If your nom de blog is Twisty Faster, and you are ever directed to Wikipedia to inspect an article titled “Twisty faster” [sic], a “self described Queer Gentleman Spinster Aunt” [sic], it is probable that you will, after initially feeling a bit flattered but ultimately blanking the page on grounds of painful factual inaccuracy (yup, I coined the term “godbag”– right after I invented the internet), get a wild hair up your monkeynut and type the word “femininity” into the search box.
The result is a laff a minute. Wikipedia’s nonsensical article, which was apparently edited chiefly by a hetero male godbag high schooler sent over from Christ-o-pedia, may be summarized as There is great debate over which qualities ought to be attributable to the female sex, which unfortunately makes it difficult to codify absolutely the denigration of women.
The “Femininity in the media” section, with its yearning nostalgia for Gibson girls and flappers, is a paean to 20th century feminine beauty. Then some brave Wikipedian mentions the radical feminist’s celebrated peevishness toward airbrushed photos in fashion magazines, hard upon which the aforementioned illiterate godbag schoolboy is compelled to append this:
There are also many that disagree with this viewpoint, due to the fact in an age when women hold significant sway in the fashion community, aesthetic virtue and competing for attention are still positivly [sic] connotated. They further argue that since women are the ones that are instinctually craving these beauty products, women are therefore the ones driving this yearn towards physical perfection, and not a patriarchal oppression conspiracy.”
Which remarks beautifully illustrate the unsophisticated, imperfect grasp of the subject one so often finds among godbag dudes. It gratifies them to believe that women, who universally clamor for their own oppression because it is “instinctual,” are the sole architects of femininity.
Oh, and check out this howler: “In circumstances such as prison where men are segregated from women, a fraction of the population will nevertheless divide according to persistent female principles.”
Female principles! Dear god.
I mention all this to remind the young onion that Wikipedia, the 10th most visited website in the known universe (quoth Alexa), may occasionally seem handy, but it is also infested by the fanciful and clumsily executed musings of knobs whose competence is compromised by their saturation in the dominant culture. Remember Essjay, that influential Wikipedia editor who claimed, in order to dominate other Wikipedians, to be a tenured professor of religion at a private college, but who turned out to be — what else — a godbag schoolboy?