Coatlique Takes Manhattan

Usually, I don't encourage readers to write to the Coatliques of the world, but she seems to like it. And it's a good way to get easy material for one's site.

The fact that I know you're a male seems to really upset you. Why is that?

Always real,
Coatlique

Because no one is supposed to know about my secret identity. Shhh, don't tell anyone.

And some feminist you are. Can't even let women have their own beliefs. Are you going to criticize me because I like to bake, and I dared to make a black forest cheesecake for a 4th of July picnic? I mean, fucking a man and baking a cake -- I'm single-handedly going to bring down Womyn. From now on, blame me for every woman who enters the porn industry or gets date raped. It's all my fault.

You don't know anything at all about feminism. Your view of it is far too stereotyped and simplistic. Why would a woman want to be somebody who hates women, which would include herself? If such a thing exists, and I'm sure it does in some cases, it would be the result of the woman internalizing the negative messages about women in our society, or it could be the result of abusive treatment from another individual, or, most likely, a combination of both. Do you think that self-hatred, on the part of any human being, is a healthy and legitimate "choice"? Self-hatred is not really a "choice," just like depression (also associated with low self-esteem) is not a "choice." It's just something that a person develops, often subconsciously. Nobody sits there and thinks, "Gee, I'd really like to be someone who really hates herself or himself. That would be such a great choice!" Get real, OK? Feminism! Ha!

Furthermore, you think your web site represents the best in intellectual, up and coming, liberal thinking, but it does not. I represents all of the old, ignorant prejudices that have existed in society for centuries. I speak out against pornography because I think it is degrading toward women as well as children and racial minorities, who are also represented in a degrading fashion in pornography. It also exploits poor women, abused women, and helpless children in a very immediate sense by taking advantage of the fact that they are desperate, worn down, or unable to resist coercion into pornography by virtue of their age. There may be some examples of white, middle class adult women who (presumably) were not ever abused and who decide to "work" in pornography for whatever reason, but their experiences are often not as brutal as those of others and they do not represent the majority of women exploited by pornography. Focusing on this minority of women in pornography (whose childhood and life histories we still know nothing of) obfuscates the reality of what the pornography industry is built upon.

I do not generalize about African Americans, Jewish people, gay people, or women, as you do on your web site. I also do not generalize about men. On the other hand, your mentality reflects that of any ignorant fan of Hitler who joined the KKK and sits on his front porch in his dirty overalls with a shotgun threatening to shoot any "coon" who steps on his lawn and "get" (read: rape) any woman who "teases" him. I can see you as being someone who is a fan of Howard Stern and Bill Mahr and believes they are some of the "great thinkers" of our society. You think you have such a wide "scope of reasoning" just because you defend pornography, but you do not. An enjoyment for looking at "titties" does not an open-minded (or mature or intellectual or sexually liberated) person make. You are only out to protect your own self-interests, even at the expense of others. Your views of sexuality and the rest of the world are as about as open-minded as liberated as those of the Christian Coalition and other ultra right-wing conservatives. You're just a right-wing conservative who's not religious, thinks abortion is OK (because you hate children, not because you care about women), and likes porn. Other than that, you're just the same as them. You want to discriminate against everybody who is not willing to succumb to the view that the entire world should revolve around catering to your own selfish desire to dominate everybody else and make them conform to your own way of life. Stop acting like you're the great libertarian while I'm the big prude. Anyone with an ounce of intelligence and compassion and see through this farce.

Because I already sent a relevant e-mail to someone concerning feminism I will cut and paste part of it for you and send it to you.

Always real,
Coatlique

Using the term "right-wing conservative" negates your entire argument. Nice term to bandy about, much like "racist," but it doesn't mean anything.

And I think your average right-wing conservative would have a problem with a pro-abortion, anti-censorship, pro-porn, anti-forthechildren, no-problem-with-gays atheist.

Feminism is simply the belief that women should be allowed to do whatever they want -- stay at home to rear children, become a CEO, be pro-life, be pro-choice, be a misogynist, be a misanthrope, buy porn, make porn, protest against porn, be dominant, be submissive. It's about choices. You're just trying to box in women to what you think women should be.

Your argument is no different than the politicians who want to "protect" women from cursing, pornography, violence, etc. You think women are weak and need to be protected from themselves because, really, don't you know what's best for them? How can they pretend to know how to live their lives? It's all a farce, and you need to show them the way to salvation.

You'd fit in well with the "right-wing conservatives" you seem to hate so much.

Although they'd probably argue that the porn industry simply exploits greedy, materialistic people, and hell, what's wrong with a little capitalism?

You didn't listen to me at all. Just admit that you're not a woman. You know you're not.

Always real, Coatlique

If being a woman means being grouped in with you, I'll gladly deny my gender.

