How many times are you going to this well? By now, the bottom is dry and cracked. I’m over here yawning. Please, for the love of God and the sake of good, interesting humor, get some new material and stop reading your Grandfather’s Mad Magazine archive.
OTOH, the inevitable shitstorm your latent mysogeny will cause will be very interesting to read.
BTW, the “bipolar/chill” binary doesn’t make sense, because bipolar is a mood disorder that fluctuates between “high” and “low” moods so to place it at the top is strange. Then again, most people don’t understand bipolar, so I’m not surprised–some even think it’s a personality disorder.
this morning, in response to my ‘men matrix,’ catherine lacey and ‘g.’ asked me to do a women matrix, and so i did. i feel htmlgiant is special b/c commenters can influence contributors, that there’s no impenetrable editorial wall.
making fun of men is cool, but 4 hrs later, doing the exact same thing to women is not cool. as a person who doesn’t really care about gender, i don’t understand this.
also many of these names were proposed and positioned by a woman, who incidentally studied feminism. so now what? and i know bipolar very well. the ‘high/mania’ and ‘low/depression’ are both ‘crazy,’ like the ‘low’ isn’t ‘chill’ so i don’t think there’s any flaw in my dichotomy there.
as for the bigger picture, the one were you ‘put me down,’ i’ve been writing free for this site since its inception, at work, at times getting behind in work (which pays) for this site, in order to maybe make some ppl smile, or something. this is called ‘being productive,’ ‘doing something,’ ‘creating.’ i like misogyny. i like racism. keeps people honest. keeps people humble maybe. but of course, you have your 1/2 minute of comment composition, and judgement, to be with you. let’s both sleep horribly 2nite.
Yes, Jimmy, I’m familiar with the, “it’s just a joke/can’t you take a joke!” logic when one defends bad humor. You didn’t need to waste all those words rationalizing what I already knew you were thinking before you hit, “post as.”
I’m glad you “like” misogyny and racism–whatever that means. “It keeps people honest”? WTF?
Do you mean, writing jokes/stories/poems/etc that probe bigotry in interesting, subversive ways keeps people honest? If so, yeah, I’d agree. Definitely. I don’t support whitewashed art at all and most of my favorite texts are fearless when tackling social ills, but at the same time, you don’t get a Subversive Pass just because you incorporate some racism and sexism into a text. That’s just silly.
hey! mr. MFBN&Improved (like your handle, actually, hey, yo)
you’re correct in that ‘that’s just silly’!
but it’s friday evening
and some of us around here are trying to have fun!
(and it’s still light out and gorgeous here in the bay area – yo yo yo – hey jimmy – and i haven’t eaten dinner yet but i’m approaching nirvana/three sheets to the wind/the white buffalo – )
do. you. mind.
ps – the divine miss flannery o’ is hovering somewhere above it all and above that matrix so, yeah, hey, whatever, yo
do you see how u just unsarcastically said ‘bad humor’ in the context of either earnestly aligning yourself with ‘objective truth’ (lol), or to simply insult me. i would hope, for the sake of this universe at large, for the latter.
I’m going to play a game. Here’s a game. I’m going to open a word document and paste all the typical, standard responses to a post like mine and then see how close I am when I check-in back here at around midnight. Should be fun.
Hey, guys. Y’all know who this is. I ran across the street to a friend’s house to post this. Wanna know why? Because one of the HTMLGiant admins banned me shortly after my last post on this thread, which means a) this comment will probably be deleted soon; b) I won’t be able to reply to any replies to my other posts on this thread and c) censorship here is alive and well.
It’s all good, though–it sort of confirms what I’ve always thought about The Suburban Boys Club in charge here.
