09 March, 2010

Oh no you did not just say that

I was catching up on my procrastination when Hairy Bloke (the manly man himself) twittered this, in hipster magazine Platform. And I know that anything he refers to as "impressively, deeply, deeply offensive stuff" is probably going to be bad.

So I read it.

And then I frothed at the mouth.

And now I blog.

The article is titled "Ways Not To Fuck Up A Fuck". I hereby suggest it be retitled "Lessons In 'Nice Guy' Douchebaggery and How To Be A Misogynistic Arse".

The first how-not-to is called "Lying about having already done it", and the result is, apparently,
"Two things then happen: she feels totally violated and refuses to talk to you (this shit is worse than rape for some girls), and the guy tells everyone what a fucking loser you are for lying about it."
Oh yes. Because some silly skinny-jeans wearing trust-fund "artist" tells his friends he's had sex with you in order to mark you as "his", this is somehow worse than rape. I wonder if Robert Foster has ever found himself agreeing with the sentiments "she was wearing a short skirt so she was asking for it" or "having her handbag stolen is more traumatic".

On to the next section, titled "Getting mad that it’s not happening":
"After a few weeks of being a nice fucking guy (probably about a month of talking on the phone, meeting on lunch breaks and staying over but getting nothing) things get pretty frustrating. If nothing at all has happened at the six week mark, leave it, because she knows what the fuck is up but she just doesn’t find you attractive and the best thing you can do is walk away, cos if she’s the kind of self-involved bitch that keeps a sucker hanging around for 6 weeks then she’ll miss the attention and be on your dick in no time".
Buh? Maybe, Robert Foster, she didn't want to jump into bed with you straight away because she had an inkling that because you're a "nice fucking guy" you are actually a woman-hating entitled dickwad who thinks being nice to someone with tits and a vagina automatically results in you being able to put your penis inside her. Here's a tip, Robert Foster: no, it doesn't.

"If you haven’t been intimate with someone but they gave you the gift of their number or their BBM, they might be a little into you, which is totally fair enough, you’re a nice guy and you were funny and you bought her a drink but didn’t force her to hang out with you overly long, follow her around the bar like a psycho cos you got too drunk or wink at her or any of that shit."
Still doesn't entitle you to a shag. Ever. Do you know why, Robert Foster? Because you bought her a drink. She gave you her number. It's not an all-access pass to her vagina. But it's ok, because you're a "nice fucking guy" who equates dating-but-not-having-sex as ruining some poor man's life.

But Robert Foster doesn't stop there.

"Sleeping in their bed and trying it on over and over again
If you’ve been trying and trying with a girl who’s not so sure but at least keen to talk to you, and it gets really late and she says you can sleep over at hers, but then stipulates a ‘no funny business’ clause in the verbal contract of you sleeping in her bed, then you’ve got to suck it up and take it, pal. ‘No’ does sometimes mean ‘yes’, but if she’s been firm about it before you’ve got under the covers, then just roll over and go to sleep, safe in the knowledge that you’ve made some healthy baby steps towards wetting your dick but tonight is not the night.

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, you really did read that right.

"'No' does sometimes mean 'yes'"

He said it.

What. The. Blithering. Fuck?


You know what that is, Robert Foster? That, Mr "nice fucking guy" is called the Women-Hating Rape Apologist's Favourite Line. And it's BOLLOCKS. No =/= yes. It is that fucking simple. They are two entirely mutually-exclusive answers. Opposite answers, in fact. No is used to express refusal or denial, and yes is used to express permission, acceptance. If you, or anyone else, is having issues confusing the two, might I suggest a quiet evening spent with the dictionary, or possibly a role-playing scenario. Or therapy.

The entire article is a stream of women-hating douchebaggery, of the worst variety, because it tries to come across as funny and cool. It's not funny. It's not even a little bit funny, it's just offensive. It's just nasty. It's misogynist claptrap. And it's really, really not fucking hipster.


  1. That sounds pretty typical of so much stuff on the internet which is basically advocating misogyny. Funny how it isn't a crime but encouraging racial hatred is?

