The Sexist blog interviews "Feminist Geek" Courtney Stoker

[Modax]

She's a science fiction fan, why not invite her to join the board?

I think the OP has some valid points, especially regarding misogyny by male nerds being a vicious circle. I really can't see the "angry" component of the young-angry-virgin-complex as anything but a sentiment of vain douchebags unwilling to see their romantic ineptitude as being in any way their own fault or to accept any responsibility for bettering themselves.

However, I don't appreciate her conclusions that these forum guys either see women as sex objects or as people, with no overlap, with no benefit-of-the-doubt granted for her lack of experience being male.

[Shroom Man 777]

@ Ghost Rider: Uh. Oh. Wow. Man, okay, whatever. Cool.

Goddamn!

[Akhlut]

you're right starglider, people with vaginas clearly are judgmental and cannot stay on topic. penis power is needed to ensure that discussion remains focused. you're also right that the womenfolk are just too emotional to do real science, which is why the society of women engineers and association of women in science are just frauds and biologists, a step below frauds in any case- Oh Christ, I can't even fake it anymore.

Except Starglider didn't mention her gender at all, only speculated on the content of her posting history based on the the explicit evidence (that supports his position) in her interview.

No, it doesn't. It really does not, and he jumped to the conclusion that she must dislike science, logic, technology and whatever based on her saying that she wanted to bring analysis based on race, sex, and gender, rather than plot, logic and setting. She said that she was brutally attacked on the forums after trying to participate, and we have nothing to suggest that she hijacked threads or conducted herself rudely. She has since been the target of misogynistic insults. So from that, Starglider leaped to the conclusion that she must have been doing something wrong and hate science and technology based on her feminism/social activism or her femininity, and neither paints a good picture. He also argues that she deserves misogynistic insults because of his imagined conclusions, and you're defending this. What the hell is wrong with you?

Hey, as we all know, it must be her fault for pissing off those white nerds by bringing up feminism in sci-fi! Goddamnit, when will women learn that it's their own fault if they're victimized?

But, yeah, that's definitely something I've been seeing a lot of in this thread. Whores deserving the treatment they're getting, in spite of the fact whether we know or not how they got into their current position. Asia Carrera's in porn, therefore, she's a whore and it doesn't matter how smart she is or how fucked up her life was that made being a porn actress an option (hint: abusive family fits in there). Ms. Stoker's treatment by nerds is deserved, because she's an attention whore who had the temerity to bring up a new angle on Dr. Who for people to examine that happened to somehow threaten the nerds on the forum.

[Big Phil]

But, yeah, that's definitely something I've been seeing a lot of in this thread. Whores deserving the treatment they're getting, in spite of the fact whether we know or not how they got into their current position. Asia Carrera's in porn, therefore, she's a whore and it doesn't matter how smart she is or how fucked up her life was that made being a porn actress an option (hint: abusive family fits in there). Ms. Stoker's treatment by nerds is deserved, because she's an attention whore who had the temerity to bring up a new angle on Dr. Who for people to examine that happened to somehow threaten the nerds on the forum.

Are a preponderance of people actually saying this? I see a number of people saying she was naive for not expecting this reaction (myself included), but I don't really see large numbers of people saying she deserved it.

[Eleas]

She's a science fiction fan, why not invite her to join the board?

I think the OP has some valid points, especially regarding misogyny by male nerds being a vicious circle. I really can't see the "angry" component of the young-angry-virgin-complex as anything but a sentiment of vain douchebags unwilling to see their romantic ineptitude as being in any way their own fault or to accept any responsibility for bettering themselves.

Yeah, those other maladjusted individuals surely suck.

However, I don't appreciate her conclusions that these forum guys either see women as sex objects or as people, with no overlap, with no benefit-of-the-doubt granted for her lack of experience being male.

Wow. I mean, wow. That conclusion is yours, specifically, your interpretation of what she's saying. But thanks for reminding me of the classic followup dominance technique also called "well, you may have a point in some small way... but on reflection, you're making several unstated assumptions in my mind that makes me question your objectivity!"

Should I laugh? Is this some form of transcendent irony that's come into vogue lately? Anyone?

[Shroom Man 777]

I say they're all assholes, every one of them. Her, and also all the male people, and everyone else tangentially involved. Myself included to. That will be the best compromise for everyone. We must admit our failings.

My previous reply was directed to Ghost Rider.

[GuppyShark]

However, I don't appreciate her conclusions that these forum guys either see women as sex objects or as people, with no overlap, with no benefit-of-the-doubt granted for her lack of experience being male.

Wow. I mean, wow. That conclusion is yours, specifically, your interpretation of what she's saying. But thanks for reminding me of the classic followup dominance technique also called "well, you may have a point in some small way... but on reflection, you're making several unstated assumptions in my mind that makes me question your objectivity!"

IN HER OWN WORDS: "Geek communities love women, as long as their members don’t have to think of those women as people."

[Bakustra]

Well, this also applies to sci-fi literature too, which isn't a part of mainstream literature.

Well, if we're going with novels and expanded universes based on Wars, Trek, Who, whatever, then they are still based on things from the mainstream media.

Also, really, how CAN you be totally separated from mainstream media? Unless it's some obscure foreign indy shit or transcendentalist bullshit, it's still inevitably going to be steeped in mainstream media crap. *snip*

When I say that it's not part of mainstream literature, I mean that it is considered a bit second-class when it comes to academia, like other genre fiction. Film is more dominated by genre works, and so academic criticism of film is quite a bit more egalitarian. (And there is less baggage from the early twentieth century). Of course, the insular and often incestuous nature of sci-fi and fantasy doesn't help much, and things have changed significantly, but those are the breaks.

You can't really be separate from mainstream media; even if you are defying its conventions, you're still aware of them, and foreign works are simply those of a differing mainstream. Of course, people like to pretend they are, for reasons that you elucidate quite clearly in the section I didn't post.

Except Starglider didn't mention her gender at all, only speculated on the content of her posting history based on the the explicit evidence (that supports his position) in her interview.

No, it doesn't. It really does not, and he jumped to the conclusion that she must dislike science, logic, technology and whatever based on her saying that she wanted to bring analysis based on race, sex, and gender, rather than plot, logic and setting. She said that she was brutally attacked on the forums after trying to participate, and we have nothing to suggest that she hijacked threads or conducted herself rudely. She has since been the target of misogynistic insults. So from that, Starglider leaped to the conclusion that she must have been doing something wrong and hate science and technology based on her feminism/social activism or her femininity, and neither paints a good picture. He also argues that she deserves misogynistic insults because of his imagined conclusions, and you're defending this. What the hell is wrong with you?

Heh. Nothing is "wrong," if by wrong you mean something out of the ordinary is happening. It's the same pattern as ever: an underprivileged person points out this lack of privilege as a problem, and then, well, shit gets real. Her words will be mocked or lambasted, but they will never be read as such, because they have already been interpreted and prejudged.

The privileged, you see already know the facts of what happened. That's, after all, one of the rights that have just been questioned and must be defended - the right to be the one to define the terms and the truth. And what better way to do that than to declare the questioner to be at fault?

Man, just like Jade Raymond, remember? What a bitch!
*snip frightening story*

God damn. I remember hearing about the fringes of that, but the full details are horrible. It's not just underprivileged individuals, too; even if you happen to be white, or male, or straight, then should you dare to suggest that there might be racism or sexism still around, why, then you get the same treatment, though at least you have the privilege of not having your dismissal based on race, or sex, or sexual orientation.

