« "fun" with words, stalker-style | Main | what I'll do for money, honey; or "power, sex, and money" rewrite »

06 February 2009



That's rather stunted. It's truly banal and boring when men do it, and it's no more revolutionary when women do it. Likewise, there's nothing revolutionary when homosexuals star in romantic comedies. They're no more enjoyable to watch then any other romantic comedy. They're still romantic comedy. You're being human when you smell bad, and being human isn't statement, nor a declaration. If you think it is, then you're starting from a pretty repressed place, and that's your own issue, not societies. There's a power in femininity and it's not in one upping men. In that case, you're still allowing male expression to define your female expression. Truly lame, and truly tacky.

chelsea g.

I'm going to disagree. I think that the fact that women haven't used a full range of expression, or haven't been allowed a full range of expression, and are now writing--and getting paid to write--about their bodies in an open manner, however crass, is important. Lots of roads out of second-rate status have been built upon the rhetoric of the reigning powered establishment.

I hope that some day chicks don't have to be crass. But maybe, just maybe, what we're seeing as crass has more to do with it being a woman's writing than a man's. Men still take the crass cake. I think one can argue whether or not that's a good thing.

Finally, I think "femininity" is a deeply problematic word and an even more problematic concept. I think there's power in being a woman, but forgive me if I don't think that power rests in being feminine.


I recommend this review of Roche, And She Seems like Such a Nice Girl, by a British doctor who apparently moonlights as a literary journalist.
I've yet to read the book, but the heroine's exploration of her bodily fluids would not be shocking in a male character. I'm trying to think of examples, Bloom in Ulysses is one, but it's entirely permissible for men in literature to delight in their shit, snot and smegma.
The glib thing to say would be that we never leave the infantile phase of sexuality; but it's true


CG dear, there is nothing rushed about this post, or at least not in the way you mean it. Every now and and then the muse not only delivers the inspiration but also the work.

Great post.


I think you make several salient points, and one could go even further in observing that the big R (religion) is where a great many of mens' collective anxieties about female bodies and functions--not to mention their own--are immortalized in their perverse, ecclesiastical glory. You can almost draw a wavering line from the bible, to Milton, to most literature up through and including the (overly) celebrated boys in the bedroom, Updike and Roth, to glean the myriad ways men grapple with and, in many cases, project their own inadequacies about themselves and women.



Maybe I really do prefer to poop rainbows; but I still encourage the de-mystification of my genitals, whether that involves gross tampon stories or not. ^_~

The comments to this entry are closed.