A Reply to Spring has sprung and I must mate.
Don't be fooled. Breakup Babe isn't empowered, she's conflicted, hence the Super Ego Id exchange. I would say that she is trying really hard to level the playing field-- you know-- the traditional 1950's stain of puritanical double standard that gets scrubbed and scrubbed, but to this day has just made the fabric slightly less discolored, rumpled, and a little threadbare. For that I salute her-- o.k., well, shrug, and hope that her bean spillage serves as catharsis, which would earn her a bonus point for being somewhat self-aware. But empowered? Nah. Spilt beans aren't attractive/empowered or hideous/contemptible according to gender. Any illusion to the contrary is a fabrication of our own fucked up perception of gender roles.
I can't hold Victory Shag up as a counterpoint to Breakup Babe because I don't subscribe, so haven't read (other than the posted Metafilter letter which isn't his writing) his work, and prefer to maintain my ignorance. In a generalized sense, I find the musings of MOST habitual intimacy bean spillers
1) highly suspect
2) generally lacking in any sort of holistic appreciation for those with whom they have dallied
3) invasive to the dallied's privacy
4) often callous and ill-written/spoken, lacking any kind of artistic value, and therefore, vaguely titillating in an empty nauseated kind of way.
If you were able to transcend all four points, you could really be onto something. Instead of the reader being one who sops up the details like leftover sauce with stale ciabatta cause they don't have a warm mouth-watering 5 course meal of their own, we could all watch awestruck as you glow with pleasure while you relive your feast. The glow (of this glimpse into the human condition) would be so warm and beautiful in hue that we would feel a compulsion to hover our hands about it in hopes of warming our chilled numb little fingers. And not to be a total suck-up, but in general, it IS your glow (beans or no beans) that keeps your blog bookmarked in my little web world.
A random girl.
Ask and ye shall receive. I was wrestling with what was bothering me about this site. Could I be stained by the very same double standard? Was I just hatin' 'cause she's got more readers? Is it 'cause I know her and that I think she should be forced to wear a warning sign? I was puzzled...
I'm sad I don't have any Victory Shag issues saved 'cause I think Dobbs was trying to transcend those four points you mentioned. (see: http://www.victoryshag.com/k.html http://www.victoryshag.com/peanutbutter.html http://www.victoryshag.com/susie.html for examples)
Actually, what I wanted to link to was an article written about him by a woman who obviously was biased...yet intrigued. Yet she used her postition to diss him and paint him as reprobate.
All of us who blog are exhibitionists, I suppose. Just some more than others. And really, the most attractive thing about blogging is that the only rules is: Don't be boring! However, I was a little miffed at the idea that someone was using the old "Men just don't get it" crap as fodder for blogging material-and getting rewarded for it. Especially when guy's attempts to write about the same subjects are met with distain.
Anyway...Thanks for your input. I think I can relax now. Anyone for pancakes?