Man, Jonathan Franzen is a critically acclaimed author.

It is like a bad joke, who is a well-known author with no self-awareness? You almost feel bad for the guy. Well, that passed. Let me begin by saying I like books, and I even like some of Franzen’s books. But he isn’t worth all the hype. Much like a lot of male authors, they’re good, better than me, but not super original or groundbreaking. I mean take The Corrections, a book that can be boiled down to a tale of a middle class family with a declining patriarch and the disappointment you find in others, and he’s not experimenting with form or language here. John Green’s Papertowns is about a young man projecting onto a girl something she can’t possibly be and thus being forced to grow up. You’ve read these stories before; we all have. This is the Western canon: man + decline or conflict (literal or metaphorical) / personal growth = Great American Novel. Man, I’m a genus. I have one story about a white male lead, and it deals with the ideas we hold about ourselves and others, and how you determine the truth if everyone is telling you different versions of the truth and no one is lying. Literally, a white guy learning about different people’s perspectives and recognizing their value. This will never be a great American novel.

But today is a day of Franzen. As reported by the Guardian, Franzen was considering adopting an Iraqi orphan to understand young people. Thankfully, his editor pointed out the problems with this. Which I imagine was just his editor writing colonialism and fetishism over and over again at Franzen in an aggressive manner. No, sir, you don’t adopt a child from a country your country has destroyed for research. YOU DON’T GET TO USE PEOPLE THAT WAY. Franzen is the Joe Biden of literature. He talks and talks, sometimes he does something right, but most of the time you’re yelling “FRANZEN!” at the top of your lungs shaking your fist in the air. I give Franzen a lot of room most of the time because he’s a writer, and they’re all weirdos with a lot of insecurities and usually self-loathing. However, there comes a point, and for me it was his terrible views on women writers (read about them here). Any man who says that about Edith should know they are on my shit list.

See Franzen is finding himself in that scary place a lot of men go when they think they are the victims:

“I’m not a sexist. I’m not somebody who goes around saying men are superior, or that male writers are superior. In fact, I really go out of my way to champion women’s work that I think is not getting enough attention. None of that is ever enough. Because a villain is needed. It’s like there’s no way to make myself not male.”

Ok, but for Franzen the canon is representative of the best work. It doesn’t matter it was determined by men for men in a time when women and people of color didn’t get attention they deserved. He is unable to see this. A great example of this is the novel itself, which was largely considered to be a feminine form, largely until the 18^th century, which is when things change. Men began giving up the epic and moved into this form. On top of it all, he’s releasing a book called Purity which has a man hating feminist in it who emasculates her husband so much she makes him sit down to piss.

This is the best response to that:

AFTER ALL THESE YEARS WE FINALLY GET TO READ A MAN'S TAKE ON FEMINISM BLESS YOU AND THE HARD WORK YOU DO, MR FRANZEN pic.twitter.com/2bK0okClFA

— Anne Thériault (@anne_theriault) August 11, 2015

I truly do think he lacks any self-awareness. That or he’s a master troll and this is all one big social experiment. 

Let’s be clear, being rejected isn’t the equivalent of living in rape culture.

I can’t even with these people. Honestly, when you write something like this, do no alarm bells go off indicating you sound like an asshat? Well, let me help you out, if you ever feel the need to write anything defending men engaging in pick-up artistry, you are an asshat. If this compels you to compare rape to rejection, you’re definitely an asshat. And if you think for one second that not “getting a girlfriend” i.e. ownership and possession of another person is an affront to you because you are owed this much just for being a special little snowflake, you are in fact the largest asshat.

So what exactly am I talking about, well Sam de Brito wrote an article called “Hating the search for love.” Let’s use a flight of fancy and pretend that is what men who engage in this sort of behavior are doing, which we know isn’t true based on the techniques which encourage men to treat women like objects, and the phrase search for love implies giving and receiving, which objects can’t by definition do. But let’s pretend. Sam graciously agrees that men like Julien Blanc are creeps because he doesn’t respect women. However, then he argues that the “scenes on the Yarra River in Melbourne” (where a protest took place over Blanc and his followers) were mean. *tiny violin* See there is at least one incident of violence at the protest, but let me be clear, most of what I read was protesters yelling about rape culture and “walk of shame” as the men exited the boat. I was called a bitch with my sister when we were walking home from school at 13 or 14 for ignoring grown ass men yelling sexually explicit things at us. Sorry your feelings were hurt boys, but grow a pair and walk that shit off. Women do it all the time, where the threat of violence is very real. So you know, hug it out and move the fuck on. You are after all endorsing a man who regularly assaults people and video tapes it. Consequences of your actions, aren’t they fine.

Sam argues that because he has attended a variety of PUA seminars over the years as a journalist, he knows that they range from men like Blanc to speakers who want to “improve their client’s lives and do so in a respectful manner.” I wonder if Sam is talking about respecting their clients alone or if that extends to their client’s prey remember these seminars often use that terminology.

This is the point in the article where Sam writes a swan song about how hard it is to be one of the guys attending this seminar. He lists off every possibility like minority, disabled, etc. to make you sympathetic,  closing with the line “Imagine you turned up at last week’s event with that mindset and had people screaming ‘creep’, ‘loser’ or ‘abuser’ at you and they were filming it?” Um, well, golly gee, I might not be endorsing a man who assaults women or I would expect a backlash. I expect to be called a baby killer, cunt, d**e, etc. every time I wear my “This is what a feminist looks like” t-shirt, and no one was harmed by my fair trade t-shirt. I know, but Kari, how can these guys be expected to be accountable for how they spend their money and who they endorse? Oh, you mean like everyone else? *side eye*

Sam points out, well these poor guys aren’t the real bad guys invoking the whole women only date jerks meme—citing religious zealots, athletes, the wealth, etc. Because nerds can’t hurt women they just can’t except with the fake geek girl meme, or at cons, or in videogames, or in STEM or, well it looks like there is quite a list of where nerds are capable of hurting and exploiting women.

But it gets better, or so much worse depending on the lens you’re using to read Sam’s piece because, “My point is, the demand of seminars such as the one Blanc teaches arises from a very simple fact of life; the dating game is an uneven playing field.” Oh? Do go on. *rubs hands together like a Batman villain* You can see the car wreck coming for this guy.

“Men and women suffer and benefit from different sides to it.

“No man goes out of a night worried he might be raped, sexually abused or catcalled and these are all serious instances of aberrant male behavior that we must address, punish or discourage as a society.

“The flipside of this is your average man can go out every Friday and Saturday night for five years, buy himself a drink and stand at a bar and NEVER have a woman start up a conversation with him.

“In the majority of social situations, men have to be instigators and, of course, there are a plethora of respectful, non-threatening ways to do this.

“Some women, however, are quite happy to overlook, diminish and outright mock the problem this poses for many, many men—the anxiety of approaching women, the fear of rejection, the despair at being completely ignored by the opposite sex.

“This is an experience 100 percent guaranteed for 95 percent of guys. It happens. Over and over and over again. And some guys need help to deal with being invisible.

“I’m not equating the fear of rejection to the fear of being raped, merely pointing out that men—like most of the ones that attend Blanc’s seminars—do not do it to learn how to manipulate women, to sexually assault them or degrade them.

“They do it to get a girlfriend, to have someone to hold, to find love.”

I know, where to begin? Yes, please tell me about how dating hurts women. Are you going to address the social economic inequities that lead to a power differential between potential partners? What about the new study that says men are happy when their women partners fail? You know, the politics of dating. Oh, no, of course not because the only thing women have to think about on dates is whether this dude is going to rape me. Well, yeah that is there. Dating is actually dangerous for women  (see all the domestic violence and stalking stats). But you’re right Sam, this isn’t about women, why have we been talking about them this long? Back to the dudes. Poor, poor dudes who are ignored and rejected because no one deserves that unless your poor, a person of color, a woman, gay—who never show up in this piece at all—oh, wait you see what I did right there.

