Everything's A Problem

I'm here to chew bubble gum and dispense problematics. And I am all out of bubble gum. If you see something that's problematic, let me know about it! [email protected]

[everythingsaproblem]

Lady Ghostbusters

The new Ghostbusters movie has been praised for putting women into roles once reserved exclusively for men. No longer relegated to secretaries or love interests, these ladies were going to be doing the actual busting. So many male tears were spilled and that was awesome because it’s cool when dudebros are given sadz.

Obviously, though, Lady Ghostbusters is still deeply, incredibly problematic. I mean, AYFKM with this trailer?

“Oh, wow, cool, three white ladies who are into science and inventing stuff” you’re thinking and then you see Leslie Jones and you’re like “YES AN AFRICAN AMERICAN GHOSTBUSTER” and then she’s all “I want to join your club” and you’re like “whoa hold on their club why can’t it be her club too” and then she’s all “you guys are really smart about this science stuff” and you’re like “WHY CAN’T THE BLACK LADY BE SMART ABOUT SCIENCE STUFF” and then you see her working in a subway and you’re like “ffs i cannot even with this.”

Every. Single. Time. One steps forward. Ten steps back.

Fortunately, our fellow warriors for social justice are all over it.

Uh, I think it’s pretty fkin obvious. 

UGH THIS. I mean, fans of the Ghostbusters would never settle for a blue collar African American character

would they?

Twitter gave the voiceless a chance to vent their rage:

oh i think we all know why

Hollywood is notably reactionary, though; to studio execs, ghosts are more believable than a black scientist. #smdh

Appropriate handle this one has.

I don’t know why people keep asking this when the answer is so obvious. It’s like asking “Why does she love Cadillacs?”

Remember: SALTY MALE TEARS are worth mocking while SOCIAL JUSTICE TEARS really make you think.

I think we all know why. Because everything’s a problem. 

I give the transgression of making a Lady Ghostbusters film in which one of the ladies is black and also not a scientist three problematics. 

[everythingsaproblem]

The Force Awakens

Some people think that it’s really awesome how diverse the new Star Wars film is and how much more the diverse characters have to do. For instance, Jezebel celebrated the new film thusly:

This was a very good point; after all, who can forget Princess Leia doing literally nothing but giving birth and dying in the original trilogy? Remember the controversial “preggers Leia makes cookies barefoot whilst hanging out on Endor waiting for the menfolk to come home” scene? Shockingly retrograde, even for 1983.

But this time! This time we have a strong woman character!

And a strong black character!

And a strong Hispanic character!

So maybe Star Wars: The Force Awakens isn’t problematic! Maybe this, the most diverse Star Wars film ever made featuring numerous non-white-male characters in numerous roles is good enough!

lol jk

Don’t you know?

Did you forget while we were gone?

Everything’s a problem.

Caution: spoilers for The Force Awakens below. (Not that you should be seeing this horror show anyway.)

smdh

But alas, a curious thing happened on the way to a galaxy far, far away… The character of Finn as the penultimate symbol of racial inclusiveness for this franchise reboot is knocked unconscious during a climactic battle scene in the final act of the film, and he remains unconscious for the rest of the film.

Interesting use of “penultimate” here; if Finn is the second-to-last “symbol of racial inclusiveness,” one wonders who the last will be.

While this is not the first, nor will it be the last time that a character has been held in abeyance at the end or the beginning of a series installment, whether knocked unconscious, frozen in “carbonite”, abandoned or running away to a hidden land, world or fortress, robotic parts separated and/or power disconnected - the unconsciousness of Finn throughout the final act of "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" as I shall discuss it here in this piece, reveals to us that, White Hollywood, as we near the beginning of the last year of Obama’s presidency, is ushering in a new and more powerful form of racial tokenism.

Well, obvs.

Hyper-tokenism in a White film can be defined as the marked increase in screen time, dramatic involvement and promotional images of a Black character in a White film, while simultaneously reserving full dramatic agency as the providence of White characters by the end of the film.

In other words, a hyper-token is a fully formed character who happens to be minority.

JFC, is there no depth to which White Hollywood will stoop? FFS.

Moreover, hyper-tokenism takes a toll on the creative consciousness of Black filmmakers and writers in the sense that it makes it even more difficult to breech the loyalty of the Black audience from White films that have Hyper-Tokens and get that Black audience to support Black films where Black characters can exercise full dramatic agency without the approval of White characters or the guidance of the "White Savior Trope."

wow really makes u think

Others have noticed deeply problematic themes in the world of The Force Awakens:

Much has been made of the ethnically diverse cast. The stars are John Boyega, a black British actor who plays Finn, a former Stormtrooper, and the white British actress Daisy Ridley as Rey, a scavenger with a mysterious backstory. The two are affable and telegenic, and there are fun moments between them as they battle a gathering galactic tyranny.

So far so good, but...

There just aren’t any sparks.

Ugh.

Boyega — who, by the way, worked sanitation duty as a Stormtrooper —

can you even with this because i cannot even with this and i tried so hard to even with this but i wasn’t able to even wi

spends most of the movie running scared while his co-star makes his status in the friend zone as clear as starlight. He is not powerful in the way Rey is. And it’s not that we don’t appreciate the skill of the young heroine; it’s just that she seems empowered at his expense.

Of course she would be; can’t have a strong black man be too strong now can we?

By contrast, the Finn character is remarkably anodyne. In important ways, a black character has moved from the periphery to the center of a blockbuster story. In other ways, Hollywood is still dancing around issues of intimacy and black heroism for a black male lead in a mixed-race cast.

As one smart aleck noted on Twitter, 

the whole time i was watching THE FORCE AWAKENS i was like "why haven't i seen a dick yet"

We won’t have true equality onscreen until we do.

I give the transgression of making a super-diverse film that will almost certainly become the highest-grossing film in North America of all time four problematics.

[everythingsaproblem]

Everything

THIS.

Everything is problematic, including this post.

And it’s about fking time you all realized it.

I give the transgression of everything being problematic four problematics. Now we can start making change happen.

[everythingsaproblem]

Spooning

Some people think it’s cute when people lay in bed with their loved ones, holding each other in their arms. This act is commonly referred to as “spooning.”

Other people—enlightened people—realize that spooning is a deeply problematic way that power structures propagate themselves. Fortunately, such enlightened people are dominant in the media and can explain to us how we should be Good:

The more I reflect on spooning during my sojourn, the more I have come to see it as a terrible idea, one that’s fraught both physically and ideologically.

Yes, thank you! I’m glad someone is finally addressing this. 

Big spoons are manly and will take care of you (provided you let them use you to take care of themselves); little spoons are fragile, passive creatures that need to be held and kept safe. This, of course, is fundamentally a sexist arrangement, one that casts the big spoon as “the man” and the little spoon as “the woman.”

wow really makes you think

To say that this power imbalance is built into all acts of spooning—whichever the sexes engaged—is not, I think, an overstatement.

Not only is it not an overstatement, it’s the truest thing I’ve ever read. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to say that the government should probably step in and begin educating our children about the ideologically unsound nature of spooning. Is it really too much to ask for a chapter in sex ed books on this topic?

I give the transgression of sleeping next to your loved one in an ideologically fraught way three problematics.

[everythingsaproblem]

‘Tomboy’

Sometimes you don’t even need to see a movie or read its script or even see an ad for it and you know that it’s obviously, deeply, incredibly problematic. Such is the case with Tomboy. I mean, can you even with this headline?

...

Seriously?

I mean, seriously?

The script, written by Hill from a story by Denis Hamill, centers on an ace assassin who is double-crossed by gangsters and falls into the hands of rogue surgeon known as "The Doctor," who turns him into a woman.

The hitman (now a hitwoman) sets out for revenge, aided by a nurse named Johnnie, who also has secrets.

It’s really unbelievable. Fortunately outrage is building before cameras have even started rolling:

smdh

Really, “WTF” is the only proper response to this news. 

It’s almost as if the term “problematic” was created just for this project.

YES! THIS! This is the most problematic thing I’ve ever seen. 

I kind of don’t even know where to begin with this but suffice to say, it’s yet another project I can’t believe got the greenlight thanks to its insensitivity.

ugh hollywood is so reactionary

To base a film around someone who isn’t even trans (at least from THR’s report) getting the surgery forcibly is a horrendous idea.

ikr

The backlash against the Eddie Redmayne-starring The Danish Girl (among several other projects) has proved hiring cis actors to play trans roles is a bad idea. And yet, it keeps happening.

Look, if you’re going to make a movie about a person being forcibly sex-changed, it should at least star someone who actually has been sex-changed, you know what I mean? FFS, Hollywood.

Fortunately, there’s still time to shut this monstrosity down as shooting doesn’t begin for another couple of weeks. Call your congressmen, email your college professors, tweet until your fingers bleed—do something. Anything. This movie must be stopped. It is literally the most problematic thing that has ever been made and the heat from all the takes that will be published if this movie makes it to big screens might destroy all life on planet Earth.

I give the transgression of even considering making the most problematic movie of all time four problematics.

[everythingsaproblem]

The Word ‘Too’

Sometimes you find new problems in the most unexpected places. Sometimes it’s a word you use every day. Sometimes it’s a common word, an adverb, a simple modifier that means “in addition, also”—when it doesn’t mean “smdh, patriarchy,” that is.

The word “too” is obviously deeply problematic.

The freshness of this 1,258 word take is something to behold. Now that I’ve read it, I cannot stop seeing oppression.

I have a very love-hate relationship with my hair. I love its uniqueness -- it seems signature to me. But I'm never really satisfied. Frustrated, I decided to text my friend. After a quick exchange of opinions about my hair, our conversation ended with, "Well you don't want it to be too short or too long."

jfc she said that?

What she said was harmless, 

Nothing is harmless because everything’s a problem.

but it still caused an epiphany.

I’m sure it did; millennials manage to find epiphanies everywhere they look.

There is no proper way for a woman to cut her hair, let alone do anything right in this world. There seems to be an unobtainable one-millimeter-wide mark of perfection, and none of us can reach it. Everything is too this or too that. We see it every day in the tabloids. For example, one day a female celebrity is too revealing and the next day she is too matronly.

Yes, that bastion of patriarchy, the tabloid newspaper.

In my experience, I rarely hear too thrown around about men.

Never.

You hear someone say, "He's short," but you seldom hear "too short."

Frankly, I find this bit of heightism a little bit disturbing. But I’ll let it slide.

I have determined that too means you're calling a woman too far away from your idyllic vision of what a woman should be.

oh geez v problematic

My epiphany about this word surprised me.

You’re not alone sister.

I spent this past summer being a counselor at an overnight camp.

Obviously you are qualified to lecture the world about what is right and what is wrong.

Being a counselor was truly transformative; it was the first time I felt really impactful.

It’s always good to be impactful; that’s how we learn to think out of the box in order to shift paradigms and increase awareness.

I am taking a vow to ban the word too from my vocabulary.

As should we all! Banning words is the first step toward justice of the social variety.

Anyway, this piece really made me think. I hope it’ll make you think too. 

WAIT, NOT TOO. I mean, “also.” Also.

(Is “also” still okay to say?)

(SMDH, get it together; this is how patriarchy wins.)

I give the transgression of using a common, totally harmless word three problematics.

[everythingsaproblem]

Yik Yak

Yik Yak is a social media service that allows people to broadcast their thoughts to other people within a certain geographic area. It is very popular on college campuses, where students use it to anonymously chat about teachers and each other. The service goes largely unmonitored and bad words/bad thoughts are often expressed

Obviously, this sort of unfettered speech is deeply problematic.

Not sure that sarcasm is called for, shitlord, but I appreciate you bringing this to our attention:

A group of 72 activist groups—including major women's-rights players like the Feminist Majority Foundation and the National Organization for Women and other big-name orgs, such as the Human Rights Campaign and the National LGBTQ Task Force—are asking the U.S. Department of Education to demand more monitoring and regulation of the popular app Yik Yak by college administrators.

Of course, the soft, welcoming hands of a protective figure—a bigger brother looking out for us, if you will—wouldn’t be necessary if the people at Yik Yak were more considerate about the desire of others to punish those who say bad things.

JFC, corporate responsibility, have you heard of it? Don’t people understand that free speech is a problem to be monitored?

I’m glad someone cares about finding a good way to better shut down speech.

And yet, of all the anonymous apps and Web sites promising safe spaces for users to spill their souls, perhaps none has proved so consistently problematic — so apparently irredeemable — as Yik Yak, the scourge of campuses from California to Concord, N.H.

ugh 

None of this bodes well for Yik Yak’s grand ambition, which is to become a kind of hyperlocal news and community network — think the coffee shop cork board for the digital age. The problem with that analogy, of course, is that some barista presumably watches the IRL cork board for rude and/or offensive fliers.

YES! THIS! Yik Yak needs a barista around constantly monitoring every communication to make sure that no one’s feels are hurt. Honestly, there’s only one thing to do:

Censorship is a blunt instrument, to be sure, and it's often not the correct one for the job.

Whoa let’s not get nuts; if anything we should be censoring more stuff (Twitter, I’m looking at you).

Yakking gives you the ability to say whatever you want to everyone within earshot without ever revealing who you are, and anyone who has attended a high school assembly can tell you how helpful that input usually is.

Some have suggested that those offended by such speech just “turn Yik Yak off” but this is absurd: the Internet is a safe space and we should all be free from ever having to hear anything that offends us bec—

YOU HAVE NO POWER HERE, REALITY, BEGONE

I give the transgression of an app existing that can’t be easily censored and gives people all the sads four problematics.

[everythingsaproblem]

Jem and the Holograms

Jem and the Holograms is a cartoon from the 1980s about empowered women singing powerful pop tunes in the hopes of empowering young girls everywhere with the power of fashion and the power of pop.

Obviously, its adaptation into a live-action film was deeply problematic. 

First off, can we talk about how sexist it was that this nostalgia-laden film was budgeted at $5 million when “boy” movies like Transformers and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and GI JOE get way more money to play with? Pajiba is ON IT:

Maybe it’s because as brainless as the big budget ones are, they still offer scads of action and spectacle.

well that would make sense given that explosions cost more than keytars but things don’t need to make sense when they are problematic because logic is a construct of the patriarchy let’s see if we can find the real reason OH WAIT

But the fact that Jem and the Holograms’s budget was so comically small makes me wonder if it’s that we don’t value girls’ nostalgia as highly as boys’.

THIS. Who cares if the movie debuted to near-record-low grosses; equality demands that the studio behind it loses EVEN MORE MONEY. Otherwise the shitlords win.

Of course, maybe the movie did so poorly because it was itself problematic:

But before succumbing to collective nostalgia and getting too fist-pumpy about it all, let's remember for a moment that the film has a pretty glaring problem.

obvs everything does

And yes. It has to do with gender.

oh geez

The silver screen version of this female-empowerment tale is being spearheaded by a male director, male screenwriter, and eight male producers.

JFC. No wonder they spent so little money on it and value the nostalgia of women so little. I bet there’s more than just sexism at play, though:

I bet the answer is yes.

Perhaps it is this shortened timetable, which might give explanation to the very haphazard casting of the film. I’m speaking in particular about why the producers thought that biracial actress Aurora Perrineau, best known as Bianca on the television series Pretty Little Liars, would be a good likeness for character Shana, the dark-skinned African American bass guitarist (of course she plays bass) and Hologram member with the electric purple afro?

Ugh, wow, kinda minority but not minority enough is the worst thing you can do. And there’re two examples of that sin in this film!

And while we are at it, what’s the deal with the producers thinking that Hayley Kiyoko Alcroft, the biracial daughter of comedian Larry Alcroft and figure skater Sarah Kawahara, and best known as Thelma in recent Scooby Doo projects, would be a good pick for Aja, the Hologram’s only Asian-American member? That one may not be as obvious an issue for some, considering that the term “Asian” is pretty inclusive. However, you rarely see Hollywood go darker or more aesthetically Asian, say, like a Mindy Kaling or Lucy Lui (unless the film requires martial arts or slumdogs or something).

I just cannot even with this. 

I give the transgression of not spending enough money on a sexist, racist movie three problematics.

[everythingsaproblem]

Anthony Mackie

It’s like Marvel’s Dude Bros go out of their way to be problematic. In this post we highlighted the ways in which Chris Evans, Jeremy Renner, and Robert Downey Jr are problematic. Yesterday, we saw Renner being problematic yet again. Joss Whedon, the director of the two Avengers movies, has said problematic things.

But we thought Anthony Mackie was cool. Mackie plays Falcon, the only black hero the Marvel Cinematic Universe (Blade doesn’t count and you know this) has deigned to bring to the bring screen (aside from War Machine, who was casually replaced by Marvel higher ups because Terrence Howard got too big for his britches or whatever). We have a lot of hopes riding on Mackie--maybe he can one day become Captain America, like in the comics, and stand up to evil anti-immigration folks.

But then we found out our fave is problematic. We are so disappointed. I mean, can you even with this?

I cannot even with this nor can anyone else who believes in social justice.

What’s the bad Trump joke? Glad you asked!

Mackie later said he was “joking.” But there was nothing funny about this gaffe:

I bet he would never make a joke about women, would he?

JFC! Well, I bet he at least had some solidarity with Selma when it got snubbed at the Oscars, didn’t he?

AYFKM

I think we all know the proper word for Anthony Mackie.

smdh

I give the transgression of repeatedly being problematic on every single level four problematics. Plz work on your intersectionality, bro.

[everythingsaproblem]

Saying Supergirl Is ‘Hot’

During a recent campaign stop, Jeb Bush was asked who is favorite superheroes are. His first response was Batman (oh the cishet white rich dude loves Bruce Wayne, I’m shocked). But then he added that the new Supergirl is “hot” and that he’s looking forward to watching her new show.

Obviously, this is deeply problematic.

Blushing emoji indeed. In no surprise to anyone, shitlord central doubled down on their gross sexism.

And, soon, the media focused on this shiny new object:

It’s good to see the media understands how to prioritize the news: deregulation of federal land is a very minor issue compared to Jeb’s feelings about Supergirl.

SO ... awks. But also creepy:

Frankly, though, the Internet Outrage Machine has been a bit too quiet on this for some of my fellow social justice warriors. 

Just because CBS went out of its way to find an attractive young woman to be the new Supergirl, that’s no reason for you creepy dudebros to mention that she’s hot. FFS. Get it together.

I give the transgression of saying that a hot woman is hot four problematics. 

[everythingsaproblem]

Jeremy Renner

We’ve previously dealt with the problematic shitlord Jeremy Renner, who thought it was “cool” and “funny” to make horribly problematic jokes about Black Widow being a slut. So I guess we can’t be too surprised that he can’t be bothered to stand up for social justice and equality of pay.

Way to check your privilege, man.

jfc

SOME celebrities are better than you; most of them are just sexist dbags.

Unlike Bradley Cooper, who starred alongside both Lawrence and Renner in American Hustle and is happy to work with his co-stars to bring attention to the issue, Jeremy Renner doesn't care to participate in the fight for wage equality.

Cool unity bro it’s really good to see this. Doesn’t Jeremy Renner know the old phrase? “If you don’t have anything socially just to say, don’t say anything at all.” 

Of course, this is just another example of one of our problematic faves letting us down:

But one warrior for justice (category: social) had a good idea:

YES! THIS! People should only work with those who agree that actors should negotiate their pay together. That way everyone—from the biggest star to the lowliest extra—will earn the same amount of money. Only then will we have true equality.

I give the transgression of refusing to spout the current line on whatever topic is rustling social justice jimmies at any given time two problematics.

[everythingsaproblem]

Prince William

I guess we shouldn’t expect much more from literal monarchs—holders of the ultimate in white, male privilege—but ffs. Can you even with this?

ugggghhhh

But what is odd about William’s words yesterday is his description of his daughter Charlotte: “lady-like”. ... I never really know what people mean when they say “lady-like”, but surely not that. Surely not going to the toilet, in your pants, in front of Peppa Pig. So it doesn’t really make sense for a baby. Does William not realise that his daughter could quite easily confuse his face with that of Mr Potato Head? Because she’s a baby – not a lady, not an adult.

This is how the patriarchy works: by forcing gender norms onto babies that literally can’t even tell the difference between an anthropomorphized potato and a human face. 

Of course, this isn’t the first time that Prince William has stepped in it. 

You’d think that it might be nice that William was taking his wife’s desires into account before simply agreeing to a brotastic day out with a legendary footballer.

lol don’t you know that everything’s a problem?

Of course, there are still people who refer to their partner as ‘the missus’. I’ve been on the receiving end of it myself and was mortified. In fact, until I’d been called it, I probably wouldn’t have expected my reaction to be so strong. But it made me feel small. Generic. Replaceable.

‘The missus’ is the sort of phrase that women tolerate. It’s not overt, vile, abhorrent misogyny – but it is the sort of creeping, benevolent sexism, that needs stamping out.

SMDH. Despite being born into the whitest of privileges, one can’t but help feel a bit of pity for Princess Charlotte:

I’m with Laura Sheldon, a 16-year-old who tweeted, “Are we really still in the 1950s with gender norms?” Apparently, Laura, we are.

Sheldon then emailed The Associated Press: “I don’t like the way the media are emphasizing the baby is a girl and companies exploiting this in their marketing. The whole ‘pink for girls’ and ‘blue for boys’ thing is so outdated and too conservative for what should be a progressive society.”

I BELIEVE THE CHILDREN ARE OUR FUTURE 

TEACH THEM WELL AND LET THEM LEAD THE WAY!

I give the transgression of prince bros enforcing gender norms three problematics.

[everythingsaproblem]

IHOP

Is IHOP teaming up with the shitlords of #WorldPatriarchyDay or something?

IHOP deleted the tweet. But the Internet is forever, sexists. 

They may have tried to sweep that gross tweet under the rug. But here’s another one from last month that no one has thought to get rid of just yet:

WTF JFC AYFKM

What is this, the International House of Problematics?

I give the transgression of letting sexist pancake bros work your pancake social media account four problematics. 

[everythingsaproblem]

Ronda Rousey

Ronda Rousey has become something of a feminist icon in these last few months. She is the most popular athlete in a sport traditionally dominated by men. She has spoken out against domestic violence. She has received glowing writeups on numerous blogs and in numerous magazines.

Obviously, she’s deeply problematic.

I mean, can you even with the fact that Ronda Rousey does not want to fight someone who was born identifying as a man?

In 2013, when UFC fighter Matt Mitrione made offensive comments about transgender MMA fighter Fallon Fox, calling her a “lying, sick, sociopathic, disgusting freak,” the New York Post asked Rousey for her thoughts on Mitrione’s words. Rousey said he expressed himself “extremely poorly” and that she could “understand the UFC doesn’t want to be associated with views like that.” But in that same interview, Rousey didn’t exactly demonstrate a predilection for sensitivity. “She can try hormones, chop her pecker off, but it’s still the same bone structure a man has,” Rousey said about Fox. “What if she became UFC champion and we had a transgender women’s champion? It’s a very socially difficult situation.”

Well, of course it’s going to be a socially difficult situation with BIGOTS LIKE YOU around. The fact that Rousey refuses to subject yourself to the fists of someone who just happened to be born with the bone and muscular structure of a man sickens me. Who cares if she literally broke the face of the last woman she fought? Science proves that she’s just the same as any other woman now. FFS.

And sure, it’s good that Rousey spoke up against Floyd Mayweather’s abuse of women. But did you know she dates someone who was accused of domestic violence himself?

Yet Rousey is currently dating UFC fighter Travis Browne — a man accused of domestic abuse in his previous relationship. In August, his wife Jenna Renee Webb said she’d be pressing charges against Browne.

Was there an independent third party investigation of this proving her claims?

Though a third-party investigation done at the behest of the UFC found “inconclusive evidence” of these claims.

Eh, close enough. The point is, society should shun someone who is even thought to have maybe one day possibly committed domestic violence. Some people simply can’t be rehabilitated. 

And what’s with all the bodyshaming, Ronda? 

This summer, Rousey decried what she called a “do-nothing bitch.” ... Being proud of your body is great. Burying other women because they have a different body than yours is not. As Alanna Vagianos noted in the Huffington Post, Rousey’s DNB speech is “certainly not empowering, and it certainly does nothing to combat the large issues that create a society where athletic bodies like Rousey’s are judged as less than.”

ffs ayfkm

Don’t even get me started with how she responded to a guy she was dating who had surreptitiously taken nude photos of her. First off, she slapped him. (JFC.) And then this:

Rousey then wrote that “Snappers McCreepy” begged her to let him explain. She refused. He was blocking the door and wouldn’t move out of the way. So she “punched him in the face with a straight right, then a left hook.” She slapped him again. He still didn’t move, so she “grabbed him by the neck of his hoodie, kneed him in the face, and tossed him aside on the kitchen floor.”

Rousey had a right to make Mr. McCreepy move out of her way, and what he did to her was extremely wrong, but the incident seems a bit excessive nonetheless.

YES! THIS! Use your words, Ronda. When you find that someone has taken nude photos of you that you don’t want, sit down and discuss your feelings about it. Share. Talk. Don’t react with your fists. This just perpetuates patriarchal privilege: violence is NEVER the answer. 

I give the transgression of Ronda Rousey not wanting to get hurt by a former man in the ring while simultaneously being willing to hurt current men who took creepshots of her three problematics. 

[everythingsaproblem]

Emma Watson

Emma Watson is an outspoken feminist. She has been the UN Women Goodwill Ambassador since 2014. She delivered a powerful speech about men and women’s equality to the United Nations. As a result of that speech, she was terrorized by a group that pretended to have nude photos of her in order to shut down the site 4chan. She has “brought men into feminism” by informing them of the ways patriarchy hurts them as well.

Obviously, Emma Watson is deeply problematic. 

Her speech to the UN was lousy with privilege. 

In addition to being sexist—we don’t need white knights—Emma Watson’s brand of feminism is extremely white, as the website Black Girl Dangerous helpfully reminds us.

Some of the mainstream (white) feminist interwebs are all abuzz because, according to said mainstream (white) feminist interwebs, it was all kinds of awesome and really, really next-level or something. Yes, some of it was very good. Ms. Watson talked about how she came into feminism herself, after experiences such as being sexualized by the media at age 14. For the first few minutes, the speech is awesome.

But then I bet it gets problematic doesn’t it?

The issue is that the message Ms. Watson delivered is problematic in many ways.

oh ffs i knew it

Here, she seems to suggest that the reason men aren’t involved in the fight for gender equality is that women simply haven’t invited them and, in fact, have been unwelcoming. Women haven’t given men a formal invitation, so they haven’t joined in. It’s not because, you know, men benefit HUGELY (socially, economically, politically, etc. infinity) from gender inequality and therefore have much less incentive to support its dismantling. It’s not because of the prevalence of misogyny the entire world over. It’s just that no one’s asked. OMG, why didn’t any of us think to ask?!

Wow, could she BE any more ignorant about how the structures of oppression are built?

Telling men that they should care about gender inequality because of how much it hurts them, centralizes men and their well-being in a movement built by women for our survival in a world that degrades and dehumanizes us daily. This is problematic for the same reason telling white people that they should end racism because racism “holds us all back as a society, so eradicating it will help you, too,” is problematic.

So many problematics, such little time.

Firstly, because even if that’s true, it does nothing to create solidarity. I have never met a white person who decided to take on anti-racism work because of the negative effects of racism on white people. Literally, never.  And I don’t think I’ve ever met a man who genuinely supports feminist ideals because of the ways they benefit men first. If I did know people like this, I wouldn’t like them.

I’m sure you have tons of dude friends as it is, so this is a very strong point.

Needless to say, when Emma Watson whitesplained this week about how she’s totally down with solidarity for nonwhite feminists, it was laughable. 

Although many mainstream media outlets praised Watson as a new feminist hero for her speech, which issued a "formal invitation" to men to join the struggle for women's rights, many intersectional feminist blogs questioned the approach, suggesting that the campaign problematically positions men as the saviors of women and that Watson had spoken from a privileged position as a rich white woman without thinking about the experience of women of color, dubbing her a "white feminist" -- that is, a feminist who only considers the experience of white people.

SMDH. How did right-thinking people respond to her attempt at “solidarity”?

Though, again, many websites have hailed her response as "smart," the intersectional feminists of Twitter do not seem to be satisfied with it.

Nor should they be. Nor should they EVER be.

Some people might suggest that responses like these are why so many celebrities are quick to disavow the “f” word. But who needs those faux-feminists anyway? If you don’t even intersection, I cannot even with you. 

I give the transgression of being a feminist who frames her feminism in a way that displeases other more extreme feminists three problematics.

[everythingsaproblem]

Saying North Koreans Eat Dogs

In North Korea, a communist nation frequently racked by famines, people eat dogs. Wikipedia informs us that “Daily NK reported that the North Korean government included dog meat in its new list of one hundred fixed prices, setting a fixed price of 500 won per kilogram in early 2010.” The Guardian highlighted the repressive dictatorship’s delightful foodie scene with the following headline/image:

After Kim Jong Un suggested dog meat should be the nation’s national dish, some defectors suggested that this was ridiculous since dog meat is far too expensive:

Kim Jang-Ok, from Hoeryong, who defected last year in July, said, “When I was living in North Korea, I had never considered dog meat to be a ‘national food’. The first thing that comes to mind when I think about dog meat is how expensive it is. A national food usually refers to something that everybody can enjoy. Dog meat is only available for specific groups. Dog meat is twice as expensive as other kinds of meat. You can buy pork by the kilo in the markets, but it’s a different story with dog meat.”

Obviously, it’s deeply problematic to joke about North Koreans eating dog meat:

SMDH, Mike. C’mon. That was super-racist. There is literally no other comment necessary.

It’s not cool to make light of North Koreans eating dogs. FFS.

“C’mon man” indeed. Why would you say that North Koreans eat dog meat? That’s just a nutty, racist thing to say with absolutely no bearing on reality. Ugh.

SMDH.

I give the transgression of suggesting that North Koreans eat dog meat—which they clearly do, in great quantities—four problematics. How dare you, sir. How dare you.

[everythingsaproblem]

Breakfast Sandwiches

Capitalism has led us to the point where people can get an easily consumed egg-and-meat-and-cheese-delivery-device—the breakfast sandwich—for virtually nothing delivered into your hot little hand in literally tens of seconds. Capitalism has also led us to the point that some people with more money are willing to pay a greater some for very similar foodstuffs.

Obviously, this is deeply problematic:

FFS.

A new restaurant called BEC — short for Bacon Egg and Cheese — was about to open in Manhattan, and [New York Times food critic Pete Wells] was less than pleased.

I’m sure he has a good reason, no one ever gets upset for stupid reasons these days.

here was a trendy new spot, readying itself to sell fancy pants egg sandwiches at four times the normal price. That is, for as much as $11.50.

JFC! Can you even with this? Charging more money for something that other people like to eat and pay less for?

Wells's angst was the angst of anyone who feels queasy about the upscalification (yes, that's a made-up word) of anything originally made by and for the working class. And it's well founded.

Of course it’s well founded. Disgust with inequality is predicated on the idea that someone, somewhere is eating a slightly better quality breakfast sandwich than you are. Better to tear down the whole system and start over again than live in a society where the wealthy pay a higher price for a food that they could eat for less elsewhere.

The role that convenience has played in the rise of breakfast sandwiches rubs up against their gourmet counterparts. Many of the fancier versions, including those sold at BEC, are better eaten with both hands, a seat and a handful of napkins. They're sit-down breakfast sandwiches and run contrary to the very nature of the food. They have created a sort of bizarre form of food inequality.

wow really makes you think

The awkward juxtaposition is particularly acute in a city like New York, where bodegas can be found on almost any block. At these convenience stores, people linger just outside, unwrapping freshly bought $3 egg sandwiches. Meanwhile, next door, or just across the street, others now wipe away stray breakfast sandwich egg yolk with cloth napkins. They're paying more for that bacon, egg and cheese sandwich, and they're taking their time with it, too.

Senator Sanders, a nation turns its lonely eyes to you. A woo hoo hoo. 

I give the transgression of serving a more expensive breakfast sandwich four problematics.