![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
OH JOHN RINGO NO!
With all the business about this kind of skeevy crap (not to mention the fact there's a massive case of failboat here), is it wrong that I'm perversely pleased that OH JOHN RINGO NO has become a catchphrase (![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
hradzka must be proud!)?
No, seriously. It's not everyday one is present at the birth of an Internet meme and has the commenting record to prove it.
What? Don't look at me like that.
Anyway, Unfunny Business on Journalfen is going a bit of a round-up on the business.
As for me, I only have one question:
Why is it that whenever someone (usually male) decides that it's time to get "sex positive," it's invariably the women who need to "get over their issues" so they can participate? Also, why is it that they're the ones who usually end up at the receiving end of whatever insane little "sex positive" experiment is being done?
Strange how that works, hunh?
Look, if a woman says the idea of such a "sex positive" experiment (read: giving men a free pass on treating female-type people like meat) is skeevy, it does not mean she's "got sexual issues," or "lacks a sense of humor," or is "anti-feminism."
What it means is that she reserves the right to do one or all of the following if you pull that shit on her:
1) Mace your ass
2) Rip your nuts off
3) Call the cops and press sexual assault charges
It also means that she (and I imagine quite a lot of men) don't like it when complete strangers grope any part of their anatomy, erogenous zone or not.
Seriously, what the hell is wrong with some people that they don't get that?
That said, seeing OH JOHN RINGO NO plastered all over this tempest has had me giggling like a loon all day (much love tothe_red_shoes for using it first in reference to this).
hradzka must be proud!)?No, seriously. It's not everyday one is present at the birth of an Internet meme and has the commenting record to prove it.
What? Don't look at me like that.
Anyway, Unfunny Business on Journalfen is going a bit of a round-up on the business.
As for me, I only have one question:
Why is it that whenever someone (usually male) decides that it's time to get "sex positive," it's invariably the women who need to "get over their issues" so they can participate? Also, why is it that they're the ones who usually end up at the receiving end of whatever insane little "sex positive" experiment is being done?
Strange how that works, hunh?
Look, if a woman says the idea of such a "sex positive" experiment (read: giving men a free pass on treating female-type people like meat) is skeevy, it does not mean she's "got sexual issues," or "lacks a sense of humor," or is "anti-feminism."
What it means is that she reserves the right to do one or all of the following if you pull that shit on her:
1) Mace your ass
2) Rip your nuts off
3) Call the cops and press sexual assault charges
It also means that she (and I imagine quite a lot of men) don't like it when complete strangers grope any part of their anatomy, erogenous zone or not.
Seriously, what the hell is wrong with some people that they don't get that?
That said, seeing OH JOHN RINGO NO plastered all over this tempest has had me giggling like a loon all day (much love to
the_red_shoes for using it first in reference to this).
no subject
Let's see, in my experience? ComicCon, no. Dragon*Con, no. WriterCon, sure as hell no. Maybe behind closed doors, but no where did I see anything like that in public. Arisia? Hell yes. Wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if this boob touching became the rage there. One of the reasons I stopped going because it skeeved me out too much.
no subject
Which is probably why there's such a negative response to this; Cons are not 100% safe, but they are safer for some of us, most of the time, and we don't want this to be a public gauntlet we have to deal with, hunh.