A poem


I put my coin
into the machine
again and again

near miss
not quite

then it all lines up:
and your love comes pouring out
warm and safe

I can’t help myself
I play again and again
chasing that feeling


the machine pierces my heart
sending electric waves
straight into it
I can’t breathe

I lie on the floor
trying to recover my equilibrium
and I wonder

was it worth it?

Posted in Musings, My Story | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Open Letter on the Eve of my Wedding

Dear Mother,

I wish you understood what was going on in my life. I wish you felt that sense of peace and happiness that I feel when I’m with my partners as myself. I wish you understood how holy and sacred this union is, how nothing satanic or evil could feel so sacred and perfect. I wish you could understand how I see my partners: as God sees them, perfect and flawed and perfectly flawed. I wish you could feel as secure in yourself as I do.

You told me it “wouldn’t be appropriate” for you to attend my wedding. I agree. It wouldn’t be appropriate for the one who abused me to see me so happy, to see me mended and whole where you would have me broken and helpless. I wish you had the confidence I’ve found, the healing I’ve found from my own abuse as you have never healed from yours. I wish you understood that someone who tells you not to trust your own intuition, someone who insists that only He knows the truth, that you are broken and flawed and can never measure up and so cannot understand what is sacred and what is evil, is an abuser. That your pastor, that your image of God, is abusive.

That you abused me in the same way.

God doesn’t make mistakes. God made me to be the person I am, genderfluid and masculine and perfect just how I am. God made me with the infinite capacity for love: love of my partners, love of my family, love of my friends, love of my fellow humanity. God made me pure and sweet and kind, affectionate and friendly and gentle. You made me bitter and broken, full of self-loathing that spills out into sarcastic bitterness towards my fellow human. And yet you hold your God to be the true one, the real God, master of all others. Why? You shall know them by their fruits, Jesus said, and the fruits of your philosophy are bitterness and hatred and brokenness, while my God offers respite and forgiveness and wholeness.

You said yourself it wouldn’t be appropriate for you to be present at my wedding. I don’t think it’s appropriate for you to be present in any way, in my thoughts, in my heart, in my life. Not until you have forsaken your evil trajectory and your sinful God and found peace and wholeness.

Goodbye, Mother. I hope you find what you’re looking for. I hope you can find even a fraction of the peace and harmony I’ve found. I hope…

But it’s done, now. The time for hoping and forgiveness and prayer is over. I’m growing and changing, and I’m done letting you hold me back any longer. I’m done with the wages of your sin, the death that your path leads me down. I know who I am. I know who belongs in my life. And it isn’t you.

I wish you all the best,


Posted in Life Lessons, Musings, My Story | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

Understanding Racism via The Prince of Egypt

The Prince of Egypt is a 1998 American animated musical produced by DreamWorks Animation and released by DreamWorks Pictures. You’ve probably seen it; it starred Val Kilmer, Sandra Bullock, Jeff Goldblum, Danny Glover, and Patrick Stewart, and the music was full of banger after banger. Seriously, Hans Zimmer and Stephen Schwartz did not need to go in that hard. Consider this opening track, Deliver Us:

The epic scale really drives home the suffering and pain of the Jews enslaved in Egypt. The plot follows the story of Moses in Exodus, delivering the Jews from slavery under Ramses I and Ramses II. Moses of course was raised as Ramses I’s son, alongside his brother Ramses II, but he did not discover that he was a Jew until he was grown and Ramses II was taking over as the pharaoh. He ran away for a time, learning the ways of the Levites (Jews who were not enslaved) and getting married, before returning to free as many of his people as he could.

The emotional climax of the film is the Ten Plagues, delivered through the most epic song I’ve heard in an animated film in a long time. Through the melody line, we come to feel Moses’s pain for the suffering of both his birth people the Jews and his adopted people the Egyptians. But we also come to feel for Ramses II, who did not personally begin the enslavement of the Jews but also chose to, by inaction and inattention, prolong their suffering.