But just in case you thought it was impossible to be IP-banned and censored from a site that makes jokes out of female “hysteria” and menstrual cycles, well, I’m here to prove otherwise–my posts on this thread prove that it is indeed possible to be banned on a site that is offended by my posts yet manages to cracks PMS-jokes at the expense of women! (it’s okay though, because Jimmy Chen ran the post by a few women and we all know that all women have an inherent ability to sniff out sexism because they are women…and in a future post, Jimmy Chen will run a potentially racist post by one of this black “friends” before hitting, “send.”)
For those of you who actually see writing as a way to serve your communities, who don’t “like” sexism and racism, and who unfashionably see writing as a way to better humanity, you might want to reconsider what some of these “funny” boys have to offer you and your artistic development. There has to be a better place.
Admins: please keep my ban intact. We’re cool–it’s all about “honesty,” right? I know how are you are now, and you know how I am, and so there’s no need to make this anything more than it is, so thanks for the blessing-in-disguise, since I obviously want no part of a place that advocates censorship. Adios!
people who are banned on htmlg always find a loophole to come back on and start shrieking “I WAS BANNED I WAS FUCKING BANNED ON FUCKING HTMLGIANT HOLY FUCK” like it’s some sort of exposé or something.
I would guess that you were banned because even htmlg has its limits. there is a type of commenter probably best described as simply an asshole. anyone who has been on htmlg more than a couple of times knows exactly how a thread of comments involving an asshole commenter will play out. it isn’t edgy or exciting anymore. maybe 2 years ago. I don’t know, but I bet you weren’t banned because you disagree with jimmy chen or even because you think he’s sexist and racist. I would imagine you were banned because you couldn’t register your disagreement like a civil human being.
i just half-slept thru ‘sex lies and videotape’ with lorian crunk off robitussin and bourbon and i made cheddar ham quesadillas and talked about heart break and loss so who’s the feminist here huh???? fuck yalls u can suck my balls thru my dralls as jay-z saidz
I too had my comment deleted and was blocked / just saying I blame Chen that Jackie Wang doesn’t post here anymore / nobody thinks that’s sad? / the best contributor @ HTML / also want to know where Chen Chen would place his mother and wife in the matrix? / w/ love
Wow. Is this html magazine or Maxim? And why does html publish this tripe. Do they have any standards at all? What will the next graph be? A graph on black writers where the poles will be “angry black” to “stepin fetchit?” Would this be “keeping it honest?” The stupidity of this graph is astonishing on all levels. If we’re comparing this to your odiously dumb men’s graph, wouldn’t it be girly/butch? Many of the women writers you mention are so outside the mother/whore paradigm — in fact, that’s why they’re interesting. It’s because they subverted those stereotypes or avoided them altogether. Why don’t you try to counteract your sexist reputation, html? Just a little?
that’s not fair, srsly. i read wang’s blog post about not wanting to write here because of me, which was kind of low, to publicly say that, because you should write either for yourself or your readership, and not in silent protest or opposition of someone. if jacky wang doesn’t write here, it’s because of jackie wang, not me. it’s just so cheap — this goes beyond this feminism/misogyny issue — to call out someone in public and try to make them feel guilty like that. how about this? how about i stop writing here if jackie promises to write here in my place? if jackie publicly says that (not in a comment because i need to know it’s her, but in a post) then i’ll humbly leave this place in concession to her. okay? im serious: if jackie posts that she’ll come back to hmtlg on the condition that i resign, then we have our deal. but i want it publicly acknowledged right here, for every one to know. don’t fuck with me, i get serious.
MB, I think you’ve reacted to a non-issue. The site occasionally fritzes and stops commenters from commenting on individual threads – that pale-orange strip appears at the top of the thread, there’s no “Reply” or “New Comment” operation, “you” are “blocked”. It’s sometimes just the one thread, and, in my case at least, it’s ‘all clear’ in half a day. Truly, this happened to me just now on this thread, and, going back to the master thread and coming back here in maybe ten seconds, the “ban” was/is off. –so maybe this thread is, eh, jumpy.
–or maybe somebody at HTMLG hates or fears you. Neither of those possibilities sounds rational to me.
I’m shocked that a reader here was banned for a critical comment on a blog
post. It is completely disgusting that HTML Giant would do that and
definitely pokes a hole in their vestige of promoting edgy, radical
content. Nothing in the poster’s manner struck me as uncivil and I don’t go to
experimental literature (or the internet for that matter) for civility.
It’s pretty clear that HTML Giant sides with Jimmy Chen (or the vapid, apolitical, misogyny-in-broad-daylight view he here espouses) if it would block a commenter simply publishing their distaste.
If that’s all it takes to be radical here, then maybe we should just ingest bins of barf mailed from women, girls, and so-called effeminate guys all over the globe than read books published in paper or e-files, discuss ideas, and log onto so-called alternative websites to cultivate our so-called alternative perspectives with like (lol sike ;) minded folk.
Whatever your reaction to the content in the post, please remember what this thread is really about: censorship. The enemy of literature since beginning-less time.
HTML Giant, you cannot refute this. Just try and throw me. Sadly all you are doing is hacking off your own vitality, and the relevance of any content and community you do nourish.
MF you reached “bottom” here but guess what, you’re rite there are better beanstalks out there.
It’s called p-r-o-t-e-s-t Jimmy. Not cheap. Brave.
How bout this? How bout everyone who is genuinely disturbed by your posts (or more importantly, what they in turn support or enable in the HTML Giant community) simply turns their backs to the screen whenever a misogyny-spiked post of yours appears on the site.
That way, the protest will be present only between the writer and his readers, and will therefore be more authentic. It will be so pure that you, Jimmy Chen (and the rest of the HTML Giant community) will never have to feel it.
In turn, you can do the same to Jackie’s posts. Except that? Oops? It appears she doesn’t write here anymore? The purest of all. You never even have to think about it, really.
People reacting to this or similar posts is not identity hysteria or a case of not getting out enough and you know that. People are going to have opinions any time gender or other matters of difference are invoked and anyone who writes about such topics, whether seriously or sarcastically or humorously is well aware of that fact.
What I think is that some opinions are going to seem to me cogent and based in a shared lifeworld and other opinions are going to seem to grasp for some inbuilt advantage of grievance farther than logic and experience can reach.
What I “know” is that the casual and the intense identity hatred that I see when I leave the house are validated by the toxic identity politics that would see malice in these mildly provocative “Matri[ces]”.
Oh, there’s no doubt from me about that. I’m just wondering if MB actually was “blocked”, or whether a glitch I’ve experienced – unless I’ve been “banned” and re-admitted within several minutes/hours several times! – isn’t what happened to MB.
These matrices are mild to you. Others may not perceive them as such. You don’t get to determine the degree to which they provoke because that’s relative and personal. That said, this is a bizarre comment thread and most of the reaction here has very little to do with this matrix.
My laptop’s IP is definitely banned–I can’t post on other topics and the yellow strip appears when I click on Kitchell’s post, so yes, Jimmy Chen–the likely culprit–has decided that I shouldn’t be allowed to post on HTMLGiant without using another computer.
And I’m biting my tongue on the silence about my banning from a particular prominent poster with some clout around who I thought was cool w/ me.
“as a person who doesn’t really care about gender, i don’t understand this”–I’d call this a post-structural mysogynist logical fallacy; I understand that it appears like this view gets past gender dynamics at their worst, but a strong case cld be made that this position is not moving beyond but instead erasure–and erasure has a very different set of registers/potentials. It is not an accident that a man writes not interested in gender: the more your subject position is enfranchised, the less daily necessity there is for contemplation. As well, thinking it ironic the male graph doesn’t get as much shit is a logical fallacy: calling hypocrisy only works if the two elements have identical social capital/if each group is equally culturally enfranchised. In other words, the different responses/or lack of are not reverse binaries.
Are there nuances I am not delving into: yes. But I think as preliminary points these make sense.
