Regina Cannot Explain It All
I'm Regina Small. I'm a writer and editor in NYC. I have a lot of opinions.
Interests include: sci-fi/fantasy, literature, summertime daydrinking, trying to be a better person, fancy manicures, philosophy, pictures for sad children, and the role of irony in the modern world. And fandom, of course.
I have another blog dedicated exclusively to science fiction/fantasy. Read it here.
![Yes. It’s been difficult to sort out my thoughts about it. Because here is what I’m thinking:
Obviously this is a young woman who is introspective and sensitive and inclined to share. (I don’t believe in the term “overshare” as an external judgment; all that dictates what is “too much” is an individual’s own (dis)comfort in revealing personal details. End.)
There’s the side that argues that eye-rolling about Marie Calloway’s essay is a way of silencing her feelings about her own sexuality and no doubt there’s at least some truth to that. Ladies who starfuck are going to get some static. I don’t think you can honestly critique what she wrote without acknowledging the role played by our collective visceral disgust at the impulse to screw someone and screw them over. “What if Malcolm Harris lead the revolution?” Lead the revolution. (Just one example.) This is not polished or well-considered prose. It offers nothing significant except in a metatextual this-is-how-we-fuck-and-then-talk-around-the-alienation-of-fucking, and even that is just a function of the fact that NYC media youngs on the Internet need something to chew on during the doldrums of year-end lists and slideshows. (Guilty.)
But the challenge here is recognizing that Marie Calloway — or any attractive young woman who writes nakedly (but without any real insight or inspiration) about sex — is not the enemy. Her desire for “Adrien Brody” to find her attractive can’t and shouldn’t be blamed on the 21-year-old woman offering herself up to a 40-year-old man, who is in a prime position to exploit her (even if he won’t let himself understand that it’s exploitation). What we really need to do is start shaking our fucking heads at the system that says “Hey, ladies, the fastest track to fame is fucking an older successful man [me] and making much hay of it. But afterward we’ll cluck our tongues and hold you up as a sad symbol of our age. Be not afraid: this is part of your road to notoriety.” No one writes think-pieces about the guy who didn’t turn down an offer of sex from a hot 21-year-old in spite of his own personal commitments or a sense of moral duty, because it’s so hard and unrewarding to be a writer so we take our perqs where we can get them, am I right? Like there is an a priori concession that the dude’s acceptance of easy pussy is just what happens.
I think the point that Emily NotSettingOffGoogleAlert made was not something with which I can entirely agree, if only because young beautiful women writing about sex is far from verboten. In fact, it may be the only acceptable subject for those women to write about. But there is a culture of punishment that surrounds it, one that grows especially (and understandably, if not defensibly) hostile if the writing is just not good. But holy fuck, you guys. Would anyone have read anything Marie Calloway wrote, would she have secured this level of sad “microfame,” if this weren’t set up as the very easiest and most direct way for women to get this level of attention? Re: reward v. punishment: the only worse sin than writing about sex is not writing about sex. This is a problem that predates her, that predates all young women who write about sex, that predates all young women who write, that predates all young women. It’s a horrible systemic problem and let’s unleash our rage upon it. Let’s say that it’s fucking terrible that the desire for attention, for women, is inevitably socially coded as a desire for sexual attention. It hurts women who engage and participate in becoming objects — and it also really hurts women who don’t. Be horrified by her choices — they are bad choices. But also be horrified that it often looks like the only choice.](http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lwkf29qA1Y1qzyrgso1_500.png)
Yes. It’s been difficult to sort out my thoughts about it. Because here is what I’m thinking:
Obviously this is a young woman who is introspective and sensitive and inclined to share. (I don’t believe in the term “overshare” as an external judgment; all that dictates what is “too much” is an individual’s own (dis)comfort in revealing personal details. End.)
There’s the side that argues that eye-rolling about Marie Calloway’s essay is a way of silencing her feelings about her own sexuality and no doubt there’s at least some truth to that. Ladies who starfuck are going to get some static. I don’t think you can honestly critique what she wrote without acknowledging the role played by our collective visceral disgust at the impulse to screw someone and screw them over. “What if Malcolm Harris lead the revolution?” Lead the revolution. (Just one example.) This is not polished or well-considered prose. It offers nothing significant except in a metatextual this-is-how-we-fuck-and-then-talk-around-the-alienation-of-fucking, and even that is just a function of the fact that NYC media youngs on the Internet need something to chew on during the doldrums of year-end lists and slideshows. (Guilty.)
But the challenge here is recognizing that Marie Calloway — or any attractive young woman who writes nakedly (but without any real insight or inspiration) about sex — is not the enemy. Her desire for “Adrien Brody” to find her attractive can’t and shouldn’t be blamed on the 21-year-old woman offering herself up to a 40-year-old man, who is in a prime position to exploit her (even if he won’t let himself understand that it’s exploitation). What we really need to do is start shaking our fucking heads at the system that says “Hey, ladies, the fastest track to fame is fucking an older successful man [me] and making much hay of it. But afterward we’ll cluck our tongues and hold you up as a sad symbol of our age. Be not afraid: this is part of your road to notoriety.” No one writes think-pieces about the guy who didn’t turn down an offer of sex from a hot 21-year-old in spite of his own personal commitments or a sense of moral duty, because it’s so hard and unrewarding to be a writer so we take our perqs where we can get them, am I right? Like there is an a priori concession that the dude’s acceptance of easy pussy is just what happens.
I think the point that Emily NotSettingOffGoogleAlert made was not something with which I can entirely agree, if only because young beautiful women writing about sex is far from verboten. In fact, it may be the only acceptable subject for those women to write about. But there is a culture of punishment that surrounds it, one that grows especially (and understandably, if not defensibly) hostile if the writing is just not good. But holy fuck, you guys. Would anyone have read anything Marie Calloway wrote, would she have secured this level of sad “microfame,” if this weren’t set up as the very easiest and most direct way for women to get this level of attention? Re: reward v. punishment: the only worse sin than writing about sex is not writing about sex. This is a problem that predates her, that predates all young women who write about sex, that predates all young women who write, that predates all young women. It’s a horrible systemic problem and let’s unleash our rage upon it. Let’s say that it’s fucking terrible that the desire for attention, for women, is inevitably socially coded as a desire for sexual attention. It hurts women who engage and participate in becoming objects — and it also really hurts women who don’t. Be horrified by her choices — they are bad choices. But also be horrified that it often looks like the only choice.