Think this through for a minute. You've got a group of insecure, socially maladjusted outsiders who are afraid of girls/angry at girls because for some reason they don't like fat, creepy losers/or putting the pussy up on a pedestal. They have their own little world where they're actually important, where what they have to say has some value and people listen to them. And now one of those scary/evil/virtuous girls is threatening the status quo... it shouldn't really be any surprise to anyone that nerds react badly. This idea that white male nerds are somehow more egalitarian and open to women just doesn't hold water - nerds are just as sexist/racist/prejudiced as any other group... they have the added bonus of being awkward around girls.

I'm a little disappointed that she ran away rather than stay and argue her points, but I'm not particularly surprised. Social groups stick together to drive away outsiders, especially those who are threatening their paradigm. A woman should expect the same reaction were she to wander into a sports-oriented forum and question why more people aren't paying attention the WNBA or the Women's World Cup. It's not right, it's not fair, but that's the way it is.

Weren't you going on about how Asia Carrera was "just a whore" earlier? I think you have very little room to talk about nerds being misogynistic, unless you have some great explanation, perhaps involving the fact that you may have had sex with women, according to you, and thus you can't be misogynistic or sexist in your actions, unlike those nerds. Also, look down.

Hey, as we all know, it must be her fault for pissing off those white nerds by bringing up feminism in sci-fi! Goddamnit, when will women learn that it's their own fault if they're victimized?

But, yeah, that's definitely something I've been seeing a lot of in this thread. Whores deserving the treatment they're getting, in spite of the fact whether we know or not how they got into their current position. Asia Carrera's in porn, therefore, she's a whore and it doesn't matter how smart she is or how fucked up her life was that made being a porn actress an option (hint: abusive family fits in there). Ms. Stoker's treatment by nerds is deserved, because she's an attention whore who had the temerity to bring up a new angle on Dr. Who for people to examine that happened to somehow threaten the nerds on the forum.

For that matter, at least one person calling Ms. Carrera a whore likes to go on about how all the nerds here are so judgmental

Wow. I mean, wow. That conclusion is yours, specifically, your interpretation of what she's saying. But thanks for reminding me of the classic followup dominance technique also called "well, you may have a point in some small way... but on reflection, you're making several unstated assumptions in my mind that makes me question your objectivity!"

I love the implication that it's impossible to sympathize with another's position unless you actually step into that position. I guess she should have cross-dressed to try and peek into the male geek mind, rather than looking at the misogynistic insults combined with the focus on women in sexual costumes and coming to a conclusion that the people involved may be more comfortable with women as sexualized objects than as opinion-bearing individuals, given their differing reactions. I guess this must be completely unwarranted on her part, given that the geek community is so well-known for its tastefulness. Why, look at Harlan Ellison, and his strict avowal to never grope people without their consent.

[Shroom Man 777]

More egalitarian geek communities should love all people equally, irregardless of gender, as long as their members don't have to think of people as people.

[Modax]

IN HER OWN WORDS: "Geek communities love women, as long as their members don’t have to think of those women as people."

Thank you, beat me to it. I probably could have worded it better. But that is some inflammatory stuff.

That bit comes right at the end of the essay; I guess that's what tl;dr gets you.

[Bakustra]

IN HER OWN WORDS: "Geek communities love women, as long as their members don’t have to think of those women as people."

Thank you, beat me to it. I probably could have worded it better. But that is some inflammatory stuff.

That bit comes right at the end of the essay; I guess that's what tl;dr gets you.

I guess that minorities aren't allowed to have opinions or emotions anymore.

[Shroom Man 777]

When I say that it's not part of mainstream literature, I mean that it is considered a bit second-class when it comes to academia, like other genre fiction. Film is more dominated by genre works, and so academic criticism of film is quite a bit more egalitarian. (And there is less baggage from the early twentieth century). Of course, the insular and often incestuous nature of sci-fi and fantasy doesn't help much, and things have changed significantly, but those are the breaks.

I can't pretend to be an expert on anything (I am not), but academia? Like, in high-falooting literary circles? I am not so familiar with those, and I think most people are more familiar with film/television stuff. How does the "academia" or whatever work? What is that?

