Archives

Here’s The Thing

To save myself, Dirt, and/or other real Lesbians from having the same argument with Straightbians, other straight “feminists“, and various other assorted dillweeds on Twitter or elsewhere over and over and OVER, I wanted to do a general post to address the most common nonsense we encounter.

So, without further ado, here are the definitive answers to the common malarkey we hear from Straightbians, purported “feminists” and other assorted asshats:

Accusation:

Dirt and/or I and/or other Lesbians are “really male” and/or “really transgender“.

Answer:

Hahahahaha(gaspsforbreath)hahahahahaha!

Seriously, folks: Are you really THAT stupid? (Hint: If you are dumb enough to tweet, retweet, like, and/or believe these lies: Sadly for you, you are officially a few fries short of a Happy Meal).

Both of our real identities have been revealed…long ago, and….drum roll, please….wait for it….wait for it….BOOM!:

We are BOTH Lesbians!

(Duh).

Here’s a helpful hint, Einstein:  Try doing even just a tiny bit of basic research and using just a small smidgen of critical thinking skills, if you have any, to avoid looking like a completely vacuous air-headed dingbat by saying such foolish things in the future. (Or, alternatively: If the asinine shoe fits…go ahead and slip that stiletto right on, “sister“).

Furthermore, accusations that Lesbians are “really men” is a clear indicator that the accuser is a Straightbian. Why? Because it’s clear that she has no clue whatsoever how Lesbians communicate, look, act, or respond. So, keep talking, cupcake, you’re just proving our points with every dimwitted thing you say.

Accusation:

Dirt and I claim that Lesbians are not biologically female.

Answer: 

Sighing loudly. Nope. Learn to read. Learn to comprehend what you read. Learn to think. That is, if you can. Otherwise, shut up and leave the thinking to those who are smart enough to decipher what is ACTUALLY being said: That Lesbians are different than STRAIGHT females. Geez.

(Double duh).

Accusation:

Dirt and I hate straight women.

Answer: 

Again, no. (Really, what is wrong with some people’s ability to read and to comprehend what they read??). Refer to these posts which explain this misconception here and here.

Accusation:

Dirt and I harass, bully, threaten, dox, stalk, and/or have gotten people fired from their jobs (and other assorted variations of these lies).

Answer:

Not just no, but OH HELL NO. No to all the above and to any/all other variations of this ridiculous lie.

Calling a Straightbian a Straightbian is NOT harassment, bullying, etc.; rather, it is falsely called harassment, bullying, etc. because the truth hurts.

Bottom Line:If you find yourself so very threatened by someone else’s assessment of you that you stoop to spreading riDICKulous lies and/or creating DICKsgusting drama to prop up your own clearly-threatened weak ego, it’s a sure sign that YOU are not secure in your own (false) “identity” as a “Lesbian“.

Real Lesbians would simply respond directly. Real Lesbians are not threatened by being called a Straightbian. Why? Because real Lesbians know who we are and we don’t need anyone else’s approval.

So, if you find yourself OVERreacting to the point of making a total ass of yourself, it’s time to consider why what we are saying is so threatening to you. (Spoiler: You are looking more and more and MORE like a STRAIGHTBIAN with every hysterical OVERreaction).

Remember this same principle if you see someone else overreacting and outright lying in a similar manner: “Protesting too much” is an actual thing. And Straightbians doth protest way too much because they have built their entire lives (and, quite often, careers) on the LIE that they are “lesbians“.

Similarly, those who falsely claim that Dirt is “doxxing” anyone are also wrong. Posting what is already posted publicly on the internet is NOT “doxxing”. Dirt is NOT publishing real names, addresses, workplaces, phone numbers, and/or any other personal/private information, nor would she.

Again: Learn to THINK, people. Do some basic research of your own to come to a fully-informed conclusion before blindly believing people’s lies; my blog and Twitter account are both public, and so are Dirt’s.

Helpful Hint: Whenever someone is just throwing out triggering accusations, without any actual examples/data/proof to back up what she is saying, you really need to consider the fact that there is an obvious reason for the lack of details. And that reason is: It never happened. You are being actively lied to and manipulated, people. Wake up and smell the BS.

Accusation:

Dirt and I block people “because they asked a question or disagreed”.

Answer: 

No. People ask questions and disagree with us ALL THE TIME, yet we don’t block them all. Why? People who are polite and respectful and willing to engage in discussion (even civil disagreement) do NOT get blocked. Well, who gets blocked then? Rude/disrespectful people; lesbophobes; pornified accounts; people who just want to argue incessantly and clearly have no intention of having a discussion; people who lie about us; trolls; bots; and those who continue to follow/support outright liars, lesbophobes, and other toxic people.

Accusation:

Dirt and I call everyone who disagrees with us a Straightbian.

Answer:

Yet again: NO. So: Who do we call a Straightbian? Hmmmm….let’s all THINK about it now…yes, even those who are bringing up the rear, brain-power-wise…oh, yeah…that’s right…STRAIGHTBIANS, that’s who! (Triple Duh). If we have called you a Straightbian, it’s simply because you exhibit many of the signs of being a Straightbian. If anyone in these posts here and here sound like you…oh yeah, cupcake, guess what? YOU ARE A STRAIGHTBIAN.

Accusation:

Dirt, I, and/or other Lesbians are “ugly”, “homely”, “mannish”, and/or any other insults to our physical appearance.

Answer:

Sometimes, mean-spirited individuals will stoop to insulting physical appearance. When this happens, such insults always say much more about the insulter than they do about the person/people being insulted.

If you choose to act in such an immature, unattractive, and toxic fashion, just know that your true, nasty, petty, mean colors show through more clearly with each and every insult you hurl.

People will eventually see you for what you really are: a petty, mean, vile, repugnant asshat.

And Karma always sees you too.

Furthermore, insulting someone’s appearance is a sure sign that you do NOT have a coherent argument to offer regarding the actual topic of discussion.

And: For those who are falsely calling themselves “feminist” and/or “gender-critical“, faking copious concern about the transitioning of Lesbians, while clicking the “retweet” or “like” button on a tweet directly insulting the physical appearance of Lesbians: We see you as the hypocritical, fraudulent liars that you are. YOU are the problem.

Dirt and I don’t give a darn whether or not you like what we look like. Dirt and I are happy with ourselves and with each other. If you don’t like the way we (and/or other Lesbians) look, don’t look at us. Problem solved!

Here’s the thing: Reading what we write is completely optional. If you don’t like us, the way we look, who we are, and/or what we write, just go away. Far away. Now. Don’t let the door hit your sorry butt on the way out.

We trust that the REAL Lesbians who need to hear what we are saying will find us and will understand what we are saying…which, by the way, is exactly what Straightbians are afraid of.

Straightbians WANT us to shut up, because we are giving away their dirty little secrets.

But we are NOT writing for Straightbians AND we will never shut up.

Real Lesbians deserve the truth. And our message is for LESBIANS only.

Keep out

Image: Pixabay: AG_Exposed: CC0 Creative Commons

Assorted Straightbian Subtypes: Part 2: So Many ASSes

As a follow up to our previous post entitled Assorted Straightbian Subtypes: AKA the Seven ASSes, we wanted to follow up with 2 other subtypes of Straightbian, both of whom may likely have significant overlap with some of the previously described 7 subtypes.

Additionally, although this should go without saying, obviously it needs to be said anyway, based on comments we have received:

Of course, some just-plain-straight females (not Straightbian posers claiming to be Lesbian, but straight-up heterosexual females) may share characteristics that fall into one or more of these archetypes. That makes sense, since both just-plain-straight females and Straightbians share a VERY important characteristic: THEY ARE STRAIGHT, but always remember: we are never going to be talking about straight women unless they are impacting upon Lesbians in some way

So, before you comment, “I know a straight female who likes Tarot”, please stop and remember that unless she is a STRAIGHTBIAN, we are not talking about her, nor denying her existence. She is simply irrelevant to this topic.

So, without further ado, here are 2 follow-up ASSes to add to our previous Assorted STRAIGHTBIAN Subtypes:

8). White Picket Fence and 2 Children In The Suburbs Straightbian: The White Picket Fence (WPF) Straightbian just wants to fit in, to be “normal” (in the eyes of society), yet still retaining her Straightbian status due to her own pathology.

This Straightbian will say that there is absolutely no difference between herself and her soccer-mom neighbor, except who she is in a relationship with (and, actually, she is right about that…because they are BOTH STRAIGHT!).

“We’re all the same”, White Picket Fence loves to say, “Why label people?” Because “Love is Love”, after all! “We’re all human, why create all of these unnecessary divisions?”, WPF often thinks, shaking her perky head.

The White Picket Fence Straightbian loves this cup and carries it everywhere because, gosh darn it, we are all just HUMAN, now aren’t we?:

The White Picket Fence Straightbian cares very much about appearances and fitting in with society’s expectations.

She is in a relationship with another female (either another White Picket Fence Straightbian or a Lesbian who can pass as Straight) but, by golly, she and her partner are going to FIT IN OR BUST:

House in the suburbs? Check!
Golden Retriever? Check!
Volvo? Check!
Casually rumpled, but subtly elegant, decor? Check!
White wedding? Check!
2 adorable children? Check!
Picture-perfect holidays? Check!
Roth IRA and 401K? Check and Check!

On social media, she will call herself something like “just2mommies2kidsand1goldenretriever”. She will follow only others exactly like herself, “eschewing” any real Lesbians who point out that Lesbians are actually different than straight women. So darn divisive, those Lezzies are!

LOVE IS LOVE, after all…

White Picket Fence may be married to a female…

BUT she is not a Lesbian.

8a). Sunshine and Roses:

Relatedly, a sub-sub (-sub…?) type of the White Picket Fence is the Sunshine and Roses Straightbian, who is an emotionally-fragile straight female who uses relentless, sugary-sweet positivity to completely escape/avoid dealing with her own issues that have led her to mistakenly believe she is a “Lesbian“.

Sunshine and Roses was perhaps physically, emotionally, and/or sexually abused as a child; or at least likely had a very chaotic, disturbing home life while growing up. She likely has had very bad previous experiences/relationships with past boyfriend(s)/husband(s).

Sunshine and Roses is desperate to escape not only those bad situations, but also all of the heavy emotional baggage that she carries from those situations.

In fact, she has stuffed that baggage down so far that she actually mistakenly thinks she has left it behind.

On social media and in real life, Sunshine and Roses “eschews” all negativity and strives to keep herself forever insulated from real-world unpleasantness. Her social media posts are likely predominantly inspirational memes and/or cutesy GIFs and/or dreamy “Peace, Love, and Harmony” sentiments, and/or heartbroken laments about “Why is there so much strife in the world?”.

Sunshine and Roses may not even attempt to embark upon a relationship, preferring to call herself a “Lesbian” (or possibly “queer” or “LGBTQQIAAP+“) without the pesky reality of dealing with another fallible and not-always-positive human being. She lives in a fantasy world, perhaps fantasizing incessantly about an idealized version of a particular singer, actor, book, movie, TV show, author, etc. She may read or even write happy-ending fan fiction to erase the unpleasant reality of how an actual storyline turned out.

Sunshine and Roses is likely to unfollow or block anyone on social media who she perceives to be “negative” or “crass” or “unpleasant” in any way. She surrounds herself with beautiful objects and frantically attempts to create harmony in a world sadly lacking it.

Sunshine and Roses is not a bad person. In fact, she is typically a good person who has been dealt a very bad hand in life.

BUT she is not a Lesbian.

8b). The Urban Version of the White Picket Fence (WPF) STRAIGHTBIAN:

Like her suburban counterpart, the Urban WPF Straightbian just wants to fit in, but with a very different crowd.

The Urban WPF doesn’t want the actual white picket fence of her suburban counterpart’s dream…no, of course not, because that would be just too common for Urban.

No, the Urban Straightbian “eschews” the suburban lifestyle, wanting something more “edgy”, more “in”:

Renovated loft in an old cigar factory? Check!
Assorted popular Artists/Actors/Authors/Directors/Designers/Etc. as friends? Check!
Being the cool moms at the most exclusive private school available? Check!
Invitations to the most exclusive events in town? Check!
Season tickets to the local alternative theater? Check!
An amusingly pretentious Chilean chardonnay for the farm-to-table dinner party? Check!
Offspring named Jayden, Ayden, Cayden, or Brayden? Check!
Transgender child? Check!
Roth IRA and 401K? Check and Check!

The Urban Straightbian is popular with the liberal crowd, fitting right in with her liberal friends’ collective desire for diversity…

BUT she is not a Lesbian.

9). Mean-Spirited Unbalanced Faux-Feminist Yahoo (Muffy):

Muffy often overlaps with many/all of our previous 7 Assorted Straightbian Subtypes. In fact, Muffy has likely dabbled with playacting many of the subtypes at one point or another.

Muffy loves and uses social media with a vengeance. And “vengeance” is the key word here, because Muffy is one angry, hateful harpy. In fact, in her social media bios, she proudly claims to be a/an “angry, hairy Lesbian“, “man-hater”, “virago”, “shrew”, “Patriarchy-smasher”, “radical Lesbian“, “angry feminist“, “Lesbian separatist”, “woman-identified-woman” (or womyn or womon or wimmin or wimms…or any other ridiculous misspelling) and/or some similar descriptor.

On the surface, Muffy may seem to be the polar opposite of Sunshine and Roses, but these two subtypes share common denominators; the difference between them is exposed in how their underlying issues are expressed in opposite ways. Instead of internalizing/repressing her anger/angst (as Sunshine and Roses does), Muffy externalizes her rage, spewing her hatred outward in an incessant vomitous torrent, reminiscent of the pea-soup scene from The Exorcist.

Muffy doesn’t just wait for trouble to find her on social media; oh, no, not Muffy. She goes looking for trouble and when she doesn’t find it, she creates trouble.

Like a trigger-happy bounty hunter, Muffy is always on the hunt for people she finds offensive, and when she inevitably finds someone who dares to say something she disagrees with, she tries to blow that person away with her high-caliber nastiness.

In her quest to destroy her perceived enemy/enemies, Muffy completely “eschews” all logic, listening skills, and literacy, opting instead for sheer unadulterated, completely illogical, meanness.

No insult is too low nor off-limits for Muffy. Muffy hits below the belt and is proud of it.

Despite claiming to be a “feminist“, Muffy regularly insults other females’ looks, clothes, hair, makeup (or lack thereof), weight, age, marriage, choices, profession, ideas, words, work, etc., etc., etc. She calls Lesbians “men” without a single thought, nor care, in her venomous, vitriolic, vapid head about the potential effects of her words.

Muffy LOVES using inane memes/GIFs in the heat of battle, apparently not realizing that her memes/GIFs are as lame, illogical, nonsensical, and ineffectual as she herself is. She will then throw at least a few red herrings into the discussion, saying untrue things that make no sense whatsoever, and have nothing to do with the conversation at hand, but are intentionally designed to try to make the opponent(s) look bad and to distract from the fact that Muffy has no coherent argument. (Examples include falsely claiming that the perceived opponent(s) is/are: racist, sexist, misogynist, rape-apologist, perverted, pedophilic, etc.).

Finally, despite having deliberately sought out and started/continued the argument herself, and, despite having said absolutely false, defamatory, and despicable things to her opponent, Muffy then pretends to be the victim in the situation, falsely claiming that the other person is “bullying”, or even “stalking”, her. And Muffy is not above nor below using a fake suicide attempt to garner sympathy and support, thereby completely nullifying any further arguments.

She will then enlist other Muffys to attack, berate, harass, block, defame, exclude, and/or report her perceived opponent(s), while basking in the shallow, brittle “sisterhood” and feel-good-for-a-minute attention afforded from being The Perpetual Victim Of The Patriarchy.

Rinse and repeat, ad nauseum.

Muffy is one nasty, bitter piece of work.

BUT she is not a Lesbian.

In conclusion, while some Straightbians are clearly more dangerous to Lesbians in the individual sense, even Straightbians who partner with each other are dangerous to Lesbian as an idea. Straightbians are collectively responsible for taking the real flesh-and-blood Lesbian and turning us into nothing more than an idea which they, warped Het Women, flesh out through their own individual pathologies. Pathologies which the Psychiatric community has documented, diagnosed, and demonized for centuries. Pathologies ignorantly accepted by Het society as truth. Heterosexual Pathologies widely and readily, though incorrectly, attributed to actual Lesbians, haunting our relationships with family, friends, and even strangers, all with long held preconceived, wrong IDEAS forged by Straightbians!

But Lesbian isn’t an idea, we are flesh, blood, and bone.

Dirt and Mrs. Dirt

UnStraightening Lesbian: Removing the Heterosexual Lens: Andrea Dworkin

Note: This is another Unstraightening Lesbian joint post with Dirt, originally posted here.

Next up in our UnStraightening Lesbian series is the odious Andrea Dworkin, who routinely called herself Lesbian, used her Heterosexual privilege to speak for Lesbians, all the while being, living, breathing, and most certainly practicing Heterosexuality.

Dworkin was born in the fall of 1946, to an unhealthy mother and an overworked father, she had a brother who died in adulthood of cancer. For all intents and purposes Dworkin had a fairly middle class childhood in Camden NJ, where she enjoyed playing with dolls as a girl as much as she enjoyed playing strip poker as a teenager:

Dworkin claimed to have been fondled at a movie theater by a stranger when she was nine, a claim her parents either didn’t take seriously or didn’t believe, either way nothing beyond Dworkin’s claims ever became of it. Whether this story truly occurred or was merely hyperbole used as a feminist device, Dworkin referred back to it repeatedly in her fiction, non-fiction and other writings.

Dworkin early on had aspirations of being a writer, she read voraciously, as well as dabbled in poetry and short story writing by the time she was a teen. Her aspirations however never matched her talent, creating some very DEEP seated jealousy toward male writers. Not surprisingly it was precisely that writer’s jealousy clicked with Dworkin when she first read Kate Millett‘s Sexual Politics:

Dworkin ignorantly comforted herself in her Het female passivity by assuming male writers simply whip out a work, have publishers eagerly waiting to publish and make millions along with receiving tons of accolades. She later foolishly (and unfeministly) gloated over her imagined superiority over both Sylvia Plath-a genius- (who nailed the likes of Dworkin and a good many Het females past, present and future with one line of poetry “every Women adores a Fascists/the boot in the face“) and Anne Sexton (who had her own issues with mental illness but still managed to write some VERY good poetry) saying:

Apparently Dworkin failed to see her own slow suicide via excessive weight/food addiction.

Between early a bachelor’s degree Dworkin also spent a short time abroad in Greece:

After she graduated college in 1968, Dworkin left for Amsterdam, getting involved with the counter-cultural movement there and through whom she met her first husband. Dworkin claimed her husband was emotionally and violently abusive, a situation she Heterosexually mismanaged (at first?) by passively hoping the abusive partner would one day leave:

Elsewhere we have to wonder did the husband or other male sex partners even have an idea of Dworkin’s proclaimed dislike of them/their sex lives:

It is clear Dworkin’s male lovers were given no indication she was not into what they were doing. This isnt simply a lack of communication, it is NO communication! Yet it was through this nonlinear form of communication Dworkin and other RadFems believed change would magically happen:

And interestingly like the absolute lack of verifiable proofs of her various sexual abusesrapes, prostitution etc, beyond that which comes from her mouth or pen, Dworkin SPECIFICALLY refrained from publishing works about her claims of her ex husband’s abuse/rapes in his country (fears of libel?).

But for those Dworkin enthusiasts who never questioned beyond her lips or her pen regarding Dworkin’s male violence claims, it is impossible for me to understand how Dworkinites did/do manage to balance this:

or this:

or this:

or this:

with her claims of being a Lesbian? What Lesbian spends all her time writing about Heterosexual smut such as:

and:

Dworkinites are told/believe of course that Dworkin’s life long love affair with the cock was because she/females are conned by patriarchy from birth:

Patriarchy that threatens Lesbians STRAIGHTBIANS from leaving their HUSBANDS (i know right) because they might lose their children or calling Women Lesbians just to keep them in line:

This same Patriarchy that Dworkin claimed to socialize females into cleaning-baby-making-fuckbots for males, Dworkin with Malice of Homophobia rationalized was one big butt load of Homosexuality:

YET Dworkin also states that Homosexual males are nothing but bitches with dicks:

I suppose Dworkin comforted herself with this Homophobic bigotry in order to explain why Gay men, despite living in a near predominant Heterosexual world still manage to make gains/carve out niches for themselves.

Not surprisingly, at least to any Lesbian (no not the man hating Het Women raping Lesbian culture/violating the very fabric of Lesbian kind) Andrea Dworkin sans lube sodomized Lesbian for her own sick kicks! Speaking FOR Lesbians at a New York LESBIAN Pride rally, Dworkin clearly speaking to other mentally ill Het Women like herself said: (obviously she wasn’t speaking to us as her speech has shit all to do with Dykes-I’m including the entire speech as the Lesbian ignorance and heterocentric insanity she spouted bears being read in full):

Not a single one of her three reasons has ANYTHING whatsoever to do with being a Lesbian, not a fucking one! And lets ve perfectly clear, wanting to get into your mother’s panties, wanting to fuck your mother’s moist bloody membranes is S I C K, not Lesbian!

And the garbled batty bonkers ending to her speech doesn’t simply have nothing to do with Lesbians, it has nothing to do with basic mental coherence! Like Dworkin’s delusive child molestation/rapes/prostitution stints/battered spousal abuses etc, Dworkin with Heterosexual privilege, used Lesbian (“In 30-plus years of knowing her, I’ve never heard of a single romance with a woman—not one.”) to fuel her own personal fires for her own sick selfish gains. Dworkin didn’t give a toss about how her Hetsplaining Lesbian colluded in the struggles Lesbians face/d, didn’t care her oversexed-weak-warped-man-hating version of Lesbian maximized the myriad of struggles Lesbians face/d daily, struggles sometimes culminating in the deaths Lesbian youths then as well as now!

Dworkin had an equally warped debased passive plan for changing the Heterosexual nature she despised:

How did she propose Heterosexuality was going to be transformed? By recreating the sexes of course!:

Dworkin’s idea for the sexes sound like a demon seed baby born from the copulation of Firestone and Millet! As both Firestone and Millet were Het Women Dworkin greatly admired, we shouldnt be surprised Dworkin was in favour of Transsexualism, including believing some children were Transsexual:

Ironic how often we find Radical Feminists who are blatantly anti-Trans, yet quote Pro TransDworkin till the cows come home. I suppose though, no more ironic than Dworkin’s zeitgeist (anti-pornography) swimming in an ocean of Dworkin pornography. Perhaps irony is missed among Radical Feminists.

Whatever mental defects or illnesses Andrea Dworkin suffered, none give her or her Dworkinites permission (ethical or otherwise) to write, publish or preach in the name of Lesbian, about Lesbianism or as a Lesbians! Dworkin’s Heterosexuality was ALWAYS firmly intact; whether chasing after cock, riding cock, sucking cock, bending over for cock, Dworkin’s life was ALL cock cock cock! The only women who could think Dworkin a Lesbian were/are as fucked up as Dworkin herself.

Dirt & Mrs. Dirt

UnStraightening Lesbian: Removing the Heterosexual Lens: Kate Millett

First up in our next (ongoing) series of Unstraightening Lesbian is the recently departed Radical Feminist Kate Millett. Millett is best known for her sex obsessed (all her works aremuch ado about nothing book Sexual Politics, published in 1970; a huge tenet, gospel, and BIBLE of Radical Feminism past and present.

Millett (she was married to a man for 20 years, mind you) is equally known for her tenets on “CHOOSING” Lesbianism for the sake of sisterhood and the destruction of the family, but I digress.

Sexual Politics was the brain child mental diarrhea of Het female excuses blamed for personal failures/unhappinesses in (Het) Women. In Sexual Politics Millett tried to detach biology from males and females by redirecting real and perceived Het female inequalities toward collective (Het) man-Patriarchy, using a warped version of Marxism lite.

The gist going something like this: (Het) females are conditioned by males/male systems of power to act/function in ways approved of by males/male systems of power and there is little (Het) females can do about it. Therefore, if some of the higher thinking (Het) females (like Millet) raise the consciousness of less conscious (Het) females, together they can challenge these male power systems and smash the Patriarchy! Female roles will be cast off and with the removal of socially conditioned roles, so to will fall the inequalities held in place by constructed sex differences; sexual construction being propped up and maintained by Patriarchy.

 

Millet went about dismantling biological sex differences among males/females by primarily utilizing (homophobic) Robert Stoller and (pro-pedophile) John Money’s THEORY that males and females are RAISED (brains are malleable) masculine/boys/men and feminine/girls/women, they are not BORN that way. So, if the next generation of humans can be raised without the sex roles assigned to males/females, the next generation of females would be inclined to be more equal/equal to that of males.

Millet also proves her case for social construction by use of HOMOPHOBICALLY HETSPLAINING French Gay author Jean Genet/his semi auto-bio novel the Thief’s Journal. Millet says in Sexual Politics on Genet’s novel:

I didn’t leave Millett’s quote from Genet in as it served no purpose for her point, yet interestingly Millett quotes “female figure” where no such phrase exists in the Thief’s Journal. Millett being fully ignorant of Gay male culture, filters Genet’s/Genet’s homo character’s homosexual experiences through her own privileged heterocentric lens.

Millett, with Het privilege intact, accuses Genet of grotesquely mimicking the very Heterosexual roles SHE herself despises! Millett cannot see/comprehend Homosexual Genet or his Homosexual characters outside of HER Heterosexual framework! That Sexual Politics was such a huge seller isn’t at all surprising, Millett’s Homophobia runs rampant in this book, a book published at a time when Gays and Lesbians were just beginning to make headlines and headway, and if the world isn’t ready for that today, imagine nearly 50 years ago.

Millett goes on to say that Homosexuality is a:

Painstaking exegesis of the barbarian vassalage of the sexual orders, the power structure of ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ as revealed by a homosexual, criminal world that mimics with brutal frankness the bourgeois heterosexual society . . . . In this way, the explication of the homosexual code becomes a satire on the heterosexual one.”

In a NUT shell, Millett is Homophobically saying that through Homosexuality’s mock version of Heterosexual roles, Heterosexuals can better see where Heterosexuality shines and where it needs polishing.

Around the time of Sexual Politics, Kate Millett’s sister visited Kate and her husband Fumio in New York and arrived to this:

Homosexuality to Millett being a role like the masculine and feminine roles assigned to Heterosexuals via Patriarchy; by casting off the role of Heterosexuality Millett and other Feminists could simply put on Homosexuality:

As bizarre as it sounds, and was, Kate Millett/Radical Feminists believed/preached (through a warped/flipped-on-its-head act of sublimation) that by taking up Homosexuality (I know, right!) they could destroy Patriarchy!

In other words, rather than directly confronting the issues they had with males (singular/collective), in typical Het female form, they (and with Het privilege) redefined/used/abused and colonized Homosexuality (Lesbian), through which they could then fuel their collective anger (real or imagined) at men.

And obviously another upshot of gay liberation for Millett and her fuck friends, creating more fuck friends! Because marriage (heterosexuality) according to the married Millett was:

But when Kate Millett embarked on one of her many excursions into her Radical Feminist CONSTRUCTED lesbian relationships, Millett speaks of her female partner not unlike how Radical Feminists squall at men for doing:

Millett also wanted to shout NO when at a conference at Columbia University she was publicly confronted head on about whether or not she was a Lesbian:

Private lezziefied fun fuckfests for Millett was one thing, but publicly calling herself a Lesbian was “unspeakable” (without pressure) and “shameful”:

An orgy with her husband and another Woman, how very NOT Lesbian! In her book Sita, Millett says of her sexual relationship with Sita:

Millett admits she was not sexually fulfilled until/unless a woman dominated her/her pussy in the same way as did a man. But Millett’s sexual relationship with the older, multiple-times-married-with-children Sita didn’t last beyond the sex. Millett’s selfish disdain and jealousy for Sita’s children and her occasional male lovers ended their affair and Sita’s life through suicide.

Between juggling Radical Feminist conscious raising brainwashing sessions, her husband, multiple (Het) Women, teaching and a multitude of mental breakdowns/forced incarcerations, Millett bought a farm she hoped to make into a Radical Feminist utopia. She also carried on with yet another affair with another (Het) Woman (Sophie Keir), whom she purportedly recently married despite saying this about both Sophie and same-sex marriage:

The RadFem all female farm life also proved a bit much for Kate Millett:

Kate Millett was clearly NOT a good person, NOT a Lesbian, NOT Radical, NOT Feminist and, frankly, NOT all there! Millett shows in her earliest writings a deep connection with SEXologist/pedophile and all around pervert John Money, and regardless of my personal anger at Kate Millett for co-opting Lesbian for her own selfish/sick reasons, what I find most fucking abhorrent about Kate Millett is her promoting PEDOPHILIA! Or rather FEMALE PEDOPHILIA:

Millett’s biggest beef with adult/child sex (after removing exploitation) was legal/moral legislation has always been directed at man/boy and not at all toward grown Het Women having sex with little girls! 

Mental illness threads itself through Radical Feminism creating a most ugly, warped, and demented tapestry. And Kate Millet’s morally bankrupt needle pierced more than just the hearts of Lesbians, because, by publicly advocating sex with children, Millett and ANY and ALL proponents of Kate Millett severed the very head of Humanity!

Dirt and Mrs. Dirt

Are Lesbians Ever Attracted To Men?

Recently, I received the following comment on a post:

“I am definitely a lesbian but have been attracted to men.”

So I thought I would do a post addressing this important question:

Question: Are Lesbians Ever Attracted To Men?

Answer: No!

TheEnd

Image: Pixabay: Michitogo: Creative Commons CC0

The Sadly Predictable Stages of Hetsplaining

Note: Please also see Dirt’s post on the same topic: Lesbians: SEEING the Forest because we are Not Trees

Dirt and I have been attacked on Twitter by hetsplaining straight “feminists so many times now, I have discerned a predictable pattern of behavior which delineates the stages of hetsplaining:

Butt in to a conversation uninvited;

Attack viciously; twist everything being said beyond all recognition; falsely claim we are misogynists, racists, etc.; even sometimes stooping low enough to insult us personally by attacking our appearance, our relationship, etc.;

Rage all out of proportion to the situation; using all emotion with no logic whatsoever;

Block us so we can’t see what they are saying;

Incite others to attack;

Enlist others to continue the drama;

Subtweet about us, knowing we cannot see what is being said to defend ourselves (which is quite cowardly).

(Rinse and repeat ad nauseum with each new wave of straight “feminists” who pick up the gauntlet).

You can remember this sadly predictable pattern of hetsplaining by using the acronym BARBIES. The most recent brouhaha involved a Barbie harpy (see below).

And for just ONE example of how these hetsplaining harpies treat Lesbians who don’t kowtow to their straight-privileged BS, here’s just one of many insulting tweets Dirt and I have been subjected to for simply stating our opinion:

Harpy

And people wonder why I say that Lesbians are on our own…but, seriously, with “feminist allies” like this, who needs enemies?

Do Dirt and I Hate Straight Women?

Since Dirt and I have been speaking out about how Lesbians are different than straight women and how straight females (even many alleged “allies“) and Straightbians harm Lesbians, we have received a lot of feedback which typically boils down to: “Be nice! We need to support our straight sisters! You HATE straight women! Etc.

In fact, I recently accidentally noticed someone on Twitter subtweeting “She (Dirt) hates straight women”. I already addressed it directly with that person, but the incident made me realize that some people seem to actually think that, so I felt I needed to do a specific post on it.

So, here’s the official answer:

NO, DIRT AND I DO NOT HATE STRAIGHT WOMEN.

(Sighing loudly).

NoHate

Image: Pixabay CC0 Public Domain

Pointing out that there are actual differences between straight females and Lesbians beyond who we f**k does NOT equal “hate”.

Pointing out that Lesbians have been harmed in numerous ways by Straightbians and even many straight allies does NOT equal “hate”.

Look, if Dirt and I actually hated straight females, we’d just SAY it. It’s not like we are known for mincing words, is it? 

Falsely claiming that what we are saying equals “hate” is a typical but transparent way to try to dismiss what we are actually saying and to attempt to alienate people from us.

Both Dirt and I have many straight female friends, relatives, and coworkers who we get along with just fine, thank you very much.

The key factor with these relationships is the fact that NONE of these women who we remain close to are pretending to be Lesbian, speaking for Lesbians, lying about Lesbians, appropriating Lesbian, profiting from Lesbians, or in any other way harming Lesbians.

Because if they were doing any of that, we would NOT remain close to them.

Our true friends stay in their lane, and we stay in our lane. They don’t tell us what it’s like to be a Lesbian, and we don’t tell them what it’s like to be straight.

It’s really simple, Sherlock:

Standing up for ourselves and for Lesbian lives/rights is NOT “hate” nor is it inappropriate in any way. What is actually wrong is when straight women attempt to hetsplain Lesbian to actual Lesbians while refusing to listen to us.

Bottom line: Dirt and I do NOT hate straight females, but we do, in fact, hate what is often done to Lesbians by straight females. There’s a HUGE difference between the two, and it would behoove our detractors to learn what that difference is.