From Ramses II’s perspective, his brother has come back from being missing for decades, something that should have been a joyous occasion for reunion — but instead of good tidings, Moses brought back pain, suffering, and supernatural plagues for not just the royal family, but all of his people as well.

Why would Moses do this to his own brother, his own family, his own people? Ramses cannot understand it. What sense is there in destroying his family and his country when he could instead work from a position of power to reform it slowly? If the Jews are being mistreated, surely there are little things that can be done to ensure their comfort without destroying everything the mighty Egyptian empire has built? Surely Egypt, the most prosperous, powerful, and blessed nation on Earth, has room for both Egyptians and Jews? After all, Ramses doesn’t hate the Jews — his own beloved brother is a Jew.

But all this erases, eclipses, and shadows the very real pain and suffering the Jews were undergoing due to their slavery at the hands of the Egyptians. When you cannot see the Jews as people, you cannot see their pain and suffering. You cannot take into account the enormity of the crimes against them, the vast cosmic unbalance that led to this point. Ramses isn’t capable of understanding the harm he’s causing — so he hardens his heart, turns away from their cries, and refuses to move, insistent that if Moses just approached things the right way things would have been different, but now we have to fight and it’s all Moses’s fault for being unreasonable.

I love Prince of Egypt. There are so many Ramses when we come to do justice work, that it’s easy to understand what’s going on in this song, in this scene. It takes the death of his own son to get Ramses to let the Jews go — and not because he understands, but because he is afraid of what more may come upon his household if he does not. In order to change the heart of a Ramses, we have to make the current system untenable. It has to hurt more than change would in order for change to happen. And people assume change will hurt.

Be gay. Love your neighbor. And make it hurt.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Animal Crossing Proves Marxism

…and other clickbait headlines.

In order to understand this post, you’ll need to know a little about the meta of Animal Crossing. I’ve been playing a lot of it lately, as I mentioned in my previous blog post, but I didn’t get into the ways in which this entry in the beloved series has been updated. One of the many new additions is a smartphone full of apps (because every kid these days has one, so every kid’s game has to include one or kids will wonder why they can’t have one). You can’t call anyone with your smartphone, but that’s fine; the apps are the point, as they have become in the real-world meta over the generations.

One such app, perhaps the single most important to the gameplay loop, is the Nook Miles app. Nook Miles are basically frequent-flyer miles you earn by doing things around your island. At first, you only have a number of long-term goals unlocked, like talking to your villagers every day for 30 days or planting a number of flowers in your lifetime. But eventually you are upgraded to a “miles plus” member, which gives you a sequence of short-term, randomly-generated quests to earn miles. These are small tasks such as selling 20 weeds, catching 5 fish or bugs, or having 3 fossils assessed: each of them can be done inside of half an hour at most, and they reward you with some small number of miles (usually 100 or 150). The first set of quests you get in a day have a multiplier on them, so you earn triple rewards; each task you complete will generate a new task, but the new ones won’t have the multiplier, so there are diminishing returns after the first five quests a day.


Why am I talking about nook miles? Well, as a facebook friend by the name of Miles Redman pointed out today, this means nook miles are effectively a currency directly tied to your labor. You can’t sell anything to earn more nook miles; new miles are only generated when labor is performed, and so every mile represents some small unit of player agency and time. You can, however, buy things with miles. I believe the intended metaphor is that the player is improving the island and, as such, gets rewarded with trinkets and baubles as a thank-you for their hard work and effort. These thank-you gifts include items, recipes, and a way to cash out for bells (the in-game currency of buying and selling) — but they also include the infamous Nook Miles Ticket.

Nook Miles tickets provide a trip to another island where you can obtain more resources than you can get on your home island. They also represent a gamble, as some of these procedurally-generated islands are rare, including ones where you can capture the most expensive bug in the game at a far higher spawn rate than normal, rapidly earning you a lot of bells. But perhaps more importantly, they represent 2000 Nook Miles in an easily transportable package — a physical manifestation of your hard work and labor.

Why does this matter? Well, to understand that, you have to understand another piece of the meta of the game: the Stalk Market. Every sunday, you can buy turnips from a wandering turnip broker for anywhere between 90 and 110 bells. Any day except Sunday, your shop will buy them for a random price, between 30 bells and 800. Obviously there’s huge profit to be made; however, every Sunday morning, the previous week’s turnips all spoil, and spoiled turnips can’t be sold at the going price. So you have a limited time to cash out before you lose your investment. Couple this with multiplayer allowing you to sell things at someone else’s island and you start to see where the meta is going. The intended strat here is to play with friends so that when one of you gets a lucky big break, all of you can rush over to their island and profit. But the internet being what it is, there is now an underground market for high turnip prices, complete with “entry fees” being required on many islands to access the shop and “turnip bouncers” whose job it is to physically block you from going to sell your turnips until you pay the fee.

In a game where time travel can get you nearly infinite bells, there’s no way to cheat the Nook Miles system. A real human has to perform real labor in order to obtain Miles. As such, the Nook Miles Ticket (or NMT as you see it in adverts) has become a defacto underground currency. Ads run something like this: “Nook buying turnips at 615 bells! 10 NMT entry fee, tips accepted!”


Here we begin to see the Marxist analysis. Money can be easily manipulated by playing stocks, gaming the system using your wealth (the more turnips you can afford, the more profit you make) and connections (knowing the right friend with the right price can make a world of difference) as well as a bit of good old-fashioned luck. But when money is just a game, what matters is the player-performed labor. That’s what really adds value into the system. What do the rich long for? More time, and the ability to put in less effort.

There’s also an ethical component here as well. If you know what you’re doing, you can time travel and open your gates all at the same time, meaning you can perpetually have the highest price you can find to let people come sell, while raking in their entry fees in exchange for… what, exactly? In this case, you’re not the shop owner paying for turnips. That’s Timmy and Tommy Nook. You don’t own their shop either. You don’t own the land it sits on, so you’re not even a landlord. It’s more like you were lucky enough to find oil on your property, and you’re leasing the rights to collect it in exchange for NMT (and sometimes gold or rare items that are hard to amass, but you can trivially connect that to the time and effort it takes to obtain the rare items in the first place, just like nook miles are crystalized time and effort). If you’re unethical enough to sit on a high price all day long, posting on turnip exchange websites and cultivating a long queue, time traveling when the shop closes back to when it opened again, you can rake in the consolidated labor of hundreds of players, all for the luck to have a good price and the lack of scruples required to exploit it.

The only way this is going to stop is if people stop paying NMT for turnip prices — that is to say, if they collectively withhold their labor and refuse to play the metagame that the scalpers are playing. If we were all okay with playing a slower-paced, laid back, casual gaming experience, we wouldn’t need to sell at the absolute highest price possible; it’s pretty reliable to obtain a small profit if you’re willing to sell at, say, 126 bells instead of 600+. But as long as people are competitive about it, as long as they need to have all the bells now instead of taking their time acquiring what is essentially an unlimited resource, we’re going to see that play out in the market dynamics that end up consolidating wealth in the hands of a few who know how to work the system.

Posted in Musings, Politics | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Adventures in Swapping

So I’ve been playing a lot of Animal Crossing.

Today we posted our dodo code publicly for the first time. We gated off a section of the island so it was all our guests could reach, and built a little Swap Shop complete with a sign. The idea? Take an item, leave an item. The reality? The first guy who showed up cleaned out half the items and booked it, halfheartedly dropping 6 hardwood in response. (Hardwood is a very plentiful resource, and 6 is a pitiful amount).

Based off this article, the idea seemed sound. And yet, I think the “DM me for the codes” element of his posting was essential to maintaining some semblance of accountability. That or his twitter feed is self-selected for people who will understand the point of the concept. We posted on dodocodes.com with a note explaining that there was a swap shop and to bring things to barter, but apparently the idea isn’t self-explanatory enough for the limited text on the site to carry the meaning. (We did post a longer explanation in a facebook group, but nobody came, so we opened it up to dodocodes.com in the hopes of reaching more people).

I’ll keep you posted on future shopping endeavours.


Image may contain: table

These tables were full when we started…

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Who is the “Bad Guy”, exactly?

or, “Does Billie Eilish realise how this song hits adult listeners?”

I’ve been listening to a lot of Billie Eilish lately. I love her sound, her ability to set a mood, the essence of her music. But when I listen to “Bad Guy”, her biggest hit, one lyric in particular keeps jumping out at me:

My mommy likes to sing along with me
But she won’t sing this song if she
Reads all the lyrics she’ll pity
the men I know

(emphasis mine).

Will she? Let’s read all the lyrics the way Billie suggests we do, and see what they’re saying. One thing I want to highlight before we continue, however: Billie Eilish was 17 when the song was released (and presumably 17 or younger when it was written). Keep that in mind as we read:

  • Billie was wearing a white shirt, but it’s stained red from her nosebleed, and she is now asleep. The song doesn’t expand on whether this is a natural nosebleed or someone hit her. The Pop Song Professor suggests that this implies a virgin innocence now stained with blood from sexual conduct, and I’m not inclined to argue given the context of the rest of the song.
  • “You” are sneaking in, whether to be with Billie behind your girlfriend’s back or back to your girlfriend after being with Billie. It’s implied from context of the song that “you” are a male and Billie’s (cheating) lover. It’s also implied here that someone (or everyone) knows you’re doing this, as you only “think” you’re getting away with it. If the nosebleed was unnatural, you may have been the one to punch Billie in the face, though that’s a bit of a stretch read given it might just be the loss of innocence listed above.
  • Billie has bruises on both her knees “for you”. Again, given context, this implies she’s giving blowjobs (perhaps frequently), though alternate readings exist where she’s just a fan of doggy style or perhaps BDSM.
  • The next line has two possible readings depending on the elided subject. Either Billie doesn’t say please or thank you, implying she’s rude; this would be the first “bad” act in my book in the song performed by Billie, who certainly doesn’t control whether the man she’s with cheats or not. The other reading is that she’s ordering “you” not to say please or thank you, giving off an air of machismo: the type of person who dislikes “please” because it shows weakness and dislikes “thank you” because it means they’re doing a favor they don’t want to admit to doing.
  • Billie does what she wants when she wants, refusing to be controlled. Again, this is either a further refusal to be polite or a furthering of the machismo reading from the previous line.
  • “My soul? So cynical”. This line makes me smile every time. Not in a patronizing, “you’re only 17, what do you know of cynicism” way; Billie is Gen Z, a generation that is coming of age in (if possible) even worse conditions than we Milennials grew up in. No, the reason I smile is that 17 is a developmental age where it’s common to feel jaded or cynical due to the loss of childhood and being on the cusp of adulthood. Even the Boomers, who came of age in a very favorable time period, felt that cynicism and loss of innocence. However, ms Eilish probably wouldn’t thank me for pointing it out, as exceptionalism is also developmentally appropriate to 17. Put bluntly: every 17 year old thinks they’re uniquely jaded and cynical now as compared to their 13 year old past self, and they’re all probably right except for the “uniquely” part.

Now the stage is set for the chorus, the main theme that repeats throughout the song:

  • “You” think you’re tough, and really like rough sex, but (it’s implied) you’re not so tough after all, you just puff out your chest and act macho
  • Billie is “the bad guy” who will make your mother sad, your girlfriend angry, and perhaps seduce your father on her quest to fuck everyone and everything.

Billie’s “badness” here is so far entirely predicated on one thing: liking sex. Those of us who subscribe to the label of “ethical slut” refuse to judge her poorly for that. So what if she likes sex? It’s normal to like sex at 17! (It’s also normal to not like sex, given many people just don’t enjoy it, but that’s beside the point).

