Saturday, March 24, 2012

The crude and binary question

Sigrid, who is almost, but not quite, credentialed, tries to get an early start on waving her credentials around at Susan's place:
Your argument(s) (and I use “argument” loosely) about female promiscuity and its correlation to a litany of negative individual/societal outcomes notwithstanding, I find your tacit (0r perhaps not so tacit) support of “slut shaming” deeply disturbing. As a PhD student at a large university with two two nieces and one nephew in their first years of college (representative of your primary audience), I cringe that their earnest navigation (whatever that may look like) through the inevitably disorienting and murky terrain of their sexuality and sociality should be so crudely measured on a loaded and psychologically damaging binary of shame vs. exaltation. And I would posit that, indeed, it is the rhetoric and discourse emanating from that binary that exacts the profound negative toll on all of us. To “shame” anyone (although in your case you have a particular penchant for females, it seems) is cruel and counterproductive....

Maybe if I include a photo, you can size me up and further illuminate me on my “spinster” status with some added commentary based on my haircut, fashion sense, posture, or general appearance, in the same way you did my colleague, Extragiraffe, who, far from a “douchebag” or “frat boy,” is a kind and incredibly decent human being, a respected and decorated academic-in-training who is well-read in feminist theory/praxis, and a thoughtful discussant on a range of issues pertaining to gender and sexuality. If I wasn’t already put off by your crude category-building and your amateur sociology, your sophomoric, evasive, and baseless response to my friend solidifies that I will discourage everyone I know (but particularly my nieces and nephew and their peers) from ever taking your web site or its logics seriously.
To which I commented: You’re a maleducated twit, Sigrid. Slinging around that half-baked academy-speak suffices only to demonstrate you don’t understand supply and demand or the burden of debt. It certainly doesn’t cut any ice here. Babbling about “feminist theory/praxis” on this or any Game blog is about as impressive as asserting one’s Keynesian credentials at the Mises Institute. Perhaps if you weren’t so intently posturing on the basis of credentials you don’t even possess yet, you wouldn’t have missed Susan’s core point, which is that due to a surfeit of women being unwilling to man the sexual gates they are biologically charged with keeping, all women are negatively affected by the consequent changes in the sexual marketplace regardless of their behavior.

Your status as a spinster is obviously the result of a combination of your own decisions and your environment since everyone’s status always has been. Susan has merely provided the service of pointing out the potential consequences of the former while commenting upon the observable changes in the latter. And it’s worth pointing out that “the earnest navigation” of your nieces and nephews, as well as your own, will be judged in the same crude and binary manner as everyone else’s. To fuck or to not fuck, that is the initial question, followed eventually, in some cases, by commit or not commit. And no appeal to “the inevitably disorienting and murky terrain of their sexuality and sociality” is ever going to change that stark reality.

The herpes simplex virus doesn’t give a damn about the earnestness of one’s navigation. Nor does a future prospective husband or wife. And absolutely no one gives a damn about your almost-degree. As a kind and incredibly decent human being, I will, out of the angelic goodness of my astonishingly generous heart, favor you with a suggestion that may help prevent you from being perceived as the usual academic ass: anytime you begin writing a sentence with the word “As” that refers to yourself in any way, shape, or form, stop immediately and write something that might at least have a remote chance of being relevant instead.

Sweet Oxford and Cambridge, but how I despise academics in the larval stage. Not that I'm loath to kick around the odd professor here and there, when necessary, but as a general rule, even the most obnoxious academics can't compete with the pretentious poses being struck by the useless grubs still in the process of working on their PhDs.


Anonymous said...

I bet she is a shit student doing a Shit PhD in a shit subject, she has never created anything and is a parasite on humanity.

Oh and I bet she has HPV.

DW said...

I really hate the way people like her write.

Brian said...

Big words and long, empty sentences with lots of commas do not make you a writer or smart. Someone should explain this to Ph.D hopefuls before writing their fancy final papers.

7man said...

It is a delight to see a pretentious woman that flaunts academese be dissected by a smarter man using finesse & wit.

It is easy to see that Sigrid’s words are the typical female shaming deflecting, misinterpreting, exaggeration, insulting message that ordinary women use, only couched in high-falutin’ verbiage.

Anonymous said...

Dude. You kicked her ass. And she damned well had it coming.

Rich said...

Flash forward five years...

Yes Sigrid, I would like fries with that.

Anonymous said...

I would posit that, indeed, it is not within the dominion of language and communication where her scholarship abides.

Anonymous said...

she used so many words to say so little

Anonymous said...

"she used so many words to say so little"

King A, is that you again posting on that site?

Anonymous said...

Do you ever feel guilty for using such harshness in expressing your opinions? Might there be a better way?

swiftfoxmark2 said...

Do you ever feel guilty for using such harshness in expressing your opinions? Might there be a better way?

He doesn't. Tolerance of idiocy only encourages it.

Soga said...

Oh boy, academic language. There's nothing quite like it for padding the word count on a paper or comment post. Her post could've been summed up in one sentence:

I'm OFFENDED that you would shame me and my kids for being sluts!

Anonymous said...

"I'm OFFENDED that you would shame me and my kids for being sluts!"

You are completely slut-phobic! You should be ashamed.

Retrenched said...

What's really sad is that Sigrid probably really believes that she's offering a fresh, unique take on the issue, rather than just rehashing the same pro-slut arguments that have already been made a million times.

Soga said...

It's true, I'm scared of sluts! At night, when I'm sleeping in my bed, I leave my night-light on. I'm scared that a slut will creep out of the closet and have sex with me.

Orville said...

It's spring and Vox is spraying the lawn for grubs. Nothing like pinching one between the fingers until that foul puss-like nougat spurts out of their empty skull.

Yohami said...

What's with women and the "appealing to authority" thing? everything turns into pokemon-esque status game. Take my credential! no, you take mine! oh how you DARE!

Still figuring that out.

VD said...

Do you ever feel guilty for using such harshness in expressing your opinions? Might there be a better way?

No. That's not me being harsh anyway. You wouldn't like me when I'm harsh. There may be a better way, but I haven't found one that more effectively stops the BS-spouting.

Anonymous said...

Academese is an assault on the beauty of language. Certainly not the worst example, but when it rears its head in the real world, it's quite hideous.

Apologies for the grammar nitpick, but it should be "loath" as in "reluctant" to kick around instead of "loathe" (hate).

Vox said...

Apologies for the grammar nitpick, but it should be "loath" as in "reluctant" to kick around instead of "loathe" (hate).

None necessary. Thanks for the correction.

Albatross said...

That said, the credential status knife can cuts women too.

Sometimes the better halves among among poker games I attend wonder why I make the calls I do. Soon after listening to their butchered half explanations for my decisions, I look into their eyes and say, "I have a Ph.D. in statistics from Harvard" and the table quiets for a moment before we relax into lighter (and less depressingly revealing) conversation.

LP 999/Linda said...

Oh brother, now she wants everyone to qualify her appearance?

Colleges are the ruination of women.

Johnycomelately said...

It took all that to say:
I'm smart
Can't make right or wrong statements
Am I ugly?
My friends are cool
Your stupid dumb
We're not talking to you

Rantor said...

"Extragiraffe ... is well-read in feminist theory/praxis, and a thoughtful discussant on a range of issues pertaining to gender and sexuality.

I bet he is only a "thoughtful discussant" so that he can bed feminists.

Pablo said...

Sigrid cries foul on Susan for suggesting sluts be shamed for their behavior, waving her pseudo-credential as proof she's a moral authority, and then proceeds to attempt shaming Susan, an MBA from the Wharton School, for what she has written in her post.

I'm just going to let that hang there...

Anonymous said...

"To “shame” anyone is cruel and counterproductive"

This is so true. We have become a shaming, labeling, judging, reality tv show society. It's actually pretty disgusting in many ways. Especially when looking at the root cause. Our money mongering legal system and hollyweird's elite.

Shame should come from within ones self. The word itself is defined as such.

Anonymous said...

The only way shame would ever come within oneself is if society has ingrained it within you that X action is what horrible/losers/whatever people do. So that when you do it you feel shame.

To shame people directly, one on one, can have many different effects from positive to negative.

On a societal level though, shame works wonders for setting guidelines to people's actions.

The question, then, is how the hell we're supposed to get a society that has stripped itself of many of the useful shaming procedures to put them back in before everything goes to hell.

Ecce Hetero said...

Her follow-up comment is if anything quite a bit worse than the original. A couple gems:

"Susan of the Angelic Character plasters The Wharton School prominently in her About section. Ivory Tower, indeed. Although it’s a professional degree/not a scholarly degree…not taken seriously by any scholar"

That's so off one wonders if Sigrid is newly arrived from a particularly unfortunate Norwegian backwater, or maybe the 15th Century...

"Many on here (not all…but definitely Susan and her devotees) are laughable caricatures of free-market bible thumpers and misogynists."

It's never a good sign when people (especially grad students at Penn! in religion!!) feel unashamed to be so open and blatant in their bigotry. That she's so bizarrely off in her stereotypes to begin with borders on the surreal.

