven innocent". But this particular context is Wonkette and myself, both of whose thoughts on this matter are well-known. It's highly unlikely that I'm a boorish male taking the opportunity to salaciously joke about a woman as a means of expressing an unconscious or conscious misogyny. That alone isn't sufficient, of course, intent is not everything. Were I have said this about, say, konolia, it would be offensive regardless of my intent because there's no doubt konolia would take offense. But I think there's little doubt that Wonkette would not take offense.

I'd like to add something else. In the homophobia MeTa thread a while back, the matter of patronization and condescension by heterosexuals came up. In that context, it was a charge against me. Here, I am making that charge against dobbs. As a white, straight male, I've long had to run the guantlet of figuring out how to speak out and act against things that offend my sense of morality and justice while not being patronizing. And I may have mentioned that I've seen some deep patronization, pardon the gender inappropriateness, in, for example, some of my fellow rape crisis advocates who, mostly, were well-off middle-aged white women who displayed a deep well-intentioned consdescension toward a certain kind of client (sex-workers who were raped, etc.) that really, really pissed me off. To me, this is a way of taking away someone's dignity as a person, to treat them like a child or something. And I very much don't want to ever act in that way. On the other hand, I am quite sure I violently disapprove of the way many people are oppressed. My personal solution to this dilemma is that when I express outrage or opposition about something like this, I do so on my own behalf. As a human being, who though not the target of the injustice is nevertheless rightly offended by something that is simply wrong.

So, for my part, if I speak up against homophobia or whatever here on MeFi or elsewhere, I'm not "defending" amberglow or my friend Darien. They can defend themselves, if they like. I am, however, saying: "This is wrong. Stop it." Because I think I have a right to say that.

Now, I don't know where exactly dobbs was coming from in his objection. Does he really think that a wrong was committed, that my joke was truly hurtful and he was objecting to it on that basis? Or was he defending Wonkette, assuming that she would be hurt? I don't know. But I think he is off-base. Well-intentioned, but wrong in this particular example.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 1:59 AM on November 7, 2004

Speaking just for myself, I constantly feel happy that Matt [and others] will stick up for the ladies. I feel comfy sticking up for myself, but I don't want to have to defend myself just to stop guys from saying they want to [or do not want to] have sex with me or other random women ad nauseum. I agree with rushmc and t r a c y and dobbs and languagehat. I like it here. I'd like it here more if there were less "I'd hit it" comments and more serious discussion, and more women who felt like it was worthwhile contributing to the discussions without having to constantly defend themselves.

Maybe I'm just old school but I don't care who you want to have anal sex with. I can go months, years even, in my real life without having an "I'd like to fuck her/him in the ass" conversation. On MeFi it's like a week, tops. I wish I felt comfortable talking about touchy girly stuff on AskMe [breast lumps, menstruation stuff, being a woman getting older, whatever] without worrying about it turning into some peanut-gallery free for all. It's not a huge regret, but if someone asked me "Why isn't Metafilter exactly what you want?" that would be one of my answers, and I'm sure we all have our own.

I miss rebeccablood here [though I get to hang out with her IRL, she's a peach] and also the contributions of many other female members who used to contribute much more frequently like judith, heather, and meg to name a few. I'm happy for the contributions of dagny, madamjujujive, sidhedevil, deborah, konolia, janetland etc. etc. I'm always pleasantly surprised when a female-oriented thread gets good participation from both men and woman, and I like most of the people here. I'd also like people to participate who maybe were shy, or sensitive or maybe wouldn't have the courage to stand up in the "rape haiku" MeTa thread and say "I was raped and these haikus suck" Is it a huge whiny problem I have? No. Does it make the community less rich with the absence of these people? I think so.
posted by jessamyn at 8:42 AM on November 7, 2004

I compared men rushing to the defense of women to straights rushing to the defense of gays, or perhaps whites rushing to the defense of blacks. And all are inherently paternalistic to a degree. But I do think there's a big difference between the first and the other two. And it's that the defense of a woman's sexual honor by a man is itself part of the traditional structure of sexism against women. Not just because it makes clear the inherent sexual objectification of women of sexism, but also, less abstractly, it's quite obviously a mating ritual tactic...which also reduces women to mere sexual objects.

The fact that women are routinely and ubiquitously sexually objectified even in more "enlightened" cultures and subcultures is incontrovertible. Being male, I can only attempt to comprehend this second-hand, intellectually, by looking carefully at what I see and hear. In the online world, women exist in a very different "reality" than men do—where, if they self-identify as female, they are treated very differently and, quite often casually as sexual objects. Any man who doubts this should try taking on a female online persona and see just how different the online world is.

So I don't disagree at all with jessamyn's complaints above, or the general boyzone complaint.

