Original link located here.  (Edit for clarity: this tweet went up on the 7th, the day the article was posted.)

Unless you’ve been under a rock, I’ve been posting a lot about this Bitch Magazine/biphobia debacle over the past few days.  (Gosh, I’m still waiting on that public apology I requested!)

Now, many fellow members of the LGBT community have made it clear that we have a HUGE problem with the headline and content of this piece.  Now, I don’t advocate that Bitch should remove old tweets, but I do think it’s telling that this tweet popped up on my Twitter about an hour ago:

(Original link located here.)

Seriously?  Really?  On what fucking planet is this acceptable?  It’s bad enough that Kelsey Wallace seems to think that the title was the only objectionable portion of the article, but to post the SAME article (with nothing changed by the title) again on their Twitter account stinks of childish stubbornness.

I’d rather get my feminist analysis elsewhere.

(But, as a side note, I did find this hilarious comment from Kelsey Wallace on the worldwide intertubes.  Scroll down until you hit it; in a nutshell, she has a problem with a blogger’s criticisms of Bitch‘s take on the travesty known as Jennifer’s Body.  It’s so professional of her to track down bloggers and chastise blog posts on their personal sites.  My favorite portion was this line “but I don’t think that warrants your questioning of our feminism or abilities as bloggers.”  Right, because disallowing non-mainstream feminist voices doesn’t imply that the Bitch editors are the arbiters of feminism, now does it?)

—-

If you’re reading this from my Facebook notes, please go to the original blog post (located here) to comment.

While I was enraged about the bi-phobic garbage presented in the infamous Casey Johnson/Tila Tequila article posted on Bitch Magazine, I made a sarcastic comment about how begging readers to donate money was a much better use of time than actually fixing the problem.  And what do you know?  A few days later, the Bitch Facebook page linked here in an attempt to beg for subscriptions.

My response to this (on Facebook) pretty much sums up my feelings on the whole matter:

LOL. THANK YOU FOR PROVING MY POINT.

This magazine is a fucking joke. See the handling of the Casey Johnson “article” if you don’t understand why. Hey Kelsey Wallace, thank you so much for ignoring my email after giving us the bullshit, pissy “you can email me if you have issues with Bitch” comment on that thread.

If this magazine’s interpretation of feminism has become posting homo/bi-phobic and misogynistic articles, all but ignoring complaints about them, and then begging readers to subscribe to this hot mess of a publication, then count me out. I’ll be removing myself as a fan and publishing my email to Kelsey on my website as a follow-up to my criticisms about the horrendous “Tila Tequila” post.

I’m certainly doing more for feminism there than reading this nonstop crapfest.

It’s beyond frustrating.  Web editor Kelsey Wallace spouted off a talking point about giving a crap and then completely ignored my email.  I gave her two business days to respond and watched her ignore my email in favor of putting up two posts on the website (one on the 9th and another yesterday, the 11th).  I’m so glad to see where Bitch Magazine’s priorities lie.

Here’s the content of the email that Ms. Wallace couldn’t bother to respond to:

Kelsey,

I think I’ve pretty much covered all of my complaints with the content.  In my opinion, Bitch’s online content has been steadily declining over the past six months.  Many of the pieces I have caught online have bordered on insipid, even when I do agree with the point.  Take the South Park piece, for example.  (Located here: http://bitchmagazine.org/post/come-on-down-to-south-park-and-watch-some-feminist-episodes)  I agree that Trey Parker & Matt Stone have presented a feminist (or at least feminist friendly) perspective in quite a few episodes of the show and – as both a radical feminist and a libertarian – would have loved to read a much more in-depth essay about the subject.  Instead, readers were treated to a shallow piece that barely scratched the surface or incorporated feminist theory into the discussion.  I copied & pasted the piece into Word and did a word count on it; it was 390 words and came in at around 1 page.  There is no reason why Juliana Tringali couldn’t have incorporated examples, criticism, and a little bit of feminist theory into a tight, polished essay instead of something that reads worse than most blog posts.

I used to be able to count on Bitch for making me think about things a little bit differently, but now I can only really count on Intro to Women’s Studies-esque discussions.  Natalie Stein wrote the type of article you expect to see in an Intro to WMST course just before the author gets schooled.  I’d really love to not be subjected to this crap from a “feminist” publication.  Bisexuals take shit from lesbians who think we aren’t gay enough or who want to label us as “dykes.”  Straight men either automatically assume you’re into threesomes or are so intimidated that you might know how to get a woman off better than them.  Straight women are often convinced you’re going to want to lez out with them or are threatened because you’re so much more exotic than they are.

All of this shit that we take is dismissive of the many facets of our sexuality, objectifies us, and is just bad news bears in general; these ideas are based – at least in part – by ill-formed stereotypes of bisexuality.  Instead of tearing down these stereotypes and misconceptions, Natalie focused more on tearing down the unlikable women attached to these stereotypes (to paraphrase a Facebook user: the unstable, exhibitionist bisexual and the fallen blonde heiress).  What could have been a powerful critique on the media circus surrounding this very sad, very real story turned into an excuse to say “HAHA BI = BAD IDEA!”  Geeze, there were so many different, feminist ways this discussion could have gone.  Y’all could have even used the Perez Hilton/Tila Tequila Twitter war (over Casey Johnson’s death) to talk about sexism within the LGBTQA community and stereotypes about LGBTQA women instead of this tripe.

Hiding behind a disclaimer means nothing, especially when it’s used to justify misogynist and homophobic crap.  As I mentioned in one of my Facebook comments, it’s not like unpopular feminist perspectives will be read in Bitch anytime soon – which is the reason newspapers, magazines, websites, etc. have a version of that disclaimer.  It’s downright shitty when – instead of being used for it’s intended purposes – the web editor hides behind such a disclaimer to justify a piece such as this one.  As a member of the LGBTQA community, it really feels like I’m being told that my complaints, issues, struggles, and oppression don’t matter, as long as no one’s feelings get hurt by Patty Heaton.  Honestly, if you can’t see how this is a problem, then I don’t know what to tell you.

In a similar vein, passing all the blame off onto the author is irresponsible of both you and Bitch Magazine, and your miffed tone when you first began receiving criticism is bullshit.  You came across as more annoyed than anything else because those uppity lesbos threw a shit fit; I’m sure this wasn’t your intention, but to be honest, your tone in your initial comment really pissed me off.  It really struck me as typical dismissive breeder bullshit.  Furthermore, before you can even attempt to defend an article about the LGBTQA community, you need to check your privilege and try to understand why so many of us took issues.

It’s fairly obvious that neither you nor Natalie even attempted to see where we were coming from here.  The “solution” was an apology posted way down in a Facebook comment thread that came across as an “I’m sorry if you got offended” styled “apology” and the title of the article was changed.  This was despite the fact that many commenters complained about the CONTENT of the article, myself included.  I really think you missed the point on this, considering you didn’t get that the title was only PART of the problem.  I’m not going to go through point by point and tell you everything that was sexist, homo/bi-phobic, and/or generally fucked up because – frankly – as a gender studies major, you should know better.  These are the reasons I said that I probably would not be restarting my subscription to the magazine; I don’t really want to pay money to be dismissed and have it defended.  I’m very disappointed with the Casey Johnson piece, and even more disappointed with the way it was handled; seriously, Kelsey, we didn’t even get a response from a Bitch Magazine rep until I mentioned I likely would not restart a subscription.

With all that being said, I do appreciate you opening your inbox for comments on Bitch, as well as coming online to facilitate a discussion.  Personally, I hope that this entire debacle can be used as a learning experience.  In the future, I deeply hope that Bitch will take a bit more responsibility when selecting pieces to run in print or online editions, that future authors will be a bit more sensitive to marginalized groups, and that the dreaded “opinion disclaimer” will be used for its intended purpose (instead of a way to deflect criticism from the magazine and its contributors).  As far as right now, I think the least that Bitch could do is put up a public apology on the main page from both Natalie and you; both of you have already apologized once in the infamous Facebook thread and we have every right to expect a formal, written apology on the main page.  I’m not saying that it will fix everything, but I think that it will go much further than you might think.

Thank you for letting me sound off to you.

Sincerely,
Vicki Moore

I don’t understand why this email – along with the suggestions in it – was ignored.  I guess that the Bitch staff has a huge case of butthurt when it comes to criticism directed at the magazine, which is pretty disappointing.  You would think that a magazine billing itself as an alternative to mainstream media might actually function in an alternative manner.

‘Magine that.

—-

If you’re reading this from my Facebook notes, please go to the original blog post (located here) to comment.

This all led the author to use the term “fake lesbian relationship” in her headline.

Luckily, many other Bitch readers were also pretty pissed about the off-base and phobic shit in the article. Frankly, I am shocked that anyone from Bitch thought this article should have been run on their website, but before I delve right into that mess, I really need to unpack all the sterotypical garbage here.

1. Oh, those darn attention seeking bisexuals!

As one Facebook user remarked, no one claims that Paris Hilton isn’t into dudes because she’s used her sexuality for attention. The attention seeking portion of it doesn’t make the sexuality any less real or valid, and is so heavily rooted in bi-phobia. What bisexual hasn’t heard claims that they’re just doing it for the attention, especially bisexual sex kittens – who are also always doing it for male attention? Surely no femme looking sex kitten or vamp type could have actual desire for another woman or even be experimenting; nope, it must be Girls Gone Wild syndrome.

2. Why can’t these homos be two-dimensional Super Gays instead of being nuanced individuals?

I can’t believe that Bitch Magazine would allow something to run that was so dangerously close to making a “credit to your race community” argument. Dude, really? Do I have to make more of a point here? Seriously, Tila Tequila, Courtenay Semel, Samantha Ronson, Portia De Rossi, Fergie, Perez Hilton, Neil Patrick Harris, Margaret Cho, Andy Dick, Sir Ian McKellen, Elton John, Jim McGreevey, Barney Frank, Dan Savage, and Christian Siriano are NOT the emperors of gay people. None of ‘em hold that title. They are not saints, they are not perfect, and they are certainly not two-dimensional stereotypes. Are we good on this?

3. OMG TILA TEQUILA HAS GONE OVER HER 140 CHARACTER LIMIT OF GRIEF!

Before Shot at Love, the only real distinction Tila had was to be the person with the most popular Myspace page ever. Shocking that she might grieve online? Let’s be honest, yeah, it’s not the smartest idea. If nothing else, when you’re emotional, you are so much more likely to say things you’ll later regret, and given this twisted mess of clusterfuckery, it’s probably a much better idea to take a breather and log off Twitter for a few days. But is Tila Tequila really the first person to publicly mourn the loss of a loved one? Is she really the first person to make bad decisions on the internet? Even if she was the first to do it, how on Earth is this proof that this is somehow a “fake” lesbian relationship?

There was a lot of great feminist theorizing that could have happened here. We could have seen a discussion open up about the media circus surrounding Casey Johnson’s death, or even a discussion about any of the objectionable portions of Stein’s post; instead, Bitch Magazine’s web editor, Kelsey Wallace, felt that this bi-phobic tripe was a better use of bandwidth. How do I know this? Well, Ms. Wallace jumped into the fray of critical comments (after I had commented that I would likely never get another subscription to the magazine) with the following miffed comment:

Hi, this is Kelsey, the Web Editor at Bitch. Thank you everyone for your comments. I have contacted Natalie, the author of this post, and asked her to respond to your concerns about her interpretation of Casey Johnson and Tila Tequila’s relationship. Please keep our policy in mind that “Opinions expressed on this website are those of their respective authors, not necessarily those of Bitch.”

As for those of you who feel that all of the content on the Bitch Media website is rapidly declining and is at the level of a high school women’s studies course, please feel free to contact me (kelsey@b-word.org) to relay any specific criticism you may have.

Thanks again,
Kelsey Wallace

Notice two things: the statement does not address the specific issues others had with the post, and it uses a disclaimer to deflect all criticism onto the author. Opinion disclaimers are meant to protect a publication from extreme criticism over an unpopular view. In this context, it would be meant to cover the mag’s asses if they had someone writing about why they don’t support gay marriage because they don’t support marriage (for example). The disclaimer isn’t intended as a clever little shield to deflect rightful criticism such as horribly bi-phobic language and points made in a supposedly feminist publication. (What’s next? Are we going to see articles warning us about the Lavender Menace?)

By hiding behind it and hanging Natalie Stein out to dry, Kelsey (and, by extension, Bitch Magazine) might as well be saying, “not our problem!” I guess we’ll just ignore the web editor’s responsibilities re: approving pieces for publication. It was completely irresponsible to allow this article to run in the first place. The solution was to change the headline of the piece (to “Sapphic Salon: The Death of An Heiress, The Milking of the Press“), to completely disregard the issues within the article, and to give a half-hearted “sorry if you were offended” styled “apology” within Facebook comments. As of right now (11 pm EST, 1/9/10), there is still not an apology or any acknowledgment that the article was shouldn’t have been posted in its current form.

Considering that Bitch likely won’t be asking Angela Keaton to contribute any pieces to their site under the guise that her opinions are not necessarily shared by Bitch Magazine’s, I think it’s safe to call “bullshit.”  It’s even more depressing to me because it feels like Ron Paul campaign BS all over again.  Why is it that my issues – as an LGBTQA woman – can be sold out and dismissed, but it would be the worst crime in the world to give Jill Stanek a voice? (I say this as being one of the main organizers on this event.) I’m guessing that it will be a cold day in hell before we see Kelsey Wallace giving either Wendy McElroy or Camille Paglia a voice in the publication.

It’s the same old homo/bi-phobic crap that we queers have been subjected to since the beginning of friggin feminism. It’s tired and played out, but sadly, probably won’t fully change; instead, privileged straight people will continue to act like they know how we should feel about any subject. Maybe we would all be a little better off if we started listening to marginalized groups and stopped speaking for them.

Then again, what do I know?

Follow up: Kelsey Wallace, web editor of Bitch Magazine, ignores reader complaints.

—-

If you’re reading this from my Facebook notes, please go to the original blog post (located here) to comment.

Don’t worry, he’s not lonely right now.

While Libertarian Boyfriend was at work the other night, I was doing my normal all night internet-a-thon. A few hours after he left, a funny little thing popped up in my inbox:

from: CNN Breaking News
date: Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 10:31 PM
subject: CNN Breaking News
– Former President Bill Clinton is going to North Korea to negotiate for the release of 2 U.S. journalists, a source says.

This CNN breaking news alert was followed by this one earlier today (technically yesterday):

from: CNN Breaking News
date: Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 3:24 PM
subject: CNN Breaking News

– North Korean President Kim Jong Il has pardoned two U.S. journalists, state-run news agency KCNA said Tuesday.

Even though I picture most of Clinton’s diplomatic missions involving the local rec center and the phrase “I mean, Prime Minister Sharon….come on!”
, the man is pretty much the OG Diplomat. (Oh, that’s right Jimmy Carter, I went there. Go back to building subpar housing for the poor, eating peanut butter off a spoon and hanging out with Paula Deen.)

The pressing question in my mind is this: With the many comparisons made between current President Obama and former President Clinton – does it chap Barry O’s ass that he doesn’t have the same way with words as Slick Willy? I’m guessing it’s a mixed bag. On one hand, he so desperately needs that neo-con cred. (Oh wait, lol, I forgot, he’s, like, omg all about hope and change! And his policies totally mesh up with his campaign promises lip service! And you either support President Obama and hope and change, or you support raping fluffy bunny rabbits, and then the turrorists win! You see the point I’m driving home?) On the other hand, I’m thinking that it probably really frosts Obama’s balls* that Clinton is the one to talk that wacky Kim Jong Il out of releasing the panthers on those journalists. I can’t imagine that Obama doesn’t want to pretend to have some sort of hemp loving, community organizing, fresh faced liberal cred left. Realistically, what better way to shove all that latte drinking elitist “leftist” agenda in a warmongering neo-con’s face than by chillaxing with the Axis of Evil?

You know I’m right.

* Thx Urbandictionary!

(Well, barring me becoming an overly emotional cutter fuck or something.  I had originally said “suicidal,” but I can think of much better ways to go.  This is the exact type of melodramatic bullshit that cutters latch onto.)

Now, before you comment that this is something that I just haven’t opened my mind up to, I’ve tried to watch LOTR. I really tried. I tried so hard, but…I just couldn’t do it.  I got through about an hour of the first one, and realized that it was Forrest Gump all over again.

After I finished watching Forrest Gump, I was pissed. Not just disappointed, but visibly fucking angry. I was infuriated that the three-fucking-thousand minutes of my life that I would NEVER get back actually won multiple Academy Awards.  There was some shit I went into with an open mind, and what the frig did it get me?  Higher blood pressure and a newfound hatred for Tom Hanks. But what enraged me the most was that others insisted that I really liked the movie even though it made me homicidal.

And the LOTR crowd is the same damn crowd.  Except creepier.  And more Ren Faire like, with a splash of RPG involved, but the somehow really lame Ren Faires and RPGs, even for Ren Faire/RPG standards.

I also can’t deal with a lot of the LOTR crowd, either. They seem to fit in that camp of Radiohead, DMB, and Tori Amos fans.

You know exactly what I’m talking ’bout.  Don’t even front like you don’t.

It’s awesome that you want to convert everyone to Jackisanity. That’s awesome, but just ask anyone who really knows me how of a tolerance I have for Jehovah’s Witnesses.  (Hint: I’m the same person who told a child Witness and her mother that this was a house full of atheists and they were wasting their time.  SDC was not too happy about that.)  I don’t do well with the Chick Tract crowd, and considering that the thought that LOTR is somehow more important than, I don’t know, my eternal salvation or damnation is dubious – to say the least – I’m guessing that I can die happy without ever having watched Frodo chill with the ring.

To reiterate: If I haven’t budged on religion, where I’m potentially at risk for burning in hell for my entire afterlife, I’m certainly not making the 12 hour investment just so I can “yes, I watched the entire LOTR trilogy.”

I get that you really dig LOTR, but man, quit acting like such Jesus Camp evangelicals about it.  I liked you guys better when you were dragging the TV cart into class so we could watch Telefrancais.  (Oh, how I miss that wacky l’anana!)