Case (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
case) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
fandomsecrets2016-05-24 06:34 pm
case) wrote in fandomsecrets2016-05-24 06:34 pm
[ SECRET POST #3429 ]
⌈ Secret Post #3429 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.
__________________________________________________
02.
__________________________________________________
03.
__________________________________________________
04.
__________________________________________________
05.
__________________________________________________
06.
__________________________________________________
07.
__________________________________________________
08.
Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #490.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.
Re: Nerd Elitism
Specifically, if you want me to rant for a million blog posts, claim that Lolita is about male sexual freedom. Or that it was Dolores's Haze's fault for seducing Humbert Humbert and that he's a tragic figure.
See, I had to write a PAPER for this stupid book, which means I have read a LOT of critical analysis about it. And so whenever I see the arguments above (which I have) I hit the roof and just want to scream, "DID YOU EVEN FUCKING READ THE BOOK?!"
Especially when I run into these arguments from high-falutin' literary types who you'd think would have basic reading fucking comprehension but APPARENTLY NO, they think you're supposed to justify Humbert Humbert's behavior and AAAAAAAH.
(Hey, you want nerd elitism, I'll GIVE nerd elitism.)
Re: Nerd Elitism
(I mean I've never read the book but I'm gathering from your commentary that that's the kind of dynamic that's going on)
ETA: oh wow mother fuck I just looked that book up and damn is that creepy. I 100% empathize with your anger over people who interpret the book that way, holy shit. (I read a plot summary and have zero interest in ever reading the book)
Re: Nerd Elitism
I figured it counted as nerd elitism because for me, it's specifically literary critics who get my ire. Like, ordinary folks who haven't even read the book, I can understand how they'd have that misapprehension, via pop culture osmosis. But it seemed painfully obvious to me when I READ the book that Nabakov was NOT condoning child molestation in any way. It seemed incredibly obvious to me that the AUTHOR and his NARRATOR were NOT the same at all.
Also, once you start seeing what Nabakov himself has to say about it, it gets even MORE obvious. He specifically states in interviews that Humbert Humbert is a monster. He told people NOT to have any pictures of girls on the covers of Lolita, out of fear people would see it as sexualizing children. (Sadly, that was a total failure.)
But apparently complete dickbags still thought it was all about male sexual freedom and the tragedy of being victimized by society and AAAAAAAAAAH *headdesk headdesk headdesk*
(This is the article that caused me such rage, by the way. Why is it 'male sexual freedom' in these contexts seem to mean pedophilia, incest, and/or rape? Like, seriously, with ALLLL the fucking issues men can have around sex, why does this vision of freedom have to be so fucking CHILDISH and self-centered? As a man IT MAKES ME SO ANGRY.)
EDIT: tl;dr Nabokov wrote a book about the horrors of child molestation, douchebag guys made it all about how hot little girls are. Nabokov rotates in his grave at 4000 rps, providing free energy to the entire city of New York.
Re: Nerd Elitism
That is good to know! From the synopsis I read on Wikipedia all that nuance was lost.
Why is it 'male sexual freedom' in these contexts seem to mean pedophilia, incest, and/or rape?
Oh man it makes me rage to see male sexual freedom equated with rape, and denial of sex to a guy as oppression. I saw some of that just the other day (something compelled me to go down the Redpill rabbit hole for a while...I don't know why I do such things to myself). The poor man, no woman can understand his paaaain, it is torturous for us to not offer up our vaginas for public use, etc. etc. but when we do we're worthless sluts!
Nabokov rotates in his grave at 4000 rps, providing free energy to the entire city of New York.
I like your commentary. xD
ETA: looking at that article and wow...don't you love the implicit equation of male sexuality to wanting to sleep with teenagers? :/ (I'm not all the way done with it, probably won't have time to finish it before I have to get up and go somewhere else, but I'd be really interested to hear your own thoughts on it, specifically, if you want to talk about it)
Re: Nerd Elitism
Oh man, redpill, that takes me back. You heard about governmentgetsgirlfriends yet?
As for the article: PREPARE FOR WORDVOMIT MY FRIEND. PREPARE.
Okay, first of all, I have READ Portnoy's Complaint and Lolita, and Lolita does not deserve the company of the rest of those books. (Since, as I mentioned, the book is NOT about male sexual fantasy. It's about complicity in the face of evil, and how child molesters can seem incredibly charming and persuasive, even as they admit to doing terrible things.)
Second, holy shit dude, wtf is wrong with you, giving your book about a man wanting to bang a teenager he thinks is his kid, TO YOUR TEENAGED KID. What, is the kid just not supposed to be bothered at all because he's male? That's such a creepy thing to do! And the author seems weirdly GLEEFUL about it.
The whole article just feels... childish. Like these guys LITERALLY can't imagine more sexual freedom than this. Like not getting published is somehow 'edgy' when it is, in fact, the norm. It's just, really guys? This is freedom to you? The idea that you can write about this stuff, and have it not considered political? (I mean, you get people STILL equating being queer with being a child molester! Why are straight guys able to get away with writing stuff like this without it being generalized to their whole sexual orientation?)
And speaking of sexual orientation and generalizations, the idea that this VERRRRRY specific book of this one author is somehow representative of male sexuality as a whole. And that this book, which covered ground books OVER FIFTY YEARS OLD have long since already covered, and probably more effectively, is supposed to be edgy and new. Seriously, when's the last time you saw a book about a trans person's fantasies being considered great literature? Books like this seem to only get to be 'great literature' when it's about a straight white dude!
Like, I recently came from a support group for male survivors of sexual abuse. We never outright discussed it, but I'm sure that like me, they have a VERY different idea of sexual freedom than this article and this author seem to. For me, sexual freedom is being able to TALK about my relationship. Period. Not my sex life, just my relationship. Being able to HAVE desires, to be SEEN as a sexual subject, rather than a sexual object. To have sexuality OUTSIDE of the abuse I sustained. And yes, I would consider the freedom to express needs for cuddles, or affection, or intimacy, also part of sexual freedom, even though that article seems to denounce that.
It seems to be this nudge-nudge-wink-wink, "I know guys, women like to think we're just cuddle-bunnies, but YOU know what I'm talking about, don't you man? Huh, huh?" And I'm like, "No, sir, I do not. GOOD DAY SIR."
And finally, I get really irked with the way it draws this line in the sand, like MEN like THIS and WOMEN and ACADEMICS with their stupid TRIGGER WARNINGS and crap, as though no man can ever be triggered, or ever want a WARNING before going into a book ahead of time.
Like, this guy thinks this book is SOOOOO edgy, pushing the envelope, and to me, that was how I thought all male sexuality WAS until I got out of my situation and met my husband. It took him over a YEAR to persuade me that no, really, I wasn't a freak on earth and a fake man for not wanting to rape anyone. No, he didn't want to rape me. No, he still didn't. OMG STOP ASKING NO.
To them, this is obviously just a thought experiment. The idea of actual incest, child molestation, or sexual violence is just SO FAR from their experience it doesn't even OCCUR to them except in a, "teehee, we made them mad!" kinda way. It just feels like the literary version of screaming, "POOP!" at a dinner party.
Re: Nerd Elitism
No? Do I want to? o.O
It just feels like the literary version of screaming, "POOP!" at a dinner party.
omg xD
I also think though that as a straight cis dude it's probably very, very easy to take for granted that your demographic has been the deciding factor for all but the last few decades of western society as to what is popular.
The sweeping generalization about male sexuality got me too. And some men seem to think that male sexuality = predatory and it's this big open secret that's too controversial to talk about and I'm like...wow I hope men aren't all like that. (Fortunately I know they are not, but some guys are so desperate to have their harmful tendencies normalized that they want people to think they are all like that.)
...I'm not sure if I worded that very well.
Re: Nerd Elitism
And some men seem to think that male sexuality = predatory and it's this big open secret that's too controversial to talk about and I'm like...wow I hope men aren't all like that.
Yeah, exactly. I mean, going back to your redpill wanderings, it's this weird thing where guys will argue their innate sexuality is predatory, and then blame feminism or SJW or whatever as though THEY invented the idea. It's this weird cognitive dissonance.
I know for a while, I thought I couldn't BE male because I couldn't connect with those kinds of claims at all. Man, those were nasty times. Thankfully, things are much better now and I know how bullshit it is.
Re: Nerd Elitism
(Women are people, we are not commodities, you sick fuck. Gah!)
I've seen redpill types argue that their sexuality is inherently predatory and we should just accept an enable it - not in so many words
at least not yetbut the concept is there.I know for a while, I thought I couldn't BE male because I couldn't connect with those kinds of claims at all. Man, those were nasty times. Thankfully, things are much better now and I know how bullshit it is.
I'm really glad you got past that. <3 I can't imagine how much more of a mire all this bullshit must be if you're trans. And I know that the majority of men are not delusional regressive sickos. (Thank fuck.) But the people who are continue to freak me out. o.O
Re: Nerd Elitism
I've seen redpill types argue that their sexuality is inherently predatory and we should just accept an enable it - not in so many words at least not yet but the concept is there.
Yeah, it's this fucked up thing where their sexuality is innate and unchangeable... but people should also NEVER protect themselves from it the way we would if half our population really WERE incapable of controlling themselves. They want to have their cake and eat it too, and it is a cake OF BULLSHIT.
I've heard that predators assume everyone would do what they do, given the chance. Bleh.
Re: Nerd Elitism