But in this particular context, it's very delicate, for a man, to deal with this problem in an appropriate manner. Put very bluntly, if I come to amberglow's defense when he's attacked by a homophobe, it's not because I want to fuck amberglow. On the other hand, far too often, when a man comes to a woman's defense from another man, it's because he wants to fuck her. That's blunt, and I imagine that me saying this will really piss lots of people off, but it's simply true. In this context, I get hives whenever some man comes running, with sputtering outrage, to comdemn another man who's said something supposedly inappropriately sexual around a woman.

My comment was a riff on Wonkette's running joke. I regret it now, mostly because I shouldn't assume everyone would get the context—and without the context, it's ugly. I'm not comfortable with ignoring the reality that people find other people sexually attractive, or that this is very important for most of us in our daily lives. I think that's part of why I'm sex-positive in this context of my anti-sexism: I'd like to recontextualize this stuff so that it's not about the objectification of women by men, but about people being sexual beings, which they are, male and female alike.

When there are meetup photos posted, and I notice one or more women that are very attractive to me, it always puts me in a quandary that I, probably, awkwardly try to resolve. People care about their appearances and, I think, most of us want to be attractive to other people (at least some other people); and so a big part of me thinks that complimenting someone's attractiveness is as much a positive thing to do for someone as is complimenting their wit, or intelligence, or some other characteristic. And someone always does comment that so-and-so is very attractive. I try to resolve the difficulties with this by, first of all, being honest and to some degree singling out the particular person that I think is especially attractive, but at the same time try to not make anyone feel conspicuosly excluded. In regard to sexism, I also try to compliment the men or some of the men, as well, even though I'm not really attuned to evaluating male attractiveness (generally or subjectively—there's only been a handful of men in my entire life that I've been very aware I found physically attractive). Anyway, my point in mentioning this is that in my own, probably awkward and over-intellectualized way, I'm trying to recontextualize what it means when a man compliments a woman on her physical appearance. I can't really stop other people's "I'd hit it" comments; but I'd like to think that it's possible to demonstrate that a straight man can notice a woman's attractiveness without implicitly objectifying her.

The "it" in the "I'd hit it" thing is deeply revealing, isn't it?
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 9:29 AM on November 7, 2004

Bligh, fortunately I don't respect you enough on any level to take offense to your condemnation of my actions. Comments like this:

On the other hand, far too often, when a man comes to a woman's defense from another man, it's because he wants to fuck her. That's blunt, and I imagine that me saying this will really piss lots of people off, but it's simply true.

Pretty much prove you're as ignorant as I thought you were. Your generalization is extemely revealing as to--what was the epression you used?--your unconscious views on women. Thanks for clarifying. Your beliefs about my motivations say way more about you and your thoughts on "the man-woman thing" than all the "I'm not sexist!" and "I used to work in rape crisis!" can ever say.

So, for my part, if I speak up against homophobia or whatever here on MeFi or elsewhere, I'm not "defending" amberglow or my friend Darien. They can defend themselves, if they like. I am, however, saying: "This is wrong. Stop it." Because I think I have a right to say that.

Unbelievable. Nice to see you'll grant yourself that but nobody else.

Now, I don't know where exactly dobbs was coming from in his objection. Does he really think that a wrong was committed, that my joke was truly hurtful and he was objecting to it on that basis? Or was he defending Wonkette, assuming that she would be hurt?

Try reading my posts without judging them first.

For the record, before I started addressing you directly, above, I wasn't thinking of or referring to you at all. (You'll notice that in my first few posts on this thread, I didn't name anyone, including you, Wonkette, or Rebecca. I used general terms like "you guys" and "if a woman"; I also used myself as an example so that it was clear I was talking about a general modicum of respect for fellow members, regardless of gender.)

I was talking about a general tone on mefi and was not attempting to single anyone out. As mentioned, I've commented on the boyzone thing previously--on MeTa and MeFi and Ask--to the same extent that I have in this thread and you and Wonkette weren't part of it.

I am not attempting to "defend [any one in particular's] honor". As I said above, I don't think any particular person is being harmed. I'm talking about an overall gist--feeling, atmosphere, whatever you want to call it--to Metafilter which makes me (and others of both sexes) less and less enthusiastic, and more and more uncomfortable, about the place.

Anyway, my point in mentioning this is that in my own, probably awkward and over-intellectualized way, I'm trying to recontextualize what it means when a man compliments a woman on her physical appearance.

LOL. You're doing a bang up job.

I'd like to think that it's possible to demonstrate that a straight man can notice a woman's attractiveness without implicitly objectifying her.

Here's a tip: don't do it on a public forum and when you do, leave the ass fucking part for the followup.

I'm generally embarrassed and ashamed of my sex's behaviour when it comes to women. As someone who was raised by women (two older sisters and mom, with no man around) in the "projects"/white trash parts of town, I've had a belly full of sexism and misogyny, thank you very much. My motivation is not "because I want to fuck her". It's this: I'm sick of men, such as yourself, who make men seem like a bad idea. Simple as that. You don't like it? Too bad. You think it's a problem I have? I can live with that. I'm not doing it to please you. I'm doing it because not speaking up at what I think is wrong (whether it be sexism, racism, misogyny, homophobia, whatever) isn't that far down the line from those actions themselves. If that's too complex for you to understand, that's not my problem.
posted by dobbs at 1:17 PM on November 7, 2004

Dobbs, I apologize. Far be it from me to criticize you speaking out against sexism. I intended my comment to explain why I was so quick to judge you as I did, not that I continue to do so. My intention was to explain why I deeply distrust anything that smacks of chivalry, and I think I have good reasons to do so. Furthermore, while I wholeheartedly agree that sexism very often, and ubiquitously, takes the form of the sexual objectification of women by men in conversation, I strongly believe that the implicit denial of women as sexual beings by prohibiting sexual conversation by men about women is itself a variety of sexism. It's the other edge of the same cutting knife—it's disturbingly similar to the "virgin" side of the classic sexist view of women as virgins or whores. They are nothing but sexual creatures, or we are to sanctify their sexuality into the realm of the unspeakable. I disagree with those choices. I'd like to see a world where, when someone compliments, say, dejah420 on her attractiveness in a mefi meetup photo it means no more or less (and certainly nothing oppressive) as when someone says the same thing about ufez or amberglow or thomcatspike. A world which allows such compliments of ufez but not dejah420 is, in my view, not much of an improvement over this one.

About the assertion that offended you greatly and you thought revealing: well, I stand by it. Maybe it's not "most often". But it's "often". It's a staple romantic plot—it's the "male rescuing the female from another man and they fall in love" storyline. It was, I just now recall, a creepy little scene in a recent episode of "The Wire" where two men work as a team: one crudely, lasciviously hitting on a woman at a bar and the other comes to "rescue" her, apologizing for his friend and sending him on his way, to be left with the grateful woman. It's fiction, and it's a little hard to believe that anyone would do this (I suppose), but there's without a doubt in my mind an underlying truth to it.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 3:57 PM on November 7, 2004

I strongly believe that the implicit denial of women as sexual beings by prohibiting sexual conversation by men about women is itself a variety of sexism.

Who's denying they're sexual beings? Certainly not I. And I'm not complaining that you or anyone else is simply saying they're sexual beings. That's not what is meant by "boyzone". Here's the thing: every time you bring up a woman's attractiveness when it's not relevant to the discussion, you're saying she's ONLY a sexual being. Or only of use sexually and has nothing else to offer this world.

I'm sure that you must understand how bloody tired women must get of doing something--making art; making a difference; in science; whatever--and that anyone feels that it's necessary to comment on their appearance. (And I'd argue that anyone who makes a post to an online forum to say, "Woohoo! She cured cancer... and she's teh hottie!!!" feels it "necessary".) Does it really matter that they're attractive? It's irrelevant to any and all discussions on mefi that are not in and of themselves about sex and sexuality, no?

In addition, is the compliment not saying, "I'm telling you this because I think if I don't that you will think that I find you unattractive"? There's an implied "you need to hear this because you're a woman" under the out of place compliment.

Here's a story from my own life: I once dated a girl who seemed to be universally attractive to both men and women. I've never in my life met another person like that. Our first date, I was walking her home and every single guy in our 2 mile walk (and I mean *every single guy*) checked her out. And not subtlely. People could just not take their eyes off her. I asked her how she put up with it and she said she just learned to tune it out but that it makes her really sad that she can't even run out for coffee without someone gawking or hitting on her. I saw men risk their lives to cross major intersections to compliment her on her appearance. One guy even tried to pick her up while she and I were having brunch. I couldn't believe it.

So one time, we're walking down the street and some guy tells her that "I see you're with your boyfriend and I mean no offence. I just had to tell you that you're probably the most beautiful woman I've ever seen." He sounded very sincere and not at all lecherous. I was not offended. You know what she said? "Why do you think I care?" He didn't have an answer. There isn't one. Yes, compliments can be nice. Yes, compliments from strangers can be nice. That's not the issue.

I'm sorry, but I find your assumption that there's a place for them here to be a very deluded one. I think that if the female members were asked to choose between things staying the way they are re: a boyzone or never seeing another out of place reference to appearance on the blue/grey/green, they'd choose the latter. Again, that's just my opinion.

And thanks for your apology.
posted by dobbs at 1:09 PM on November 8, 2004

I wondered what happened to my thread. I thought it disappeared because I screwed up the login, but I see I hit a raw blue nerve. It was probably due to the words "Zell Miller" and not the contents of his article. His words weren't as memorable as his duelling comments, but I thought a dose of his fiery rhetoric served with a dose of down home country flavor was worth a gander. He mentioned mules and hunting dogs for crying out loud!
posted by Frank Grimes at 7:37 PM on November 9, 2004

For what it's worth, I emailed Wonkette and asked her about it. She said she was not offended and found it amusing.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 6:56 AM on November 10, 2004