Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



Little Valkyrie ([info]waltraute) wrote in [info]otf_wank,
@ 2010-09-18 12:28:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
This feminist blog which depends on your donations is not here to educate you!
Thanks to the anon at wank_report for the bulk of the writeup, with its singular virtues.

S.E. SMITH accuses Lady Gaga of appropriation:

It's been pointed out that she appropriates a lot of things from musical traditions created by people of colour and nonwhite people. That her work contains transmisogyny. That she appropriates the experiences of people with disabilities. These are all things that I don't think of as feminist acts—note that I am not saying that Lady Gaga is not feminist (because I don't think it's up to me to decide that), but rather that I am saying that her actions do not always mesh with the identity she has chosen to claim. The same could be said of many other people who identify as feminist, including myself, however. Let those in glass houses...

(bonus points for the excellent use of praeteritio here.)

A commenter asks for references and explanation. According to Snarky's Machine, late of the now-closed Shapely Prose, asking for sources is derailing and oppressive:

I can't be arsed to unpack and respond to your comment except to say you're trafficking in copious amounts of derailing for dummies. Your inability to "see" how Gaga misappropriates says everything about YOUR own privilege and inability to google "Grace Jones" and nothing else. If concepts are unfamiliar to you instead assuming the concepts themselves are wrong, you might want to hit up Professor Google. Because the argument, "you're wrong because I don't know what you're talking about." just does not cut it.

Comments defending that commenter get deleted (although some are reposted in the anon threads below). Mods claim to be "reviewing the situation" (i.e., pretending to do something about it). "Open thread" disappears after 20 minutes after irate commenters leave comments there. The current status is "please email the mods directly if you want to talk about comment policy", which couldn't possibly have a chilling effect--not at all.

Snarky's Machine has another reply to that initial commenter on Twitter:

Ha. I love how some weird ass creepy e-troll named whitney is stalking my feed and tattling cause I'm so mean. Who are these people.

People take refuge to complain in several threads in the sfd_anon community. (Which are now locked; possibly accessible if you're a member of the community.) Worth noting are the ones about how Bitch magazine aggressively solicits donations to support their journalism, which puts a special irony gloss on the "we're not here to educate you" rebuttal.


(Post a new comment)


[info]sarracenia
2010-09-18 06:11 pm UTC (link)
I know it's really hard to understand that it's not OUR JOB to educate you or meet your standard of appropriate sourcing, but it isn't

...This is a magazine, correct? Where people do get, in fact paid to write articles and educate people and source their claims so people know that they didn't make up the "Lady Gaga is appropriative" from full cloth, yes?

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]waltraute
2010-09-18 06:16 pm UTC (link)
It's the blog of the magazine, and they highly encourage you to subscribe by auto-donating $5 a month, which then gets you 'free' four yearly issues of the magazine.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]sarracenia, 2010-09-18 07:41 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]notjo, 2010-09-19 01:38 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]waltraute, 2010-09-19 01:39 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]notjo, 2010-09-19 01:53 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sarracenia, 2010-09-19 03:45 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]notjo, 2010-09-19 05:41 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]snarkhunter, 2010-09-19 12:09 pm UTC

[info]solle
2010-09-18 06:11 pm UTC (link)
That her work contains transmisogyny.

I... what... how?

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]shark
2010-09-18 06:15 pm UTC (link)
Apparently her repetitive insistence that no, she was really born with two x chromosomes and she really identifies as a woman is dirtybadwrong?

Apparently the imagery in the prison breakout video with Beyoncé is also transmisogynistic.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]platedlizard, 2010-09-18 07:04 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]shark, 2010-09-18 07:16 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]platedlizard, 2010-09-18 07:54 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]arionhunter, 2010-09-18 09:31 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]platedlizard, 2010-09-18 09:44 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]blue_penguin, 2010-09-19 12:44 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]shaggydogstail, 2010-09-19 01:05 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]arionhunter, 2010-09-19 01:16 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]skarrow, 2010-09-19 06:47 am UTC
(no subject) - redwarrior, 2010-10-02 01:19 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]kosaginolegion, 2010-09-19 03:13 pm UTC
(no subject) - redwarrior, 2010-10-02 01:18 am UTC

[info]white_serpent
2010-09-18 06:16 pm UTC (link)
It sounds like you're asking for sources. Asking for sources is forbidden.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]notjo, 2010-09-19 01:54 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]white_serpent, 2010-09-19 06:00 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]snarkhunter, 2010-09-19 12:12 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]white_serpent, 2010-09-19 06:28 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]notjo, 2010-09-19 06:34 am UTC

[info]skarrow
2010-09-18 06:27 pm UTC (link)
Jaysus.

You know, when I found out that Gwen Stefani was being creepy and fetishising/appropriating Japanese street fashion (Visual Kei, which she white!named Harajuku) I found out because an article told me about it.

It didn't have to explain to me about cultural appropriation or othering or fetishism, it just had to tell me 'she pays four japanese women to follow her around and pretend they don't speak English.' I figured the rest out myself! Of course, I didn't know about this before the article. Because I could give an entire rat's ass about Gwen Stefani.

So the fact that Snarky doesn't need to say, point to a picture of Lady G. wearing a bad parody of a Romany outfit or sporting a meat 'war bonnet' is disingenuous. I don't need to be educated in cultural studies-- but if you're going to go around calling her names, I want a crash course in Lady Gaga. Unless the one magazine cover I glanced at on Go Fug Yourself was THE DEFINING MOMENT OF HER CULTURAL APPROPRIATION that I just should have picked up on.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]lilitu93
2010-09-19 02:36 pm UTC (link)
I'm not denying what Gwen Stefani did wasn't creepy or appropriative, because it was, but she didn't make up the name Harajuku. Harajuku is an area of Tokyo where lots of different kinds of young people hang out in various different subcultures with their own kinds of street fashion. The one she ripped off wasn't really Visual Kei, though I'm not sure off the top of my head which subculture in particular she ripped off, or if she just took bits of what she liked from several of them.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]skarrow, 2010-09-19 02:39 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]lilitu93, 2010-09-19 03:28 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]jupiterpluvius, 2010-09-19 11:59 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]gerorin, 2010-09-26 05:02 pm UTC

[info]chibikaijuu
2010-09-19 08:03 pm UTC (link)
I don't need a crash course in appropriation. I don't need to be hand-held and walked through everything someone is being accused of and why that's bad and wrong. I don't think the onus is on those calling someone out to educated everybody on the subject.

I do expect, though, that if you say "this person is doing some appropriative bullshit", "this person's work has elements of racism/misogyny/transphobia/etc", you will point me to example of them doing these things, instead of assuming that I am fully versed in their entire body of work. I expect to be shown examples, or at least be given names, of artists and styles they are appropriating from, because you also cannot assume that I am familiar with those works, either.

(The article did link to other articles about each of the individual topics, however the examples were somewhat limited. Particularly on the appropriation issue, which basically discusses how she has cribbed some of her persona and style from artists of color who are famous in their own right.)

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]skarrow, 2010-09-19 09:29 pm UTC

[info]platedlizard
2010-09-18 07:09 pm UTC (link)
Re: apropriation

Isn't that, like, the entire history of modern music?

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]silrana
2010-09-19 02:03 pm UTC (link)
I was thinking the same thing. So all those early rock & rollers who said they were heavily influenced by the music that was coming out of the black community are dirty, dirty racists?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]sequinedlizard, 2010-09-19 06:17 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]insanityprelude, 2010-09-20 01:59 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]bandit, 2010-09-20 03:57 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sequinedlizard, 2010-09-20 04:25 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]tofuknight, 2010-09-21 06:56 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]insanityprelude, 2010-09-21 07:06 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]bravest_spinja, 2010-09-20 10:23 pm UTC

[info]franzen
2010-09-18 07:28 pm UTC (link)
I have no problem with this. All of this:
It's been pointed out that she appropriates a lot of things from musical traditions created by people of colour and nonwhite people. That her work contains transmisogyny. That she appropriates the experiences of people with disabilities.


CONTAINED LINKS TO POSTS DETAILING THOSE ISSUES. lolwhut.

It's not uncommon on kyriarchy-centered blogs to expect commenters to be willing to learn on their own. If you don't understand, the response is not "please stop talking about the larger issue to provide me with a greater understanding of 101 concepts," because, yes, that is privilege.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]waltraute
2010-09-18 07:32 pm UTC (link)
One of the comments down thread engages with those posts, and says:

But that paragraph doesn't tell you that much. Using electronic sounds is appropriation? Wearing "outlandish attire" is appropriation? Why has Gaga stolen from Grace Jones, but not Cher? When I Google "mia gaga mimic" I get MIA saying that Gaga tries to mimic pretty much everyone, not specifically singers of color. And these are two subjective claims - opinions. If SE wants me to take them seriously, she needs to evaluate them with videos or sound clips side by side.