If you really want to know about feminism, I suggest you actually read a book that was written by a feminist. Here's a few of my favorites to get you started:

Fire with Fire, by Naomi Wolf
The Beauty Myth, by Naomi Wolf
Backlash, by Susan Faludi (spell?)
Refusing To Be a Man, by John Stoltenburg
Faces of Feminism, by Sheila Tobias
The Mismeasure of Woman, by ?
Dangerous Relationships, by Diana Russell (about pornography)
Who's Science? Whose Knowledge? by Sandra Harding (not sure about the author)

All of these books are fairly simple to read, with the exception of Who's Science? Who's Knowledge? which is intended only for the serious philosopher. At any rate, I would suggest reading some of the other books first, just to make sure that you do not have a biased perception of it because that book could be confusing to someone who doesn't have any background. The Mismeasure of Woman in particular would be a good one to read before reading Who's Science? Who's Knowledge? All of these books should give you a good introduction to what feminism is all about, particularly the first five. The last three are better once you understand the basics, or they could be misunderstood. It's your choice whether or not you want to educate yourself about what feminism is, but if you do not, then how do you know what you're criticizing? If you don't read these books, at least read something. And make sure it's by someone who is held in high esteem by the feminist community and not by some psuedofeminist like Camille Paglia or by some other woman who writes a book called All Men are Jerks or something like that, OK? These are NOT feminist books and ones such as All Men are Jerks do not even claim to be. Do your homework to make you know what you're reading. Just because something looks "feminist" to you doesn't mean it is. Something that comes across as representing female assertion or aggression cannot automatically be labeled "feminist." And always remember that even the Spice Girls can call themselves "feminists."

Good web sites to visit are:

www.feminista.com
The Andrea Dworkin Library (use keyword Andrea Dworkin)
feminist.com
oneangrygirl.com
http://www.feminist.com/pro.htm (Men in feminism)
The NOW web site
The web site for the Feminist Majority Foundation
The POW (Pissed Off Women) web site

Web sites such as "Heartless Bitches International," "The Official Boys are Icky Brigade," and "All Men Must Die" do NOT count as feminist web sites. (And they do not claim to be.)

Well, I really hope this gets you started on your journey towards understanding feminism. From now on, it's *your* responsibility to teach yourself about feminism. (Read: not mine.) If you read some of these books and go to some of these web sites (and it's really important that you read the books and not just go to the web sites) and still decide to be an antifeminist, then at least you'll have something more to base your decision on than what the mainstream media has told you and represented to you so far.

It's important to make educated opinions about things so that you can come across as speaking from a standpoint of being informed rather that a standpoint of being ignorant. Of course, if you want to hear "the other side of the story," there is a wide variety of antifeminist books (and movies and albums and magazines and standup comedy acts) available to you. However, you already seem to be very familiar with the main premise behind the antifeminist philosophy, which are that it is right and true for men to dominate women and that feminists are therefore perverters of all that is right and true (which is sometimes expressed by calling us a bunch of stupid, man-hating feminazis). Perhaps you could benefit from hearing our side.

I hope you find these things I've referred you to helpful.

Always real,
Coatlique

Reading those books is what turned me off to modern feminism. Had I not witnessed the horror that is Andrea Dworkin, perhaps things would have gone a different way. After reading her works and the works of her male slave, I was different.

If you did read them (the whole book, not just the back cover), you apparently paid about as much attention to what they actually said as you paid to what my last e-mail actually said. The only thing you hear is your own voice echoing in your mind. You can't hear anyone else at all. You simply misconstrue what other people say in order to fit them into your own preconceptions of them--into your own little box. And you say I'm the one who puts women in a box? I'm not the one with a web site that claims all women are prostitutes.

Always real,
Coatlique

I don't believe I claimed that all women are prostitutes, but now that you mention it, that's a great theory.

At first I didn't think your last e-mail deserved a more detailed response, but I think I can put this into what I would consider a relatively small nutshell:

First of all, you are mistaken when you say that the first premise of feminism is that women can be whatever they want. The first premise of feminism is that women can and should be treated equally to men. Obviously, if women should be treated equally to men, than they should be given as many options in life as men are given. And ultimately, we want all people, male or female, to have as many options as possible. We want to eliminate prejudice in all it's forms. This distinction between my first premise and your first premise is important, because what a woman "chooses" to do when her options are limited may be different from what she chooses to do when she is treated as an equal instead of a second class citizen. For example, a poor woman living in a patriarchal society that discriminates against women in the workplace and exploits women's sexuality may "choose" to work in the pornography industry in order to put food on the table, and she might even claim that it's not so bad. However, if she had more options in her life, I would be willing to bet that such a line of "work" would not be her first choice. If she had more options (besides low paying jobs) open and still wanted to do it, then that would be her right. What I'm talking about is not forcing women into another choice, as you claim, but rather simply giving women a choice where they have none.

Furthermore, are you trying to compare being a misogynist to being a stay-at-home Mom or a CEO? Remember when you were in grade school and they gave you lists of word out of which you had to pick one that did not belong? See if you can tell which word does not belong: Doctor, Homemaker, Artist, Lawyer, Volunteer, Athlete, Soldier, Carpenter, Misogynist, Skydiver, Activist, CEO, Potter, Politician, Chef. First of all, misogyny is not a career and it is not even a hobby, a skill, a craft, an activity, a sport, or anything of the kind. Second, as I already explained, if a woman were a misogynist it would mean that she would have to hate herself. I already explained what I think about that "choice." A woman does not "choose" to hate herself. What kind of a choice would that be?

I know what you're trying to do. You're trying to take what you see as "feminist rhetoric" and turn it around on us. You're trying to take our logic, twist it around, and throw it back in our faces to use it against us. Well, it isn't working, because the things you are saying sound completely absurd and ridiculous. A woman is free because she "chooses" to hate herself? Exactly in what Universe does that asinine idea make sense?

And furthermore, at the risk of sounding repetitive, you're not a woman.

Always Real,
Coatlique

Then hospital administrators have a lot of explaining to do. The doctors and nurses swore my parents' sperm and egg omelet was a bundle of pink joy. It's only fair that they learn that something happened to my male genitals between birth and going home from the hospital.

Well, that sounds like a personal problem. By the way, I am not the first person to notice that you mention your "boyfriend" way too often. Why is that?

Always real,
Coatlique

I've noticed that the (two) people who ask about the references to my boyfriend tend to be people who couldn't get a date if they walked around naked with free beer coupons stuck to their faces.

And if the name of my site were "(Name of boyfriend)'s Misanthropic Bitch," I could see your point.

Is that why you're always mentioning that you have a boyfriend, because you think it proves that you're not ugly and unable to get man? Insecure much?

And by the way, I was referring also to people I have talked to on the Internet who have not talked to you. And how do you know that someone is ugly if you've only spoken to them on the computer? You make no sense. You can't insult someone's looks if you haven't seen him or her. Oh yeah, it's not just women who are criticizing you on this point. Some people think you are a woman and that you are hopelessly dependent on your boyfriend for a sense of identity. I still think you're a man.

Always Real,
Coatlique

It is always about appearances to you, Coatie? You could be the hottest woman to walk the face of the earth, but as soon as you opened your mouth, no man could resist the urge to shove his cock in there to shut you up. (Shit, I'd be tempted to shove a boob in there if it would keep your yapper shut.) Your personality is severely lacking.

And I find it odd that I've also mentioned friends, relatives and acquaintances on my site, yet no one has written to ask, "Why do you mention [those people]? Do you think you're cool because you weren't raised by a pack of wolves?" Why is it only an issue when a boyfriend is mentioned?

I'm sure if I were a lesbian and mentioned a girlfriend, this conversation wouldn't have been initiated. Because, you know, only blatant heterosexuality is frowned upon by you.

Traitor that I am to you and Dworkin, I don't find non-thrusting sex that appealing.

And by the way, out of the hundreds of thousands of words on my site, perhaps two dozen are "boyfriend," and all of the references relate to incidents in which he was involved. None of them are random. And the references that don't make sense to you make sense to us. The occasional inside joke rears its ugly head.

Ah, well, I guess it's just another day in the life of a fake woman with a so-called Web site.

Hmmm...I've been convinced that you're a heterosexual man, but maybe you really are a woman, or at least a gay man, because you are way to defensive about this boyfriend thing. So, you're not using him (if he exists) as a way to justify your existence and your gender? Me thinks she doth protest too much.

Or maybe you are a man who's just keeping up a really good act.

TMB responded:

Defensive? Nah, just gathering fodder for my site.

A frequent "insult" used by your kind (middle-class/rich white girls questioning their sexuality and trying to digest the information gleaned from Vagina Lovin' 101) is to disdainfully call me "straight" or "heterosexual." Apparently, I'm too narrow-minded to look away from the cock.

How do you now what "my kind" is? You don't know what my income is, you don't know what color I am, and you definitely do not what my love life has been. And you think that feminists should be banned from the Internet? Gee, you believe in freedom of speech! Yeah, right! Freedom of speech for you and no others, perhaps, which was what I said you believed in to begin with. Thank you for proving my point.

And you have mention your boyfriend far more than anybody else, and you have mentioned him out of nowhere for no particular reason. Yes, honey, it's true.

Always Real (and laughing),
Coatlique

You must be a fun date.

"So, Lisa, what do you like to do?"

"What is that, some veiled reference to sexual activity? Are you asking me what kind of sexual favors I'll provide for you?"

"N ... n ... n ... no. I just, um, wanted to know what you like to do for fun."

"Fun? What a fucking presumptuous bastard! What makes you think that I like to have fun? Because I'm a female college student? And you think that makes me some kind of fun-loving, carefree woman?"

"Can I buy you a drink?"

"Why, so you can slip some GHB in there? And take advantage of me like the oppressive pig you are?"

"So, how do you like this?"

"Hhhmmhhmmhhhhmmmhhhhhmhhhmmmm."

Providing jack-off material for white misogynists since 1997.

The Misanthropic Bitch does not encourage feedback. All submissions, though, become property of the Misanthropic Bitch. Submissions may be published or reused in any other medium.