Archive | Sequins RSS feed for this section

Little girls are sick of the girl hate, too. Gimme my pink legos!

3 Apr


Hey, guess what?  In the interests of supporting ALL the little wannabe engineers and architects and builders and makers around the world, Lego has designed some blocks JUST FOR GIRLS.  I mean, boys can play with them, of course, but Lego has decided that little girls and their interests are just as valuable and interesting and worthy as little boy’s interests.

pink legos

I know.  Outrageous!  What, little girls are just as deserving of being acknowledged as little boys?  And not just acknowledged, but actually applauded?

Oh, come on now.  It’s not that controversial. There have been oodles of campaigns designed to promote the interests of girls, specifically.  Here are just five.  You can find more. Lots more. It’s pretty easy.  It’s not like the campaigns to support and empower girls are hidden behind the ones to support boys.  Those don’t exist.


girls 5

girls 4

girls 3

girls 2

So what’s the problem with Legos for girls?  Let’s take a look shall we?  Here is Jake Simons, writing for the Telegraph.

Pink Lego is an abomination. End this gender fascism

By Jake Wallis Simons


Take a look at the picture above. This is a Lego advertisement from the early Eighties, which has recently been circulating online. Beautiful, isn’t it? A cheeky-looking child wearing scruffy child’s clothes, proudly clutching a Lego creation which would resist any attempt at interpretation by an adult. The fact that the child happens to be a girl is neither here nor there.

She’s not wearing a “child’s” clothes.  She’s wearing a “boy’s” clothes.  There’s nothing wrong with that, of course.  Maybe she has a couple of older brothers and hand me down boy clothes are just the way it goes in her life.  That’s fine.

In case it’s too small to be legible, the first paragraph of copy reads as follows: “Have you ever seen anything like it? not just what she’s made, but how proud it’s made her. It’s a look you’ll see whenever children build something all by themselves. No matter what they’ve created.”

No matter what they’ve created.  Let’s keep that in mind.  And watch how much it DOES matter what they create.

Contrast this with Lego Friends, the new range of Lego aimed specifically at girls, which celebrates its first birthday this year. It features the heavy usage of the colour pink; figures which have been moulded to look more like real women than the traditional, blocky Lego people; a large collection of cars, home interiors and pets; and almost zero opportunity for the imagination to play a role. Every model is so over-styled and prescriptive that it is nigh on impossible to be creative. The words “crying” and “shame” spring to mind.

Right.  As opposed to Hagrid’s Hut.  Note that most of his hut is a kitchen!


Or this airport.


Or Indiana Jones’ lair.


Or Jack Sparrow’s ship.


Or the Millennium Falcon.


When Legos are styled for boys, or geeky girls, that’s okay.  But when they’re styled for girls specifically, that reduces the role of imagination to zero.  I guess boys can imagine themselves Han Solo pretty easily, but when girls imagine themselves as a specific character, they’re just brain-dead simpletons?

Hey, thanks for the love, Jake.

To bring the contrast into sharper relief, it may be necessary – apologies in advance – to watch the Lego Friends advertisement below. This will likely be the most excruciating 45 seconds of television you will endure this year. (“I just finished decorating my house! Time to chill with the girls at the beauty shop! Emma is styled and ready to go!” “Cupcakes are ready!”) But I implore you: grit your teeth and watch it. Then take another look at the Eighties advertisement at the top of the piece. Where did it all go wrong?


It went wrong with your assumption that whatever girls do just automatically sucks ass, unless it’s something boys do, too.

There are two problems with that assumption, Jakey boy.  First of all, it’s some pretty specific characteristics you’re railing against.  Very specifically feminine ones.  Taking care of a home? Caring about your appearance? Home cooking? Why, it’s almost as if the girls feel like itty bitty wives and mothers.  For shame!  Let’s beat those instincts out of them.  Or at least heap SHAME upon the little slatterns.  Caring for others and cooking and looking nice!  What would Andrea Dworkin say?


Only when manhood is dead – and it will perish when ravaged femininity no longer sustains it – only then will we know what it is to be free.

Andrea Dworkin

Secondly, you apparently haven’t played with a lot of Legos recently.  Indiana Jones has a frying pan and a coffee cup!  No really!  It’s true!  And bananas.  He cooks!  He eats!  He makes coffee!  He can even make coffee for a pink Lego girl!

frying pan

He might also bash you over the head with the frying pan, or Marianne will, or you might just have a nice chat and some fried apples.