Maybe a musicological analysis isn't the OP's strong point, but it's worth then bringing up and discussing in the comments.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]franzen, 2010-09-19 12:19 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]waltraute, 2010-09-19 12:27 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]chibikaijuu, 2010-09-19 08:09 pm UTC

[info]scifantasy
2010-09-18 08:03 pm UTC (link)
That definitely does change the tenor of the debate. Probably an important point to have been in the writeup--there is a big difference between statements unsupported and statements with links.

But at the same time, all links are not created equal, and shaky foundations make for shaky arguments. Reading through the spark here, I see this sequence:

Article: "Some of what Lady Gaga does clashes with her self-identification as a feminist. For example, she appropriates from people of color and nonwhite people. See this link." (This is part of a wider theme of examining--not judging, just analyzing and closely inspecting--the question of Lady Gaga's feminism as represented through her music, and perhaps also the degree to which culture at large gets into crazy debates about Lady Gaga in particular.)

Commenter Whitney: "I don't think that article supports its thesis--that Lady Gaga appropriated--very well. Its evidence for that point seems to consist of Grace Jones and M.I.A. both claiming that she copied them, with links to where they said it. But that seems to be it."

Commenter Snarky's Machine: "If you don't see it that's because you have your head shoved up your ass. You're saying you don't understand and therefore you're right."

Which...strikes me as what a friend of mine calls a purple hair problem.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

(no subject) - [info]kattahj, 2010-09-18 10:26 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]lizbee, 2010-09-18 10:48 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]franzen, 2010-09-19 12:23 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]kattahj, 2010-09-19 09:49 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]franzen, 2010-09-19 05:54 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]kattahj, 2010-09-19 06:16 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]annaham, 2010-09-19 10:59 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sepiamagpie, 2010-09-20 12:07 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]annaham, 2010-09-20 12:23 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sepiamagpie, 2010-09-20 12:27 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]dr_tectonic, 2010-09-20 06:39 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sepiamagpie, 2010-09-20 08:10 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]kattahj, 2010-09-20 04:30 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]annaham, 2010-09-19 10:03 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ruslan, 2010-09-20 08:21 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]kattahj, 2010-09-21 04:23 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]snarkhunter, 2010-09-19 12:21 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]annaham, 2010-09-19 09:57 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]snarkhunter, 2010-09-19 10:08 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]annaham, 2010-09-19 11:01 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]phuck_u, 2010-09-20 09:06 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]visp, 2010-09-19 05:38 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]bacon_lover, 2010-09-26 10:31 am UTC
At risk of being THAT WANKA:
[info]feenix
2010-09-18 08:17 pm UTC (link)
...is it just me, or did anyone else just blanch at seeing this because they KNOW it's going to end in a deluge of UFB and drama?

Regardless of my worldview (which...no, does NOT intersect with S.E. Smith's or Snarky's Machine's), I just have a feeling that anything that involves themes of oppression with regards to any minority just isn't going to end well.

tl;dr - As interesting as it may be, I think it'd be more appropriate for UFB at this point (even if UFB already gets 99% of the traffic on JF right now).