  2. One Way Not To Fuck Up A Fuck: ignore this shite.

  3. As an aside, I'm getting rather concerned at these Fail-like comparisons of "funny how racial hatred is criminalised, but not sexism" and other such phrases to that effect. Just as I have no right to trivialise - and wouldn't dream of for a second - any woman's shitty experiences arising out of sexism, I would respectfully ask that people at least think before they post such phrases, not least because the phrasing tends to trivialise racism inadvertently. Having been on the receiving end of many a racial epithet (geographically mistaken, I might add, since Bangladesh isn't part of Pakistan anymore, unless time stopped for you in November 1971), it is beginning to bug me now.
    Back to post: Funny, if he was such a nice guy, he wouldn't be ranting like a moron over it. Robert Foster fails at life. And with women, obviously.
    Great post as always :-).

  4. I tell you what. This guy definitely isn't getting laid anytimes soon with this attitude. What a self-centred prick. And he's supposedly a nice guy? I nervously anticipate the next instalment of "BOO HOO why don't the wimmins like the nice guys?" blogwanking. And if the nice guys are anything like him, there's your answer.

  5. So racism isn't trivial but sexism is? No sorry I can't agree that it trvialises racism at all - both are about treating other people disrespectfully.

  6. Please read and tell me where I said sexism was trivial.

  7. "Funny how it isn't a crime, but encouraging racial hatred is?"

    It is essentially implying that ethnic minorities get a privileged position over everyone else in society by dint of the comparison to the lack of protection afforded against sexism. The statement therefore casts protection against racial hatred in a negative light because race is seen as getting greater priority of protection than sex. Having been on the receiving end of racial
    abuse when I was younger, that was why i took great issue with the statement.
    You're right on your second post, both do involve treating others disrespectfully, but rather than taking it out on the protection offered to ethnic minorities, have a go at the short-sighted legislation that omitted that protection against sexist speech.

  8. i think anyone who's ever had and even slightly interesting sex life would agree that no sometimes does mean yes...

  9. what has this bit:

    "Oh yes. Because some silly skinny-jeans wearing trust-fund "artist" tells his friends he's had sex with you in order to mark you as "his", this is somehow worse than rape."

    got to do with this bit?:

    "I wonder if Robert Foster has ever found himself agreeing with the sentiments "she was wearing a short skirt so she was asking for it""

    they don't seem connected in any way at all, but in your blog they're sequential sentences... seems a bit of a leap really. there's quite a lot of massive leaps in this piece. it's all a bit alarmist don't you think?

    ps HI! i wrote this. Relax girls, I was trying to tell awkward boys not to let their masculinity get in the way of getting laid (getting laid is fun remember?), not trying to get them to rape you all and get paid more than you in the workplace. Do you get this angry every time a man writes about sex? Yeeesh.

  10. Robert - Then I would consider adding something along these lines - "no means no, except in pre-agreed situations with distinct rules of engagement, safe words and regular questions to ensure your partner is comfortable". "No means yes" not only makes it seem that rape is ok and consent not needed, but is one of the reasons the BDSM community struggles to make people understand, and why play within that community is so tightly controlled.

    As far as the possible leap, I suggest reading this article: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-mayor/article-23470426-women-more-troubled-by-bag-theft-than-rape-bnp-candidate-claims.do before making further "worse than rape" comparisons. Because it might sound like a flippant comment to you, but to many women - and men - seeing manchild silliness as worse than rape trivialises the very real trauma victims go through. It would be like telling someone with severe depression to "just get over it" or someone in hospital for pneumonia "oh it's just a cold, don't be such a wimp".

    Do I get this angry whenever a man writes about sex? No. I do get angry, however, with "nice guy" idiocy and woman-hating. And the phrase "no sometimes means yes" - because really, tell that to the one in four women who have experienced rape, attempted rape, or sexual assault (http://www.rapecrisis.org.uk/law/statistics.html), and see if they agree with you.

  11. To Robert above - please don't address us as "girls." We on this blog are fully grown adult women and men. To talk about girls and consensual sex in the same sentence doesn't look fantastic, does it? You can refer to your readers as "boys" all you like, they may well be boys, I have no idea as I've never read your publication save for Emma's link above, but please do not attempt to belittle us by referring to us as children.