You can't really be separate from mainstream media; even if you are defying its conventions, you're still aware of them, and foreign works are simply those of a differing mainstream. Of course, people like to pretend they are, for reasons that you elucidate quite clearly in the section I didn't post.

Even if it is truly different, somehow, someway, which is rare, mainstream media ends up eating it up anyway! So it won't stay original or different... ever!

[Eleas]

Are a preponderance of people actually saying this? I see a number of people saying she was naive for not expecting this reaction (myself included), but I don't really see large numbers of people saying she deserved it.

The more homogenous and insular the forum, the stronger the narrative will be, because unopposed prejudice tends to feed on prejudice. Particularly when the audience participates in one-upsmanship to see who can be the most hardcore, but really, it happens to different degree on all forums. I know of one fairly pathetic Harry Potter board where the character of Ginny Weasley is consistently referred to as "The Whore," presumably because she's... there, I suppose.

Why would geeks be any more considerate to a woman whose movies they jack off to (she makes me feel guilty!) and who performs sex for money (whore!)?

IN HER OWN WORDS: "Geek communities love women, as long as their members don’t have to think of those women as people."

Thank you, beat me to it. I probably could have worded it better. But that is some inflammatory stuff.

That bit comes right at the end of the essay; I guess that's what tl;dr gets you.

Priceless. I hear "geek communities" is a person, now. Every person, in fact. Rather than, you know, a representation of a trend.

Indeed, inflammatory stuff, as always. It never fails to spark the same reaction: "she's talking about every one of us I'm telling you! It's implicit because I think it is!"

[Shroom Man 777]

I find it interesting that when women rail on about how society is objectificating them, be it this nerd feminist chick or Christina Hendricks with her big titties, lots of guys get outraged and throw shit at them for being wronggo or for being hypocritical (like Christina Hendricks, for complaining about objectificating while at the same time having enlarged mammary glands on her chests). Personally, I don't really feel outraged since no matter what these women will say, I/we'll end up having the last laugh since we'll do things to them that'll be even more outrageous than whatever they can say about us or our patriarchy or whatever. In the end, we still win and they lose.

(I am being facetious again.)

[Modax]

I love the implication that it's impossible to sympathize with another's position unless you actually step into that position. I guess she should have cross-dressed to try and peek into the male geek mind, rather than looking at the misogynistic insults combined with the focus on women in sexual costumes and coming to a conclusion that the people involved may be more comfortable with women as sexualized objects than as opinion-bearing individuals, given their differing reactions. I guess this must be completely unwarranted on her part, given that the geek community is so well-known for its tastefulness.

I appreciate the point, I just think we should all aspire to a higher standard when it comes to making generalizations about the opposite sex, especially based on emotionally charged, anecdotal evidence.

I guess that minorities aren't allowed to have opinions or emotions anymore.

What? I say that a statement is inflammatory, and that means I'm denying her right to have emotions? I was commenting on statements somebody wrote in an essay.

[Eleas]

God damn. I remember hearing about the fringes of that, but the full details are horrible. It's not just underprivileged individuals, too; even if you happen to be white, or male, or straight, then should you dare to suggest that there might be racism or sexism still around, why, then you get the same treatment, though at least you have the privilege of not having your dismissal based on race, or sex, or sexual orientation.

Yeah. I mean, he's a good guy, he's just taken things way too far. I happen to think those feminists have a point too sometimes. Oh, we already banned him? Well damn. Okay, he was a bit of a dick when told to stop it with the pointless nitpicking.

(Shit, following the script just comes way too easy to sit well with me.)

Weren't you going on about how Asia Carrera was "just a whore" earlier? I think you have very little room to talk about nerds being misogynistic, unless you have some great explanation, perhaps involving the fact that you may have had sex with women, according to you, and thus you can't be misogynistic or sexist in your actions, unlike those nerds. Also, look down.