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]cygnia, 2010-09-18 08:36 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]adevyish, 2010-09-18 08:37 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]rosehiptea, 2010-09-18 09:03 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]meagenimage, 2010-09-18 08:57 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]cie_anthy, 2010-09-18 09:16 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]meagenimage, 2010-09-18 09:32 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]cie_anthy, 2010-09-18 10:50 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]platedlizard, 2010-09-18 09:48 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]jkefka, 2010-09-19 01:48 am UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]sepiamagpie, 2010-09-19 03:15 am UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]sandglass, 2010-09-19 06:32 am UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]meagenimage, 2010-09-19 12:40 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]lilitu93, 2010-09-19 02:45 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]kylenne, 2010-09-19 05:45 am UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]snarkhunter, 2010-09-19 12:23 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]visp, 2010-09-20 03:46 am UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]annaham, 2010-09-19 10:16 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]sarracenia, 2010-09-18 09:25 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]sandglass, 2010-09-18 10:50 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]xero_sky, 2010-09-19 02:54 am UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]snacky, 2010-09-19 03:06 am UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]sandglass, 2010-09-19 03:20 am UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]zing_och, 2010-09-19 11:06 am UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]witty, 2010-09-19 12:26 am UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]sandglass, 2010-09-19 12:39 am UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]sepiamagpie, 2010-09-19 02:09 am UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]blue_penguin, 2010-09-19 12:50 am UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]witty, 2010-09-19 01:00 am UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]blue_penguin, 2010-09-19 01:27 am UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]cygnia, 2010-09-19 04:16 am UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]magnetic_regina, 2010-09-19 09:53 am UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]snarkhunter, 2010-09-19 12:25 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]snarkhunter, 2010-09-19 12:26 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]witty, 2010-09-19 12:47 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]gerorin, 2010-09-26 05:42 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]gerorin, 2010-09-26 05:43 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]snarkhunter, 2010-09-19 12:24 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]white_serpent, 2010-09-19 07:22 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]snarkhunter, 2010-09-19 09:33 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]sarracenia, 2010-09-19 09:35 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]ashu, 2010-09-20 12:31 am UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]kumquat_of_doom, 2010-09-20 12:36 am UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]sadisticferret, 2010-09-20 01:56 am UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]hallidae, 2010-09-20 07:54 am UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]cmdr_zoom, 2010-09-20 04:09 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]white_serpent, 2010-09-20 04:17 pm UTC
Re: At risk of being THAT WANKA: - [info]mcity, 2010-09-26 09:59 pm UTC

[info]puipui
2010-09-18 09:35 pm UTC (link)
I know that you know where [info]unfunnybusiness is.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]waltraute, 2010-09-18 10:17 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2010-09-19 01:50 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]faultypremise, 2010-09-19 03:16 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sandglass, 2010-09-19 03:31 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]sepiamagpie, 2010-09-19 05:58 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2010-09-19 06:58 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]ashenmote, 2010-09-19 06:48 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2010-09-19 06:59 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]ecchaniz0r, 2010-09-19 03:42 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]spawn_of_kong, 2010-09-19 04:37 pm UTC
Reposted for fail
[info]sandglass
2010-09-18 10:48 pm UTC (link)
Grudgewank much?

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: Reposted for fail - [info]franzen, 2010-09-19 12:27 am UTC
Re: Reposted for fail - [info]cie_anthy, 2010-09-19 05:20 am UTC
Re: Reposted for fail - [info]sandglass, 2010-09-19 05:38 am UTC
Re: Reposted for fail - [info]notjo, 2010-09-19 05:45 am UTC
Re: Reposted for fail - [info]ecchaniz0r, 2010-09-19 03:39 pm UTC
Re: Reposted for fail - [info]ryuutchi, 2010-09-19 02:47 pm UTC
Re: Reposted for fail - [info]white_serpent, 2010-09-19 05:12 pm UTC

[info]witty
2010-09-19 12:37 am UTC (link)
Two things:

1) This is near-verbatim match to the thread about the same topic on FFA, here: http://community.livejournal.com/fail_fandomanon/2791.html?thread=11312871#t11312871 (Presumably, it went in FFA and W_R by the same anony hand.)

2) The SFD_anon links are all access denied.

It might be lulzier if #2 were resolved, via copious copypasta if by no other method. (I presume it's open membership, but a broken link is nobody's friend.) I do think "Magazines don't provide exposition, whaddya talk" is pretty lulzy myself, however, no matter that the topic of exposition is a sensitive one.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]waltraute, 2010-09-19 12:44 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]waltraute, 2010-09-19 12:50 am UTC

[info]xero_sky
2010-09-19 12:48 am UTC (link)
Your inability to "see" how Gaga misappropriates says everything about YOUR own privilegez

So requesting sources is now also privilege?

I'm not even sure I know what that word means anymore.

(Reply to this)


[info]staroverthebay
2010-09-19 02:37 am UTC (link)
(I learned a new term today! *adds "praeteritio" to her list of vocabulary words to familiarize with*)

Also, wow, I had no idea that asking for proof and sources is the same as derailing! Good to know!

Does this person even understand what the point of journalism is?

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]fern_on_fen, 2010-09-20 02:54 pm UTC

[info]fishies
2010-09-19 03:15 am UTC (link)
Last time I read Bitch there was an article saying My Little Ponies were pedo sex dolls.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]sepiamagpie, 2010-09-19 05:45 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]ryuutchi, 2010-09-19 02:43 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]fishies, 2010-09-19 03:55 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sepiamagpie, 2010-09-19 03:59 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]fishies, 2010-09-19 04:14 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]snarkhunter, 2010-09-19 09:35 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]fishies, 2010-09-20 02:59 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]snarkhunter, 2010-09-20 11:24 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]drakyndra, 2010-09-20 06:56 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]mcity, 2010-09-26 10:03 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sandglass, 2010-09-19 06:04 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]feenix, 2010-09-19 11:58 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]nekoneko, 2010-09-19 04:55 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]kookaburra, 2010-09-19 05:57 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]bienegold, 2010-09-20 05:54 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]mcity, 2010-09-26 10:05 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]kookaburra, 2010-09-26 10:13 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]mcity, 2010-09-26 10:23 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]kookaburra, 2010-09-26 10:25 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]snarkhunter, 2010-09-19 12:29 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]fishies, 2010-09-19 03:59 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ekaterinv, 2010-09-20 06:42 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]everstar, 2010-09-20 07:07 pm UTC

[info]ryuutchi
2010-09-19 05:20 am UTC (link)
I disagree that S.E. Smith used praeteritio in her post. She specifically said that she wasn't saying Gaga wasn't a feminist-- and then clarified to point out that what she WAS saying was that, like many people who take on the title of feminist, Gaga's ideals and the title she adopts don't always entirely mesh. Smith, in fact, indicts herself-- so if she's obliquely saying Gaga's not a feminist, then she's also saying she herself is not a feminist.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]feenix, 2010-09-19 01:13 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ryuutchi, 2010-09-19 02:41 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]feenix, 2010-09-20 03:46 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]lilitu93, 2010-09-19 02:51 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ryuutchi, 2010-09-19 02:56 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]darksumomo, 2010-09-19 05:27 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ryuutchi, 2010-09-19 05:30 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2010-09-19 09:11 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]darksumomo, 2010-09-20 01:38 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]phuck_u, 2010-09-20 09:14 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]lilitu93, 2010-09-20 11:11 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]phuck_u, 2010-09-20 11:12 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]snarkhunter, 2010-09-21 12:53 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]phuck_u, 2010-09-21 02:02 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]snarkhunter, 2010-09-22 04:06 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tofuknight, 2010-09-21 07:05 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]phuck_u, 2010-09-21 08:06 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tofuknight, 2010-09-24 07:08 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]phuck_u, 2010-09-26 12:49 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]tofuknight, 2010-09-28 08:50 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]phuck_u, 2010-09-28 10:01 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tofuknight, 2010-09-29 12:03 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]kylenne, 2010-09-19 09:08 pm UTC

[info]sepiamagpie
2010-09-19 06:08 am UTC (link)
Can you add, like, a knock knock joke or something?

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]puipui, 2010-09-19 09:32 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]zing_och, 2010-09-19 11:08 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]kumquat_of_doom, 2010-09-19 05:44 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]notme, 2010-09-19 06:32 pm UTC

[info]keri
2010-09-19 11:30 pm UTC (link)
I hope I'm not the only one who kept seeing [info]snarky_machine and misreading it as [info]snacky_machine, and then wondering how [info]snacky got her own robot, and also what kinds of things that robot is capable of. Or is it a machine related to Snacky's Law, and gives automated responses linking the subject at hand and the mean girls in high school?

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]rosehiptea, 2010-09-20 12:34 am UTC
(no subject) - tetradecimal, 2010-09-20 02:32 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]keri, 2010-09-20 03:17 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]hallidae, 2010-09-20 07:58 am UTC
(no subject) - tetradecimal, 2010-09-20 02:49 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]snacky, 2010-09-20 02:43 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]tofuknight, 2010-09-21 07:06 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]galletas, 2010-09-20 06:40 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]rotten_fish, 2010-09-22 12:30 am UTC

[info]mcity
2010-09-26 09:46 pm UTC (link)
When I saw the first few lines, I thought "Of course she does! Illumati imagery, military imagery, geeky references--oh. You mean *that* kind of appropriation."

(Reply to this)


redwarrior
2010-10-02 01:23 am UTC (link)
I find this ironic coming from a magazine where all of the trans columnists are FtM's.

NOT A TRANS WOMAN IN SIGHT NO SIREE BOB

(Reply to this)


 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map