  12. wow, you didn't publish my reply. that's pretty pathetic no? could you not think of a reply? maybe i won the argument. thats probably it. yeah, i won.

    aren't you up for discussion? surely that's censorship? i don't think the pc police will approve of that. what about how i'm jewish? by your own hysterical logic doesn't that make you as bad as the nazis?

    yawn. you guys are never going to get the "lovely man to come and buy [you] lots of nice clothes and give [you] babies"

    hasn't everything that's said on this blog ever has been said before, years ago, back when women's lib was actually a real issue?

    these days isn't it just just boring girls with nothing else in their life who wish they were part of a real, actual minority with real, actual problems?

    see ya girls. xxxx

  13. Ladies, it really is nice to know that we wield so much power that men feel the need to justify the fact that their personality flaws aren't the reason that they don't get game, but rather it's because we refuse to see them for the Nice Guys that they are.

    I, for one, am involved with a Good Man. This is different from a Nice Guy. Most women are aware of this distinction. Most men, it seems, are not.

    My Good Man knows that NO means NO (outside of the bounds of sexual roleplay with pre-arranged safe words). A Nice Guy, according to Mr. Foster, is one who thinks that sometimes a NO means a YES. How wonderfully patronizing. The Nice Guy thinks that they know a woman's mind better than she does, whereas a Good Man accepts that a woman has autonomy and can make decisions, even contrary ones, and respect is paramount.

    I'm glad I've passed on Nice Guys, especially if they're taking advice from someone such as Mr. Foster.

  14. You're so right, Robert. Women's lib is no longer an issue. I mean, really, who cares that in the UK women are still paid less than men for doing the same work, and that paid maternity leave is 39 weeks while paternity leave is 2 weeks. That for an academic article by a woman to be published it will be judged to a standard twice that of the standard set for men. That 70% of the world's poor are women. That only 11% of seats in parliaments worldwide are held by women. That women do twice the unpaid work that men do. That one in four women in the UK face sexual assault, rape, or attempted rape. That school is the most common site of sexual assault and coercion of girls.

  15. See when I read the blog there were three distinct images about the writer forming in my head. 1) he's been chasing tail of women who want relationships that have some meaning beyond futile sex, hence he's been failing, and thus makes him bitter 2) he's probably watched a David Lynch film (most likely Mulholland Drive) and wonders why this doesn't impress people, recommend some Jodorsky next perhaps, though tbh using art as a tool rather than enjoying it on its own means you get a full sense of enjoyment, you know like watching a good film or listening to a great album, lack of which makes him sardonic and a wee bit empty, and 3) is so unbelievably shallow and egocentric this 'advice' isn't about sharing wisdom but reinforcing his own views then defending them to the hilt.

    Of course I shouldn't make these wild assumptions without backing them up, and having clicked on the troll postee I found his other blogs and found this little article http://doomedforeverandever.blogspot.com/2008/05/bad-sex.html which I thought wasn't so much adorable as a clear highlighting of an unstable heartless and probably sociopathic mind.

    Finally as a 'nice guy' all that I've read, said and done, all the conversations, the religious (or lack thereof) morals and cultural debris that is me has it ever occurred to CA that respecting women and not seeing them as potential mates might actually make his life nicer and easier?

  16. @ Wellis: I was going to quote a section of the article at the link you posted. Unfortunately, the offensive bit never ended, and the quote would have been too long. Nonetheless, thank you for demonstrating clearly how "nice" and "adorable" Robert actually is (interesting that these are both monikers he has chosen for himself).

    @ Robert: you're not 'adorable', nor do you appear to be a nice guy. Your writing reeks of resentment and misogyny, and is embedded in an absolute dearth of self-awareness.

    You describe yourself as 'rotund' and go on to completely slate the object of your lust (or not) in the article Wellis uncovered. You employ homophobic language and are, to cut a very long story short, a troll of the most hideous and unimaginative type. Your attempts to be controversial, original and, indeed, a writer of any class, fail miserably and both men and women in great numbers find you repellent. Rather than flapping about on this blog, squawking your lack of education into cyberspace, why not actually go away and educate yourself on something. Anything.

  17. "(getting laid is fun remember?)"

    Yes! Yes it is! Unfortunately, if you carry on treating women in the manner your article would lead me to believe you consider acceptable, you will never discover this fact.

    It's attitudes like the ones expressed which make women even more likely to despise men. Honestly, if you behave this way, you deserve our contempt.

  18. Ah Robert, my dear lad, I used to be the same as you. Having racked up my fair share of rejections, I too descended into a wasting furious blob of bitterness.
    Ever thought, though, that getting laid means sweet Fanny Adams in the grand scheme of things? Get fixated on that and all you're going to do is make a mess of yourself, especially when you're completely hung up on the idea that the "Nice Guy finishes last". Have you ever wondered whether you're actually a nice guy or whether you're just doing it to pick women up? Do you show everybody worthy of compassion such a trait, or is it merely a means to a somewhat selfish ends?
    Seriously, do something worthwhile with your life. You don't want to be just another statistic under the column headed "Self-indulgent Waster". Take it from someone who's been there and wants to forget about it.

  19. HAHAHA! Robert tried to make out that he was a Good Man as opposed to a Nice Guy (thanks for that Ryn, most handy) with his first comment. Then, when aforementioned comment didn't appear INSTANTLY, he threw his toys out of the pram and delivered a textbook-perfect example of Nice Guy misogyny. Oh hang on, sorry, that's offensive to babies, all of whom can muster more charm than Robert.

    That's what most people call a FAIL, I believe. Learn to read, Robert - some of us ARE minorities (Sayem, myself) and pulling the Jewish card like you did is pathetic and insulting to all those Jews out there who manage not to be utter tosswipes.

    And finally - it is too too beautiful that a guy worrying about his getting laid is telling other people they don't have 'real, actual problems'! Wank - I mean, walk on.

  20. hi girls, me again!

    good luck getting those boyfriends.

    in the meantime: http://www.readplatform.com/bitchez-aint-shit-a-riposte-by-tuvshin-bolor/

    (ps, you woulda got the jewish joke if she'd published my first comment... the internet's fun huh?)

    pps KJB, i was telling other people how to get laid, not worrying about it myself, i'm fine!

  21. you need to read platform and understand that they are this type of magazine than you may realise that its more jokey and for a reputation of them not giving a fuck about what they say.

  22. Firstly, please tell me you're being ironic when you say you're "waiting for a man to buy you nice clothes" in your personifesto thing - leaving yourself within striking distance of the 'women are money grabbing hos' stick that misogynists beat you with doesn't seem particularly smart.
    Secondly, why the hell do you want to associate a struggle for equality with the word Nazi? Calling him out for trivializing rape in the first paragraph (which I agree he is, but unintentionally so) seems a bit rich when you litter your own blog with such an offensive word.
    Thirdly, why are you reacting so severely to the 'no means yes' paragraph? Your response reads like you only read those words and not the rest of the paragraph. It's obvious that he's willing to accept a 'no', he's just saying there are rare occasions when an evening can change trajectory unexpectedly, but unless there are strong hints to do otherwise, you sit alongside her in the bed and STFU.
    I agree that his article is written in a misogynistic tone but it hardly warrants you labeling him a 'rape apologist'. There's no evidence in that article that he is, if anything is suggests he's the opposite.

  23. Feminazis - Robert is the kind of shoreditch twat who claims to be a writer (but can't spell), political (but doesn't vote), a stud (but only gets laid when he and his victims are out of their minds on lager and shit MDMA) and a macho no-nonsense man (but can't throw a punch).

    He's trying to tell lame geezers to stop following girls around who aren't really interested, but because he is a mouthy Nathan Barley-style douche he cannot do it in terms other than offensive schlockery.

    I do not for one minute believe he is a rape apologist, or even a misogynist, just a minor pratt.

    Robert - I get ad hominem on your ass because this was a great opportunity to explain yourself and your writing as being comedic, or not commenting at all (the true artist cares little for reviews or criticism, or truly involves in the dialogue: yet, by telling people to 'chill' and calling them 'girls' (when, in fact, several are male, and the rest women), you blew it.

  24. ps khan, you're right except i'm teetotal.

    are you implying you can get good MDMA? I've heard feminists have the best drugs.

    don't you think the nathan barley comparison is already 6 years too late? you should find some more lazy stereotypes to compare me to.

    Right on sisters!

  25. I'm not sure why you so readily associate a normal male sex drive with deviance, Foster is trying to teach young guys to channel this in a gentlemanly way, and being "somewhat tongue-in-cheek" about it too. (I don't get the blatant Nazi joke but the blistering lack of humour regarding his much less offensive satire). This article is just as narrow-minded and unforgiving for women as you claim his is.
    Maybe read through the rest of the Platform website, get an idea of their style and readership and maybe it will teach you to be more good-natured about what I found to be essentially sweet and harmless.

  26. wow. im a woman in the 21st century...are you guys?

    im going with no.

    feminism? you need to grab the fire extinguisher and stop your bras burning. feminism makes me feel sick, its 2010 and you guys are still banging on about shit like this? picking fights over blogs? so lame. its a 'hipster' website and to be offended by what someone in an office is writing is also incredibly lame. i highly doubt mr foster is away out to rape girls who say no to him, because in his mind it means yes. as someone else said you need to know platform to understand what they write.

    perhaps you've been so busy being crazy feminazis that you've lost track of what feminism actually did to a generation of women, it ruined them and more importantly their children.

    a blog whole heartedly created and labeled as 'feminazi'? show me to the vomitarium please

  27. Sam, if you can't tell that the Personifesto is ironic then I'd suggest it is you who's lost their sense of humour. Seriously, try reading it again. Here's a hint: if you say "THIS IS IRONY" after everything ironic you say, it kind of loses a little nuance. And most people aren't that dim.

    Secondly, use of the word Feminazi, though slightly controversial, is an act of reclamation - I suggest purchasing a dictionary or using one of the many fine online sites offering such services and look it up.

    Thirdly, again, if you can't tell how claiming that "yes means no" is incredibly dangerous and creates instant excuse for rape, you should probably spend less time on the internet and more time in school.

    Factory Girl - Versatile an excuse as "but it's like totally a *joke* man!" invariably is, misogyny is misogyny, wherever the author has rammed his tongue.

  28. the comments on our site are much more fun to read. i bet you guys are hard work at parties.

    that shit at the top of your site doesn't sound ironic, it sounds like you're saying 'we're all normal girls underneath, don't worry!'

    you guys love alanis morrisette right? she knows the true meaning of the word.

    maybe what i was saying was ironic all along!!!!

    are you having fun? I'm having fun!

    THIS IS SO FUN!!!!

    seig heil girls! (cos of your name! get it?! like i said, this is the most fun!!!!!)

    i should really go do some real work.

  29. Hi V. I've missed this.

    There is no point engaging in any kind of philosophical or dogmatic discourse with a bunch of meowed-up DFA fans who think 'culture' is the Queen of Hoxton and 'art' is that guy who shat in a pint glass and threw it at the audience. They've all got herpes anyway.

    Just accept them for what they are - professional trolls - and never log into Vice again, unless Karley's talking, because she speaks The Truth.

    Oh another point Robert - having missed one of your particularly smug posts, I thought you were taking the piss. Then I saw this:

    "hasn't everything that's said on this blog ever has been said before, years ago, back when women's lib was actually a real issue?

    these days isn't it just just boring girls with nothing else in their life who wish they were part of a real, actual minority with real, actual problems"

    Oh shit. You're for real. You ARE stupid, and ignorant. Seriously dude, for a guy with the best private education money can buy (open FB profile when acting like a cunt = FAIL), I am surprised that you share the social monocle of a Mail reader.

    Quick tutorial:

    - Rape. There's a lot of it, even in this country (20% of omen have been sexually assaulted in the UK and 5-10% raped. Ouch). A lot of people still think that women are 'asking for it' if they act or dress a certain way. Read a bit.

    - Pay/gender gap. Look at a female-dominated industry (say, publishing) and see how many senior execs are female. Just take a look. I know you know people who work in these industries.

    - And, last but not least, that you live in a world - an educated, well-heeled world - where young, graduate males who view themseleves to be liberal and open-minded, constantly speak of women in derogatory terms and resort to pathetic, childish 'tactics', reading the game and genuinely observing 'seduction culture' when, really, all you need to do is be good at shit and comfortable in yourself and you will basically get what you want with people who want the same things.


  30. grow up all of you, we all want the same thing no? sex, money, pancakes, comfort and the A team.

    I mean really if a guy writing about how other guys shouldn't be such cocks to women really grinds your gears you have serious problems. Most men would love to have someone special in their life but 90% of the time the women aren't what they're looking for. This leads to a problem cause men want to sexytime all over the place, and when they don't call the poor WOMAN back DRAMA.

    It's a fact of life have you not seen a single rom-com? ugh?

    Rob was simply trying to tell guys how to enjoy the company of a special WOMAN without being a pushy dick.

    and sometimes no does mean yes. i do that all the time.


  31. add me if you like!

    why aren't you guys publishing my comments?

    what do you care i went to boarding school? what's that got to do with anything?

    yeesh. this is all so sixth form!

  32. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  33. also, DFA was 5 years ago! and nathan barley even longer!

    if you know my world so well then why don't you know those things?

    i don't care about statistics, all i think is that writing a blog saying 'women are equal' 10000000 times to a bunch of people that already agree that women are equal is a pretty pointless exercise. seems like a lot of this is about pomposity and self-gratification rather than actually doing anything about it?

  34. We are, it's just that some of us are working, or have had better things to do to sit and wait for you to spew yet more idiocy.

    Iona - I'm not entirely sure how feminism has ruined a generation of women and children? Do you like being able to vote, have an abortion should you need one, and be able to support yourself without requiring a husband? Excellent. Now, how do you feel about the Stern report?

    Robert - unfortunately it is still assumed that a private school education is somehow better, and that therefore you might have a smidgen of a clue, rather than worrying about irony and what people think of you.

    Anna - I don't think a normal sex drive is deviant. I think Robert crossed the line from "hoxditch twit being vaguely amusing while discussing the dating scene" to "misogynistic"

  35. This comment has been removed by the author.

  36. The Lib Dems need clearly need to campaign for IQ and articulacy permits to use the internet as well as all that download malarky.

    I mean, I get feminist rage as much as the next person, but it's these people's stupidity that genuinely offends me most. I know it's a truism that the thicker you are, the less you know it, but still. Come on Buffy for the Shoreditch Vampires, is all I can say.

  37. i can tell this is intelligent feminist discourse cos buffy gets a mention.

    i can't believe you guys are standing by this article, it's pompous, alarmist and humourless and discredits anything of worth on your blog by being so irrational.

    why aren't you getting stuck into the comments on our site? is it because you'd rather just be around 100 people that agree with you than have to deal with other people calling you out on your bullshit?

  38. Robert - that was my point. It's dated and unoriginal, and your lot fret about things being 'so last year' when you should be thinking about the future, and an STI check-up. I was winding you up. You probably claim to like hardcore or heavy rock now anyway (hands off). It'll be swing-death fusion next month. Or Paula Abdul. I can never tell.

    MDMA sucks right now but I can get better coke if that helps?

    Listen, I don't for a minute think you're a misogynist but I enjoy dissing folk in a cruel and unjustifiable manner as much as you do. I know exactly what you were trying to do with your piece, and understand the mouthy humour employed by writers of your genre (just not a fan, for the reasons I outlined earlier). Hence why I wrote what I wrote two posts previous. I feel hurt and offended that I have been forced to justify this, but have done so anyway. You could have done likewise.

    I just think there is always a line, a point when - whether you think people are up their own arses or not - you have caused offence.

    And sorry pal, while blogging on dude-loserdom vs getting laid is fine (if tiresome), flippant comments about rape are never on. And once that was made, everything you wrote was understandably taken in that context.

    Don't care if you or your pals think it's funny, but there is a deep concern that people do not take rape seriously enough and with great power, to quote spiderman, comes great responsibility. In your world men and women are pretty much equal. Kind of works that way for me too. But look a touch higher up and you'll see it isn't, and look a touch lower down and you'll see it's not even close. I'm sure it's all pretty sweet at your work, but look up to the board of whatever publishing or media agency owns your magazine. I'm sure hardly any of your girlfriends get beat up on or raped by the men they know, but take a look at the shit that goes down yards from you, probably, given that you almost certainly live within jizzing distance of Mare Street. Zis, my child, is the problem. Social goggles. Lose 'em.

    I'm outta here. This is a tit-for-tat between people on the same side of the fence, with one group trying to creosote it while the other pisses up it. Can't we just all get along?

  39. No, Charmblossom, you can't "tell this is intelligent feminist discourse cos buffy gets a mention", but others can probably tell it's a reference to your unwitting comedy that "Shoreditch Vampires" did.

    But thanks for proving my point a second time, mocking morons is never as fun as witnessing them deliver their own punchlines.

  40. Serious question for Double Agent Khan.

    Why did you type 'The Truth' instead of 'the truth'?

  41. I can not actually believe what i am reading here...

    I was subjected to a sexual assualt when i was younger, which in itself is hard enough to write, and i now council rape victims. So don't you dare censor this comment.

    I am absolutely disgusted that you have taken Robert Foster's lite hearted article which is clearly talking about the concept of no means yes as in playing hard to get and lowered it to the level of a man forcing himself upon a woman.

    How on earth you misinterpreted that piece of writing in such a monumental way is beyond me.
    And in such a sick way at that.

    You are almost on par with the lowlifes who cry rape and damage the credibility of true victims. You should be thouroughly ashamed of yourself.

    Well done for including the word Nazi in your name as well. Thanks for that

  42. 2SHIN - because making it a proper noun implies righteousness.

    I also quite like Al Franken.

  43. Em - because I believe that when "no means yes" is bandied about, especially within the context of a sexual or potentially sexual relationship, it has the effect of watering down the message of "no means no"; if people are taught to consider that "no means yes" then it is easier to justify rape. Which is what Robert's article did in my eyes. Obviously you feel different, which is your prerogative.

    As to our name, Feminazery, it is an act of reducing the power that being continually dismissed as raging feminazies whenever we admit to being feminist. If anti-feminists wish to give us that name, then we'll use it, just like bitch, dyke, queer and all the other words.

  44. Mornington, when extremists made all that fuss over a teacher naming a teddy bear mohammed it made a mockery of and trivialised the true racism and descrimination Muslims face.

    When you dramatise a toungue in cheek article like the one in question you directly make a mockery of real life rape issues. You WANTED the article to be offensive, because being offended is your thing. If you are not already in counceling, as a psychotherapist, i would strongly suggest you seek some.

    You come accross as a confused fourteen year old girl who thinks she deserves to have a voice, but really has nothing to say, so therefore just ends up embarressing herself.

  45. Em, as someone who counsels rape victims you should surely know that for some survivors, people joking about rape can be hugely upsetting?

    I find it sad that you've worked yourself into such a state when we're essentially on the same side - we care about women who have been raped.

  46. V - not having a go, but perhaps "worked yourself into such a state" is a bit harsh!

    Em - I know it's frustrating when people opine about anything sensitive that you have been through and they may not have done, and it can feel patronising when they do (though for the record, this blog - which is a collective - isn't run solely by people who haven't been assaulted or raped either, which is worth remembering). However, even if you don't mind this article doesn't mean other people (who may or may not have been sexually assaulted too) can't or shouldn't.

  47. Em - you didn't find the original article upsetting. I did. As I have read articles from Platform (some of which were written by Foster) and other magazines in that ilk, I am used to the tone and style many of their writers like to adopt, however I did not expect to read what I did; I read it several times to see if I wasn't misreading it, or overreacting. I felt, however, that it crossed a line.

    As a psychotherapist, what then - in your opinion - should I be offended by? And when I am offended, what do you think is the best course of action?

  48. V- "Thirdly, again, if you can't tell how claiming that "yes means no" is incredibly dangerous and creates instant excuse for rape, you should probably spend less time on the internet and more time in school."

    Oh come off it, your response to virtually every counterargument made in the comments section has basically boiled down to 'if you don't agree with me, you're stupid'. A pretty underhanded tactic, no? And hardly one of someone who's confident in their argument. You're hardly dealing with extremists here..I'd be willing to bet that at least 95% of people I've ever met would agree that you've completely misinterpreted this article, and for one I think Em doesn't deserve to be patronized with "you've worked yourself into such a state".
    To re-iterate, it's quite obvious from that paragraph that he's saying that when a girl says something like 'you can stay over but no sex', 95% of the time they mean just that, but there is a slight chance that at some point they might make it BLINDINGLY OBVIOUS that this is not actually what they want. It's quite clear that you have no understanding of how somewhat shy people in their early 20s hook up, and to think that this article could potentially lead to a rape somewhere in the world is patently ridiculous. Just because the words 'sometimes', 'no', 'means', and 'yes' appear sequentially in the article does not mean he is saying that it is ok to force yourself on someone. I think you know that he's not saying this. I could pick out four words that appear sequentially somewhere on your blog, quote them out of context, and say you're spreading dangerous ideas, but I'd probably understand the paragraph they're contained in and know that to do so would be ridiculous.


Trolling, spamming, racism, sexism, fascism and bigotry are not welcome. Anyone engaging gratuitously in any and all of the above may be removed and ridiculed, and not necessarily in that order.