Follow us on:
← 5 Tips for Showing Your Clients Love During the Holidays
, the awkward oticaveon of Jung on my part does seem pretty superficial, and probably something i should have had the oversight to edit out. there was an idea i wanted to express there that i felt needed a sort of academic qualification, if that makes sense. most of what i wrote had nothing in the way of research to back it, and i kind of threw that in there as a lazy backup. but this isn’t an essay for school, and i shouldn’t have to do that!when i said what a man was to write the converse of this article , this was (in my mind) a subtle acknowledgement that that kind of thing actually happens all the time. i’m definitely aware of the amount of awful ways in which men express that mindset, gimme a little credit here! what i really wanted to touch upon was the idea that if it is patently NOT OK for men to write things like this, it hardly seems progressive to applaud women for doing the same thing in response. i’m a believer in mediation, not revenge. a long while ago i had a discussion with Jessyca about the function of sex-positive pornography (the successfulness of which i argued against) that i think is relevant. when you’ve established that something is, for example, patriarchal and marginalizing, is it ok to re-purpose it for different means, or should it be dismantled? i lean towards the latter, but that’s a lengthy discussion of its own. i just wanted to explain that that was the point i was trying to make.as far as privilege and writing about what makes me personally feel marginalized, i’m fully aware that i have significantly less grounds for complaint than anyone else. honestly, i saw my writings on this site as dripping with all kinds of privileged-person hesitance and guilt, but maybe i haven’t acknowledged that in the right way. and i definitely understand that there are some people to whom i can not relate, and may never be able to. all i can hope to do is minimize the negative impact of this discrepancy, but i can see that i have some work to go in that regard.the reason i picked out this blog post was not that i specifically wanted to respond to this woman, but that i thought it was a good means by which to discuss the issues that reading it made me think about. i don’t presume to know her or have any desire to engage with her about this. she’s as entitled to her blog posts as i am to mine. i hope to god she doesn’t read this piece, actually, because i by no means consider it incisive enough of analysis to merit my being proud of using her as a jumping-off point. also, the whole Heisenberg-blogger thing i touched on at the end.that said, i reserve the right to play devil’s advocate, should the need arise. my intentions when i do so are anything but malicious, but i don’t think that i was brought on to write here so that i could be some kind of token or to parrot the ideals of a group that i am categorically not a part of back to them, i don’t see that as being conducive to any kind of constructive discussion (case in point: the awesome post Jessyca made being spawned from our disagreement). i try my hardest to keep my various privileges in mind when i write things about them, but i’m only human. hence, the disclaimers i add about my openness to being called out on failing to acknowledge certain things. and i’m glad you did!