"There's an old saying; just because you're paranoid, that doesn't mean they're not out to get you. I have my own variation: just because you're insane that doesn't mean that things aren't slipping in unnoticed through dimensional gateways..." ~ Christopher Knowles (h/t to The Daily Grail for quote.)



Thursday, October 20, 2011

Oh Lord Here We Go (Again)

 It's almost 2012, and yet, this kind of crap still pops up now and then. . .

Throughout my years and adventures on-line, I've encountered some very odd responses from people of the male gender. I've been accused of being a lesbian. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but, it was said as if it were some sort of insult or crime that I committed. It also didn't make sense because I've never said anything about being gay; in fact, the opposite, often referring to my husband. Which shows these critics read only what they want to and not really think. A completely illogical thing to say about me.

I've had men email me or comment on line that I hate men. I have never said I hate men, and I don't hate men. Jesus Christ fuck, I'm married to one. For over thirty years. If I were gay or hated men I don't think I'd be married to the same man for thirty-five years.

I was accused on-line by a man (anonymous, naturally, who frequented a Yahoo group I was a member of) of "wanting to be thought of as a man," and that I "write like a man." Not sure how to respond to that one; if I "write like a man" that implies I'm doing a good job, you know, coming off like a guy, but then in doing so I've pissed off some men, who are offended I'd pretend to be one of them. And, of course, it assumes that a woman can't be intelligent. Oh, she can write about all these subjects and be smart but as long as she keeps a girly vibe. Oy.

The list goes on and it's all so damn silly but it still, after all these years, crops up now and again. The latest, from someone who contacted me not long ago with praises for this blog. Someone who I just asked the other day if he has his own blog, for he has a good take on skeptics. He's been very nice in sending me links to stories I might find interesting. For that I am appreciative, as I've let him know.

But he's found something I wrote today somewhat insulting to the male gender, and wonders if I "dislike men." Truly, at first I thought he might be a little facetious:
Mark said...
Do you have some dislike of men? What is it about dudes with machines that cracks you up?
October 20, 2011 4:27 PM
Regan Lee said...

I hope you're not serious...

No offense meant. Just an observation on the propensity of men -- some men -- on a lot of these shows, Bigfoot, ghosts, etc. who lug around a lot of equipment to "prove" ghosts exist.
But Mark is offended, or at least bothered. And note where I bolded and italicized; the plot thickens. He responds:

October 20, 2011 4:46 PM
Mark said...

Why wouldn't I be serious? You said something that struck me as odd and sounded like you had some dislike of men - in addition to some other things that you said in the past that sounded like they could have meant the same thing, from my perspective. I just wanted some clarification as to whether or not you had some problem or dislike of men and what it was about dudes lugging around a lot of machines that you would find funny. I was not accusing you of anything, but I did want to know if I was interpreting things properly.

This is what I wrote in my ghost hunters post that caused offense:
Sure, it's formula and a lot chest banging. Dudes with machines; always cracks me up.
I realize it's a bit gender specific, after all, women lug around machines and tools as well and are perfectly able. Dude, my grandmother was literally a Rosie the Riveter. Worked in the Portland shipyards. My mother was a pilot. I was making a flip remark about men -- for they are mostly men who are the hosts on these ghost shows -- who seem to spend a lot of time with machines in order to find ghosts. It's funny to me, sometimes. And a bit annoying. I think ghost hunters, men or women, would do better to use their skills in other areas at times. As I said in my post.

The use of equipment is debatable and many women would side with the use of machines as well. And I'm not against the use of equipment; it's useful. Sometimes it's overused, in my opinion.

But what do I know? Clearly I'm blinded by my hatred of men to think clearly.

A P.S. : you know, what if I did hate men? So what? I'm entitled to my opinion. Lots of misogynists out there who hate women. Doesn't do any good to argue with the shameful bastards, just gets into some very ugly territory. But they have the right to their opinion. (Hmm, well, almost. There's opinion based on personal histories, and then there's lying and even violence.)  That'd be  interesting... but don't get ideas. Because I don't "have some dislike of men," as commentator Mark put it.

6 comments:

Lesley said...

Quit hatin' on the men already! Do you still have Jim locked in the cellar? lol!

I don't watch ghost shows normally, but judging by the previews they have lots of men and very few women. They must hate women!

Mark said...

Boy, I must have touched a nerve. For the record, I never said the word "hate." I wondered if you had some kind of problem with men because it sounded like a possibility given some of the things that you have said in the past and in the specific post. And if you said, "Yes, I have a problem with most men because of..." - well, I might have even agreed with you, depending on what your problem or problems were. Now I got an entire post written to insult me and other men who you think that I am acting like (a post that I think misses the mark). Regan, I admire your willingness to duke it out with the pseudoskeptics, and to have anger and passion in fighting against their bullshit. If most people on our side had that kind of determination then we could destroy the pseudoskeptic movement. That being said, however, it is important to focus that anger very tightly - like a laser beam. I won't be posting any more or sending any more e-mails. Some parting advice: Try to focus your insults more narrowly on those who deserve it. Take it for whatever you think that it is worth...or not worth.

<b>Alfred Lehmberg</b> said...

Uh... pretty obvious, Sir, the nerve "touched" was yours. Correct, you never used the word "hate," but that's a small consolation given the words you _did_ use, eh?

Regan Lee said...

Mark: I don't see how my post was insulting to you. I explained myself, but did not insult you. I disagreed with you. I was inspired by your need to make the time to post a comment regarding your opinion I harbor " a dislike of men" and, your remark that I "in addition to some other things that you said in the past that sounded like they could have meant the same thing, " -- that is very telling on your part.

In fact, I said how I appreciated your words in the past and your taking the time to send me info. How is that insulting?

You seem to have ignored, or didn't understand, that your comments were inspiration for my post. It wasn't all about you.

I think it's too bad you are sensitive and in a snit and are moving on, but your choice.

So what I have learned from this episode is: women shouldn't be angry, women shouldn't be assertive, women shouldn't be vocal. As Roseanne once said, "Women shouldn't take up too much space." It's okay to get angry, sometimes, but be nice about it. That "girly" vibe I mentioned in my post. I've noticed in my life, time after time, women aren't supposed to be flip or smart asses, things I admit I am a lot of the time. Can't help myself, just the way I am. Women and comedy and all... another subject...

Our culture in general has a problem with people - men and women alike -- expressing thoughts and feelings that aren't always full of sunbeams and chocolate kisses. And when women speak up, they're very quickly told to shut up in so many ways, from the subtle to the overt.

Now this is really something. You wrote:
"I wondered if you had some kind of problem with men because it sounded like a possibility given some of the things that you have said in the past and in the specific post. And if you said, "Yes, I have a problem with most men because of..." - well, I might have even agreed with you, depending on what your problem or problems were."

(Again with the "some of the things that you said in the past..." hmmm...)

So you decide to ask me in an open forum if I have a "problem with men" and then, based on my answer, would decide to pass judgement on whether or not my feelings were justified???!!

<b>Alfred Lehmberg</b> said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
<b>Alfred Lehmberg</b> said...

Har! [--Ka-rah-thump-pah!_] Turns out the tree falling in the forest is heard whether you're around to hear it or not, eh? Rofl...