Are you referring to my silence? I was out last night, because it was Friday and wasn’t going to think about this while drinking and dancing. In general, we are cool, but yesterday you told a guy in a different comment thread, who was commenting in much the same fashion you do, “Fuck you,” like that level of response was at all warranted. That bothered me, a lot. I wanted to delete the comment but I didn’t. If you want to know why you were banned, talk to the managing editor. I do not run this site. I am not sure what I’m supposed to say? Do you want me to get you unbanned? Furthermore, this morning, I saw you wrote me last night and said, “I don’t want to draw more attention to the situation than it deserves.” Which is it, then? Don’t accuse me of silence when you wrote me and said not to say anything. Jimmy didn’t ban you, nor did he ask that you be banned, nor did I.
Yes, I was referring to you. Let me say, touche on the matter of your silence. I shouldn’t assume people are connected to their computers 24/7 and I did ask you not to say anything. I guess I assumed you might say something after I had obviously posted here, but that’s an unfair expectation, so–again–touche on the matter of your silence. My fault.
I do think it’s important, however, to let people who are reading your comment know the larger context of my “fuck you” comment.
I was minding my own damn business, engaging in a thoughtful and productive discussion with John M on the pedagogy thread, when a poster bumped a two-week old thread to nitpick my usage of “begs the question” vs. “raise the question,” which was just mind-bogglingly petty and condescending. I responded to him sarcastically. He maintained his tone and I said, “P.S–fuck you” at the end of my second reply. Why is this a problem for you? I wasn’t bothering anyone or him and he was clearly looking to be a prick for no good reason. Do you really think he had good intentions in bumping the thread to point why I should use “raises” instead of “begs” in a discussion about BLAZEVox? Seriously?
Maybe we’re just different, but I’m not going to let anyone talk down to me, especially in a context that is clearly irrelevant to the large conversation.
Finally, this is def. my last post here: Jimmy–I should’ve just ignored your post because there was no way I could win in your own backyard and/or locker room. This place is what it is, it’s never changing, and will always be most frequented by the 20-something bro-Maxim crowd. That’s your primary audience and you’re simply targeting your audience. This makes sense, given the way Blake Butler–the site’s founder–behaves and carries himself, like he’s still 19 years old, referring to genitilia, bodily fluids, and–for some odd reason–“meat” (why the obsession with this word, Blake? meat this,meat that, meat meat meat–in every other post/comment and even in his own work, the same guy who once began a public reading with, “my book is about titties” and listens to “thug/ghetto” rap.
Yeah–see how far that vapidness carries you over the longhaul, “bro.”
maybe it’s because you talk to people in a condescending way, nest comments within comments within comments to “prove” yr point, spend all hours of the day on htmlg arguing with people, say things like “you know who this is” and run to a friend’s house to post the “truth” about getting banned, then drop two responses after saying it’ll be the last time you respond. and then try to turn all yr bullshit and the ensuing ban on you into some “this place condones racism and misogyny and is a boy’s club” strawman. yeah, no idea why you’d be banned, “bro.” money on the fact that you’ll run to yr friend’s house to post another final response.
jimmy chen is my best friend. he cleans up my puke when i drink too much and makes me dinner and supported me thru the hardest breakup of my life. he is best person and i’ve never been treated with so much respect, kindness, sympathy, and love by a man in this world. htmlgiant will lose a light if they lose jimmy.
Yes, “others may not perceive” these matrices as I do.
–and I perceive their perceptions in a way “that’s relative and personal” to me.
That is what I’ve said, Roxane: not that I want “to determine the degree to which [someone is] provoked”, but rather, that sometimes a perception of identity grievance – as, here, of misogyny – is a misperception which ought not to lead to something like a hounding out.
I do get “to determine” my “perception” of criticism of this “Matrix”, right?
Well, I think that, in the future, reported “feelings” will continue to be as subject to skepticism as any other report. People correct – or would – my sense of things all the time – and why should they not?
Slightly provocative blogicle (Rand is motherly and chill?? —that is offensive, bro); outraged “feelings”; staunch defenses; side issues issuing. –a normal thread, no?
Well, your being banned doesn’t make sense to me, but that might not be your go-to recommendation . . .
(I just reminded Adam Jameson of begs-v.-asks – I thought: not obnoxiously, but maybe that’s how the note was taken (?) – . I didn’t think that other person was being “condescending” to you; just punctilious. Quit begging for this particular reminder, will you?)
Doesn’t seem so to me–and by ‘bizarre’ I don’t think myself or Roxane intended to indicate that it was totally unique or without precedent. But it is bizarre. It’s a thread where everyone’s discussion almost exclusively centers around subtexts: the subtexts of previous threads, the subtext to responses to previous threads, and the subtext inherent in a post of this nature having been made by a person like Jimmy Chen at a time like this. It’s not an actual discussion, even by internet comment thread standards, nor is it even a continuation of a previous discussion–it’s an imposition on a situation to coherently sustain an exchange of ideas it very probably can’t.Which is something, I think, like what Roxane meant.
No, just a different – and perhaps rival – emphasis.
I think the exchanges here – given the, what, irruption of more personal agendas – are pretty coherent. It’s an interesting and important bundle of questions: Is appearing to be offensively conservative a reasonable way actually to be progressive? is entertainment a reasonable excuse for giving offense? in a culture where everything is touched by identity injustice, must the only just address be a simple, monoglottal rejection of any sense of supporting or perpetuating that injustice? no irony at all?? Good questions (?).
I’m afraid whatever point you’d hoped to get across to me with that emphasis, then, has failed to do so, though it might yet if you assist me in understanding it further. In my current reading it sounds like you’re agreeing with me while being convinced you don’t quite agree with me, and that specific nuance has escaped me.
And, unfortunately, my point was not about the questions implicitly or explicitly being asked in this thread–most of which are questions everybody should be asked, and should ask themselves. My point was about how the questions are being played out in this context, and in this place–superficially, self-indulgently, pettily, and scatteredly. I am not concerned with whether or not the questions have been answered, or will be answered–but with whether they will even be discussed. The standard for discussion of gender on HTMLGiant is not terribly high. This falls well below it, and the simple fact that there are people in one place talking about things which imply a lot of questions they aren’t going to stop asserting themselves long enough to dig into is not satisfying for me. To put it another way, all of those questions were involved in the last collective fingerwag Mr. Chen endured, and some of them were even asked.
Even if you were convinced that Roxane’s observation about the ‘bizarreness’ of this thread, and my agreement with it, were in some way inaccurate, is this the conversation you’d like to be having? If so, I’m sorry, but I can’t quite agree.
I love what Jimmy Chen does time and again. He’s a bright star. But this one not so much. Pretty offensive and not so smart. The commentary is entertaining but has nothing to do with the post. I’m going to sniff some paint so there’s no memory of this. Eagerly looking forward to the next Jimmy Chen.
No, this thread is bizarre. For me, esp because of the person who was “banned” who keeps talking endlessly, and the fact that I just ‘liked’ the comment above, when I don’t think I really like it-there is something empty at the core of it. Furthermore, I don’t think the matrix is particularly misogynist, but the matrix is definitely misogynist.
“Ooohhh!!!!! JIMMY’S DOWN. Jimmy might have a compound fracture. Jimmy’s going
into shock!! JIMMY WONT FORGET YOU HTML guests. HANDS OFF JIMMY!!.
JIMMY!! JIMMY HOLDS GRUDGES. Jimmy’s not
threatened. JIMMY’S GONNA GET YOU! Jimmy’ll see you around.”
I took your remark to be a dismissal of the difference between “feeling and being provoked”. I think that difference is worth preserving “in the future” in those cases where the “feeling” is – or is ‘felt’ by another to be – a mistaken understanding (and not rather a different, equally accurate understanding). It did sound (to me!) like you might be saying that, when someone “feels” that they’re being provoked, their understanding of the source of that feeling is beyond question (from their point of view). The emphasis would be, not on the “feeling” of provocation, but rather, on the understanding (or mis-) of it.
The thread definitely is not concentrated on the social construction of gender. That – particularly, the ethics entailed in and by that constructing – has been plainly addressed, pro and contra the blogicle–a bit, anyway. The discussion has wandered, and somewhat in accord with the indulgence of extraneous agendas. It’s not the self-disciplined conversation about gender and justice that I’d “like to be having” in a venue more conducive to that self-disciplining, but it is not at all a “bizarre” conversation here.
Then it’s as I suspected, and you’ve railroaded my irony right out of the post. I was being dismissive of an attitude which I saw as dismissive of that difference. That difference is in fact what I see as crucial and worth maintaining. I was being highly sarcastic and not a little snotty.
The question of which conversation you’d like to be having wasn’t about this thread, and the conversation within it–it was about whether or not you’d like to be talking to me about whether or not the conversation in this thread is bizarre, or coherent, or whether I was right in making a comment in passing which expressed a belief that it was the one, and wasn’t the other. Which, I repeat, I have no interest in.
Ha – well, okay, I did not realize that your in the future was ironic. I plead only the plausibility of someone saying that a claim of insult is only to be accepted on its face (without further insulting the victim or ‘victim’).
The bizarreness (I think: not) or coherence (I think: as much/little as usual) of this thread is not an interesting conversation topic to me either, despite the actual back-and-forth we’ve engaged in it ha ha.
Damn, Jimmy is a comedian not a misogynist. That’s a weak arguement. Anytime a man makes joke/comment about a women, someone calls them a “Mysogynist.” Men complain about women AND WOMEN COMPLAIN ABOUT MEN. It’s life. Men and women are different. It’s that idea where once someone calls someone a NAZI on the internet the free flow of dialogue is over b/c then the person has to defend themselves. This is ridiculous. More graphs to piss more people off.
That’s too simplistic though. Look at the Male Matrix. It goes from effiminate to masculine and from vanilla to perv. And the women goes from bipolar to chill and mother to whore. Both deal with the issue in a somewhat stereotypical way, but also comical. Whenever a man comments on women on the internet, there is a commentor calling it misogynistic. Just like feminism doesn’t want women to be percieved as one-dimensional human beings, and not to be dismissed by a single word they must defend against–men feel the same. Once you say something is misogynistic then the whole point or view expressed is dismissed, and the author is put in a one-sided view that needs to be defended. No one has one-sidedly called the commentors saying this is “misogynistic”–as “men hating feminists” b/c that would dismiss their opinion, in turn making the commentor into a one-dimensional human being. Men have opinions on women and should be able to express them w/o their expressions being called misogynistic.
So Men expressing opinions about women “as a class” fall under two options? Both that have negative conotation? So men cannot express opinions regarding women without being sexist or misogynistic? I’m sure you have opinions on men that are negative, right? As all people have negative opinions on their own gender and the other, as well as postive opinions. Basically anyman who has an opinion on women that isn’t glowing-of-approval and not-critical–which is treating women one-sidely as opposed to being a full rounded human being–is the only way a man can express an opinion on women without said opinion being called “sexist” or “misogynistic.” In all honesty and respect for women, this seems stifling of dialogue on gender from a man’s voice in the discussion. If we say anything critical, or comical, than the expression is termed as “sexist” or “misogynistic.” All love in the dialogue, no hate :-)
Who wants Jimmy Chen chained to tractors by chains and torn asunder and then put the pieces of Jimmy Chen on a Jimmy Chen matrix etched into the dust with a hickory stick, the y axis running from patriarch running dog to child rapist?