Are you pitying the men in her life yet? I’m not. Seems to me the cheater, the one with both Billie and some girlfriend, is the “Bad guy”, and Billie’s just doing what comes naturally to her. If anything I pity Billie for falling into the trap of assuming that women liking sex makes them villains while men are the hapless prey for these women to seduce.

To be entirely fair, here’s the readings for the rest of the song:

  • Billie likes to play BDSM games where she’s the “pet” or submissive partner and her partner pretends to own her, though she knows such games are pure fiction and she’s not owned by her partner
  • Billie is “only good at being bad” — her self-esteem and worth is low, thanks to her self-image as the “bad guy”.
  • Billie likes when her  partner gets mad. This line is interesting; it’s not uncommon to enjoy provoking a response out of a partner who is often stoic and somewhat controlled, making them lose that control and be more “real”. But it doesn’t speak of a healthy relationship.
  • “I guess I’m pretty glad that you’re alone”. I would normally read “alone” to mean “unpartnered” but that doesn’t fit the context of the song, so this must mean that he’s come to some location without his usual partner (in order to cheat with Billie).
  • The girlfriend is afraid of Billie, who doesn’t “see what she sees” but allows that maybe it’s due to the cheating aspect.

Now you could read this song of course as being a persona, an anonymous “bad guy” Billie’s made up for the purposes of the song. She’d probably like it that way, in fact, given her comment in-song about her mother enjoying her music. Who at 17 wants their mom to know they’re into BDSM? But you don’t write a song like this without internalizing many messages about female sexuality and a woman’s role in men cheating on their girlfriends. So in the end, I still pity Billie (and all young women growing up with these messages) rather than the men in her life.

Furthermore, I’d be curious to know if the men in the song are older than Billie; it’s often a powerful, “bad guy” feeling to be dating someone off-limits due to age or power imbalance, without realizing that you’re being taken advantage of and that the power you seem to have is an illusion. It twists and warps your perceptions of yourself in similar ways to the way the song seems to portray. Just a theory, though. I don’t know that much about Eilish’s life outside of what I can glean from her music.

How about you? Where do you fall on the song reading? Would you like more of this? It’s been a while since I did a song lyrics analysis. I still analyse songs offline, and talk about them with my family, but I happened to write this one down for you all.

Posted in Music | Tagged , | 4 Comments

2020: The Year I Finish My Projects

2020 is going to be the year I finish my projects.

I’m off to a good start. So far I finished putting up my best (co-)written story of all time: New Rules, a Dragon Age fanfiction. It’s got a lot more worldbuilding than I’m used to doing for such a short piece; we’ve written sequels and they’ll be put up as we get through editing them. We turn out to write very quickly and edit much more slowly, and I’m not putting the first drafts up without giving them a good once-over first, even for fanfics. I want to make things I can be proud of, without overworking myself to death doing it, if that makes sense. If such a balance can be struck.

I finished knitting the scarf I gave my spouse for Kwanzaa well in advance; both my partners were trying to finish their gifts the day we exchanged them or the day before.

I’ve finished doing a video project I’ve been working on for almost a year. It’s on my patreon now and will be on youtube soon; if you’re not a patron, the posts with the links will unlock Wednesday for part 1 and a week later for part 2; patrons can see both parts now.

I’m working on a nonfiction book, for the first time ever. It’s called How To Come Out, and it’s going to be a guide into all things Coming Out: discovering what to come out as, coming out in phases, transition and/or becoming comfortable with your queer identity, and how to be come out to. It’ll have real stories from real people mixed in, so people don’t feel so alone and isolated.

I’m going to get our church’s Welcoming Congregation status renewed. I’m going to finish playing A Link To The Past. I’m going to write the first draft of the last book in each of my trilogies so those can be done. I’m going to finish my projects.

I was going to say more, but life hit me in the face and I’m gonna go process for a while instead.

Posted in Musings | 1 Comment

Happy holidays (2019 recap)

If I wrote anything here, would anyone be listening? Would anyone still read this?

2019 has been a long year for me. Lots of changes. Lots of stress and pain. I’ve got secrets out the ass and I feel constipated with them, like I can’t share what I’m feeling or going through because then Someone Would Know.

Fuck Someone. This is my blog and I’m going to share.

But if you’re reading this, please leave me a comment so I know someone’s out there.
Continue reading

Posted in Musings, My Story | 5 Comments

Dr Laura: Ch 5

The conventional wisdom in favor of living-in before marriage is that it allows the couple to get to know each other, make a better marital choice, and lay a more solid conjugal foundation than men and women who marry cold turkey.

Could this thinking be wrong?

No. End of chapter.

(This chapter is about “Stupid Cohabitation”, which she calls “the ultimate female self-delusion.”)

A US survey of 13,000 adults found that couples who lived together before marriage were one-third more likely to separate or divorce within a decade. A Canadian national survey of 5,300 women found that those who cohabitated were 54 percent more likely to divorce within 15 years. And a Swedish study of 4,300 women found cohabitation linked with an 80 percent greater risk of divorce.

Here’s the thing though: in 1994, cohabitation before marriage was a fairly new practice in those countries: between 1964 and 2014, the rate rose 900 percent to a figure of about 7-in-ten women. Which means, like all new practices, it skews toward young people. And the younger you are when you get married, the more likely you are to divorce. Studies that take this into account show that age is a stronger predictor than cohabitation:

The research shows that at 23—the age when many people graduate from college, settle into adult life and begin becoming financially independent—the correlation with divorce dramatically drops off.

Kuperberg found that individuals who committed to cohabitation or marriage at the age of 18 saw a 60 percent rate of divorce. Whereas individuals who waited until 23 to commit saw a divorce rate that hovered more around 30 percent.

That said, she can’t have known that at the time:

These trends are troubling to some because nearly a dozen studies from the 1970s into the early 2000s showed that men and women who lived together before marriage were far more likely to divorce than couples who moved directly from dating to marriage. In fact, on average, researchers found that couples who cohabited before marriage had a 33 percent higher chance of divorcing than couples who moved in together after the wedding ceremony.

So you can’t blame her for believing the figures. What you can blame her for is jumping right from correlation to causation, to assuming that cohabitation causes divorce and then looking for reasons to support her claims.

Why [do you keep cohabitating despite the statistics]? Desperation. Fear of not having somebody — of not having a life if a man doesn’t want you.

In our dialogues you always come to admit it. How about saving yourself the stress of finding out the hard way?


[Choosing someone] should be out of a desire to share [your]self, [your] life’s experience. And that’s why, in the long run, I don’t think personal maturity is benefited by these living-in arrangements

Clearly the fact that some people choose to cohabitate out of fear (????) means that nobody can ever do it. This is why we can’t have nice things: desperation. She asserts that all women move in with men because they’re hoping to get married but don’t trust the man to make that happen unless they move in. Which is… honestly a really weird reason to move in together? Who does that? Without a transcript, it’s hard to see the real picture here.

I will point out that this case study is nineteen and came from a bad home life. Of course she’s not ready to get married yet! She’s, what, a year out of a bad situation? I don’t think many adults a year out of a bad marriage are ready to get married again, and that’s not counting her age. Plus, cohabitating can be a boon toward getting out of a bad situation and staying out, since you split expenses.

Listen, the phrase is “happily ever after”. All of us girls grew up with that promise. So when you’re an unhappy young girl, what better remedy than living-in with a man?

I literally can’t even follow this logic. It’s such a reductive, condescending way to judge people’s life choices.

Then she says cohabitation comes often from a place of denial, quoting one caller:

“I feel he does love me, but he holds back” is her explanation for the live-in boyfriend’s desire to sex-sap with other couples.

I’m pretty sure he’s just into swinging, but okay? I hope he found someone who likes to swing to spend his days with instead. I hope she found someone who doesn’t to spend time with, too. I hope these callers ended up happy despite the judgemental, bigoted advice they got.

Moving in with a  man when you don’t know how he feels is to try and make him feel something toward you. THat’s demeaning and stupid. It is about you auditioning.

She uses as evidence of this a caller whose boyfriend keeps saying he doesn’t feel ready to get married. And you know what? young people who have only been together a year might not be ready to get married! That’s okay!

Dr Laura’s advice? If he’s content to live together and she’s not content, she should move out so that he’s discontent and therefore will make changes such as marrying her. She suggests that he offered to go to therapy with her, and Dr Laura’s reply was cold and dismissive:

Dr Laura: That’s nice too. But right now I’m not interested in him. I’m concerned about you. Diana, leave. eave because living with him is making you feel bad about yourself. That’s why you shouldn’t be there. It is damaging to you.

Note that Diana didn’t say she was unhappy with the living arrangements — she just wants to get married, and he isn’t ready yet.

(Toxic monogamy is this: you want something and your partner can’t provide it yet so you throw out the baby with the bathwater and leave him forever, endlessly searching for the one person who will fit all your desires perfectly, until you get lucky or decide to settle for less).

Later she literally equates living together with prostitution:

Women have to know of their alternatives to selling themselves. And they have to be able to use their courage and creativity in ways that make them choosers, not beggars.

I feel like the alternative to “selling themselves” is a lesbian duplex, but okay.

I pointed out to Yolanda that when you move in with a man without a commitment, he already knows one crucial thing: He doesn’t have to do much to get you. Then he fools around, and you stay, and he learns something more:: He doesn’t have to do much to keep you either.

In other words: it’s her fault he cheated, because she was “easy”.

“Commitments don’t stop people from being abusive, unloving, unfaithful, or just plain annoying. Commitments don’t even stop people from dumping each other. So– big deal.”

Well, the statistics prove that commitment is a big deal

But they don’t — they don’t say what she thinks they say, and the fact that she interpreted them as cut-and-dried proof is on her even if the real cause wasn’t widely publicised yet.

Having sex-too-son, moving in without commitment or life plans in concert, are the behaviors of basically immature, let-me-feel-good-right-now-because-I-want-it-therefore-it-is kind of people.

What’s wrong with feeling good right now? Does every relationship have to be forever? Is there point to dating without marriage as a goal? I clearly feel there is. Dr Laura doesn’t even bother touching on these items; she just writes them all off as immature and moves on.

Susan called me to discuss her boyfriend’s immature and manipulative behavior, which she was determined to change!

Dr Laura: You live with him?

Susan: Yes.

Dr Laura: You got sexual too soon. You moved in too soon.

Dr Laura sees what she wants to see.

Grown-ups should know that they don’t get the goodies legitimately unless they have earned them.

We’re done here. I’m pulling the plug on this chapter if all she has to offer are ad-hominems and assumptions.

Posted in Deconstructions, Dr Laura | Tagged , , | 3 Comments

Dr Laura: Ch 4

I know I’ve been gone a while. Here’s why: I open the book to my bookmark and see the chapter’s subtitle “Oooh, aah, we’re breathing hard… it must mean love”.

Then I close the book.

The sheer scorn and lack of empathy dripping from the page is painful. She just lives and breathes misogyny at every turn. How did people read this and think, oh yes, this woman was enlightened, she’s a hard-hitting no-nonsense woman who really has her head on straight? I guess the same way they voted for Trump. This was happening in 1994 when this book was published. People have always been suckered by bigotry posing as no-nonsense facts.

Chapter four is about “Stupid Passion”


“We will sell no wine before its time.” Would that more women would display the same attitude toward sex!


And please don’t accuse me of being a throwback to the double-standard days without considering the increasing numbers of unwanted pregnancies, abortions, venereal diseases, and broken hearts since the sexual revolution told us: “Hey, baby, you have the same right to fun ‘n’ games as men do.”

First of all, you’re a bigot.

Secondly, you’re not even accurate:

Unintended pregnancy rates decreased in all world regions

“Abortion has been on a nearly steady decline since the rate peaked in 1980,”

In general, data on reported STDs in the USA showed steady increases during the 1960s, with a levelling off or decline of most of the bacterial STDs but continual increases in viral STDs and genital chlamydial infections during the 1970s and 1980s. National reports of gonorrhoea and syphilis began declining at different times and at different rates in all industrialised countries during the late 1980s and 1990s

I don’t think the government tracks broken hearts, but overall, all those trends slope downwards decade after decade. There may have been an upswing in the 60s and 70s, but the more education you get out there, the rates all drop consistently. Certainly by 1994 the tide was turning.

The first case study: someone who fell in love, had sex, and found out the man didn’t see her the same way. The answer to that is a frank conversation, not a moratorium on sex.

I am not saying women should do a virgin-till-death act to make a man see them as pure, good, or a prize to be won. […] However, a man who is heavily indoctrinated in a fundamentalist mentality would require a mate in kind — perhaps a better pan than the sexual chaos we have now.

Hot take: a man who is heavily indoctrinated in a fundamentalist mentality is garbage and you deserve better. These men do not want you to have pleasure, or control over your own body, or fundamental rights. These men want you to sit down, shut up, and simper at them. You’d think this is the kind of hard truth Dr Laura claims to be willing to give her clients — and yet, all she can offer is the same tired opinion that you should give men what they want, because heaven forbid you have standards.

Let’s face it, it’s perfectly possible to have a complete discussion with a man who seems to be on the same wavelength only to find out he is a liar, that he is someone playing a game with others.

So the alternative is to never talk to people, but instead give them what they want without question?

Finally, I’m much more concerned with you playing games with yourselves — expecting pleasure while you’re actually setting yourselves up for pain.

This is the fundie trope again: women can’t have equitable relationships or real pleasure, and therefore when men behave badly it’s all the women’s fault.

Her next case study is a woman who slept with a married man. That’s an easy target — except watch carefully what happens here:

The “mistake” turned out to be getting sexully invovled with a very close friend’s husband. […] Although it had only happened once some five weeks earlier, it plagued her. When I asked Tiffany why she’d done it in the first place, she initially claimed she didn’t know, and then. . .

(notice the language here: “claimed”. Because women always lie about their motivations.)

And I don’t know exactly why… except… I thought that I needed to help him, in a way… because his wife.. my friend… had just died two weeks before and now I… I feel like I betrayed her…

The wife is dead. There’s no cheating happening here! Just two people, grieving, and coping with that grief, maybe in an unhealthy way (though it’s hard to be sure behind the Dr Laura filter).

Dr Laura: You didn’t do this to her. You obviously have done something to hurt yourself. Do you like this man? Did you have warmies for him when she was alive?

(WARMIES. What the fuck.)

Tiffany: I don’t think so… Well… yes and no… yes….

Dr Laura: So you already coveted him in your heart. And now there was the opportunity

This is again puritan sexual ethics: having sexual feelings for someone is “coveting”, and makes her 100% responsible for what they both did together later.

She suggests calling the man and telling him that she feels used. Tiffany says that both parties pulled back, but Dr Laura buffalos past her, saying “But he pulled back first?” until she agrees. She also insists Tiffany say no until she’s sure he’s gotten past his wife’s death — not saying a word about how Tiffany should deal with her own grief. That just doesn’t come up. At all.

Dr Laura is a shitty psychologist.

Only after making it clear that things are the women’s fault does she talk about how couples should talk things over, how it’s more intimate to talk about sex than to do it.

The rest of the chapter is just… bland. She talks about how sexual intimacy can hide deeper self-esteem issues, how jumping into bed with someone can be a patch over poor self-esteem, how you won’t find a lasting relationship until you figure out if you’re compatible in non-sexual ways, how the right age to start having sex is the age at which you can maturely handle the consequences (which is different for everyone). This is the “clean your room” part of the Jordan Peterson message: the boring, vanilla advice sandwiched between layers of misogyny and victim-blaming.

Posted in Deconstructions, Dr Laura | Tagged , , , , , | 3 Comments