Don Juan de Doodlebug's page

If it isn't clear, let me state forthrightly that I have never employed any of these methods, nor do I endorse them.

That being said, physically shoving a woman away from you sounds even less like sexual assault.

To his Coy Mistress

Rape advocacy or handbook on seduction? I don't recall how the feminist movement concluded that particular debate.

I remember reading in a British film mag once that Woody Allen was the proof to the lie that "Yanks don't do irony."

As far as I can tell (and because Comrade Jeff and Sister Sarkeesian informed me) the Bechdel test is a joke from a comic book.

Applying it to one of the more famous not-quite-feminist film auteurs of the 20th century is, imho, even funnier.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If a stranger picks me up and attempts to force me into a sexual position, it's assault. You are trapping and restraining someone.

That's not something you do to a stranger without first getting their consent.

Chapter 7: Physical Escalation and Sex: "OK, you've made it this far. You are with a beautiful woman whose company you truly enjoy. You desire her. She longs to be desired. It's time to harness all that passion." Skip down a few sections and then we get to picking people up and putting them on your lap. Doesn't sound like he's advocating "picking up" strangers to me.

They're not functionally the same. They should be, but they're not, as anyone who's ever had to deal with an aggressor can tell you. Some of them will continue until you shout loud enough to draw attention.

And some sexual assaulters take your polite decline, lurk in the back of the alley and, given the opportunity, get you on the way home. If someone puts in a " Of course if you're really unclear, back off. Better safe than sorry" it's pretty disingenuous to say that they're promoting sexual assault.

He tells you that no doesn't always mean no.

"With some experience, you will learn to differentiate the "No, we can't... my parents are in the next room... OMG [yes]" from the "SERIOUSLY GET THE **** OFF OF ME, YOU CREEP" variety of resistance."
Wrong. Unless you're engaging in predefined sexual play where protestation is explicitly called out as part of the activity (and hopefully there's a safe word), no means no.

"No, we can't," is sufficient refusal. If she's said that, then unless she explicitly reverses it, you have been denied consent.

And how does a suitor usually get the suitee to explicitly reverse a denial of consent without becoming a rapist? Usually by continued persuasion. Which is what, according to my reading, is what's being advocated here.

"Nothing in that section even hints at claiming that once your potential partner is naked they can't revoke consent.

No, because it doesn't talk about obtaining consent at all, let alone what to do if it's revoked. Which, if you're going to tell someone to "be dominant" and not wait for their partner to give consent, is a pretty bloody important thing to clarify.

Yes, because that whole "Important Note on Resistance" where he says "Of course if you're really unclear, back off. Better safe than sorry" isn't included in the text, not anywhere before the advice on kissing, fondling and sex. Nope, not there at all.

Quote:

Physically pick her up and sit her on your lap. Don't ask for permission. Be dominant. Force her to rebuff your advances.

Assault.

(Lest you say this is taken out of context, it is from the section on escalating -- basically, how to interact with strangers -- that tells you not to wait for signs of interest/acceptance, not the part that is for when you've succeeded in getting her to your place.)

Well, it's definitely not assault if it's not objected to. I've watched the drinking classes interact and flirt with strangers for year now. I've seen them touch each other and place each other on their laps and sometimes it results in slapped faces and sometimes it results in sexual congress. I'm not saying sexual assaulters don't do these things, but, no, I don't think these things by themselves are inherently sexual assault.

Quote:

IMPORTANT NOTE ON RESISTANCE:

If at any point a girl wants you to stop, she will let you know. If she says "STOP," or "GET AWAY FROM ME," or shoves you away, you know she is not interested. It happens. Stop escalating immediately and say this line:
"No problem. I don't want you to do anything you aren't comfortable with."
Memorize that line. It is your go-to when faced with resistance. Say it genuinely, without presumption. All master seducers are also masters at making women feel comfortable. You'll be no different. If a woman isn't comfortable, take a break and try again later.
All that matters is that you continue to try to escalate physically until she makes it genuinely clear that it's not happening.

The onus should not be on me to be vehement enough in my disinterest. If I say politely and quietly, "please leave me alone," that is it. Full stop. If you continue to touch me, you are assaulting me. I shouldn't have to shout "STOP" or "GET AWAY FROM ME" or physically shove you away to get you to stop touching me. The way in which I tell you to stop touching me is irrelevant.

And if I tell you to stop touching me, especially if I've shouted "STOP" or "GET AWAY FROM ME", "waiting and trying again later" doesn't make it okay.

Assault.

"If I say politely and quietly, please leave me alone, that is it. Full stop."

"If at any point a girl wants you to stop, she will let you know. If she says 'STOP,' or 'GET AWAY FROM ME,' or shoves you away, you know she is not interested. It happens. Stop escalating immediately and say this line:
'No problem. I don't want you to do anything you aren't comfortable with.'"

These are functionally the same. Is it creepy that Mr. Bad Dating Advice is now planning on how to get you to relax and get in the mood? Yes. Is it advocating sexual assault? No. "Of course if you're really unclear, back off. Better safe than sorry."

"And for that matter, a lot of the stuff in the "Sex" section is questionable. Just because someone consents to sex doesn't mean they can't revoke that consent. If someone tells you to stop, it doesn't matter if they're naked. You stop. If you're forcing someone's hand onto your genitals, and they're resisting and telling you no, you are assaulting them, even if they were okay with making out with you.

Nothing in that section even hints at claiming that once your potential partner is naked they can't revoke consent.

Supplemental checking Bechtel site...

Manhattan passes.

Next time I run into Sister Margatroid, Mr. Shifty, I'm going to find out what she thinks of the cinematic feasts of Lord Konigsberg.

There's gotta be more than one!

Okay, that one with Gena Rowlands probably passes, then.

Maybe Interiors.

Hannah and Her Sisters, as I recall, has scenes with Dianne Wiest trying to get Mia Farrow to lend her money. Of course, my favorite scene of hers is when she's duking it out with Carrie Fisher over Sam Waterston.

EDIT: Scene ends too soon, alas.

Time and place, Comrade Dwarf. This thread is for hawt chicks in fantasy and sci-fi and the feminist critique of them.

I call bullshiznit.

Most of the choiciest bits seem to come from this page.

The stuff about always be touching her is for when you're out on a date with a woman. The stuff about whipping out your penis and placing her hand on it is for when you've gotten to third base with a woman and are making the turn towards home.

There's tons of issues one could take with statements like "You're the man, it's your job to lead," and the dating style it advocates might not be to everybody's taste, but this isn't promoting sexual assault.

You know, I tried following the links to find the actual sources of the quotes and I couldn't find much.

'Cuz, you know, sometimes context matters:

Is this supposed to be at the bar? On the subway station? On the couch once you've gotten her home?

Context matters.

A) Derailery.
B) Even the far left has had its problems with sexism and rape scandals.

More importantly, I just read the Dark Horse version of Howard's "The Frost Giant's Daughter."

Hawt!!!

Fair enough, but "Even right-wing authors have produced [apparently] pro-grrl power characters" doesn't seem anything like giving "leftists" like Clinton and the Secret Service a pass to me.

Radbod Jarl wrote:

Given that I was the one who brought Aliens into this thing, I'll try to set things right...

In all seriousness, one of the reasons I got into Sci-fi and fantasy in the first place was because most good stories in the genre are gender-blind. Even politically right-wing authors have produced heroines like Honor Harrington, to say nothing of every other woman in the Royal Manticoran Navy. One of the things I always loved in Sci-fi was the idea of better worlds where people were judged on merit, not on race or gender or religion. So when I see authors being sexist - and female authors getting hate mail for taking a stand - I feel pretty damn betrayed.

If you'd like to discuss barriers to progress, the bolded phrase provides an example. If you believe that those on the left never commit acts of racism and sexism and those on the right always commit acts of racism and sexism and are the only ones who commit acts of racism and sexism, you make things worse and not better. Look at Bill Clinton's scandals as governor of Arkansas (which didn't surface until later) and as president, and the behavior of Obama's Secret Service. The belief in question promotes sexism by giving a free pass to anyone who commits acts of sexism but is on the left- giving a free pass to sexists is a significant part of why sexism is as strong as it is today.

How would it be possible to believe the part I bolded and write the part you bolded?

More engendered comics geek fare for the masses.

Thank you, Comrade Dwarf.

[Shakes his fist at Mr. Shifty]

On The Road to Martin and Lewis? Oh, Doodlebug...

Oh yeah, and I bet that there isn't a single Woody Allen film that passes the Bechdel test. Or whatever it's called.

So, read the first third of Ehrenreich, and, I must say, choosing this from Sister Margatroid's list of books on Feminism is totally cheating. This is, as Norman Mailer quipped above, just old socialism. I'll have to delve deeper, I guess.

But I chuckled when she speculated that working people continue, perversely, to smoke because "work is what you do for others; smoking is what you do for yourself. I don't know why the antismoking crusaders have never grasped the element of defiant self-nurturance that makes the habit so endearing to its victims--as if, in the American workplace, the only thing people have to call their own is the tumors they are nourishing and the spare moments they devote to feeding them."

I also liked it when she blamed her potty mouth on being married to a Teamster organizer. See, mods, it's not my fault. It's f#$#in' cultural.

Apropos of nothing, Comrade Dwarf, but:

Do you like Woody Allen films?

Without Martin and Lewis films, we would never have had Asprin's MYTH series.

Whether that's a good or bad thing is for each one of you to decide on your own.

So uh

I wish this thread had talked about the thing it was about
but instead it just became basically something that is not good
I want you to be better paizo forums but instead you are basically about terrible threads these days

Well, I did my best.

In addition, I got a new Paizo girlfriend through Private Messages about Machiavelli and Muddy Waters, so, as far as I'm concerned, this is the best thread ever!

See, Mr. Shifty, there's philistines on both sides of the Pacific.

Woody Allen's Bride of Frankenstein

I got the impression that they were talking about old-timers, possibly even dead people. I couldn't find an actual copy of the article on-line and, for whatever reason, all the sites that I clicked to from the original Guardian article didn't ever spell out who they were talking about.

I'd repeat, though, that OHWFA! supports the discussion of hawt female sciene-fiction writers and editors of yore.

Soon-Yi, Mia Farrow, Diane Keaton, Louise Lasser...

On the one hand, we've got evidence that at least one film critic in Australia "gets" Woody Allen, and on the other we have a blanket statement that nobody in Australia "gets" him.

Anyway, as Judy Davis said in Husbands and Wives when told by her would-be suitor that they were attending a performance of Mozart's Don Giovanni, "Don Juan de Doodlebug? They should've cut his f~%#ing dick off!"

The Australian Jewish News appears to disagree.

But I have unfortunately allowed my fanaticism to wane in recent years. I haven't seen Scoop. In fact, I don't think I've seen anything since Hollywood Ending which I remember being rather dreary.

Apparently, you need more Jews Down Under.

Although, to be honest, he's always been an acquired taste over here as well.

Those who acquire the taste, though, tend to be fanatical about it.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Anyway, we left the film early, and, as I was driving her home, I made the mistake of mentioning the scene in Hannah and Her Sisters where Woody decides not to kill himself after watching a Marx Brothers film. "Woody Allen is a pedophile and a misogynist!" she shouted, angrily.

At which point, I kicked her out of the car...

Oh yeah, I was reminded in another thread, in a roundabout way:

So, we had this rally in Boston over the past weekend, blah blah blah, and afterwards we went to a bar in Kenmore Square and me and the comrades were shootin' the shiznit, discussing heavy-duty Marxist stuff and the topic got around to some of the more memorable debates on the Sectarian Left around the woman question. Anyway, it was getting hawt and heavy and I went to interject some levity by pulling out the "Intellectuals are like the Mafia" line.

"Well," I remarked, "It's like Woody Allen said..."

"Oh, yeah," a comrade derisively snorted* "The great feminist Woody Allen..."

Before I could stop myself, I shattered the beer bottle against the table and yelled "Wtf you gonna say about Woody Allen, huh?!?" [Overturns table] "Smart-ass [redacted], what are you gonna say, now, [redacted]?!?"

*

But I wanted to post more Roxanne Shante videos!

To be to fair Brother Kirth, this thread hasn't really been about the SWFA Bulletin since, like, the first page.

[Imagine's Kirth's wife and his sisters-in-laws in bikinis]

OHWFA!

Radbod Jarl wrote:

Sissyl wrote:

Hey hey hey... It seems to be an adopted policy that literally EVERYONE can look good if they put in the effort to do so. Or, otherwise put, if someone does not look good, say some german tourist or so, it is ENTIRELY their own fault for not putting in the effort. Don't try telling anyone that looks have anything to do with nurture here, okay?

Actually, this raises the even thornier point of strong women in fiction who *don't* look conventional attractive either being sidelined or killed. TV Tropes highlighted this with Vasquez from Aliens: she's a Marine, with superior training and combat skills to Ripley...yet she's *not* the heroine? OK, Rioley was pretty kick-ass, but I wouldn't mind seeing a film where it was a woman like Vasquez who was the central character.

I doubt Ripley being the heroine in Aliens had anything to do with Weaver being more "conventionally attractive" than Goldstein.

Much more to do with Ripley being the heroine of the previous movie. It was her movie from the start. Vasquez was just one of many Marines, basically there as cannon fodder. (Who got some cool characterization along the way, one of the things that made it a great movie.) It's also a fairly common trope for the hero not to be the professional soldier/cop/etc.

None of which isn't to say that a film starring a Vasquez-type character couldn't be cool.

Also, it should be pointed out that Ripley wins the day by her superior stevedoring abilities--which, I think, is just as gender-role bashing as Vasquez's superior soldiering abilities.

But yeah, Ripley is the hero because, um, it's her series.

Guy Humual wrote:

I don't get the rage aimed at Angelina. Shouldn't women be raging at the medical system for making medical testing so expensive? Choosing what course to take is probably better informed by genetic testing and the fact that it's been shown that pricing for medical procedures can be pretty much arbitrary depending on what hospital you go to.

It's the same rage that's been directed at minorities or any other disadvantaged group when topics of rebalancing have come up. When one or more groups has been disadvantaged, the corollary is that at least one group has had a privileged position. The members of that group generally aren't very happy when they're told that what they've come to expect as their natural due, has been undeserved privilege.

Maybe there's some pent-up rage against Angelina Jolie that I'm unaware of, but I don't see how Ruth Fowler, Julian Vigo or my socialist-feminist female's comrade railing against what they perceive as class privilege has anything to do with the pattern that you're describing.

Do I think people are horrible for liking images of scantily clad women, or suggestive posing or outfits, or for thinking anyone is HAWT? (Thanks, comrade Doodle, I'm never going to be able to spell that any other way!:P) I don't, honestly. I recognize that as the human condition, and, in a lot of cases, a good thing.

All of our elected offices in OHWFA! are already filled but there are many open positions on the OHDFA! Executive Board, Ms. Pippi.

As for the beach:

I wonder what our European brethren, with their nudist resorts and whatnot, make of the idea that bikinis are mere sexual advertising.

thejeff wrote:

Well I would disagree, but I've gotten tired of explaining the difference between being *ist against the dominant group and against the subordinate one.

There is no explanation that I would accept on that topic anyway, so probably not worth spending your time on. Denouncing Xism whilst engaging in Xism just makes someone a hypocrite as well as an Xist.

thejeff wrote:

More importantly, regardless of the term I used, what do you think of the rant I was responding to?

More important to you perhaps, but to me, outright sexism and gendershaming was more noteworthy than the other posters personal opinions that I happen to simply disagree with. One is a flawed personal worldview, the other was about purposefully shaming and degrading.

Most important of all, in my limited understanding, "mansplaining" is when a male condescendingly explains something to a female.

I don't think Adamantine Dragon is a woman.

Objectification:

An article

And four tunes, covering most, if not all, of the bases:

Ruff Neck
So Alive
You Make Me Feel
Right In Time

OHFWA! approves of all of them--well, except the Saudi Arabian government.

On "Sexual Advertising":

OHWFA! recommends that all young lads should take their cue from this rock parable:

You know that chick that used to dance a lot?
Every night she'd be on the floor, shaking what she's got
Man, when I tell you she was cool, she was red hot, I mean that chick was steamin'
And that time over at Johnny's place, well this chick got up and she slapped Johnny's face
Man, we just fell around the place, if that chick don't want to know, forget her!

sunbeam wrote:

I want She Devils with a Sword, Red Hair (and a lot of it), and a chain mail bikini that doesn't chafe (like I said, I'm drinking a beer). And I don't really want to hear from someone that I really shouldn't like that kind of stuff.

Paizo Employee

I apparently have to link this in every Red Sonja/chainmail bikini thread:

Red Sophia: What do you think of these?!

Hee hee!

I must not go into many chainmail bikini threads; I haven't seen that.

It's pretty straight-forward really: it's a warning to stay civil, that's all. Not saying you're being uncivil, just stay civil.

Peace, bro.

\/

Doodlebug, just read Picnic on Paradise and you'll see it done right. (But, sadly out of print.)

