On Intimate Relationships with Geeks.

No. This is not about sex. (As an aside, geeks do tend to be rather good in the sack, contrary to any pop-culture representation of geeks in the sack) This particular rant is about dating/intimate relationships geeks the folly of expecting geeks to get less geeky based on your relationship with the geek.

Now, let's imagine you're dating a geek. And you have a hard time understanding why they are into their geeky hobby, be it an obsession with Star Wars or whatever. Understandably, you have a hard time understanding why they spend so much goddamn money and time on said hobby. You are grumbly about this. Perhaps you want them to give up their hobby. Maybe you think it's childish and a grown man/woman should not be playing video games/playing with miniatures/watching so much fucking anime. You just can't understand why they spend time on their hobby/interest. From your perspective, their geekery is the problem. Afterall, it's just toys/a dumb show/ a dumb game/ creepy Japanese cartoons, so what can it matter--right? Why can't they give it up? Why can't they refrain from talking about it with you or your friends? Really, the geek you're dating knows you're not interested, so why do they keep on talking about all that nonsense?

However, I would argue that you are probably the problem. Not your geeky partner. So long as your geeky partner is not lying to you about how much they spend, spending little to no time with you because of their hobby or spending the rent/mortgage payment/ utility money on geek stuff , if you can't accept/tolerate/support their geekery, you are the problem, my internet friend.

You are the problem because resenting your partner's geekery is, in essence, the inability to accept that your partner is a different person from you. And as a different person, they may like things you don't or have interests you do not. Insisting they give up their difference from you or stifle it in your presence is narcissistic; it's sending the message that you only want to love someone who is just like you. When you reject your partner's geekery, you reject a part of them because you don't share it. You reject something that makes them seperate or different from you. I am not saying that common interests are not a factor in a successful relationship. I am saying that insisting that your partner share all of your interests, or expecting that you will share all of theirs, is redonkulously unrealistic and extremely fucking unfair.

The very definition of a "geek", in my opinion, is to have a hobby or interest--usually of the pop-culture variety--that one enjoys immensely and feels passionate about. To be a geek is to take unapologic joy in one's hobby(ies) whether it's anime, manga, miniature gaming, videogames, Star-Trek, Star Wars, Babylon 5, sci-fi, fantasy, RPG's, larping or any other number of things generally labelled geeky. The heart of geekery is the heart of what gives a person child-like glee. Geekery is what happens when something captures your imagination and never quite lets go.

Therefore, if you insist that your partner give up thier geekery in order to be with you, or even merely stifle it when you're around--you are asking them to remove a source of significant joy from their life. Worse, you are blackmailing them into removing that source of joy--do it, or face the withdrawel of my respect and love. And buddy, I hate to break it to ya, but that's some serious fucking bullshit right there. Because emotional blackmail has no place in a healthy relationship.

So love your geek and embrace their geekery, whatever it may be.

Contrary to popular belief, strangers don't give a shit about your opinion.

A bit of a preamble- this post was inspired a conversation I had with a friend of mine over beers (well she was drinking coffee and I had 2 pints, hence the plural form of beer) She stated "You know, I've been thinking, what's up with the double-standard of women being required to be fit, whereas men are not?". To which I replied: "More to the point, why the hell does anyone think it's okay to make negative comments to a complete stranger about their body? It's just fucking rude."

Yes, why is it seemingly acceptable to openly judge a complete stranger's appearance? And, why is it more common to do so when the subject of your commentary is female?

I am, frankly, flummoxed on what the answer to the first question could be. Unless it's to ask "dahling, where did you get that sinfully faaabulous handbag?" or something similar, I usually refrain telling stranger what I think of what they look like. I don't tell strangers if I hate their hair, think they might look better if they shed a few pounds, think their wardrobe is ghastly, or whatever. I refrain from commentary because I don't fucking know them. Therefore, I assume that my opinion on the subject of their appearance won't matter to them anyway. Also, may they like that haircut, maybe they know they are a bit chunky and they feel sexy and own/work that  or whatever. Not my body. Not my choice. Ergo, not my business.

As for the answer to the second question: I think that it's more acceptable to comment on a woman's appearance because, in general, women are expected to give a shit about their appearance. As a result, there is the all-too-common perception that the commentary is helpful. As in "Oh, the poor lamb doesn't know she's an uggles! How will she ever be happy looking like that? I better give her some tips to help her conform to my personal aesthetics and standards of attractiveness! After-all, I know best!".  Fuck. Me. That. Is. Extremely. Fucking. Stupid. (See the paragraph third from the top if you find yourself unable to comprehend why the attitude outlined in this one is anything but supremely fucking stupid.)

I'm definitely not implying that men are not expected to give a shit about their appearance. Especially in some contexts, such as white-collar workplaces, they are most definitely expected to care. But I am saying we have a double-standard here. A double standard that is painfully obvious and deeply annoying.

I'm Calling Bullshit on Sexual Shame.

Am I the only one who's noticed the normalization/romanticization of coercion as a method of obtaining sex?

I think you know what I'm talking about--the phenomena known as "the chase" or "playing hard to get.". Using more and more persistant and methods (follow them home, hold a boom box over your head, get sex? No. Get arrested.) to badger someone--usually female--until they give in and fuck you.  In my mind, badgering someone constantly until they give into my request for sex is not only disrespectful, it strays dangerously close to the territory of sexual assault. "Playing hard to get" or "the chase" is creating a space for "no" or body-language that means "stop" (turning away, laughing nervously, making excuses to leave the situation) to be willfully interpreted as "yes! just try harder!". And that is just really, really fucking disturbing.

Why is it unseemly to willingly, openly and explicitly negotiate our sexual encounters? Why is it not okay for two--or more, hell, I won't judge the polyamory crowd--adults to just say, for example: "hey, how bout' you and I fuck until we can't stand up? Or, have some oral sex? I'm down with either.". The other party is then free to refuse, heartily agree or perhaps make suggestions for additional fun-time activities invloving genitals. I do not understand why this should not be. Especially in the begining, the formation of sexual relationships, when communication is most critical.

But no. Instead we are left with a fuck-tarded game. And I lied, I do have a partial understanding of why it seems that open communication about sex--in the beginning of relationships, especially--is implicitly forbidden. A little shit-tastic social construct I like to call sexual shame. The need to obscure wanting sex in a variety of shitty little social games is rooted in the fact that, despite the saturation of sexual imagery in our media, despite the repeated pop culture assertion that everybody be fuckin' ,  sex and sexuality are--you guessed it-- still viewed as filthy as satan's unwashed anus, worthy of contempt, suspicion of moral-unworthiness and disgust. Therefore, neogitating it openly is obviously for people who are similarly filthy as satan's unwashed anus. (Sorry, I'm just really enjoying taking that simile for a walk.)

And to anyone who is saying, right now, out loud or in the sanctity of your skull, "but internet lady! I've tried explicitly sexually propositioning absolute strangers and they told me to fuck off! Obviously bitches needs the game!" . Shut. Your. Hole. This is a delibrate misinterpretation of my arguement here. A lot of people--I might even hazard to say most--do require a little "warm-up" that is, knowing who the fuck you are and maybe liking you a bit before they want to take a ride on the disco stick or in the pink canoe. (That's penis or vagina. Yes I know the proper terms, I just like the colorful ones too.) And frankly, they have a right the their preference. Just as you have right to your preference fucking total strangers, apparently.

As a final point, I like to envision a world without sexual shame. I like to envision a social environment that's fertile ground for healthy sexual relationships. I hope, one day, everyone will be able to express thier sexuality openly and joyfully. Because in my humble opinion anything less is bullshit.

Hello Internet!

Here's an introductory blog-post about starting a blog.

Hold your applause . Keep holding it. Continue to hold it...

Okay, so it's not applause worthy. I know nothing about writing a blog. This is my first foray into the domain of blogging. I have only ever read them before, not written one. When I first heard the word "blogging" I thought it was a combination of "banging" and "flogging" which brought up all sorts of BDSM-type notions... Also, I have now reached the point where I have repeated the word "blogging" so many times that it now sounds like a meaningless series of syllables. Fun. For. Everyone.

So, without further ado, I present to you my opinion about blogging.

First, the positives:

It can allow people to connect and share life experience. Blogging can bring people with similar experiences to connect and form community.  It can also create awareness of lived experience for those who may not have understood before and do not have that particular life-experience. Enhancing human understanding is pretty rad.

Blogging can help create and strengthen discourse. It can be an awesome forum to talk about new ideas and engage critically with ideas both old and new--without the time-delay of trying to get published in a book, magazine or journal. Uncensored and unfilitered--mmmm, that's gooood discourse! And strong discourse can be the foundation of real-life activism. Planting the seeds of some change-creating discontent.

And now the negatives:

Blogging can shut down and narrow discourse as much as it can strengthen it. It is far too easy to read only what you agree with and respond only with praise, thus narrowing the scope of ideas you explore. With this particular problem, blogging can start to amount to group verbal masturbation. Lots of fun for everyone, but ultimately not productive and not very interesting.

It is also far too easy to respond in a knee-jerk way to ideas you don't like with big-ol' flame. A nice, all-caps, ad-hominem fallacy--"you are quite obviously an ignorant douche-nugget, and I am not going to listen to a thing you say from here on out or respond with an articulated, unpacked reason(s) why I dislike your ideas because fuuuuuuuuck yooooou." But with more capslock and less punctuation. The stuff that faith-in-humanity-destroying-comment-sections are made of. (Ah, youtube, one minute you're watching a kitten video, the next you scroll down and someone has unleashed a rant that is antisemetic, homophobic, misogynist and racist all at the same time.)

So, for my part, I shall try to welcome open discourse and different ideas. I shall also try not to respond to flames with more flames. Afterall, I don't want to burn my first blog down.