Protected: Asking For It

25 08 2010

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:





Pitching the woo.

28 03 2010

[gauche 28/3/10]

I think queer feminist culture could do with a little more wooing. And I think also, that a radical conception of consent is right to problematise pursuit and persuasion, and to reject utterly “working out a yes” as coercion. The word “seduction” already implies some form of deceit, and etymologically “seduce” comes from the Latin for “to lead away”, and it’s an easy slide from “away” to “astray”.

But there’s no contradiction between consent and pitching the woo — if anything, the idea of the “pitch” assumes a right of refusal, and incorporates the intentionality of desire that sets my breath on fire, even if I succumb as much as anyone to accident, demurral, and the inculpability and opacity of being easy, lazy and vague (cf. trashbag; light grey, right). Keeping your desires unvoiced, unspecified or even unknown may protect you, and you might well get just as much play, but that style is tepid. There’s something way hot about compelling a direct response, and opening yourself to explicit rejection. I like that flagging can help start that question — but there’s a lot hankies can’t say for you.

I love Queerfatfemme’s podcast on courtship for taking romance as a verb and making it a skill to perfect. I’m not sure about “nobody ever died of awkward” (the phrase “mortification of the flesh” comes to mind) but I’m looking forward to being a little more fearless. You can’t always get what you want, no matter how killer your game. But if you try sometimes …

[gauche 15/6/2010]
We’ve had a flag for this for a while, but I didn’t get around to adding it.

___w Flower Pattern pitching the woo (romance top) getting wooed (romance bottom)




penchant in its place

22 03 2010

[lc 21/03/10]
I want to write in defence of scarves. Yes I’m into flagging culture and the things that it represents but I’m worried that flagging culture is going to inhibit femme fashion and limit one’s ability to accessorise. I think that flagging needs to be context specific, like at gay clubs, sex on premise venues and at erotic parties. I want to be able to go down to my local coffee shop and wear my scarves and not worry about being misread as to my sexual proclivities or worry that that kind of information is available to the general public. There has been talk about having a specific knot or the usage of a brooch to symbolise a scarf not being a flag. I’ve also been told I just need to ‘suck it up’ and that if I want to wear a scarf that’s what I have to take on board. I disagree, I think that there are other reasons for wearing a scarf than just flagging and that these need to be accounted and accommodated for (todays bad hair day was a good example).

[gauche 16/08/10]
I think I’m with Max on the strict “no anti-flags” position — for me because flagging never implies consent — but also when it comes to sex acts, I’m suspicious of the fear of being misread. Like the heterosexual anxiety at being misread as queer (An aside: have you noticed straight cis men in dresses are often especially misogynistic? Think The Footy Show.), I think that worrying about whether people think I’m into scat, when if I’m not, is more about some aversion to that which I am (mis)taken for than a concern about any real communication failure.

This is coming from a queer femme who is often read as straight, who has decided I’d rather suck it up than suggest people should be able to read my sexuality from the way I look. (I think Max is writing more on identity and appearances later.) Which isn’t to say that being misread or misunderstood is never a big deal — it can be lethal — but that particular misunderstanding, of phantom flags, of the flag unintended, that’s one I want to embrace.








%d bloggers like this: