Haters Wanna Hate, Lovers Wanna Love, I Don’t Even Want None of the Above (I Want to Shop)

A few weeks ago (During the election!  It seems so long ago — like a dream, almost) I tried to stir up trouble with an insulting post about Joe the Plumber.  My remarks about this important American political figure concerned his bad clothes, his irrational hatred of a three percent tax hike, and what I perceived as his desperate need for some pussy.  I hoped people (starting with Joe himself) would get mad, and the political blogosphere would start buzzing about my website.

Possibly  JtP is less of an egomaniac than I thought, because that never happened.  But yesterday I managed to start a controversy anyway!  A classy lady at Salon.com argues that my blog is “stupid” and “annoying” because it promotes materialism.  Do I have an ongoing beef with Salon now?  Are second-wave feminists even more thin-skinned and irritable than Joe Wurzelbacher?  You be the judge, as I share some of the wit and wisdom of “Judy Berman,” along with my own rebuttals.

— There’s just something pathetic about the idea that sex appeal is something you can go out and purchase, whether the cash you’re shelling out is for breast implants or a $372 pair of riding boots.

Most of the stuff I post about isn’t expensive.  That’s because so many of the people who submit stories to me are total cheapskates who only get clothes when a friend gives something away, or their old roommate leaves it at their place by mistake.  I did a poll on this back in September, and almost 75 percent of my readers reported they were shopping at cheap places, or not at all.   However, most of what this “Berman” has to say is really about my the post “This Is a Public Service Announcement — With Vaginas!” that I linked to above.  Therefore, I suspect this modern-day Carl Bernstein did not read very many of my posts.

More importantly, people who are self-righteous about how little they spend on clothes have got to go.  Saving up to buy something lovely and durable will build character.

Also, it’s helpful to me to hunt for products online and then post pictures of them, because it is a sort of “virtual shopping,” and staunches some of my raging desire to buy new items.  It’s less like “retail porn,” more like retail methadone.

Never mind that a recession seems like a particularly inappropriate moment to push the idea that consumerism leads to fulfillment.

Well, in all fairness, I started this website in July, and unlike the far-seeing humanists who were running the country at the time, I did not predict that the stock market was going to crash.  When that happened, I was like “LOL, now I’ll never get a book deal.”

At the heart of what bugs me about the Clothes That Got Me Laid is the lip service it pays to third-wave feminism.

I tried to come up with a clever zinger about this; I was going to be like “I paid lip service to your MOM last night!”  Then I said to myself, “no, that doesn’t really work.”  But I showed the article to my colleague in the English department, and she said “I think this woman is engaged in a strong misreading.”  That’s like the harshest snap of all time, so I felt better.

Could someone remind me again what those three things have to do with decking yourself out in other people’s outfits because you don’t have the confidence to snag a bed buddy all by your cute, smart, witty self?

I encourage my readers to come up with their own fun, interesting outfits, just like the folks who write in to me have done.  Judging from the e-mails I get, my readers are creative people, and they’re also talented writers.

***** Extra bonus misconception:*****  Dudes who are like “men don’t care what you wear, they just want to see you naked.”

I know that’s not true, and here’s how.  I have a referral log thingy that tells me what search terms people use to find this website.  The most popular search terms that show up are variations on “knee socks sex” and “fucking in thigh boots story.”  People are also looking for pics of women in wet dresses, underwear, and t-shirts.  If men did not notice, care about or register clothes, they would not want women to be embellished in any way.  If all these would-be masturbators cared about was seeing naked women, they could simply perform an internet search on “porn”;  something would probably come up.

I’ll close with a video for my favorite song of the moment.  It’s Darryl Hall and John Oates in 1976.  They were some of the best-looking guys and best singers around, so they had no reason to doubt their cute, smart, witty selves.    Hall, in particular, never seemed to lack confidence (seriously, have you ever read an interview with that dude?  So cocky).  He could have worn any old thing to this concert, but instead, he has availed himself of the classic hot-girl combination of knee boots over skinny jeans.  It looks great!  Do you think he got laid that night?


16 Responses to “Haters Wanna Hate, Lovers Wanna Love, I Don’t Even Want None of the Above (I Want to Shop)”

  1. This woman obviously didn’t read more than a post or two of yours– I don’t remember your conclusion EVER being, “go out and buy new clothes!”

  2. Wow. Did you ever miss the point. The point wasn’t that you’re shallow for liking to shop. The point was that your shallow blog mistakes being a plaything for sexual empowerment.

    You can dress up, but it isn’t going to buy you character or class. It might buy you a lovely fuck, but there are a lot cheaper and fulfilling ways of getting that.

  3. patricefitz Says:

    I wandered over here after reading about you on Salon in Broadsheet, which I enjoy a lot. I think this is a tempest in a tee-shirt. You’re both right. She (Berman) is just in temporary serious and self-righteous “don’t just do us” feminist mode, and you are in “I’m just gonna get my girly on” player mode. We whole-brained feminists enjoy both.

    You will get a book deal, despite the economy. And you started a controversy! Milk it, baby.

    But oy, I could hardly stand the Hall & Oates song. I like them, but that one was painful.

    Carry on wich your fun self!

  4. This site is just hillarious- Emily H. I love your writing.
    There is some interesting stuff on Broadsheet but generally the writers there are really overly serious and lacking in self-awareness in the most hysterical of ways- as you’ve noticed- like ridiculing the consumerism of this site while picking a fight to generate click-through revenue….
    Though I must say I’m gratful fo being turned on to your site by “Berman” (do you say that like “Newman” a la Seinfeld?) even if she activly mis-read and mis-represented your blog.
    Stay sexy- and keep up the sniping, it is quite entertaining.
    Hope you get that book deal!

  5. I can’t BELIEVE someone didn’t like “Camellia.” I should point out that if you click through to YouTube, you can watch that video in high definition.

  6. “Saving up to buy something lovely and durable will build character.”

    clothes = character? yikes. yiiiiiiikes.

  7. No no no, heidi

    saving money to buy something you really want = character

  8. Regarding JtP – we saw an interview with Samuel Joe Plumber on Extra or ET or one of those dumb shows where they asked if he had a girlfriend and he confirmed that he is ‘unlucky in love’ and has, in his words, “no game”. So even though it’s not really central to your Salon feud, we just wanted to confirm that your ‘JtP needs to get laid’ theory is, in fact, correct.

  9. Stefanie F. Says:

    I’m glad that you have a friend in the English Department. You should probably consult her on your use of quotation marks. I’m pretty sure the woman calling herself “Judy Berman” actually is Judy Berman.
    More importantly, I’ve yet to understand what if anything about your site is feminist. I don’t want to suggest that you have to be running a feminist website. Ms. Berman’s point seemed to me to be that the values of third (not second) wave feminism are not reflected by a site that suggests that women’s clothing, as opposed to their personalities, will be the crux of their sexual success. Your site seems to answer the question, “how can I best dress to be objectified?” I fail to see your contribution to the feminist discourse.

  10. "georgiana" Says:

    Hey there–so I checked out the Salon post and all the comments, and all I can say is that it’s a sad day for feminism (any wave) when a woman who wants to get laid (and succeeds) has made herself into a blowup doll. I’d also like to point out that the CTGML is about clothes that MEN and WOMEN wear when they hook up. I could rehearse a lot more of my beefs, both with salon posting and some of the comments, but it’d be preaching to the choir. Emily H.–keep up the good work and that book deal’s coming!

  11. Kitty, if you’re reducing anyone who wants to get laid as “a plaything,” you really don’t understand sex.

  12. Salon was completely overreacting. They talk about this blog like every post is about a woman wearing really cute clothes, which is inaccurate. There have been posts about men and posts about ugly clothing.

    If anyone who wants to get laid is a “plaything” then it’s a sad sad world. There are some really annoying and kind of dumb feminists who like to tell women that yes, we should go ahead and experiment sexually, but only if it’s the kind of sex they approve of with the kind of people they approve of and only if we don’t try to make ourselves attractive in order to do it.

  13. boredsexynashville Says:

    all i want to say is: what a fucking bitch she is with too much time on her hands and a limited vocabulary.

  14. brianhamill Says:

    Oates is way more cool. He’s short and he doesn’t exude tool, like Hall,

  15. I see this site as a way for women to share stories about their sexual (mis)adventures, and most of the time, there’s a cute outfit involved. A lot of women care about how they look, and this involves clothes and shoes. Big deal. I don’t think it’s a “feminist” blog as much as it is promoting a friendly environment where women don’t feel judged for being sexual. Maybe sex-positive is the better term?

  16. Ann Marizzle Says:

    I am going through posts I missed and came across this one. I just wanted to add my 2 cents a month and a half late. I identify with both second and third wave feminists, so I do understand where Berman is coming from but I LOVE your site. I don’t think that being sexual or wanting to have sex makes someone less feminist, nor does wanting to get girly. But it’s the total culture where there is the PRESSURE that you HAVE to be that way that seems to consume Berman and make 2nd wavers lash out… I agree that Berman misread your blog completely. One day, I hope to send you a few of my own (mis)adventures!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: