Bring back shame
Stigma and shame serve important purposes in society—we need to bring them back
Third wave feminism pushed a lot of bad ideas, from the claim that “sex work” was just “a job like any other,” to the related “any choice any woman makes ever is empowering” notion, to “intersectionality” and a ladder of oppression one is ranked on based on things like race and various other invented identities, to the “don’t shame anyone or anything ever” mantra.
There are more flaws in the ideology we could point to, I’m sure, but those ideas were some of the primary ones I spent the better part of a decade shouting into the wind about.
The “don’t shame” phenomenon was particularly damaging. Third wave feminism and what was called “sex-positive feminism” went hand-in-hand, effectively determining anything related to “sex” or deemed “sexual” that was also technically “consensual,” was above board—off-limits in terms of criticism.
That included BDSM, pornography, stripping, pole-dancing, posting thotty photos on Instagram, prostitution, and any variety of fetish. This is ridiculous for obvious reasons. Just because a woman agrees to sell sex doesn’t mean it’s good for her or that the man paying for it is doing something ethical. This exchange and the sex trade at large is neither “good” nor ethical. And “consent” in such contexts is just a get-out-jail-free card for those who would prefer not to think about the spiritual, physical, emotional, or ethical consequences of their actions or the actions of others.
A fetish, likewise, is not neutral… Not if it becomes all-encompassing or a public display, which it seems fetishes tend to. I mean, what is a fetish if not a fixation—an obsession, as it were. Needing a strange and very specific “thing” in order to get off during sex is weird to me, and impedes the humanness and human connection aspect of sex. You aren’t connecting with the human you are having sex with, you are demanding the fetish, regardless of the human. It has nothing to do with her, but with the object, scenario, words, outfit, what have you. It doesn’t strike me as desirable to need some special outfit, or some special violence, or some special pain or some special scene or audience in order to enjoy something your body and soul was built to enjoy in a rather miraculous way.
Paraphilias don’t tend to improve with use, either, so I’m hard-pressed to understand why they should be encouraged or pursued. Call me a prude, but violent, creepy, anti-social, abusive sexual obsessions seem unhealthy to me, particularly when we know how dangerous violent, creepy, anti-social, abusive men are.
Within modern, Western civilization, social norms have been kept in check not just by laws, but by… social norms… We often hear the common trope from trans activists wondering if those who wish to keep men out of women’s bathrooms plan to do “genital checks” at the door or plant a cop outside, but the truth is that this was never really necessary before. Were a man to enter the women’s bathroom or girls’ change room, he would have been screamed at and removed, or perhaps punched, likely by another man in the vicinity. A man walking around in public in fetish gear would have likely been treated similarly, and yes, that very likely would have included the autogynephiles.
As much as it’s not nice to suggest so-called “weirdos” be made to feel socially awkward, uncomfortable, unwelcome, or even in danger, depending on the type of “weirdo,” it’s not a bad thing. In many ways it is a good thing.
I don’t actually think men should feel “comfortable” walking around in a mini-skirt or lingerie in public. I don’t think it’s important to make men with diaper fetishes feel accepted. I don’t think we should destigmatize anti-social behaviour that creeps women and children out. I don’t think you need to bring your weird sexual preoccupations out into the public realm. I think if you are the kind of man who likes to get boners in public spaces by making other people feel uncomfortable you should be shamed and ostracized. This is a good way of dealing with these kinds of men.
We recently read reports of not one but two male autogynephiles perpetrating mass shootings—one in Tumbler Ridge, B.C., and another in Pawtucket, Rhode Island. One of the perpetrators, 56-year-old Robert Dorgan, showed up at his son’s graduation in a white lace miniskirt with some of the worst-looking breast implants I’ve ever seen, his giant calf veins protruding atop strappy (albeit flatish) black sandals, presumably worn for comfort.
One hundred percent, Robert Dorgan should have felt “ashamed” to go out in public like this, particularly to his son’s high school graduation. But also to work, which he apparently did while employed as an electrician at a Maine shipyard.
“Dorgan was known for being ‘short-tempered’—and being an ‘odd bird’ who showed up to work in ‘inappropriate clothing,’ including short skirts and dresses,” The Providence Journal reports. A man named Ryan Fisher, who worked with Dorgan at Bath Iron Works, said it “seemed odd that Dorgan would show up wearing high heels and short skirts in summer.”
Odd indeed!
This is not the same thing as a man choosing to wear a pink polo shirt and learning to dance. I am not talking about women who like to wear men’s workboots because they are more practical. These preferences and pastimes do not signify a sexual perversion such as autogynephilia that is impractical, ugly, irrational, and also connects inevitably to exhibitionism. Autogynephiles wear their wigs and fake breasts and high heels in public to get off, not because pleather is more comfortable or flattering. It’s part of the fetish. The idea that people will see them looking like this is a thrill. The violation of women’s and girls’ boundaries that happens through intruding on female spaces is the same. That they can force people to let them get away with it and go along with—participate—in the fantasy is tied up in the titillation.
This is why these things would have, pre-transanity, signified such a man is a danger, a creep, and deserving of a punch rather than applause. What was once common sense was turned into “bigotry” by the “no shame” crowd, who opened the floodgates to all variety of perverts to flaunt their psychosexual obsessions at parades, at work, and at brunch. Not only were we to pretend it was normal and harmless, but that it was brave.
Call me crazy, but I think you should try to act and look normal in public. Which is not to say you have to always be quiet or reserved or boring or that you should lie to keep the peace or conform to nonsensical rules and belief systems because that is said to be the “norm,” but rather that seeking to get everyone to stare at you because you look like a freak or a pervert is a weird thing to do and should be treated as such. Making people uncomfortable on purpose is weird. Having a different opinion is not the same thing as being a hulking man in an ill-fitting dress, demanding to be called “ma’am.”
I’m afraid I’m just not too worried that the kinds of men who might masturbate in the girls’ change room or murder their families at a hockey rink or demand to be called “she” under threat of suicide might feel “shame.” This is the kind of behaviour people should feel ashamed of, and that normalization has not alleviated. The claim that one must “affirm” an individual’s identity as something they are not in order to prevent mental breakdown has proven false. Indeed, the affirmation has only made things worse.
Bring back shame. Stigmatize perverts. Let the reign of freaks come to an end.