Anonymous said...

Ones moral upbringing is what determines ones shame. Not societal standards. Standards that constantly change by the minute in our politically correct habitation.

Our own criminal justice system is/has been broken for awhile now. Maybe you have the money to fend off false and baseless accusations of any charges that may arise against you. We can call you Roethlisberger then. For the less fortunate who are forced to rely upon court appointed attorney's to defend their best interests...that is the true shame. A shame of our own society.

Anonymous said...


Stickwick said...

"Susan of the Angelic Character plasters The Wharton School prominently in her About section. Ivory Tower, indeed. Although it’s a professional degree/not a scholarly degree…not taken seriously by any scholar"

Whereas humanities "scholars" are not taken seriously by anyone but themselves.

CL said...

I am loath to admit I didn't know that, but it's good to know.

Anonymous said...

Moral upbringing lays the foundation for one's shame triggers. However that moral upbringing is largely dictated by the societal standards. Even in religions there are changes based on the different culture and society both over time and in different locations. A child raised Catholic today in the US has a very different set of shame triggers than one raised Catholic in Rome, and both would have a very different set of shame triggers than those raised in the same places 100 or 200 years ago.

You're also assuming that the individual is unable to think, process, and change one's moral outlook on life as they go through it and have life changing experiences. Childhood upbringing might be a foundation that is hard to grow out of, but it is certainly possible.

Anonymous said...

Give me a break. If she wanted her hand held she went to the wrong site.


Anonymous said...


I have to say that this was along the lines of that lovely scene in Good Will Hunting where he tears apart some ego bloated collegian.



Susan Walsh said...

One of the joys of blogging in this corner of the net is watching Vox take down pompous nitwits. He's the best wordsmith I know of (or at least is tied with Roissy), and he might even have the edge for incisiveness.

There's a regular at HUS named Munson - a 60 yo lawyer battling terminal cancer - who is also highly gifted in this vein. Here is his response to the above comment from Vox:

BRAVISSIMO! (Munson rises from his chair, enraptured, vigorously applauding)

Such nuanced invective! “You’re a maleducated twit, Sigrid.” Channeling James Kilpatrick no less! Keynesian/Mises Institute-man, that Dennis Miller-like slider caught me looking; couldn’t even take a swing at it. You have the precision of a coiled cobra, with much less empathy. In an age that honors meaty roundhouse rhetoric, you show the skill of an AWACS directed surgical strike, killing only those necessary, leaving the rest to their dreary lives of drinking curdling sour goat milk and fucking their grub-like mustachioed women. Your writing is a delight sir. I could not find the post that started the exchange; no matter, the artist rises above his inspiration. And you are no less than that VD.

I hope I can look forward to more Vox/Munson interactions. It's a joy to behold that level of wit, humor and ruthlessness.

Duke of Earl said...

Bet hard when your cards are strong, chuck it in when your cards are weak, once everyone knows you do that, mix it up.

Anonymous said...

I find it a bit confusing that you on one hand claim morals are dictated by societal standards...and within the same breath/paragraph point to the (Catholic) religion as a standard in morals over time.

So which is it, I'm curious... Societal standards? Or is it religion that dictates moral upbringing? I don't see this as so much of a black and white (either/or) viewpoint myself. Maybe areas of our country such as the deep south use this as more of their modus of operandi. But I think it would be a huge stretch to apply to all areas.

Also I'm not assuming anything here. But I will say with much confidence that any inner city youth who has witnessed and possibly partaken in violence/murder/rape etc within their upbringing. Would be much more difficult to shame by your societal standards than you are letting on here. Considering they are or have likely been serving 8-10-20 years on said charges with other such convicts. Which brings us right back to their moral upbringing in relation to how societal shame may or may not affect them.

And how about those in the (Sacremento) California area? Who were doing their prison rehabilitation under the supervision of Ca. psychologist named Laurie Ann Martinez. The same Laurie Ann Martinez ho faked her own rape with help of a friend. So her husband would relocate them to an area more to her desire or liking. What would you say to these individuals who were under her supervision?

Maybe we should just zero in on rape claims alone here as an example?

In this false rape society that we now live in. The FBI has shown via their studies that 1 in 4 men (US Military has much higher numbers regarding this) have been falsely accused and sentenced for sexual assault/rape.

What do you have to say to this 25% of the population who are under your favored "societal standards of shaming"?

Shaming individuals is just plain wrong when you don't have all the facts at hand...but as was stated earlier. It fits right in with our labeling, judging, reality tv society that we now live in.

Houston said...

When I imagine Sigrid's facial expression and posture as she reads Vox's reply, I think of a chocolate Easter bunny under a blowtorch.

Badger said...


stg58 said...


You should have given her the Billy Madison treatment.

modernguy said...

It's a joy to behold that level of wit, humor and ruthlessness.

A joy to behold ruthlessness...that's an interesting reaction.

At any rate I think most people would rate Roissy a much better writer, at least where dexterity and originality are concerned. Vox's flair tends to come in the form of a banal and boorish sarcasm. It's really just a token offering to efface some of the overabundant nastiness in his writing.

Joe Blow said...

Man, nothing makes me hotter than an aging feminist harridan with a high partner count, whose primary relationship interest is in finding a mate familiar with feminist theory/praxis.

My loins are practically quivering at the thought of making a long term commitment to such a person... hopefully she has a screechy voice, narrow shoulders and a really wide, flat ass, because nothing could make me hotter. Nothing. She clearly has a fine grasp on what it is that men are seeking in women. (And, /sarcasm, she manages to evade it comprehensively. Consider the possibility that some spinsters are spinsters not because of male inadequacy, but because said spinsters are unattractive in a thorough-going sort of way. Just as a nice personality adds 1-2 points to the total evaluation, a nasty personality and misguided beliefs can knock off 3-5 points.)

Anonymous said...

Good job Badger, thanks LOL.

MG, still read him :)


Anonymous said...

I just wanted to make a quick comment on your writing on these subjects Vox. It is a very informative education for me.

For a wide range of reasons I will not bore you with, I grew up not understanding much of this.

What a valuable asset to have. And what a lifetime of pain and frustration this can save someone.
This is all very interesting writing. I apprecaite you breaking it down in a non-emotional way. It is an education to be sure.

Thanks, Carlotta

Anonymous said...

Funny you said this.

A local newspaper columist who writes from the "cougar perspective" recently admitted she had a run in with someone that had her taking stock of life and wondering if she made the wrong choices. The hamster was spinning and prevailed. It was sad.

It was sad because you could see her grasp reality, but it was too harsh for her to deal with. So she ended with the thought that the young women, who she claims are ungrateful to her and other feminists, are making the huge mistake of giving up their sexual freedom and being shackled by marriage and children. She further went on in her delusion to state that they are intimidated (sound familiar) by the FACT that her life experience, education and AGE (yes, she sees this as a PLUS sexually) are so attractive to men in their twenties (she is at least in her 50s) and that these younger women (and older men) are threated by the FACT that so many younger men want her sexually and other women like her.

So your comment was basically what went through my head.

How far off can you be from reality?

Spectator said...

Couldn't pry yourself for one post from those delicious ankles?

Daniel said...

As far as you want to be on Strong Gal Island.

That is, as long as you don't mind taking your independence (of children and long term relationships) quite literally.

Joe Blow said...

Not to put too fine a point on it but Sigrid basically announced, "I'm a fish. You're all bicycles. Let's go for a fun ride in the country."

The bicycles have wised up to this scam. They can have a fun ride on their own, or with a passenger that is less icky than this particular fish.

modernguy said...

Got to get that real talk in bro. Just can't stand the sight of nut hugging.

Desert Cat said...

But odaxelagnia? That's really attractive...

MinnesotaSmith said...

Apt quote (from what I believe is a conservative black):

"I would rather tell you the truth and have you be upset, than lie to you and have you lose all respect for my integrity. You may not like what I say. However, if you get offended, you will have to work that out on your own." --Andre Harper, author of Political Emancipation
(source: The Flipside of Feminism, by Suzanne Venker, niece of Phyllis Schafly)

Pussy-ManiaGirls: said...

watching my collection, we have upload more video at here:

Collection Part 1:

Doggy Style and In Missionary Position

Hot Sex Anal With Amazing Girl Friend

Sex Under Hot Lights Bad Girls

Give Me The Cum

Cum In My Panties

Nude Amateur Teen Girls

Sexy Brunette Girls

Young Kinky Sluts

Busty Tattoo Chick On Car

Young Asian fucked anal

Latina Havana Ginger gets

Teen Threesome Porn

Hot Blowjob

Amateur Pulls Down Tanga

Sweet girl amazing hot

Sexy japanese babes getting their tight


Collection Part 2:

Hot asian blowjob and pussy creampie

Sucking dick, Audrey put vegetables in all holes

Blonde love fuck

Naomi Russell And Her Royal Ass

Sexy blonde gives blowjob in the car










Hardcore Porn Celebrity





100% MAKE you satisfy......

Reply Delete

Post a Comment