In Which I Admit a Deep, Dark Secret

So, I’m supposed to have lunch with Brittney from Nashville is Talking on Friday and I’m nervous as hell. I’ve never met someone who only knows me through Tiny Cat Pants. The Shill does my stunts–she ran my half-marathon and she met Peg. The Shill is funny and charming and hot; she is welcome to continue to be my public presence. I am awkward and unbalanced and probably have a booger hanging out my nose, right now, that I haven’t noticed.

All I have going for me is that my hair smells very good.

Yes, it’s ridiculous to be nervous. I have lunch with people for a living. None of them have ever run screaming from the table. But also, none of them had an image of me that they developed from reading me. I just don’t want Brittney to meet me and have lunch and go back to the office and say, “Channel 2, Aunt B. is so not as cool as I thought she was. In fact, I’m pretty sure children run screaming from her. Plus, I think she had some Milky Way stuck to her ass.”

In order to feel less nervous about the meeting, I’ve been working on a series of questions to ask her. Here’s what I’ve got so far.

1. I get the impression that most Nashville bloggers know each other. Is this accurate? Are you having get-togethers and not inviting me? Is that because you like to sit around and make fun of me? Are these meetings at Mr. Roboto’s place? Is he hot?

2. You give me a lot of good press. Someone (cough, cough…Jon Jackson) has suggested that this may be because you are me. For the record, are you me?

3. I noticed that, until recently, you never mentioned Jackson’s blog, Crap & Drivel. Is this an effort to keep people from reading “his” blog and discovering the truth? In other words, are you, Brittney, also Jon Jackson?

4. In an actual physical fight between Pith in the Wind and Brad About You, who do you think would win? I know Pith in the Wind has a lot of contributors, but I think Brad could call on a shit-load of publicists in town to help him, so it’d be pretty even, numbers-wise.

So, that’s what I’ve got so far. I’m open to more suggestions, though, and I’ll let you know what I find out.

The Butcher Makes Me Smell Pretty

Straight women and gay men, I cannot believe you have not yet snapped up the Butcher.

Okay, so he has some attributes that might have, initially, made you cross him off the list of possibilities: he’s not gay, he has little ambition, he sometimes farts and then gets a weird look on his face and says, “I hope I didn’t just shit myself” but he doesn’t bother to go check, he has, allegedly, in the past, when we lived in another state, participated in activities that can be heavily taxed in this state as another tool for an oppressive government to butt into our business (What next, Tennessee? Will you raid the Nashville zoo and sic the revenue service on the tripping leopards?), and he’ll eat all the Oreos you have in the house–1 pound, 20 pounds, it makes no difference.

But, folks, right now I smell so good that, if I hadn’t made afternoon plans, I’d just sit here in front of the computer sniffing my hair.

I don’t know what it is, but that boy has this uncanny ability to buy the best smelling bath products, not too stinky, but not too ordinary.

So, if you’re out to Cumberland Furnace and an ordinary woman passes by and her delectable-smelling hair makes you want to grab her and give her smooches, that’s me.

For Those of You Who Like to Keep Score at Home

One of the things that gets especially tedious about reading any feminist thought, especially on blogs, is the comments. I always feel like, especially if there are a number of comments, that I ought to see what people are saying and take into consideration their responses to the post as I shape my response.

Unfortunately, for every insightful and thought-provoking comment, there seem to be five that are not. Worse than that, once you read enough of these comments, you can start to guess what people’s objections are going to be. Still, I feel compelled to read the comments. How do I get through?

I keep score at home.

Here, let’s try it out with the “controversy” playing itself out in the big blogs here in Nashville. Egalia at Tennessee Guerilla Woman makes a post about how she’s grossed out by a characterization of Senator Clinton in a story in the Nashville Scene by Roger Abramson in which the senator is described as “the breasted Clinton.”

(No, for some reason, she didn’t point out that both men and women have breasts, and sometimes even round and supple breast tissue, and so describing Senator Clinton as “the breasted Clinton” wasn’t accurate and instead traded on the sloppy shorthand that “breasts” are a female sex characteristic instead of a physical characteristic of everyone with nipples. But anyway, accusing the Scene of being sloppy? Not that inspiring a thing to post on.)

You’d think that would have been the end of it. After all Egalia posts on a lot of things and the world keeps on turning. But no, Bruce Barry at the Scene posts about it at the Scene‘s blog, Pith in the Wind, and Abramson goes over to Egalia’s to defend himself and before you know it, Brittney’s got to sum things up for people who can’t follow who’s fighting where.

Is it worth it to even try to catch up now? No, not unless you are doing so purely for the humor, because the whole thing has now degenerated into the same mess almost every feminist “controversy” ends up in. Lucky for me, this means you can re-use this post over and over.

Okay, see if you can find the following:

  1. Someone seems to be personally hurt by the remarks of a total stranger.
  2. Someone uses the term “hysterical,” without being aware of the word’s history, to describe the poster.
  3. Someone refers to her own femaleness or the femaleness of someone she knows as being proof that her actions or opinions are unimpeachable.
  4. Someone is being deliberately obtuse.
  5. Someone trots out the treatment of African Americans or homosexuals.
  6. The person personally hurt by the remarks of a stranger tries to find a parallel way to critique the poster.
  7. It falls flat after others point out that the word s/he’s chosen to critique is actually less loaded than s/he’d hoped.
  8. Someone steps in thinking he can end the discussion by calling it “liberal silliness.”
  9. Someone else tries to shut down the discussion by calling it “politically correct bullshit.”
  10. Many posts later, someone else tries to shut down the discussion by again calling out the “hypersensitive liberals.”
  11. Things derail while folks belittle the latest attempt to end the discussion.
  12. Someone attempts to ingratiate him/herself to the parties that seem more powerful by suggesting that the initial poster was just looking for a way to bring traffic to her blog.
  13. Someone accuses the poster of “censorship” and/or “fascism.”
  14. The post is taken as proof of the ridiculousness of the monolithic feminist position.
  15. The original poster tries to regain control of the discussion, only to be met with hostility.