Tag Archives: slut-culture

Let’s talk about sluts

6 Aug

sluts

One comment that shows up repeatedly here goes something like this:

Why don’t you like sluts?

How can you be supportive of sex-work and yet rail against sluts?

Why aren’t you more sex-positive?

Why are you such a prude?

This article at Slate, about women who are out-bro’ing the frat bros at the illustrious Princeton drinking hole called the Tiger Inn, got me thinking about slut-culture, and I feel like I haven’t done a very good job explaining what it is that I find so off-putting about it. Either that, or some readers are just retarded, which is also possible.  Let’s split the difference and say I’m been remiss in explaining my slut POV and some people are stupid.

Seems fair.

tiger inn

Tiger Inn members like to get naked, “strum ‘penis guitars,’” projectile vomit competitively, and slather their dog food- and live goldfish-consuming pledges in ketchup, maple syrup and egg yolk. Last year, more women than men applied to join the Inn for the first time since the club became co-ed in 1991.

In the words of Princeton student Caroline Kitchener, The Tiger Inn is a place where there is no pressure for a “girl to be a girl”.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/08/06/women_in_frat_culture_is_princeton_s_tiger_inn_a_place_where_girls_can_be.html?wpisrc=flyouts

Well, if they’re not girls, then what are they?

According to writer Katy Waldman, they are “hyper-dudely”.  Hyper-dudeliness requires some specific actions:

bar

…pounding back shots, dancing on the bar, going home with someone you don’t care a lot about, and meeting your friends for brunch the next morning in your sweatpants…

At least Katy was objective enough to add the word “hyper” to her stereotype of men as drunk, uninhibited, slutty and slovenly.  It’s the natural state of men to do and be these things, but some men REALLY go to town with the whole charade and “hype” up their manliness.  Tucker Max, anyone?

http://www.tuckermax.com/

You’ll note that Katy doesn’t ascribe any of this to the simple state of youth, or what for many students is no doubt their first taste of freedom. It’s manly to toss back shooters and dance on the bar, and when ladies do it, they are “not ladies” and “hyper-men” instead.

Le sigh.  I wonder if Katy saw this neat little experiment in England where an attractive young woman propositioned random men for sex just to see what would happen.  Wearing short shorts and her hair long and flowing, Andrea asks men “do you want to have sex with me?”  The first guy she asked got so angry he called the police on her!  Fully half the men turned her down flat.

andrea

No thanks.

Even the men who played along seemed suspicious, questioning whether she was drunk or planning a robbery.  Not quite the unambiguous pack of raging boners the media likes to portray.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2381362/Asking-Guys-For-Sex–Young-attractive-womans-YouTube-experiment.html

Turns out that the whole “random sex with people you don’t know” isn’t particularly good for anyone’s mental health, and that includes men, too.

man

…the results show that “casual sex was negatively associated with well-being and positively associated with psychological distress.” There were no disparities in gender when it came to the impact of casual sex.

Again, not quite the story the popular media likes to tell about random sex and sluttiness.

http://www.businessinsider.com/study-college-students-who-have-meaningless-sex-have-more-psychological-distress-2013-7

A routine critique of the word slut decries the fact that it is generally only applied to women, although I personally experience no dissonance using “slut” to describe promiscuous men.  The general idea is that women can have sex anytime they like, and men can’t.  Almost any woman can walk into a bar and walk out with a willing sex partner, while men can’t do that. No one seems to consider the fact that perhaps women are willing to lower their standards, while men are not. Andrea’s experiment demonstrates, if anything, that no, women cannot just randomly proposition men for sex and expect a 100% success rate.  You can bet if Andrea has been less attractive, her acceptance rate would have been considerably less than 50%, and I suspect the inverse – an attractive man propositioning  women, under the right conditions  – would have a similar success rate.

No doubt, you have heard of the Clark and Hatfield study in which men and women propositioned each other for random sex, only to have ZERO women accept the offer, while 75% and 69% respectively of the men agreed to casual sex.

The studies took place in 1978 and 1982.

A few things have changed since then.

eighties

Oh my god, those jeans!  Look at those jeans! How did anyone get laid?

http://www.elainehatfield.com/79.pdf

Professor Terri D. Conley of the University of Michigan decided to take another dive into men and women’s willingness to have random sex with strangers, looking at what factors contributed either negatively or positively to engaging in sluttiness.