<snip>

For that matter, at least one person calling Ms. Carrera a whore likes to go on about how all the nerds here are so judgmental

Why, look at Harlan Ellison, and his strict avowal to never grope people without their consent.

You would question his "puckish" expression of appreciation for the radiant female form? For shame, Sir.

[Bakustra]

When I say that it's not part of mainstream literature, I mean that it is considered a bit second-class when it comes to academia, like other genre fiction. Film is more dominated by genre works, and so academic criticism of film is quite a bit more egalitarian. (And there is less baggage from the early twentieth century). Of course, the insular and often incestuous nature of sci-fi and fantasy doesn't help much, and things have changed significantly, but those are the breaks.

I can't pretend to be an expert on anything (I am not), but academia? Like, in high-falooting literary circles? I am not so familiar with those, and I think most people are more familiar with film/television stuff. How does the "academia" or whatever work? What is that?

Well, for literature, it's basically college English departments, or the native language departments in other countries, which essentially decided, back in the days of pulps, that there was genre fiction and there was mainstream fiction, and the mainstream fiction was better (which it was, in many ways, but no matter). So the focus of criticism and papers was on the mainstream fiction, your Faulkners and Dickenses and Shakespeares and Joyces, while the odd bit of criticism of sci-fi, or mysteries, or Westerns was published on the side. Things have changed, and especially with the rise of nontraditional criticism and a shift in the makeup of departments, there's more criticism published of genre stuff, because the focus is now on societal attitudes, and genre fiction is what most people read, so it's a better gauge of how society thinks than a novel written to be an anti-novel, as an example.

You can't really be separate from mainstream media; even if you are defying its conventions, you're still aware of them, and foreign works are simply those of a differing mainstream. Of course, people like to pretend they are, for reasons that you elucidate quite clearly in the section I didn't post.

Even if it is truly different, somehow, someway, which is rare, mainstream media ends up eating it up anyway! So it won't stay original or different... ever!

Resistance is futile. You will become part of the mainstream.

I love the implication that it's impossible to sympathize with another's position unless you actually step into that position. I guess she should have cross-dressed to try and peek into the male geek mind, rather than looking at the misogynistic insults combined with the focus on women in sexual costumes and coming to a conclusion that the people involved may be more comfortable with women as sexualized objects than as opinion-bearing individuals, given their differing reactions. I guess this must be completely unwarranted on her part, given that the geek community is so well-known for its tastefulness.

I appreciate the point, I just think we should all aspire to a higher standard when it comes to making generalizations about the opposite sex, especially based on emotionally charged, anecdotal evidence.

I guess that minorities aren't allowed to have opinions or emotions anymore.

What? I say that a statement is inflammatory, and that means I'm denying her right to have emotions? I was commenting on statements somebody wrote in an essay.

This is an interview, not an essay. She is stating her opinions derived from watching a trend, and it does not necessarily apply to you. You're complaining about her using "emotionally charged" evidence, when the point is about her reaction to geek communities. There is a difficulty with being objective on these things, namely the problem of asking somebody whether they're misogynistic and getting an honest answer.

God damn. I remember hearing about the fringes of that, but the full details are horrible. It's not just underprivileged individuals, too; even if you happen to be white, or male, or straight, then should you dare to suggest that there might be racism or sexism still around, why, then you get the same treatment, though at least you have the privilege of not having your dismissal based on race, or sex, or sexual orientation.

Yeah. I mean, he's a good guy, he's just taken things way too far. I happen to think those feminists have a point too sometimes. Oh, we already banned him? Well damn. Okay, he was a bit of a dick when told to stop it with the pointless nitpicking.

(Shit, following the script just comes way too easy to sit well with me.)

Why, look at Harlan Ellison, and his strict avowal to never grope people without their consent.

You would question his "puckish" expression of appreciation for the radiant female form? For shame, Sir.