[Scribbles furiously]:

--Joanna Russ
--Samuel Delaney
--"Sword Woman"
--Barbara Ehrenreich from Sister Margatroid in that other thread
--Those two books about the Old Testament from Comrade Samnell from that Private Message
--Jeremy Scahill from my comrade

[Throws down pencil in frustration while contemplating all the books he wants to read and his inevitable mortality]

You know what? Screw this! I'm just going to re-read all those Greyhawk books by Rose Estes...

Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:

Radbod Jarl wrote:

A case of the original being more progressive than the update...weird.

Oh, I wouldn't be so sure of that. I haven't read that particular Howard story, but I haven't read much in his ouevre that would lead me to believe it's "progressive."

"The Vale of Lost Women" and all those stories with monstrous-looking "Negroids," I'm looking at you.

You should read the title story in the anthology "Sword Woman." Dark Ages woman is forced into an arranged marriage and ends up killing her would-be husband on the altar and running off to be an adventurer beholden to no man. It's amusing stuff.

Thank you for the recommendation, everything I have ever read by Howard has been delightful, even when marred by racist and anti-gay attitudes. And let's face it, "Vale of the Lost Women" was hawt.

I should say, to the whole thread, that I hereby admit that I unjustly maligned Howard with a cheap shot in my original post.

I don't think Howard was a thorough-going reactionary (and it wouldn't affect my appreciation of his writing, even if I did) and wouldn't rate him any worse than, say, ERB, or, say, Hemingway.

But I still think if you added up all of Conan's chicks, more of them lean towards shrieking, helpless damsels in distress rather than willful, independent (or, at least, until Conan comes around) pirate queens.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

People only mention a drug induced haze after Doodlebug has left the thread for the day? Talk about a missed opportunity!

(Bubble, bubble, bubble...)

That's three, Doodlebug!

Aaargh!!!! I'll get you yet, Dicey!

Actually though, you'll like this:

Went to go pick up my car which means that although I now have access to a vehicle, I now have even less money (frickin' fallin' apart '97 Towncar!--What? No, sorry, baby, I was just kidding). The dudes at the place kept smiling more than often, which was weird, because they're not a particularly friendly bunch. I paid the bill, got my keys and walked out to the lot. The first thing I noticed was that they had given the Doodlemobile a complimentary cleaning, which, I am afraid, she badly needed.

And then I noticed, on a piece of paper, placed on the passenger seat

Now I really have got something to do. See you cats later!

[bubble bubble bubble]

PS: Belit was hawt!!

Bimbos of the Death Sun is awesome. And I never really was part of "fan culture", so I probably missed a lot of what it was lampooning.

Yeah, I remember really liking it.

I only attended my first gaming convention two winters ago, and I remember thinking, "I wonder if it's going to be like Bimbos."

Friend Set may be interested in learning that I got my copy at the soon-to-be-moving bookstore around the corner from his house.

And with that, I really must go do something else today...

Sexy renditions of the female form have been part of human culture as far back as anthropologists have been able to dig sculptures out of the dirt.

More XXXX-rolling for Friend Set

Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:

Never mind. I found some on my own.

I already got tricked into clicking on that Hawkeye Initiative link, and after the Hercules-as-Lady-Death image, I'm totally blind and typing by sense of smell.

I will not be fooled/Herc-rolled again...

Hee hee!

It's not Herc-rolling if I advertise it as objectification of corpulent beardos, is it?

One more book recommendation before I try to find other things to do today without any money or access to a vehicle...

I've been masochistically re-reading some TSR fiction from yesteryear that reminds me of my happy childhood poring over AD&D modules in the back of my parents' station wagon while being dragged to skeet shooting tournaments throughout the American Northeast and I was reminded of a novel that I've mentioned before.

Bimbos of the Death Sun

The write-up should give an indication of its on-topicness to this thread, but it neglects to mention the protagonist's sidekick and her contemptuous feminist commentary on our wonderful subculture.

I haven't read it in 20 years, so I can't actually vouch for it, but I remember enjoying it immensely and I daresay it was my first introduction to ideas about women's liberation.

Never mind. I found some on my own.

all this thread has taught me is that Patrick Rothfuss is even more awesome than I previously thought

He'd be even awesomer if he was topless...as a hairy man with some extra pounds myself, I'd love to see some objectification of corpulent beardos.

More Katharine Ross

It's even sci-fi this time!

NSFW--a little on the nudey side. OHWFA!