A few intersecting things came to light:

women

Both men and women perceive women to be less risky partners.  Very few men were willing to have random sex with other men (duh!) but plenty of women were open to sex with other women, even if the women did not identify as homosexual.

I think there is a huge part of the conversation missing when we discuss “risk” and the differences in how men and women perceive that.  It is not necessarily that men perceive there to be a lower physical risk in sex with women, but probably more likely that men feel they can deal with any bad situation that arises.

Why would women be open to sex with another woman? Because they feel that in a one-off encounter like casual sex, they are more likely to be on the receiving end of pleasure.

…both women and men agreed that the female proposer would be better in bed, thought the female proposer was warmer and had higher status, and thought the female proposer would be more likely than the male proposers to give them gifts. Men and women also believed that female proposers were less likely to be dangerous than male proposers. In sum, both men and women agreed that the male proposers are less desirable than female proposers on dimensions of relevance to sexual encounters.

sexy

Here is where it gets really interesting.  When women are presented with Johnny Depp (attractive) and Donald Trump (unattractive), their willingness to engage in random sex with an attractive partner leaps up to match men’s.  The men were given a choice of Angelina Jolie or Roseanne Barr, and I doubt I have to explain how that went!

Here’s the headline — differences between men and women in likelihood of taking the proposer up on the offer was a whole lot closer.  For the proposition by the attractive person, women were at 4.09 (2.16) to 4.16 (2.56) for men — just about a tie.  For the unattractive celebrity, men were at 1.43 (.84) to women’s 1.71 (1.61) — women were higher.  For the unknown person, though, no such effect.  Women were at 1.86 (1.38), men were still at 3.52 (2.06).  Women were only marginally more interested in the offer from a stranger than from a man generally thought ugly.  Men were almost as interested in the random stranger as Angelina Jolie.  The short fling results basically track this, with the fact of celebrity seriously closing the gap between men’s and women’s interest, and the gap for a stranger remaining wide.  The appeal of the offer follows the same pattern: little difference in men’s and women’s response to the unattractive celebrity, little difference in their reaction to the attractive celebrity, lots of difference in their response to the stranger.

What’s the key thing here? STATUS

http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2011/03/03/gender-differences-and-casual-sex-the-new-research/

College campuses are a great place to meet men with the status you are looking for, and who could be of higher status than a Princeton Man? Ladies who think that joining the boys for projectile vomiting contests and beer pong is a great strategy to attract high status males are utterly free to do so.

Go right ahead.  It won’t work, for anything MORE than random hook-ups, but some people just have to learn everything the hard way, don’t they?

Here’s where slut culture really gets to me:  most women KNOW, they just KNOW, that being a slut is NOT going to work when it comes to encouraging a relationship.  Guess what?  Most men know that, too.  Ergo the fragility of their mental health.  Hook-ups aren’t good for either MEN or WOMEN.

frat

Some men don’t give a shit.  They are not looking for a relationship and a random blowjob from a hot drunk girl is good enough.  Good for them.  Some women don’t care either.  They are not looking for a relationship and a muffin dive from a hot drunk guy is good enough.  Good for them, too.

But that is NOT what most women want.  85% of college women want to be married by age 30. They want love, family, lasting, committed relationships.

http://www.self.com/blogs/flash/2012/08/survey-most-college-women-want.html

fingers

And most women know damn well that men are not keen on marrying sluts.  Very few are willing to admit to just how many sexual partners they have had before marriage.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2045595/Men-exaggerate-women-play-Why-care-ones-number-sexual-partners.html

Most women feel terrible after random sex, and most women want to get married eventually and KNOW that random sex is not a great way to go about it.  But they are stewing in a sea of sluttiness that tells them their instinctive preferences are wrong and prudish and confining and crippling because PATRIARCHY.

dress

Look at this piece from Jezebel, called “How to Be the Perfect Slut”.  Being a slut is synonymous with liberation and self-actualization.

Having however much sex you want, with people you may or may not know very well, should be enjoyable, it should be easy, and it should never make you second-guess yourself. In other words, it requires that you’re comfortable with who you are and what you want, and capable of communicating both of those things. It requires you to have reached a certain level of self-actualization and self-assurance.