It's actually pretty creepy how easy it is to recognize the general patterns. As for Ellison, why, how could I, or anybody else, possibly object to his wonderful sense of appropriateness in one's actions, or his ability to appreciate beauty and his ability to get in touch with his inner child? Indeed, he is a role model for us all, much like John Ringo's objet d'arte Ghost.

[Eleas]

What? I say that a statement is inflammatory, and that means I'm denying her right to have emotions? I was commenting on statements somebody wrote in an essay.

It was an interview, and you interpreted her statement on geek culture to apply universally to every member of said culture. Furthermore since it is an interview, the standards of phrasing by necessity allows for more colloquial language.

If I said, when asked, that Western culture remains racist, I guess I should expect you to indignantly reply that you are not racist, have never been racist, and don't appreciate being called racist by one such as I. That would at least be consistent.

[Shroom Man 777]

Well, for literature, it's basically college English departments, or the native language departments in other countries, which essentially decided, back in the days of pulps, that there was genre fiction and there was mainstream fiction, and the mainstream fiction was better (which it was, in many ways, but no matter). So the focus of criticism and papers was on the mainstream fiction, your Faulkners and Dickenses and Shakespeares and Joyces

Uh, so they focus on mainstream fiction, and mainstream fiction is stuff that's like written centuries ago?

[Big Phil]

Think this through for a minute. You've got a group of insecure, socially maladjusted outsiders who are afraid of girls/angry at girls because for some reason they don't like fat, creepy losers/or putting the pussy up on a pedestal. They have their own little world where they're actually important, where what they have to say has some value and people listen to them. And now one of those scary/evil/virtuous girls is threatening the status quo... it shouldn't really be any surprise to anyone that nerds react badly. This idea that white male nerds are somehow more egalitarian and open to women just doesn't hold water - nerds are just as sexist/racist/prejudiced as any other group... they have the added bonus of being awkward around girls.

I'm a little disappointed that she ran away rather than stay and argue her points, but I'm not particularly surprised. Social groups stick together to drive away outsiders, especially those who are threatening their paradigm. A woman should expect the same reaction were she to wander into a sports-oriented forum and question why more people aren't paying attention the WNBA or the Women's World Cup. It's not right, it's not fair, but that's the way it is.

Weren't you going on about how Asia Carrera was "just a whore" earlier? I think you have very little room to talk about nerds being misogynistic, unless you have some great explanation, perhaps involving the fact that you may have had sex with women, according to you, and thus you can't be misogynistic or sexist in your actions, unlike those nerds. Also, look down.

Nerds are generally afraid of girls, don't know how to talk to them in person or on the Internet, and band together in a tribal fashion whenever an "outsider" threatens them. How does your red herring about Asia Carrera refute my point?

Besides, you're just flat out wrong. Asia Carrera is a whore... she has sex for money. That's the definition of a whore. Just because you suffer from the vapors when you hear the word doesn't mean she isn't a whore.

[Eleas]

It's actually pretty creepy how easy it is to recognize the general patterns. As for Ellison, why, how could I, or anybody else, possibly object to his wonderful sense of appropriateness in one's actions, or his ability to appreciate beauty and his ability to get in touch with his inner child? Indeed, he is a role model for us all, much like John Ringo's objet d'arte Ghost.

True, true. Of course, while I think Ellison is the salt of the Earth, I'm more of a Michael Z Williamson man myself when it comes to transcendent science fiction. I shouldn't be surprised if you have difficulties getting into his work, mind you, it's a bit too demanding for the casual crowd. *adjusts monocle*

[Pick]

I personally find it hilarious that anyone would act indignant, like they don't know exactly what this woman is talking about.

Please. The only way you haven't heard rage against those damned double-X chromosomers is if you spent your entire life in a little tiny box with no access to other people, which is false, because you're here. Furthermore, if you're here on a sci-fi board, you've probably had a fair amount of exposure to sci-fi. I fail to see where you could not understand where she's coming from, whether or not you agree with her assessments entirely.

[Bakustra]

Well, for literature, it's basically college English departments, or the native language departments in other countries, which essentially decided, back in the days of pulps, that there was genre fiction and there was mainstream fiction, and the mainstream fiction was better (which it was, in many ways, but no matter). So the focus of criticism and papers was on the mainstream fiction, your Faulkners and Dickenses and Shakespeares and Joyces

Uh, so they focus on mainstream fiction, and mainstream fiction is stuff that's like written centuries ago?

Half of that was current when the standards were being established.

Nerds are generally afraid of girls, don't know how to talk to them in person or on the Internet, and band together in a tribal fashion whenever an "outsider" threatens them. How does your red herring about Asia Carrera refute my point?

Besides, you're just flat out wrong. Asia Carrera is a whore... she has sex for money. That's the definition of a whore. Just because you suffer from the vapors when you hear the word doesn't mean she isn't a whore.

So it's A-OK to be dismissive of somebody as long as their job involves sex? Or is it only women? I mean, is Ron Jeremy a whore, in your book? Answer honestly, would the word "whore" be one of the first descriptions to come to mind if he came up?

I see that you don't get what I was saying. Trumpeting how anti-sexist you are becomes less convincing when you've been saying shit like "It doesn't matter how smart she is, she's still a whore!", no matter how much you furiously internalize Hollywood stereotypes of athletes and take refuge in your conviction that anybody who disagrees with you must be a nerd, and you could totally beat them up, because you are ultra-manly. You ignore my main point, which is that you are arguing that misogyny is dependent on sexual inexperience. That seems a little dismissive and focused on demonizing nerds while excluding other groups that incorporate misogynists, but then again, all you care about is a chance to go on about nerds.

It's actually pretty creepy how easy it is to recognize the general patterns. As for Ellison, why, how could I, or anybody else, possibly object to his wonderful sense of appropriateness in one's actions, or his ability to appreciate beauty and his ability to get in touch with his inner child? Indeed, he is a role model for us all, much like John Ringo's objet d'arte Ghost.

True, true. Of course, while I think Ellison is the salt of the Earth, I'm more of a Michael Z Williamson man myself when it comes to transcendent science fiction. I shouldn't be surprised if you have difficulties getting into his work, mind you, it's a bit too demanding for the casual crowd. *adjusts monocle*

Careful, somebody might think we're nerds.

I, personally, find Williamson a little too tame and pedestrian at parts. I feel that Tom Kratman is in some ways even more transcendental, as he can incorporate several similar themes within the same book.

I personally find it hilarious that anyone would act indignant, like they don't know exactly what this woman is talking about.

Why Pick, why do you detest those who live under rocks so? Surely they must make up a significant proportion of the indignant. Anything else would be disturbing.

[Elfdart]

She's a bit different than the geek computer programmer bloger and a porn star. Can't think of the name.

edit ah here we go so I raise you a supernerd pornstar to your supernerd feminist.

If you don't know Jelena Jensen, you're missing a lot. And I'm not talking about her beautiful face, vertigo-inducing curves, and all-natural 34F attributes. Or about the fact that she's a porn actress. All those things aside, Jelena's a supernerd.

A supernerd who programs her entire site, from top to bottom, using PHP, HTML, Cascade Style Sheets, and Javascript, all connected to your usual MySQL database. From the registration to the videos to the galleries, she does it all. And she also does the sites for many of her friends.

link

Jelena Jensen does hardcore now? I really have been out of the loop.

[Shroom Man 777]

I personally find it hilarious that anyone would act indignant, like they don't know exactly what this woman is talking about.

The ones who react the most would be the ones who are most affected by it? Because if someone wasn't affected by it, because that someone wasn't guilty of it or whatever, then he wouldn't react at all because he wouldn't give a fuck.