Sam’s swan song here is all about how men are owed attention because…well privilege, but Sam never says that. I fear rejection too gents, let’s bond over it. I fear being rejected purely because being a man is more desirable in the workforce (research, academia, writing, etc.) unless we’re talking low-wage service work (and try being a person of color in the workforce). Now, as for my personal life, I implement a take them or leave them approach. I have a firm you can seek me out when you want to deal with me or don’t, your choice, your right approach. See, because I’m a grown up, and I know that I don’t have the right to other people’s time, space, or thoughts.

The piece closes in truly shortsighted fashion with language that implies ownership over your partner. I hate the implication that you have to track and trap a partner and then ze will be yours for always and you can all him squish…sorry, I went all Finding Nemo. Women aren’t pets gents; we don’t need you to feed us and walk us.

What Sam never explains is why these men deserve special treatment. These men shouldn’t be yelled at for bankrolling an abuser because… These men should possess girlfriends if they want them because… These men shouldn’t be treated like women or other marginalized groups being yelled at on the street when they are just trying to get to an obligation because… Because men have male privilege, and we can’t go and treat them like women or other marginalized groups. Repeat after men: I am not entitled another person’s time or space regardless of what society tells me. Repeat this until you believe it, and then maybe I’ll buy you a drink.

Being sexually assaulted in a privilege according to George Will, columnist for the Washington Post.

George Will is an awful little person, but this isn’t news. Also, I’m coming a little late to this party, but that doesn’t really matter either. Sophia Tesfaye has a piece up at Media Matters on Will’s shitty column.  Will dismisses the rampant sexual assault on campuses because the definition of sexual assault is too board. The feds are trying to get up to speed on sexual assaults by way of issuing mandates. Will isn’t particularly interested in the best interests of students or you know facts.

A few choice excerpts from Will’s piece:

“They [colleges and universities] are learning that they say campus victimizations are ubiquitous (‘micro-aggressions,’ often not discernible to the untutored eye, are everywhere), and that when they make victimhood a coveted status that confers privilege, victims proliferate.”

So in the world according to Will victims have some kind of privilege, right, right we get cards to carry that make us even more likely to be assaulted again. Must be it. Fuck this guy.

He then laments that sexual assault is too board because it includes incidents where the victim was dating her attacker…*headdesk* Will seems to believe women who don’t fight back during an assault are liars. Maybe the conservative right can let us know what is the appropriate response to an assault because when I was in school we were told surviving was the most important thing, and no one fucking mentioned the fine print that if a rapist doesn’t kill you then it doesn’t count and what were you wearing. I hate ALL THE THINGS!

Will continues to dismiss sexual assault stats because he doesn’t like math or women. He also seems under the impression that all women report their assaults. *side eye*.

“Combine this [Dept. of Ed mandates] with capacious definitions of sexual assault that can include not only forcible sexual penetration but also nonconsensual touching. Then add the doctrine that the consent of a female who has been drinking might not protect a male from being found guilty of rape.”

Don’t touch people without consent. Don’t have sex with drunk people. You know if people are having trouble with these then 1. They are guilty of assault, and 2. They are fucking stupid. Will is worried these fine young men will be convicted of “serious felonies”, but Will, most rapists serve less than three days in jail.

“This entitlement [being raped] has already bred campus speech codes that punish unpopular speech. Now the codes are begetting the soft censorship of trigger warnings to swaddle students in a ‘safe,’ ‘supportive,’ ‘unthreatening’ environment, intellectual comfort for the intellectually dormant.”

NO ONE IS TAKING YOUR RIGHTS AWAY. We are trying to protect the rights of others like say not being raped. That’s a right, right? But damn, if someone puts a trigger warning on something, think of the consequences.

George Will is a fucking joke. Moreover, he is a rape apologist trying to make it safe for rapists on college campuses.

About that guy who doesn’t want to acknowledge his privilege.

So I wrestled with this one: do I write about him [individual and privilege dudes et.al.] or not? I believe we’ve spent too much time talking about him with the New York Times thinking his piece (which I read) is of enough merit for a larger platform. As I result, I will link to nothing, and just talk about what I want to talk about because that’s how I roll. Come along children, there will be cookies.

The most glaring thing about this kid’s piece is his complete lack of understanding of privilege, which isn’t just him by the way. I’ve noticed an increasing number of posts showing up in my Facebook feed about how hard white dudes have it because “they aren’t allowed to have an opinion” or do any activists activities. I don’t know who is preventing these guys from having opinions or doing things, but I want this power. For reals, I promise to use it on Paul Ryan. Oh, wait, I bet these guys were being hyperbolic. So clever. *sarcasm*

First, privilege is when you are afforded power, status, means, etc. just for being born into the “right” group. It has nothing to do with you, which is part of the problem. The bigger part of the problem is that privilege comes at the expense and oppression of others. This isn’t a secret either because people with privilege tend to see movements like feminism for example as a threat because they see everything in terms of zero-sum-games—meaning if they give up their privilege then they will be relegated to the position held by those they have oppressed. And yes, son, to be privileged is to oppress others because you can oppress people through inaction and compliance with oppressive structures. *rubs hands together over keyboard like a bond villain* I could go on and on about how equity and equality are not zero-sum-games, instead, we can al exist on an equitable playing field. I don’t believe anything short of a revolution will result in equality. I’m also not sure a revolution would be able to undo the damage done by racism, classism, and sexism, but I digress.

But, yeah, it sucks that someone might have preconceived ideas and notions about you just because you happen to belong to a group…which those of us who aren’t white, hetero, Christian, cis men know, all too well and would be happy to explain it to you. And, no it isn’t oppression. You know why? Because they still have all the power and disproportional control over society. But, let me put this in terms of myself as to not just rip on the gents, allow me to show you how to acknowledge your privilege:

 I am white. I benefit from systemic racism. I don’t think I am racist [I’ll defer to the judgment of others on that], but I know by being white within this oppressive structure my actions and thoughts are influenced by racism and can unintentionally oppress others. I try to work to counter racism, and I try to be intersectional in my analysis of everything, but often I fall into class-based discussions because it is what I know.

Holy hell guys, the world isn’t on fire! See, part of recognizing your privilege isn’t just saying the right thing; it about knowing yourself even the ugly parts. It is about understanding what and why you are the way you are. Sometimes, I have to unpack thoughts I have to think them through, where did this come from and why? And to throw back to a conversation I had with my sister M years ago, I will always be more sexist than racist. I have a distrust of men, even men I know, which is learned and conditioned. Women’s behavior is policed in respect to men so yeah, I’ll cross the hypothetical street every time to avoid a dude at night regardless of race. Congratulations patriarchy.

At the end of the day, I give zero fucks if you check your privilege, know why? Because unless you’re going to follow up checking your privilege with assisting in the dismantling of the patriarchy (which as I reminder I believe enables and is intrinsically liked with racism, classism, etc.) then I have no use for you. And, superficial feminist men, if you aren’t working to dismantle the patriarchy, racism, and classism, then I have no use for you either. Come to think about it, anyone, anyone no actively working to dismantle the systemic oppression within our society, I have no use for you.

Of course, I think the people really opposed to recognizing their privilege don’t want to admit the advantages they have had that others might not have. That is what I hear every time a dude complains to me that it is unfair people say he’s privileged when he didn’t do anything…that is the point. You didn’t do anything, but you get these advantages the rest of us don’t.

Because I know the menz want a cookie.

People scrutinize public appearances, statements, and appearances of white dudes so they quit…

Ok, I give zero fucks about most pop culture, unless we’re talking The Walking Dead and House of Cards. Occasionally, I’ll dabble, and I do enjoy reading Perez Hilton when I can’t sleep…don’t judge…but for the life of me, I don’t get why we’re obsessed with entertainers. I just don’t.  What I do love? When public figures freak the fuck out when their privilege is challenged, particularly the white dudes.

Alec Baldwin, Piers Morgan, Shia LaBeouf, and probably dozens of other white dudes are really tired of people judging everything they do because we’re somehow persecuting them for holding the accountable. This policing has clearly got to stop *sarcasm*.  Don’t get me wrong, I’d hate to be followed everywhere, but I also wouldn’t make transphobia, homophobic, racist, etc rants. I intentionally used the word “policing” because we don’t police white cis men’s behavior the way we police people of color, other  genders, and other sexualities (Anyone got better inclusive language that doesn’t keep cis white dudes at the center? I’m trying to make it clear that anyone who deviated from the standard by which we measure is policed in appearance and behavior in a way cis white dudes just aren’t). Additionally, this policing is more than self-policing, which a guy I know likes to complain about men are held to an unrealistic standard because of comicbooks (no, that is all). I’m talking about dress being used against you in court, or racial profiling, or the media deciding you’re the worst person ever because you cheated on your boyfriend complete with death threats. And yes, all of those are real examples.

So when Alec Baldwin pens a piece claiming he’s stepping back from public life, I just have one question, why bother penning the piece? Delete your Twitter account, delete Facebook, refuse all interview requests moving forward. Just do it. However, in that piece where he claims he was unjustly labeled a bigot, Baldwin using the T word in regards to a transgender man, so clearly he learned a lot. Reading Baldwin’s piece is kind of surreal. He talks about how lucky he is, but then everything changed because he was called a homophobe. THE HORROR! Some perspective maybe? My life’s ok, and I’m called a cunt by strangers pretty regularly, meaning I’m reduced to my genitalia on a regular basis by people who give zero fucks about who I am. Want to talk about street harassment? I suspect some of my friends of color have similar experiences. At the end of the day, I shrug my shoulder and walk it off because fuck those guys and what can I possibly do? Perhaps, Baldwin was hit so hard by being called a homophobe because deep down he knew it was true? And epically, Baldwin concludes by apologizing if he offended anyone, you know instead of apologizing for what he said and did.

Allison Kilkenny does a pretty great take down of Morgan and Baldwin. She notes their privilege is the real problem for both of them. Kilkenny notes the similarities between Morgan and Baldwin’s decisions to step back (though Morgan’s decision was probably aided by CNN pulling the plug finally). They are also both pseudo liberals. Morgan and Baldwin both keep saying their didn’t do anything wrong, which is bullshit. Morgan was so disrespectful to Janet Mock, and then went on to engage with Twitter activists about how he’s the real victim, because you know he says so (?). For Baldwin, his major issue is that technology has allowed people to capture his horrendous behavior, tough guys, I’ll break out the tiny violin. Kilkenny nails it:

“Now, here’s the thing: I believe everyone has the right to take a mental vacation. I’ve seen some of my friends (primarily women journos and activists) be relentlessly hounded by anonymous internet trolls, bullied and threatened with rape, until they left their online lives just to preserve their sanity. But let’s be very clear that what Morgan and Baldwin are describing is entirely separate from the noble existences of persecuted activists. Men like Morgan and Baldwin are accustomed to holding all the power, which is why they’re mystified and peeved by the public backlash they’ve received for, in most cases, being privileged dicks.”

Kilkenny continues by explaining what Morgan and Baldwin are really doing, which is giving up, another privilege of those with power. They don’t need to work; they don’t have to listen to people who disagree with them or want to hold them accountable. I think this is the point of all of this. People with privilege aren’t used to being held accountable, and because of that they decide they can walk away. Well, too damn bad, and welcome to the world everyone else lives in. I’m sure Baldwin, Morgan, and the rest of them are going to be alright. But as my mother told us, “grow thicker skin.”