Enjoyable

Easy

Never second-guess yourself

Self-actualizing

Self-assured

And that is what I HATE about slut-culture.  The writer at Jezebel, Callie Beusman, even admits that she wasn’t a very good slut, because she couldn’t shake that desire for a relationship to go along with the sex and it left her mentally distressed.

I wasn’t there yet, so I sucked at being casually promiscuous. I projected my anxieties about myself as a person onto the “relationships” I was having, and it put me in a state of mild psychological distress.

http://jezebel.com/how-to-be-the-perfect-slut-733975809

Rather than believe her needs and desires for sex within some sort of defined relationship is natural, normal and that ultimately, her own instincts would serve to protect her from psychological distress, she decided that she was wrong.  That her needs were wrong.  That her desires were wrong.  That her mental distress was actually wrong.  She was wrong to feel bad.  She was wrong to just be herself. She was wrong to have her own wishes about how she wanted to act and behave.

And more importantly, she was a traitor to her beloved ideology.

traitor

Taking up the Mantle of Sluticity is not always a simple task, because it’s caked with centuries worth of fears and myths and horrible assumptions re: sexually active women. So how does one even go about being successful at casual sex without experiencing emotional consequences? What makes The Perfect Slut?

Sex without emotional consequences.  Everything without consequence.  Feminism:  the radical notion that women should do anything they want without consequences.

And even when that consequence is feeling terrible about yourself, well, change your mind and get into sluthood, girl!  The carousel will set you free!

If the only thing that ever happened was bunch of spoiled college girls ended up feeling shitty about themselves, I really wouldn’t give a shit.  Too bad, so sad, welcome to life, ladies.

But there are some very real consequences for women who throw aside their own deeply felt requirements for physical relationships, and it’s not just women who must abide them.

When women can’t quite quash that feeling of utter loathing, they look for someone to blame. No consequences.  Not for women, anyways. Who do they blame?

date rape

Oh, hello date rape.  Men go to JAIL and have their lives destroyed by women who use some tequila generated courage to overcome their most basic impulses to reserving sex for the highest status males they can attract, and women end up feeling even more victimized by their own actions.

http://judgybitch.com/2012/10/22/54/

And even more tragically, very young women who buy the slut = liberty fairytale end up dead by their own hands when the magical castle of easy self-fulfilment they were promised ends up being a nightmare of never-ending terror.

http://judgybitch.com/2013/04/12/two-lovely-girls-are-dead-by-suicide-and-we-need-to-talk-about-how-the-world-has-changed/

How many women at the Tiger Inn are there because they feel like doing shooters and dancing on the bar and blowing random guys is just good clean fun?  They don’t give a fuck? How many?

And how many are there because they have bought the story that men are drunk, wild sluts who know the true meaning of freedom and if they want to taste freedom it comes in the flavor of cock?

Sorry, that was crass, even for me, but this whole cultural story just makes me so angry.  I honestly have no problem with women who truly enjoy the art of the random hook-up.  The zipless fuck.  No strings attached sex.  Not that you need it, but you ladies have my complete and utter blessing.  You’re chum that might attract the big sharks, but you will never land one.  Leaving the waters clear for women who actually respect and understand their own psychologies and bodies and who are not willing to compromise themselves in the name of ideology.

Very young women are… well, young.  They need guidance.  Reassurance. They need love and support and friendship and kindness, especially from other women.  That begins with respecting who they are and how they want to share their bodies.

Telling women to go ahead act slutty because it’s the surest path to self-actualization and fulfilment, when that is just what women do NOT want to do is more than cruel and stupid and thoughtless.

It’s hateful.

hate

And it’s a hallmark of feminism.  I’ve said it before, but I am beginning to believe I can’t say it enough.

Feminism HATES women.  Young women, especially.  The ones most in need of the protections of older women are the ones targeted to suffer the most.  Sluttiness is cast as a moral victory over oppressive social norms that keep women from behaving like the fantasy of men feminism has concocted.

No consequences.

It won’t last.

banquet

 

Sooner or later everyone sits down to a banquet of consequences.

Robert Louis Stevenson

Lots of love,

JB

Rape culture didn’t kill Rehtaeh Parsons. Slut culture did.

7 May

tread

Today you are going to witness JudgyBitch try to tread softly and quite frankly, that’s not one of my strong suits. I’m going to attempt a kid glove treatment not because I’m afraid of the subject matter – not at all – but because at the end of the day, a young woman is dead and she leaves behind a mother and father who are grieving and no matter what she did or didn’t do, she didn’t deserve to die.

christie

Christie Blatchford, writing for Canada’s National Post makes no similar effort.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/04/26/christie-blatchford-why-there-will-never-be-a-case-against-the-rehtaeh-parsons/

Christie does not reveal her sources, but let’s assume that as a respected and experienced journalist, she didn’t just make this shit up.

She begins by noting that the reluctance on the part of the police in Nova Scotia to press any charges has two possible interpretations:

1. The police are assholes who don’t give a fuck about rape victims

2. The police had NO EVIDENCE OF ANY KIND that would warrant charges

Let’s make note of the fact that the case was handled by a joint national and regional sexual assault team, led by a woman. They took over a year to collect evidence and consider whether or not there was any realistic chance of convicting anyone for anything. Eventually, the police team took the case to the local prosecutor, who was also a woman, apparently very experienced in prosecuting sexual assault offenders, and she also declined to press charges.

lawyer

The evidence was scant to begin with, and Rehtaeh’s statements were all over the place. It took her two weeks to tell the police she had said “no”.

Cue Anonymous. Demands to have the case re-opened were followed with some vigilante hackers posting the names of the alleged offenders, and Anonymous eventually had to release a statement that pointed to at least two of the named boys innocence.

anon

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE — April 12, 2013 – 12PM GMT

Greetings from Anonymous.

Please be aware of the following facts:

1) One of the alleged rapists has made several public statements admitting that he did have sex with Raetaeh on the night in question. He admits she was inebriated at the time, also that she was throwing up during the act.

2) During his confession, he names three other boys and admits that they too took turns having sex with Rahtaeh that night as well. The names match with those we have confirmed during our investigation.

3) The individual making this confession is the same boy identified in the photograph. He has also admitted to being in the photograph and named the accomplice who took the picture.

4) All information, including screenshots of the confession, have been made available to the police.

5) Two boys have been implicated repeatedly whom we believe are innocent based on numerous testimonies given by individuals with first hand knowledge of the surrounding events.

6) There are multiple witnesses who were classmates of the alleged rapists that can confirm they were shown the photograph of Rehtaeh by them.

7) At the very least, there was a house with a minimum of half a dozen underage students consuming alcohol and engaging in sexual intercourse. What happened in this house resulting in the spread of child pornography. This much the police will agree to. No charges have been filed in regards to this.

red

Ooh, I really want to get a red pen and correct that grammar, but I’ll focus instead on what seems to have happened.

Rehtaeh and some “friends” got trashed and Rehtaeh had sex with multiple partners. Was it consensual? That question doesn’t look like it’s going to be easy to answer. At least some of it was, by Rehtaeh’s own admission.

Why?

That’s what I would like to know? What part of Rehteah’s life experience led her to believe that sex with a line of boys, one after the other, was going to result in anything positive or pleasant for her?

Ariel Levy wrote a book called Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture, and in it, I think she answers my question.

pigs

“A tawdry, cartoonlike version of female sexuality has become so ubiquitous, it no longer seems particular. What we once regarded as a *kind* of sexual expression we now regard *as* sexuality.

These are not stories about girls getting what they want sexually, they are stories about girls gaining acclaim socially, for which their sexuality is a tool.”

Ariel holds what she calls “lipstick feminists” responsible for this new raunchy version of female sexuality while still clinging to the idea that “proper feminists” have the right version of what women’s sexual experiences should look like.

lipstick

She’s absolutely correct that “lipstick feminists” promote sluttiness as a virtue, but completely wrong when she fails to understand the older generation of “proper feminists” have a deeply vested interest in encouraging young women to view themselves as fuck-bunnies and little else.

What is it that young women like Rehtaeh are supposed to get out of treating sex as something so casual one can line the boys up and ride them like a carousel? In a nutshell, it makes you equal to boys, because we all know boys care nothing for love or affection or romance or intimacy. Boys will fuck anything, amirite? The only way to be equal is to go ahead and fuck anything yourself.

romeo

Here’s another book, beloved by the organizers of “Slutwalks”.

ethical

http://feministcurrent.com/2585/were-sluts-not-feminists-wherein-my-relationship-with-slutwalk-gets-rocky/

The authors define slut as “a person of any gender who has the courage to lead life according to the radical proposition that sex is nice and pleasure is good for you.

How does that work out in practice? Oh, not so great.

http://www.thefastertimes.com/loveanddeath/2011/05/31/the-ethical-slut-revisited-why-i-am-no-longer-an-ethical-slut/

Remember Karen F. Owen who decided to fuck every athlete she could find at Duke? She recounts in excruciating detail each encounter she had, and ranks them all in terms of the pleasure she experienced. The one that gets the high score? (Subject 12)

http://jezebel.com/5652114/college-girls-power-point-fuck-list-goes-viral-gallery?skyline=true&s=i

That’s the one in which she felt most like a person. He made eye contact with her (how do you fuck someone who won’t even look at you??), treated her like a person, like her feelings mattered, like HE CARED ABOUT HER.

In other words, he acted like they had some kind of relationship.

And the reality is that most women want sex in the context of a relationship. Hooking up is being used BY WOMEN as a strategy to move into a relationship, to their detriment.

What is remarkable is that even women who write books about their sexual adventures and want to defend their sexual freedom end up telling the same story. In The Morning After: Sex, Fear, and Feminism (1994), Katie Roiphe speaks of feeling “almost sick with the accumulated anonymity of it, the haphazardness, the months and months of toweled men.” In Lip Service (1997), Kate Fillion recounts how she retroactively decided she was in love with every man she had had sex with, and how the power she got from sex “was the power to cause myself emotional pain.” Cindy Chupack, an executive producer and writer for the HBO series Sex and the City, gives us the details of her sexual escapades in The Between Boyfriends Book (2003) but confesses that she wants to be more than “a notch in somebody’s bedpost”; she is looking for a husband.

http://chronicle.com/article/The-Emotional-Costs-of-Hooking/65960/

None of that stops feminists from encouraging women, even very young women, to strip down and fuck any and every guy they meet.

proud

Everyone needs to start learning the obvious fact that sex is for both girls and guys. Women should not be shamed into waiting to have sex nor shamed for having it. I am not scared to say I enjoy sex. It has no effect on who I am as a person, so society: stop trying to convince me otherwise.

http://thefbomb.org/2012/07/i-should-be-allowed-to-enjoy-sex/

There’s even a special term for encouraging girls to treat sex casually: sex-positive feminism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex-positive_feminism

Sex-positive feminism… is a movement that began in the early 1980s that centers on the idea that sexual freedom is an essential component of women’s freedom.

Slut = Freedom

What is that the feminists of the 1980s gained by promoting the idea that sexual freedom is an essential component of women’s freedom? Freedom to do what? Freedom from what?

This article by Tracey McMillan is instructive:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tracy-mcmillan/why-youre-not-married_b_822088.html

Her reasons for why women aren’t married:

You’re an angry bitch

You’re shallow

You’re a slut

You’re a liar

You’re selfish

You’re not good enough

Think about those things. Men don’t want to marry angry, shallow, lying, selfish sluts. Who would?

What does sex positive feminism promote? Women should be shallow, selfish sluts who lie to themselves about what they want and end up angry and …. alone. Sex positivism and feminism are both dedicated to fracturing the possibility of meaningful relationships between men and women. Men learn to view women as untrustworthy sluts (because they are) and women end up angry with men who reject them as serious partners.

angry

Slut-culture is a strategy designed to get women to hate and blame men for their own actions and decisions. It’s designed to put women into situations where aligning themselves with feminism seems like a solid, sensible choice. A way of protecting themselves. All without realizing that WOMEN are the ones hurting other women.

In the best-case scenario, women end up alone and rejected. More likely, they end up married to beta men whom they end up despising, thereby confirming that feminism is correct: men suck.

http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2010/09/16/why-sluts-make-bad-wives/

In the worst case scenario, they end up dead.

Being a slut didn’t empower Rehtaeh Parsons. It didn’t ensure her freedom. It didn’t make her strong and confident and empowered. It may very well have left her vulnerable to sexual assault. She wanted to blame the boys for what happened to her. And it’s possible there is some blame to go around. We don’t know the answer to that, yet.

But it isn’t boys who came up with the idea that casual sex is a great thing for girls. It isn’t the patriarchy that encourages women to fuck without commitment. It isn’t men who told women to parade around half-naked in some futile effort to make being a slut a virtue.

misogyny

It is misogyny though. Hatred of women.

And it comes from the very women who claim to stand against misogyny in all its forms: feminists.

Feminists want us to believe “rape-culture” killed Rehtaeh Parsons.

http://feministing.com/2013/04/10/rehteah-parsons-is-dead/

Bullshit. Slut culture killed Rehtaeh. And women who promote sluttiness should be made to answer for it.

Lots of love,

JB

 

EDITED TO ADD:  Look what  just went up on Jezebel

 

So, Girls, Fuck All of It

If you want to. Or don’t fuck any of it, if you don’t want to. Fuck women. Fuck men. Fuck no one. Point is, you get to fuck what you like, when you like, and your worth is not determined by some golden ratio of extreme boner tantalization vs. minimal boner touching. BONERS ARE NOT THE BOSS OF YOU. You are the boss of you.

 

http://jezebel.com/female-purity-is-bullshit-493278191

 

And god help the girls who take this advice.

 

…and does anyone else think that you get to fuck what you like, when you like sounds pretty rapey?  Guess getting consent only applies to men then?

 

ugh

A teenage girl’s best weapon against slut-culture? Her dad.

22 Jan

dad3

The Daily Mail has been running a series about the very real cultural threats that make becoming a young woman with sense and morals and manners so bloody difficult. The last article in the series today is well worth a read, because it’s about the importance of a father to a young girl just blossoming into womanhood, and that is so often left out of the debate.

I’m not one for “trigger warnings”, since I figure calling myself JudgyBitch is a pretty big indication that I might be “judgy” and quite possible “bitchy”, but in this case I do want to warn readers that the author of this article is critical of fathers who are absent, but neglects to mention the fact that most fathers who are absent have been removed forcefully from their daughter’s lives by family courts that tend to award custody to female parents with little to no consideration of what might be in the best interests of the child, following a break down of the parent’s marriage. If anything, the article strongly suggests that older children SHOULD be with their fathers rather than their mothers, particularly girls.

Be aware of this serious omission before you click through.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2266183/Get-wrong-shell-explode-But-right-fathers-love-set-daughter-life.html

The author, Steve Biddulph, a family therapist who wrote a book several years ago about the crisis happening with boys, has noted a new crisis emerging with girls: a culture of early sexualisation. In other words, slut-culture. He quite rightly notes that this is a violently destructive force that is ruining young girls’ childhoods, and he has some good advice for how to counter that force.

http://www.stevebiddulph.com/Site_1/Steve_Biddulph.html

His number one piece of advice is to have a devoted, loving father present.

“For a girl, Dad is her personal ambassador from the Planet Male. If she has a good relationship with him, she’s unlikely to settle for less from the other males in her life, or allow herself to be manipulated. Put very simply, psychologists have discovered that it’s good mothers who make girls feel secure – but it’s good fathers who are vital for their self-esteem”.

dad2

He starts by recommending that fathers make a personal pact with themselves to never strike or hit their daughters. Good advice. It also applies to boys. No one should ever hit children, full stop. Children should be treated with gentleness by their fathers, because that sets the groundwork for them to understand that when Daddy roughhouses with them, it’s about PROTECTING them, and not about Daddy being an asshole with no capacity to discipline or enforce boundaries without the use of violence.

Don’t hit your children. Seriously. It’s an awful thing to do. If you don’t know what else to do, start here:

http://www.askdrsears.com/topics/discipline-behavior/spanking/10-reasons-not-hit-your-child

Once you are established as the man who protects her, and never harms her, rough and tumble games can be really good for little girls. They lead to a greater capacity to deal with stress, for example, and an enhanced sense of adventure. I remember when PinkyPinkyPie was just a baby, learning how to crawl, and Mr. JB would crawl around after her and fling his body over hers, forcing her to struggle to get out from underneath him. It used to freak me out. Everything about it seemed wrong, but it was clear that she absolutely loved this game, so I shut my mouth (it does happen, sometimes) and just let them play.

As she got older, they would play the “I Smell A Fire” game which involved Mr. JB flinging her across his shoulders and running around the house looking for a fire, veering dangerously close to walls and corners, but never colliding, obviously. Again, all my instincts were “no! stop!”, but they both had an absolute riot playing this game.

carry

True story: I once came home from grocery shopping on a very hot summer day to find Pinky in a snowsuit, dangling from the second story stair railing, with a rope tied around her torso. Pinky and Daddy were playing “Mountain Rescue” and Mr. JB had showed her how to tie the proper knot to pull a body and he was rescuing her from an avalanche. I will admit that I did properly freak out about that one. I don’t think it’s a good idea to teach children how to tie ropes around themselves and fling themselves off staircases. He let me have that one. They went outside to catch flies and throw them in the spider web and watch the spider come and kill them. Yech.

spider

Aside: Mr. JB informs me it was a bowline knot, and everyone should know how to tie one. Oooooookay.

bowline

Each child, in turn, has had their own special, and to me, brutal relationship with Mr. JB. LittleDude was obsessed with pliers and vice grips when he was around 2, and he loved his Daddy to chase him around and pinch him with these tools (gently, obviously). MissBossyPants likes to play the chase me and catch me and throw me on the couch game, and I’ve come to see that when she invites a man to chase her, it means she really, truly loves and trusts that person. Our good friend JudgyAsshole can barely get in the house without MissBossy demanding to be chased, but if another, less familiar man were to do that, she would be terrified.

chasing

We are now entering an interesting phase with PinkyPinkyPie, who is just on the verge of turning 11. Physically, she appears to be a late bloomer, as was I. She looks entirely like a little girl, and she is very slender and small, weighing in at 68 pounds. Several of her classmates are fully bloomed young women, though, and like it or not, they have an impact on Pinky.

girls

I’ve always thought that Mr. JB would play a stunningly important role at this stage of development, and we have had long conversations about how he is now a stand-in for her expectations of how other men should treat her. Turns out he always was, but right now, physical affection and affirmation is incredibly important, as is letting Pinky know, in language that is gentle and respectful, when she’s being a dick. When the kids were really little, I was the Enforcer of Rules. Our toddlers would never have thought to ask Daddy if it was okay to have a popsicle before dinner. Mommy’s word is Law.

But now, I can see that Pinky looks to her Dad to set the rules.

Can I sleep over at Amanda’s house? – Nope. Amanda’s mom is single and dresses like a hooker. Amanda can come here.

Can I go to this birthday party at a nail salon? – Yes, but no FAKE nails.

Can I go to Jack’s house for dinner? – Yes, I know his father and he’s a good kid.

Can I have an iPhone? – Yes, when you’re 17 and have a job.

And that is just how it should be. Power transfers from mom to dad. A lot of women have trouble with that. I’ve seen it happen. Hell, Mr. JB’s mom has trouble with that. She gets very jealous when the Duke and Mr. JB spend time together without her. Perhaps because my own wicked witch of a mother threw my father out of our house when I was 11, I understand on a very profound level WHY Mr. JB is so important to Pinky right now. I mean, he always has been, but now more than ever.

dad

It’s interesting that feminism is so vested in destroying the first relationship a girl has with a man. Remember Germaine?

http://judgybitch.com/2012/11/02/daddy-should-be-every-little-girls-first-love/

Single motherhood, divorce, rape culture, slut culture. It’s all part of teaching women that men do not matter. That they are dangerous predators who cannot be trusted. That they are worthless and useless and irrelevant, unless they submit, from childhood, to the whims of women.

stepping

Why are young girls facing a crisis? Why are they lost and lonely and depressed and despairing? Because their mothers have made sure they have no fathers. What goes on in our house has a name: it’s called patriarchy. The rule of the father. Feminists insist this means that the father rules his adult partner, and obviously, that is a Very Bad Thing ™, but it doesn’t mean that at all. It means the father is acknowledged as the person who governs children as they pass from childhood into adulthood. Patriarchy isn’t the husband ruling the wife. It’s the father ruling the children.

Without that rule, girls are lost. Boys are, too. Without fathers, everyone is lost.

lost

Dangling like a four year old, tied up with a bowline knot, and no strong arms to catch her. And that’s truly a disaster.

Lots of love,

JB

%d bloggers like this: