Here we go again, guys! The previous post (with the links to all other involved posts) can be found here
The post which I am replying to can be found here
The blogospheric badminton continues with Sophia the Teenage Feminist who, having made a point of bringing up her theoretical “bisexuality,” now objects to this topic being discussed critically.
Or sarcastically, for that matter.
I don’t object to the topic being discussed critically. I object to people personally attacking me and my identity. I fully respect the idea that my sexuality is “theoretical” since I haven’t really experimented yet. I can respect calling my bicurious if that’s your cup of tea. What I can’t respect is this idea that I’m “bicurious” because I’ve never had sex with a girl, yet the little Christian kids who haven’t had sex yet aren’t “straight-curious”—they’re just virgins.
OK, congratulations, you got my attention. Under the topic of “heteronormativity” (!!) I found she referenced an occasion when she and her friends were “messing around” with a Ouija board, which became the theme of my post, An Omen of the ‘Mystifying Oracle’?
To this she responded here and also here, and then I responded this morning with “The Precocious Feminist Replies.” This afternoon, while I was watching the World Cup final (damn those Germans), Sophia the Teenage Feminist responded yet again and, among other things, wonders if calling her “precocious” was intended as an insult.
You can’t blame me for thinking it might’ve been an insult. It’s not a word I hear or see used often, and you weren’t exactly going out of your way to be nice to me.
Okay, but really, why are you so hung up on the fact that I used the word heteronormativity? It was one fucking time. And besides, I thought we’ve already established that I’m precocious? People are saying my writing style is so good that I might not even be real, and I’m not allowed to use the word heteronormativity? I’m sick of this. I’m going to use all the big words I want.
No, it was a mere description of someone who is intellectually advanced at an early age — a prodigy, the Mozart of feminism, as it were.
How many kids are slinging around the word “heteronormativity” in high school? Precocious. Her prose style was impressive enough that some of the commenters here suspected her blog to be elaborate hoax, i.e., an adult pretending to be a teenager. Precocious.
She is “upper-middle class,” she takes dance lessons, and her creepy ex-boyfriend “goes to a gifted goddamn school“ — from which I deduced that Sophia the Teenage Feminist also attends this school for the gifted, which explains her own intellectual precocity.
“The Mozart of feminism.” I like that. Can I use it as my new tagline?
Sophia the Teenage Feminist does, in fact, go to a gifted school. I am among the most gifted at said gifted school (unlike my ex) so now that we’ve cleared up the fact that I’m smarter than most of you people, we can get on with the rest of this.
(and for the umpteenth time, I used the word heteronormativity ONCE, get over it)
[Here there is a Latin phrase which Google Translate is telling me means “as required.”]
Having established the plausible veracity of her biography, so that we can presume she actually is a high-school student, we now proceed to Sophia’s latest volley in the badminton match:
At the age of eighteen or nineteen I hope to be studying Sociology at Columbia [University], far away from my asshole dad and my ambitionless ex. I hope to be dating a nice guy. I hope to be having the time of my life.
(Green Day allusion? Never mind. The reference to Columbia generally fits her “upper-middle class”/”gifted” profile.)
It’s not a Green Day allusion, actually, though I find it interesting you caught that. It’s a great song.
What does the fact that I’m upper-middle class or a genius (yes, I’m calling myself a genius here because I apparently have to be one to use the word heteronormativity!) have anything to do with…well, anything?
I am in fact bi on a theoretical basis. . . . But if you can say my sexuality is only theoretical, then aren’t all the good little Christian boys and girls only theoretically straight? This is heteronormativity in action, folks.
(Very clever. When you view the world through an ideological prism, no fact can disprove or discredit your ideology. A word like “heteronormativity” sets up a tautology, so that argument becomes impossible. It’s like trying to argue with a Marxist who insists that your criticism is a product of “false consciousness.”)
Heteronormativity. Why. Why is that word so hard for you to just let go. I used it once, and you know what? I fucking know what it means. All it means is our society’s messed-up belief of assuming everyone is straight. Hetero–meaning one, in this case the prefix of heterosexual. Normativity–ideology which claims how things should be, and what is right and wrong. Just the fact that you saying heteronormativity is a tautology displays how pretentious and ignorant you are! It is not right to assume everyone is straight because not everyone is. There are men who are disgusted by the very sight of a vagina. There are women who would rather die than touch a penis. There are people who don’t fit the gender binary at all and therefore can’t be heterosexual because there’s no opposite sex for them to be attracted to!
Oh, but wait, I forgot. The whole “god loves all his creatures” thing only applies to those creatures which are Christian and white and straight and male—priveleged in every sense of the word.
Have I been less than civil? I didn’t call you by name because — hello? — “Sophia Hudson” is a pseudonym, as you say yourself. Is it my job to “validate [you] as a person”? What does that even mean? Never mind. Here is her response to one of my points . . .
Alright, you got me there. A lot of my general rudeness is directed more toward your commenters than to you—however you are allowing those comments to take place. Like, seriously, who in their right mind calls a fourteen year old girl (or anyone, really) a vagina? Also, my actual first name is Sophia which I’ve said about a trillion times now. The pseudonym is there for a reason, but as far as you’re concerned? It’s my name. Good that we’ve got that cleared up.
Validating someone as a person, at least where I’m concerned, means treating them like a human being and acknowledging that on some level they’re the same as you—which some of your commenters certainly have not been doing. Look, you were just genuinely trying to warn me that I’m possessed by demons. But then I got called all manner of awful things in the comments. I seem to remember someone mentioning a forced Baptism and someone else said my parents were “liberal weenies”—for Christ’s sake, this isn’t very Christian of you all now is it?! Not to mention incredibly immature.
And by the way, I am not Elliot fucking Rogers and I don’t see any parallels you speak of. I’m not going to go out and murder a bunch of women because they wouldn’t sleep with me. If you think I’m going to then you can go fuck yourself because I am about 99% done with you all.
Here is her response to one of my points . . .)
Oh good lord. I don’t even know how to respond to this because it is stupid on a deeper level than anything I’ve experienced. . . .
I could go on and on for years about why this is so end-all ridiculous but in the interest of not beating a dead horse, I’m just going to keep my mouth shut for now.
Well, what was this incredibly stupid point of mine? It was this:
Given the direction our culture is heading, one can imagine a scenario in which anyone who rejects a homosexual advance – “No, thanks, I’m straight” – is accused of being a homophobe, so that society is effectively divided into two groups: Gays and Haters.
Fine, would you like me to explain it? I will beat the dead horse if that’s what it takes to get you to just listen to me. The very idea that homosexuals are the devil’s playthings created to prey on the straight is a Christian construct with little to no basis in reality. Saying that you’re straight doesn’t make you homophobic. It’s not like these so-called homosexual advances actually occur very often.
But you know what does happen? Children getting bullied because they’re gay. Children being beaten by their parents because they’re gay. Children getting murdered because they’re gay.
Don’t even try to tell me that you are somehow the one who gets the short end of the stick here when kids are losing their lives over your bigotry and hatred and the bigotry and hatred of the institution which you are a part of.
And wasn’t this the whole point of Sophia’s Ouija-board story?
When the “Mystifying Oracle” indicated Sophia’s same-sex interest — gosh, I wonder how that happened? — her girlfriends were shocked and this, Sophia tells us, proved “they’re homophobes who are terrified of girls being in love with them.” What would have been the appropriately non-homophobic reaction, Sophia?
Oh, for fuck’s sake. The point of the Ouija board story (which, I repeat, was only mentioned in passing) was that my friends got really really uncomfortable because of the nebulous and possibly untrue notion that I could possibly be sexually involved with a girl sometime in the future. Maybe you somehow misinterpreted my story and thought that I came onto them? Or that I was flirting with them? Well, I wasn’t.
My issue was the same that I told you in just the last few paragraphs. This idea that homosexuals—or anyone not heterosexual, for that matter—are inherently sexually predatory is a myth. It is enforced by our media and pop culture (that one episode of AHS: Murder House comes to mind) but rarely actually occurs.
I am not saying it doesn’t occur—it’s just that I’m just a lot more likely to be raped or beaten or abused by a man than by a woman. Sorry to burst your bubble.
At my time of posting this, only a few comments have been posted, and there is only one which I would like to directly address.
I think Bob Belvedere is right, this young lady is redeemable. Sophia, you are obviously very bright and articulate. The age of fourteen should be the beginning of ones intellectual journey and most definitely not the end. Good luck to you.
If being redeemed means becoming a part of an institution which is obtuse, hateful, bigoted, and toxic, then you can count me out. I guess I won’t be saved when the rapture comes (or whatever huge cosmic event it is that you guys are yelling about this month) but at least I’ll never be a conservative! 🙂
I don’t know if I’m really expecting a response to this post but I’ll be keeping an eye out for one. I’m very invested in this.