All depends on your ……  imagination?

You probably think you’re gonna score some pussy coming out against those horrid pink girl legos, and who knows?  You might.  But in order to do so, you are denying yourself (and by extension, all other men) the acknowledgement of your own nurturing instincts and you are simultaneously shitting on the very women you hope to score for those exact same instincts!

Not sure how well that’s gonna work in the long run.  Boys cook. And drink coffee.  And take care of their appearance. Girls do, too.  That’s not gender fascism.  It’s life.  Kind of lovely, really.


Viewed as an isolated occurrence, this may not seem so bad. To people who do not have small children – and who do not have cause to spend time in toy shops, children’s clothes shops, and exposed to children’s television advertising – it might even appear trivial. But it is part of a powerful, cynical and hugely damaging trend that is exerting a profound influence on British childhood.

You got that right.  The main influence it’s exerting is that a girl’s natural instincts to care for others and for her home and to care about what she looks like are shameful and ugly and wrong and in need of correction.

Riddle me this, though, Jake.  If you’re going to holler for girls to ignore their desires to cook and care and nest and bring beauty to life, who exactly do you think is going to do those things?  If you succeed in teaching girls that their very natural instincts and desires are actually despicable chains the patriarchy has slung for the sole purposes of enslaving them, where do you think the next generation of children is going to come from?

Any parent will confirm that the vast majority of children’s products fall into two categories. There are those intended for boys, which tend towards masculine ideals but include a range of colours, themes and ideas. And there are those meant for girls, which are almost inevitably pink, sparkly, and related to princesses, mummies and daddies, beauty parlours or cuddly animals. As we have seen, this stark division was not part of the experience of childhood in previous decades. Both in terms of gender stereotyping and the belief in the imagination, we seem to have catastrophically regressed.

You’re a journalist?  Seriously?  It took me ten seconds to Google “top ten children’s toys” at  Here’s the list:

LEGO Star Wars 9493: X-Wing Starfighter

Inflatable World Globe

15 X Mixed Colour Jet Bouncy Balls

Wooden Bead Bracelets Set of 5 for Children

The Creativity Hub Rory’s Story Cubes

Tomy Octopals Bath Toy

Scrabble Original Board Game

Syma 2nd Edition S107 S107G New Version Indoor Helicopter (Red)

Insect Lore Butterfly Garden

Bananagrams Game

You might be able to spin the X-Wing and the helicopter as boy toys and the bracelets as girl toys, but 7/10 are toys for both boys and girls.  I know that math can be tricky, Jake, but 7/10 is 70%.  That leaves 30% of the toys gendered.  Not quite the sweeping majority you claim.

Okay, maybe bouncy balls don’t require the full deployment of a child’s imagination (damn, they sure are fun though – JUST NOT IN THE HOUSE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD), but an inflatable globe?  Scrabble? Bananagrams? A butterfly garden? I’m not seeing this crisis in imagination you report.


That’s not to say, of course, that there is anything wrong with princesses, mummies and daddies, and cuddly animals. There is nothing fundamentally objectionable about different genders having different roles, if this is what they choose. I wouldn’t complain if girls’ toys and clothing were generally more feminine, in the same way that boys’ stuff is generally more boyish. It is the oppressive uniformity of girls’ products that I resent, which – unless it is consciously and actively resisted by parents – swiftly brainwashes girls into the belief that if it’s not pink and sparkly, it’s taboo.

Oh bullshit. Monster High?




Wreck it ralph?




There are plenty of toys for girls that aren’t sparkly and pink, but you know what, that’s beside the point.  If you’re finding oppressive uniformity, perhaps that’s because you’re only looking to confirm the bias you already hold against girls.  Open your mind, Jake.

In many shops, it is actually impossible to buy anything for a girl that is not pink. To wit: Lego Friends. Why on earth does Lego have to be gendered? For decades, the bricks alone were enough to fuel hours of imaginative play. In 2013, however, girls can either decorate their home, bake cupcakes, or get their hair done. That’s it. All this, added to sexualised clothing and make-up for young girls, amounts to nothing short of gender fascism. And it stinks.

Again, you’re a journalist?  Are you fucking kidding me?

Friends can build a treehouse.


They can go quad biking.


They can form a rockband.


They can go jetskiing.


They can build robots in a science lab.


Friends can do anything.  You know.  With a little …. Imagination?

Speaking of things that stink, so ubiquitous is this phenomenon that various campaign groups have sprung up, including Pink Stinks, founded in 2008 by two sisters in London, which believes that “all children – girls and boys – are affected by the ‘pinkification’ of girlhood”. The group has attracted worldwide support and has notched up many key victories, including the removal of an appalling pink globe, complete with mermaids, from the shelves of the Early Learning Centre. But their efforts have done little to stem the tide of pinkness which threatens to engulf all but the most independent-minded little girls.

What the fuck is wrong with pink?  Is it because pink is the quintessentially feminine color?  Is that what gets you so up in arms?  That girls might actually LOVE their femininity?  That they might actually LOVE themselves?

Buying shoes is a particular peeve. Try and buy a good pair of sturdy shoes for girls which can withstand heavy duty outdoor play. You’ll find it almost impossible. Clearly, somebody somewhere has decided that girls should be wearing shoes that will train them to be better ladies, not let them run about and get the most out of their years of childhood. As a society, we are doing little to challenge the idea that young girls must be fantasy-feminised, in preparation for the sexting and porn culture that awaits them when puberty approaches, or even before.

These are Pinky’s shoes that she wears every day at school.


She is definitely my girl.  Sparkly combat boots!  It’s total and utter horsehit that you can’t find sturdy girl shoes.  I have two girls.  I have bought a shit ton of shoes.  I have never, ever had a problem finding sturdy shoes for my girls.

The principle argument that Lego, and companies like them, mount in favour of the pinkification of girls’ toys is that this stuff sells. When the Lego Friends range was introduced, sales jumped by 24 per cent in six months. In a market economy such as our own, surely this is a simple case of supply and demand? Isn’t Lego simply answering Freud’s question, “What does a woman want?” Doesn’t the profit prove it?

Little girls are getting sick of your grown-up “gender is socialized and if you don’t act like a boy you suck” bullshit?  No kidding!  You might want to consider just how retarded your argument IS when a five year old can see through it.


No it jolly well does not. There is far more to this than meets the eye. The fact is that there is nothing inherently girlish about pink; this association has only been made over the last hundred years or so, and at no time so rigidly as today. Indeed, one American trade publication, issued in 1918, suggested that “The generally accepted rule is pink for the boys, and blue for the girls. The reason is that pink, being a more decided and stronger color, is more suitable for the boy, while blue, which is more delicate and dainty, is prettier for the girl”. At other times, pink was chosen for children with brown hair – from whatever gender – and blue for those with blonde.

Hey, look who finally figured out how to use Google!

It doesn’t matter WHAT color is associated with WHICH gender.  What matters is that gender is NOT a social construct and the feminist effort to make BOTH boys and girls feel rotten about their natural, deeply biological instincts is hurting both boys and girls. And for what?  So you can deny difference?  Pretend away what even a child can see? Why? What is the point?

We’ll get to that.

The overwhelming modern-day preference among girls for the colour pink speaks volumes about the manipulation of the consumer by the manufacturers to create a dependent, niche market, which can be exploited for commercial gain. The persistent reduction of girls’ ranges to a single colour, and a single vision of ultra-femininity, has created a whirlpool peer pressure and an overpoweringly magnetic suggestion of an ideal, which conspire to make girls believe that only pink is pretty. There is no facility made for a girl to use her imagination, or even to begin to think differently. Like it or not, the manufacturers are intentionally creating an addiction.

Except that all the evidence suggests just the opposite.  There are plenty of toys for girls that aren’t pink. A whole rainbow of colors.  And plenty of those toys aren’t ultra-feminine, but even if they were, SO WHAT? It’s the feminine part you hate, isn’t it, Jake?

Here’s my theory:  if Jake were to embrace the feminine as a biological imperative that most women possess in varying degrees, he would then have to consider the masculine, also a biological imperative that all men possess in varying degrees.

And he might come up short.


Better to just hate BOTH ideas simultaneously.  That requires little introspection, zero trips to the gym to put on a little muscle mass, and you get to blame someone, too!

Little girls!

What a perfect target.

I actually don’t find Jake unappealing, but his strong aversion to the ultra-feminine suggests that his internal image of the masculine might be similarly “ultra”.  He’s a little off that ideal.

Nobody is more impressionable than a child. If parents are not vigilant, daughters are easily lost to an ad-man’s dreams. Again, I speak not as someone who necessarily objects to traditional conceptions of femininity, but someone who resents the way in which a narrow vision of the world is ceaselessly foisted upon my daughters in order to turn them into obedient little consumers. And I say this not from an anti-capitalist perspective, but from one that is in accordance with decent, some may say conservative, social values.

You know who’s more impressionable than a child?  A grown-up with a deep fear of not measuring up.  But that fear is YOUR fear.  Your daughter’s complete embrace of femininity may threaten your own sense that you are not quite so completely masculine, or perhaps not as masculine as you would like to be, or imagine yourself to be.

You have a few choices, though, Jake. Hit the gym, for one.  Put on some muscle.  Increase your testosterone. You will literally be more masculine.


Or stop worrying about it.  Little girls being feminine are no threat to you.  Despite very deeply ingrained, biologically based gendered characteristics, we exist on a continuum, and there is nothing wrong with that. It’s okay to be beta.  If you’re happy, then just be happy.  And let others be happy, too.

A few weeks ago, I had the misfortune to visit a “soft play centre”. The establishment had a set of five or six “party rooms”, in which a rotation of birthday parties were taking place, each identical to the others. In one room, I saw a collection of about twenty little girls sitting at long tables eating crisps and jelly, vacant expressions on their faces. Every single one of them was dressed in an off-the-peg Disney princess dress, in various shades of pink. As I wrote at the time, it was like witnessing a battery farm for the cretins of the future.

A battery farm for the  cretins of the future.  And you are the father of daughters.  Your hatred of women is showing.  It’s not that surprising, really.  You probably consider yourself a feminist.  Consider also that in hating women, in hating the feminine, you are inadvertently hating yourself.

One does not exist without the other.  The entire point of feminism is to get women to hate themselves AND men. To hate the feminine AND the masculine.  To create a world of robotic, mindless, soulless, genderless drones.

It’s not new, is it?  Most radical social movements have had the same goals. Marxism. Socialism. Communism. Maoism.


The world is littered with the bones of millions who paid the price for a small group of elite to rule.

It is the responsibility of every decent-minded parent – indeed, every decent-minded person – to stand four-square against this pernicious, commercially motivated cultural trend. Pink is not pretty. It stinks.

Hating pink is hating girls.  Hating pink is hating the instinct to care.  Hating pink is hating a love for beauty.  Hating pink is hating the desire to nurture.  Hating pink is hating the longing for a safe home.  Hating pink is hating life.


And that really stinks.

Lots of love,


You let this slide? Are you fucking crazy? Where is your common sense?

10 Jan

So, Shona Sibery, writing at the Daily Mail, has a gorgeous 14 year old daughter, who decided that she would hold her birthday celebration at the local community center, where the party guests would have a group dance lesson and then, have their nails painted fancy colors with lots of glitter polish involved and then, under adult supervision, have a day time dance party.  Shona sat down with Flo, and together they went through her Facebook friends and created an invitation and a guest list, making certain that parents were available to help organize and supervise. Flo picked out a new routine jacket and some warm-up wear and new trainers to wear, and all the girls had a great time.




Oh, wait.  Nope.  That’s not what happened.


Flo decided to hold her party at a DISCO and invited 40 people, both boys and girls and then kitted herself out as a prostitute, and her mother’s response to that was to DRINK MORE WINE and let it pass because Flo was just so excited!  Shona knew that Flo should NOT be leaving the house looking like that, that Flo would likely face some repercussions, had no real understanding of how her appearance would be interpreted, and that Flo is just a little girl in a grown woman’s body. Flo forgot to close her Facebook page, which is apparently private in Shona’s house, and Shona was floored to see that her predictions had come true.  Flo was being “slut-shamed” for dressing like, well, a slut.




And Shona’s response?  She’s blaming the “cyber-bullies”, of course.  Not herself for being a shit mother who threw her daughter to the wolves because being a parent is just too troublesome when the child in question is headstrong and lacks any real understanding of how the world works. 


And where, pray tell, is Flo’s father?  What man in his right mind lets his 14 year old daughter leave the house to go to a disco with 40 “friends”, dressed like a hooker?  I’m guessing Flo’s father is nowhere to be seen, and hasn’t been for a long while.  Flo’s outfit is a scream for male attention, and that poor little girl got the attention, all right, but it wasn’t the kind she anticipated.


The article at the Daily Mail directly references Sabrina (remember her?), blaming Sabrina for this terrible culture of “slut-shaming” that Flo has been unpredictably and inexplicably caught up in.  How rich is that?  Shona, a grown bloody woman, is blaming another young woman for the fact that Flo faced a little social consequences for her very ill-advised sartorial choices.  Gold hot pants?  Really, Shona?  Are you fucking mad?


Shona, here is some advice for you:


Mom up! You don’t get to chug wine and stand by and watch your daughter exercise very poor judgement about what constitutes appropriate clothing for a 14 year old!  “The answer is NO, Flo! Full fucking stop. Go upstairs and change or you are not leaving the house.  End of fucking story”.  Will she whine and cry and hate you and storm away all raging in a veil of tears?  Probably.  Too fucking bad.  YOU are the mother.  How did she come to possess these clothes in the first place? You should never, ever have let Flo get to the point where she feels like challenging her mother is a good call.  But you’re here now, and Flo is going to be in for a world of teenage hurt if you don’t put a stop to this.  You are NOT her friend.  You are her mother, and it is your JOB to protect her, even from herself.  So do it.  Jesus.




Facebook is not private! Not for 14 year olds.  No way.  Flo is adding you to her friends list TODAY and you will both agree on a password and she will understand that you WILL be reading everything she posts and responding as her MOTHER to any bullshit anyone else posts on her wall.  Will she get teased for that? Yep.  Probably. Too fucking bad.  You would rather have her face being called a slut?  She is 14! And you are her mother.  You make the rules, and you enforce them, and if other kids are left to swing in the winds by their own parents, that doesn’t concern you.  Flo is your daughter.  She has no idea what she is doing, but you bloody well do.  Until she has good judgement of her own, you will exercise judgement on her behalf.  How do you think she’s going to learn good judgement if you don’t show any?


She needs role models.  What music is she listening to?  What images has she pinned on Pinterest?  What magazines and books are lying around her room?  What movies does she go to? None of these things are the sole province of 14 year old girls to decide.  As her mother, it is your job to shepherd her through a complicated culture that promotes the early sexualization of young women, without being explicit about consequences and dangers.  You have to make those things explicit.  “Flo that outfit strongly implies that you are sexually active.  It may not be fair to make assumptions about other people’s sexuality based on what they are wearing, but life isn’t fair, baby.  Learn that now! And go change your clothes.” You need to be involved, deeply involved, in your daughter’s life right now.


Your exact words:  Quite simply, my daughter looked like she was far more sexually aware than she actually is. But I just didn’t have the courage, or the heart, to lecture her about the dangers of dressing this way just 30 minutes before the start of her long-awaited party and in front of her friends.


You didn’t have the heart?  Oh, but you do have the heart to watch her being called a slut on social media?  For fuck’s sake, Shona.  You suck at this mothering thing.  It is your JOB to lecture her about the dangers of dressing that way! You KNOW there are dangers.  You don’t throw your daughter under the bus because you simply can’t be bothered to take a stand. Who gives a fuck what her friends think?




If something bad happens, it’s your fault!  Oh yes, my dear.  You KNOW that bad things can happen to 14 year old girls who spend the night at a disco with 40 “friends”, dressed like a Victoria’s Secret model.  And if one of those “friends” happens to bring a fifth of vodka for the birthday girl, something bad is very likely to happen.  And that will be your fault, Mommy Dearest.  This is the real world, not some Disney fairytale.  You are responsible for that little girl who thinks she’s all grown up now.  She’s not.  And you can stop blaming other KIDS for being assholes.  Teenagers are assholes, full stop. This is not exactly breaking news. It’s YOUR job to protect your child from those assholes, and make certain she isn’t engaging in any assholery herself.


Put the hotpants away until she understands what they say.  There is nothing wrong with hotpants.  Nothing whatsoever.  Why JudgyBitch has a pair herself!  I also understand what message I convey when I wear them, and I know how to deflect attention that I don’t want but fully understand I am going to get.  Flo is nowhere near old enough to do either of those things:  understand or deflect.  She is a striking girl who understands that her beauty has power, but she doesn’t really know what that power consists of, or how she can use it safely.  You admit that you weren’t much of a looker yourself, and that’s sad, but it in no way excuses you from coaching Flo to understand the power of beauty.  Beauty sends a signal, and that signal can be mixed.  Not everyone who sees Flo parading around in hotpants and a sheer shirt will also understand that she is a little girl playing dress-up.  She may not understand it herself.




But you do.  Flo will face the consequences of your refusal to face her down, and take a stand.  She will pay the price for your total lack of concern for her well-being.  Is that what you want?


I doubt it.  I’ll say it again:  you are not her FRIEND.  You are her mother.  Your first job is to protect her.  The next time she wants to wear hotpants out of the house, tell her “Sure.  As long as you’re dressed like Lara Croft and you know how to kick some ass”.  Then enroll her in mixed martial arts classes.  Every girl should know how to use a chokehold.




That’s just common sense.


Lots of love,




Sabrina, if you don’t want to be defined by your breasts, you’re doing it wrong!

6 Jan

This is Sabrina:

sabrina 2

She is a terrible person, who has started an internet meme that expresses hatred for women, disgust with normal human sexuality and a deep and abiding shame about her own body.  Sabrina, you see, would like to live in a world where she is defined by more than just her breasts.  I know, I know.  What a stupid little tart.  Doesn’t she know that modern woman = slut = power = check out these titties!


Oh, Sabrina.  Your boobs don’t go in your shirt, they go out on display, but remember to always watch out for rapists and shriek mightily if anyone ever NOTICES your tits hanging out all over the place.  Now all you breastfeeding ladies, don’t get excited.  Your breasts are disgusting and revolting and feeding a baby is just gross and probably really unnatural, so put your tits away, please.  This doesn’t concern you.


Sabrina sparked a bit of a trend, with other young women expressing discomfort with a wider culture that encourages them to spread their legs, wear skanky clothes and slather their faces with make-up.  You see, some young women do not like slut culture and hate being lumped in with peers who have embraced the whole “your worth can only be measured by your whore rating” .




Now let’s be clear.  There is absolutely nothing wrong with a young woman understanding the value of her sexuality and deciding to exchange it for straight up cash.  A young woman who appreciates the costs and freely chooses to be a prostitute has every right to do so, but there is a huge problem with young women who want to take full advantage of the benefits of sexuality without living up to any of the responsibilities or meeting any of the obligations that sexuality entails.

And what are those responsibilities and obligations?  When you deliberately provoke a reaction in the people around you in the hopes of capitalizing on that reaction, you accept the possibility that the reaction may be more intense or powerful than you imagined.  You also accept that the people around you may decide to provoke their own reactions using the assets they have available to them.  When a young woman deliberately and overtly displays her sexuality in the form of make-up, clothing, attitude,  voice, mannerisms and demeanor, she needs to understand that the objects of her provocation will RESPOND.

Male sexuality is profoundly different than women’s. It is, at the very heart, a very aggressive kind of sexuality.  Women want attention, admiration, to be desired and yearned after.  Walking around with your cleavage spilling out of a Victoria’s Secret bra and your lips painted glossy red is a sure way to get those things, but you are playing with a sexuality that wants far more than just that.  Slut culture posits that female sexuality, and the advantages that can be accrued thereby, are morally and culturally superior to a more base, male sexuality.  Male sexuality is curtailed, castrated and derided as crude, rude and increasingly, illegal.

Young women like Sabrina are saying “hold up!  I’m okay with interacting socially on the basis of something OTHER than sexuality”, although that is never really an option.  Platonic relationships between men and women are historical anomalies, and the current of sexual possibility is never far from the surface of the relational waters.

Sabina and her ilk are accused of “slut-shaming” because they dare to suggest that maybe breasts are sexually suggestive and it’s a good idea to display them judiciously or maybe not at all, that a woman’s value is determined by something other than spreading her legs, that clothing makes a statement and has an impact on other people and that we are responsible, at least in part, for ensuring that we understand the consequences of our sartorial choices.

If I wore this item of clothing, I would expect to get a reaction:


I would furthermore expect that reaction to be really BAD.  That’s a no-brainer.  But I should be able to wear this and expect NO reaction:

not asking

Well, darling, if you are not asking for “it”, what are you asking for?  To live in a world where no one has any reaction to anything anyone else is doing, ever?  I’m not saying you’re delusional, sweetheart, but I hope you brought extra cotton candy for your unicorn, because it could be a long night.


In Magical Princess Fairytime Sparkly World, women can walk around bare ass naked at all times, plastered out of their minds and no one will touch them ever or say anything suggestive or even acknowledge that they exist.  Evidently, there are no men in Magical Princess Fairytime Sparkly World.  Hmmmm. Could that be the point?


Here in the real world, people exists and they have drives and desires and will respond to stimuli and not always in a way you might like.  In this world, you will do well to be aware of the people around you, take notice of the impact you are having and deploy some strategies to make certain you are perceived in a way that values you as a person in your own right.

In this world, your boobs?  They go in your shirt.

Lots of love,



PS:  Sabrina, you are a doll!

%d bloggers like this: