I Love Cleavage (Who Cares)

A couple of days ago, I saw this story about a "creepy subreddit" that encourages members to upload pictures of women showing cleavage (in fact, any "sexy" photo will do) onto a special Facebook page designed for the viewing pleasure of...  well, I guess anyone on Facebook who loves to see a suggestion of breasts.  (I assume this isn't an "I Love Toe Cleavage" page, although God knows that would draw its own audience.) 

There are ground rules: The pictures must already have been posted by the subject (a Facebook user herself), the woman must be over eighteen, and the woman must not be named (as though that will somehow protect her identity these days). 

The pages (there are actually more than one) have met with an overwhelmingly enthusiastic response.

Disgusting, isn't it?  My first response was: One more way to punish women for being on the internet. 

But what if the tables were turned?  What if some intrepid person (woman or man) was inspired to obtain pictures of attractive male Facebook users for the same purpose?  Hell, for all I know, someone already has (but I'm not willing to waste an hour looking for them). 

I had to admit that didn't bother me nearly so much, and I had to ask myself, Why not? 

There is plenty of evidence that American women have taken to "objectifying" men in record numbers.  Just read Jezebel or any number of popular women's magazines.  Recall the kerfuffle over Jon Hamm's candid "crotch shots" last year?  I have every reason to believe he found that experience just as humiliating and invasive as some Jane Doe who has already posed for and posted the pictures herself. 

I'm not saying that "objectifying" people of any gender is behavior to be proud of.  But we have to acknowledge it seems hard-wired in the human brain to do so.  Obviously, both men and women enjoy looking at pictures of good-looking men and women in various states of deshabille.  (And kittens. And babies. And food.)  And we especially savor images we're not "supposed to" see. 

The underlying "revenge" element in "I Love Cleavage" or similar Facebook pages is quite unpleasant, like watered-down versions of Hunter Moore's Is Anyone Up.  There is an unescapable sense that these young women are being "shamed" for their sexuality.  Again, I ask, Why? I assume the young women posted their own "sexy" images as a celebration of their beauty, or out of vanity, or a desire to be desired -- all, BTW, perfectly valid, healthy, and natural reasons in my opinion.  So the idea that these pictures have "shaming potential" is merely a demonstration of how fucked up puritanical Americans are (even / especially American "feminists").

I'm not saying that Facebook shouldn't address this issue with a change of policy.  If enough fuss is raised, it probably will.  After all, Facebook is the domain of adolescents (of all ages), whom we hypocritically claim to "protect." 

If there is one thing I've learned in the last few months, it's that none of us have completely comprehended the power of social media to showcase the most base of human behavior.  

Although I'm not ever going to find my mug (or boobs decollatage) on an "I Love Cleavage" Facebook page, I will just add that I'm sorry I ever joined Facebook.  Of course, now that I'm on, I can't get off.  And I'll bet a lot of my friends feel the same way.

Be Afraid, Be Very Afraid

So I'm meandering through the Mysterious Forest of Twitter (because I will do anything to avoid marking papers) when I stumble across a tweet by a self-styled, Las Vegas-based playboy (whose first name is probably what he is not practicing, and whose last name is pretty much the epitome of posthumous cool).  This particular specimen of machismo has a manosphere blog, too, of course, where he promotes his e-books and classes.  His latest post teaches men "How To Have A Three Way With Strippers."  I didn't read it since I'm not planning a trip to Sin City anytime soon, but I would hazard to guess that it's all a matter of having the right party favors.

I recognized his moniker because he was one of the boys who was outraged by Roosh's little hoax.  But now he's done an about-face, urging his followers to "Treat Roosh right.  I'd take a bullet for him.  Don't fuck with him or fuck with me. And trust me, you don't want to fuck with him."

Now that got my attention, because I reckon I'm somewhere on Roosh's Shit List.  And at least by his standards, I've already "fucked with him" a bit.  

And "take a bullet for him," isn't that a bit... melodramatic?  I mean, under what circumstances might that be necessary?  Is Roosh a masculine lifestyle guru, or a war lord?

What are these guys so afraid of, I wonder?  That they'll be doxxed and their Google-able identities slimed?

Trust me, fellas, it isn't as bad as you fear.

Oops!  Breaking news!  Looks like the Las Vegas playboy has just been doxxed himself!  And not by some nasty feminist either!

Anyway, poor guy, I'm certainly not going to compound his misery here.  After all, we can all agree that doxxing is a terrible thing to do, a cowardly and despicable action, and as a sympathetic compadre pointed out, [tsk-tsk!] just goes to show how some people have way too much time on their hands!

I don't think this is going to help.

Now You Tell Me!

In case you're in NYC, you may still have time to hustle your bustle down to the White Man March.  It's been organized by Kyle Hunt, a 30-year-old graduate of Amherst College with a double major in psychology and theater and dance.  (Hey, wait a minute, aren't those sort of "girly" interests for a manly white supremacist?  On the other hand, they're probably good preparation for someone launching a fledgling career producing idiotic spectacles to incite the most moronic elements of society.)   Of course, they've got signs, and those are pretty hilarious too (although not quite as hilarious as the MRA signs).

Not your typical product of an expensive liberal education.

Dragnet Nation

If you missed Bill Moyers' interview with Julia Angwin, the author of Dragnet Nation, it's well worth watching.  The worst news?  It's pretty much impossible to "opt out."

What American Women Watch On Netflix

So over on Return of Kings, a fellow who goes by the commanding handle "General Stalin" posits that a gentleman can know a lot about a lady by her Netflix queue.

That's probably true, and the same goes for a person's library record.  Every time I pass the pleasant young man at my local library's circulation desk, I have to avert my eyes because he knows more about me than my doctor does.

Anyway, General Stalin claims to have a unique insight into the psychology of American women because a girl he "casually dated" left her Netflix password on his laptop.  Not only did he get to enjoy months of free streaming, he knew exactly what his ex and her roomies were watching (and presumably thinking).

That General Stalin is one nosy dude!  Not to mention cheap. And it occurs to me that confessing to this seems oddly more embarrassing than once failing to return a library book, but I digress...  Truth be told, I would have been sorely tempted to behave in a similarly dubious fashion, especially if I had some "unfinished business" with the ex.

The General summarizes his findings as follows:

First, young American women watch a lot of "sexually deviant movies and documentaries."  The General was dismayed to find that "a small group of average white single American girls, who grew up in nice neighborhoods with good families, cared far more about sex than romance. I hardly ever saw a romantic comedy or critically acclaimed tear-jerker on there."  

I'm not a young woman, but even when I was I generally loathed romantic comedies and treacly melodramas (with a few notable exceptions).  But I did, and still do, treat myself to the occasional kinky documentary.  Ever since my ten year old psyche was permanently scarred by "Mondo Cane," I've had a predilection for viewing the bizarre margins of human behavior.  I have watched more than one documentary about "sex dolls", for example, a phenomenon I find morbidly fascinating. 

Second in popularity, according to General Stalin's informal survey, were independent movies with "strong female leads" especially those that featured women overcoming perilous situations, like "Girl With The Dragon Tattoo."  This makes perfect sense to me.  People (not just women) enjoy watching characters they can identify with who use their wits and fortitude to triumph over evil.  From this, the General concludes that "single women want to be fucked raw and treated like filth by bad-boy miscreants, but they also want to make these men suffer for not showing them respect and honoring their strength and independence."  WTF?  I would come to the opposite conclusion.  Both men and women love watching horror and suspense for a number of reasons, but the desire to actually be a real victim (or perpetrator) is not one of them.

I've already confessed that horror and true crime are my guilty pleasures.  My Netflix queue is jammed with unwatched "Disappeared" and "Deadly Women" episodes.  Ann Rule books are my "go to" trashy reading.  I scare the bejeezus out of myself for an hour, then turn on the lights and realize how safe and cozy my life actually is, have a hot cup of cocoa and sleep like a baby.  Sadly, my partner does not share my passion, so I have to indulge myself when she is not around.

Finally, the girls whose Netflix viewing he was obsessively monitoring had a taste, broadly shared by the American public, for "Reality TV." 

OK, I agree with General Stalin, that is just plain indefensible.  I'm proud to say that I never watch Reality TV shows.  Except for the ones about plucky dwarfs and adorable polygamists.

BTW, why can these guys never discuss American women's media tastes without referencing Sex and the City, a show that has been off the air for a decade?  It's beginning to seem like a kind of tic.

General Stalin describes himself as "a passionate but misanthropic cynic who is tired and beaten down by the shortcomings of Western civilization, currently living a life of quiet desperation."  I feel his pain.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm right in the middle of "Blue is the Warmest Color,"and I'm just getting to the "good parts" if you know what I mean (and I know that you do).

Now This Is Scary

Looks like A Nice Guy, doesn't he?

I can mostly dismiss the New Misogynists as a pretty marginal bunch of losers, but then a story comes along that makes me realize some of them actually exercise authority and influence in The Real World. And that is scary. Take the case of Mike Maggio, a judge from Arkansas who was recently doxxed and revealed to be the author of the kind of blithely horrible racist and misogynistic comments that are the fodder of most manosphere blogs. Shivering in the cold wind of his exposure, he is ineffectually struggling to maintain his position in the Corridors of Power by issuing the type of (non)apologies these idiots are wont to do.  The author of This Ruthless World discusses this phenomenon -- sure to become more common in the near future -- in her typically incisive fashion.  And when it rains, it pours: the embattled judge is now facing an onslaught of unrelated complaints of misconduct and civil suits because, in addition to being a complete dick about women and African-Americans, he also seems to be incompetent at his job.

Too Funny Not to Share

If you haven't seen the new website of "Femgoddess" Desiree Meyers-Liebowitz, it isn't for her lack of self-promotion on twitter.   She only has one post up so far, but it's designed to create quite a stir in the PUA community:  "The Five Ugliest Pickup Artists".  It's a much funnier (and much meaner) riposte to the Return of Kings post that started me on my own road to ruin over a year ago.

My initial question was, Who exactly is Desiree sending up?  Because she seems to be making as much fun of the "fat acceptance movement" and the "BBW" scene as she is of the New Misogynists.  In other words, I was pretty skeptical that Desiree Meyers-Liebowitz was the unapologetic cuckolding feminist fatty that she claimed to be.

I had no idea who the creator could be of (what I initially assumed was) this brilliant caricature, or even his/her gender.  For if "The Five Ugliest Pickup Artists" she eviscerates in her post represent the average woman's worst nightmare, Desiree's online persona is custom-built to be the average manospherean's fever dream of what a "feminist" is:  A "gender studies" major, she has scored herself a "beta" lawyer husband "Harold" who, when not busying himself in the kitchen, is rubbing her feet and, indeed, embracing every inch of her gloriously wanton, gluttonous self, while she lolls on the couch stuffing herself with cheetos and entertaining a stream of eager swains.

Then I did a little "research" (that is, idle stalking googling) and I learned that Desiree has been lurking in the manosphere for years, even posting on Il Douche's Forum in 2012 (back before he decreed that vaginas defiled the Inner Sanctum*).  So it appears that she has either been "trolling" these guys for quite a while, or else Desiree Meyers Liebowitz really is "for real."

It doesn't matter either way, I guess.  My only question for Desiree at this point is, What took you so long?  And what will you post next?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* And before he thought to explicitly exclude "homos" or even ban his own members if they stooped to respond to a female commenter who had somehow slipped through security.  Are there no lengths to which this freak won't go to maintain "ritual purity?"