Breaking: Beth Ditto Is Fat [and she sings, too]!

I like Beth Ditto. No, seriously! Because she has an awesome voice, and is loud and colorful and smart and funny. Because Gossip make quirky music. Because Gossip isn’t afraid to say they’re a feminist band. Because Ditto is from Arkansas and has had the courage and strength to still be Ditto [trust me, that's a huge accomplishment - I am writing this post at Little Rock].

Also, and this might come as a bit of a shock to some of you, Beth Ditto is fat. Like, FAT. Not curvy, not chubby, not a little on the heavy side, but actually fat. What comes as no surprise in a culture of patriarchal fat-shaming and the enforcement of standardized beauty, Ditto is not known as that great voice from Gossip, or as that woman from Arkansas, or as that black-haired white lady who designs her own clothing, but mostly as that fat girl who sings quite well and wears tight clothing in public despite her weight. *pearl clutch*

You’d think that at some point the novelty would wear off, as I am quite sure that both Beth Ditto and everyone else already know that she is fat (if only because media outlets have been telling people for years now) – but nope. This is Gossip’s eighth album, and still the headlines of magazines’ supposed music reviews read like this one: “The Mega-Madonna“.

Looking on the bright side, one might have thought this could be an ode to the innovative mind or vocal strength of Ditto and not yet another hint at her weight, but: of course not. Andreas Borcholte, a man who has actually studied sociology and yet, seems to be unable to fathom the social dimension of the continuous and rather boring “FAAAAT!!!” puns in this article, cannot but write a “review” in which half of what he has to say about Gossip’s new record circles around Ditto’s weight.

Apparently going for the “How many fat-related word choices can I possibly include”-award [is that a thing? Someone nominate me!], Borcholte commingles Ditto’s music with her weight, calling the singer “weighty”, “opulent”, “Knutschkugel”, gives her height/weight stats, and, oh how very surprising, has to connect Ditto to Adele (because all fat chicks in public know each other or are somewhat alike, right?).  At certain points, he provides a couple of lines about the actual record (*gasp!*), some anecdotes about the band, their views on Madonna, “homosexuality” and subversion, and, finally, a whopping two sentences of actual music evaluation in this review; but: the so very peculiar event here remains Ditto’s fat.

The male* gaze is certainly rather unsubtle in this piece, and the constant exoticization of a fat female public figure whose work can eventually be condensed to her weight, is not less apparent. I guess it is too much to ask of a music critic to write a nuanced piece about the actual music when a non-standardized attraction like Ditto can be gawked at. Thankfully, “Spiegel” linked the entire album – so you can be your own judge. It’s certainly more productive and instructive than reading yet another article about that fat girl who also sings.

Did I mention she was FAT? No, seriously:

Do Your Homework.

Usually, I don’t do this, but it was too good to not answer it bit by bit…:

Gabriele Wolff, a jurist and fiction author who prides herself in “having analysed the devastating effects of feminism à la Alice Schwarzer on the state of law” (…LOL!), has published a reply to the various criticism Kristina Schröder’s book (and, you know, her general policies…) has received, including citing mine.

Of course, it is necessary for argumentatively forceful replies to entitle themselves with a hint of rebel and anti-political correctness, so her article is named “Kristina Schröder also says what has to be said”. Indeed, it is always a great selling point to construct your argument as the only voice of reason in a firestorm of mass media political correctness; as the sole keeper of truth and decency in this jungle (yes, I am using that consciously) of anti-racism and anti-sexism that leaves such devastating effects on public interests you alone have discovered, and to imagine yourself as being the censored minority publisher, when all you do is repeat the same arguments that every other Stammtisch and the millions of people who bought Thilo Sarrazin’s and Eva Herman’s book and will, without doubt, also buy Schröder’s, think and argue all along.

After having made this introductory maverick statement, Wolff continues that

und erntet dieselben Reflexe, die Günter Grass erfahren hat. Denn Feminismus-Kritik ist dasselbe verminte Gelände wie Israel-Kritik.

I find it marvellous that people have to step into every trap of cliché they possibly can to defend Schröder. Günther Grass has written a ‘poem’ that accused Israel of wanting to “eradicate” the Iranian people; he then complained about the “gleichschaltung” of the media (as you seem to do, dear Gabriele Wolff, but you have the sense to not use that word), and imagined himself, just as Wolff does, as the sole voice of reason in this politically correctness crazed world.

Indeed, what Wolff does here, is to play with the implicit belief that both feminism and Israel (as a state? As a government? As “the Jews”?) are so powerful and all-consuming forces that any form of criticism leads to inevitable, horrific repercussions (hence: the “mine field” analogy); a very subtle hint at the continuous and revoltingly anti-Semitic idea that both have a secret power network and are above democratic influence and are somehow capable of pulling every string. This is how antifeminist and anti-Israel prejudices work, apparently: regardless of the fact that an explicit and outspoken anti-feminist is now germany’s Federal Minister for women, and that Israel has been up for every form of criticism (and attack) since its existence, and middle-Eastern conflicts seem to be a little more complicated than what Günther Grass makes of them, somehow both feminism and Israel have been the secret victors all along.

“Fauxminists”, Season 2

So… what is it with rape culture and Julian Assange that brings all the level-1-trolls and wannabe-witty fauxminists out of the woods? The Assange case has been debated for a long time now, and still, the same “arguments” are evoked over and over again, no matter how many times they have been refuted – it’s not like any of Assange’s defenders (as in: either saying the women are lying and are honeytrapping CIA-spies, or that if there was a rape it wasn’t all that bad, or that this is all a plot by The International Policy Conspiracy to get him executed) have any new clues or epiphanies to share. The enthusiasm for Assange coming from many fuzzy Pirate Party edges could somewhat be expected; the half-ass trolling from alleged progressive or even feminist (don’t know if the ones I am talking about claim that term, though) women was not, at least to this extent – although I should have known better, given the delightful insights Naomi Wolf has shared already.

On her blog, Dominique has written a great post about women who denigrate feminism, and it is quite funny and disturbing at the same time how many of the archetypes she describes in her article fit so well on the people who have been arguing against the, in their view, silly concept of rape culture lately.

People who have followed the “debate” on the “Mädchenmannschaft” blog post on the Pirate Party, Spackeria, Rainer Langhans and his donation to Assange’s defense funds, know who I am talking about in particular (yes, journalist and blogger Julia Seeliger – and yesterday was the last day I talked to her directly, and today will be the last I talk about her), but this behaviour is nothing new and nothing too exciting in terms of trollfeminism – it is rather a good example of a classic tale.

Because the “conversation” between Julia, others and I was, quite frankly, both absurd and triggering [and obviously, a TW is in order here for rape apologism following], it has been deleted in part. People then resorted to Twitter to continue virtually yelling at each other, which was both fun and exasperating, because I would have thought that people who are invested and also known for journalistic excursions into leftist and gender politics would know a couple of things about it and not stomp their feet, start mocking others and projecting every possible, boring cliché about feminists onto those who dare criticize their views. Oh, how wrong I was…

Whereas the thread on Mädchenmannschaft was actually talking about Rainer Langhans, certain associations of germany’s Pirate Party and the (I maintain that) closely related “Spackeria”, it basically got derailed into the above mentioned “discussion” whether Assange’s case is true or false and whether rape culture is stupid or not. Yeah, that’s right.

Julia started out criticizing that Julian Assange was being made into the poster boy of rape culture, and if we were determined to do that, we should also include other men in that definition, because incidents like the ones Assange is accused of would happen every day and would necessitate talking about uncomfortable issues, e.g., condom use. Whereas she deems it appropriate that the women pressed charges against Assange, the European warrant for his arrest was highly unusual.

Having been criticized for, well, that (her misinformation, the fact that people talk about rape culture all the time and most frequently without Assange as the go-to-guy, the fact that she is reproducing some of his defenders’ strategies and outright lies, etc.) and also informed that the charges against Assange not “only” include the missing condoms but penetration of the sleeping women and using his body weight to hold them down, Julia then resorts to calling the Assange case “highly subjective”, since he was a dude who merely doesn’t like condoms, and that there are many other cases where the issue is much clearer and the charges more justified than with what allegedly happened to the women with Assange, namely – wait for it… – “sleepy sex.”

In her opinion, rape culture equates sex with sexual assault, so “you people” are taking all the fun out of things and are actually “raping Foucault” (she told me that on Twitter after saying that she now has to leave to have some burgers, and she hopes that I’m “also a vegan”, wink wink, smile smile, CAPS LOCK, heart sign heart sign, and that she “invented troll feminism, honey”) and are actually bathing in all the self-pity of female victimhood, since it “frees women” of the “responsibility to take charge” in bed.

Le Sigh…

Is anyone provoked into a blind rage yet or somehow personally hurt? Because I think she and others who argue along those lines are stuck somewhere between amusing and pathetic. The “you people” are “raping Foucault”, “I hope you’re also a vegan” who will now lose it because of the beef, the “you’re all just whiny hippies” and “I invented troll feminism, honey” are very, very subtle attempts to invoke an emotional reaction and a textbook example for projecting your ideas about humorless, frigid (and mostly also fat and ugly) feminists onto the person who criticizes you for your political positioning. Booooring…! Despite popular belief, troll feminism is not an art, it’s old. It’s pointless, it’s telling, and it’s very obviously showcasing the fact that you troll because you have no substantial arguments to make and/or cannot argue properly against those of others. Also: the combination of cluelessness, arrogance and lazy self-centredness you’re portraying makes you look like the dumbass you are. I urge you to stop talking, roll around in glitter and dance for me instead (to paraphrase Sheelzebub).