Now I know how Joan of Arc felt. Please Lord, don't let this happen again. Please. Haven't we suffered enough?

If you were suspicious, all that shit is ficticious. I don't know where I've been lately, but I've missed way too many offensive pop culture trends. Usually I'm the first one to pick up on these things, but it seems I am hopelessly behind the times.

Apparently there is a lot of hating on Jewish women going on that I simply haven't been paying attention to. Jezebel provides a comprehensive rant about the fetishization of Jewish Men and points out that their sexy female counterparts get no love. Word, people. Why do we hold on to that self-hating, spread-by-Philip Roth, nagging Jewish mother stereotype or that money-spending, frigid JAP stereotype? And why is it that the only nice thing Jewish men can say about us is that we give good head? Find a new theme!

To put it generally, as Judaism is passed through the mother, Jewish women tie men to the religion and the culture. As Jewishness is often seen as indicative of weakness, untrustworthiness, impotence, and unattractiveness in Western society, Jewish men must denegrate their female counterparts in order to thrive. Considering that the main tenant of Judaism is to marry another Jew and have lots of tiny Jewish babies, if you don't marry a Jewish woman, you're rejecting your Jewishness. I realize this is a controversial statement, and I'm not attacking Jewish men who date non-Jews. I'm pointing out that the subtext of anti-Jewish women propaganda is, in essence, a denegration of Judaism itself. This Boston Globe op-ed says the same thing with a lot less theoretical mumbo-jumbo.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: I refuse to be valued solely on the merits of deep-throating. I refuse to be defined by some archaic, anti-Semitic, misogynistic, self-hating stereotype designed simply so that Jewish men can fuck shiksas and not feel bad about it. Unlike some people, I do not suffer from an identity crisis.

You can see me, you can squeeze me. Things have been so serious lately on TL Live! what with rampant misogyny and presidential primaries and Jake Ryan that I thought I would bring some levity to your life by alerting you to this little gem. Not only does it poke fun at men's magazines, but it also reveals all the secrets of LadyTown. Me and my mythical fallopian tubes are still chuckling.

Hush little baby, don't say a word. Holy crap, y'all. I need to take a nap after this scathing review of the year of the "Abortion-Not." I've tried to ignore this trend towards yay pregnancy! in recent films partially because these movies would have no plot without pregnancy, but also because I generally think Hollywood is stupid and banal. I do not rely on Hollywood to offer me intelligent social critiques. Shocking, I know. But there's been so much uproar lately that I guess I'll have to get off my high horse and pay attention:

There can be no female agency in Knocked Up, Waitress, and Juno—not because they are comedies, but because, in each scenario, unwanted pregnancy is the joke played (by God?) on the female lead. As the most successful of the preg protags, she who is Knocked Up is necessarily the most smacked down—the glass ceiling turns out to be Alison's own uterus. Jenna and Juno are less formidable, but unexpected fertility mocks their dreams of autonomy. All three are taught their place by their own bodies—and what's more, they learn to like it.

The Village Voice just punched me in the face.

I don't care if you really care as long as you don't go. Yay! Another reason why dating is so perilous! As someone who is not so good at saying "Next," I can relate. Any of my friends will tell you that I accept way too much bad behavior as worth the price of admission. Though, I must admit, it scares me a bit that you can get dumped for no more legitimate reason than your basic existence irritating your partner. It makes me feel entirely awkward and destructively self-reflective. Boo. That said, I'm still having a blast.

Also, if you liked that article, may I recommend Jezebel's truly fantastic and hilarious series Crap Email from a Dude, in which real ladies send in real emails from real douchebags. The idea is that, contrary to social stereotypes, women aren't the only crazies out there because voila le bullshit from the mens.

So happy to be single, people!

I'll be always falling. Thanks to the Daily Intelligencer, I have stumbled upon the most hilarious and most upsetting article ever written about a pop culture phenomenon I didn't know about. Apparently I have been immune to Jake Ryan worship all these years, and I had no idea that there were so many women out there pining over this (For those of you who don't remember Jake, here's a nice YouTube tribute for you). Ladies, let's be honest: Jake Ryan doesn't have much of a personality. I agree that he's extremely kind and considerate, but my goodness is he wooden. What would you talk to him about besides beer, gym class, or his porsche? This is why I also don't agree with the Daily Intel's take on Dan Humphrey as the new Jake Ryan because Dan Humphrey, while also extremely kind and considerate, is so fucking self-righteous and faux-superior that I want to smack him off his high horse every time he opens his mouth.

Then again, I never was the girl fantasizing about prince charming. So, I leave it to all of you to pine and moon, and I'll be the cynic at the back of the bar.

Will there always be concerts where women are raped? If the New York Times is trying to get into my pants, it's working. In addition to the previously-cited article about male narcissism, there's Bob Herbert's fantastic op-ed about the detrimental effects of the nation's love affair with misogyny.

Say what you will about Hillary Clinton's campaign, but you've got to admit that all this discussion about gender in America is absolutely priceless and long overdue. Even if the only thing her candidacy accomplishes is hearty debate, I'll still be grateful.

Do you believe there's anything beyond troll-guy reality? Thanks, New York Times! Can we have more articles that deconstruct the selfish, heinous, inexplicably socially acceptable things men do? Pretty please with sugar on top?!

I am matching the big boys one for one. In this New York Times op-ed, Gloria Steinam explains what I've been saying about the Obama-Clinton struggle this entire campaign season, only much more articulately. To wit:

I’m supporting Senator Clinton because like Senator Obama she has community organizing experience, but she also has more years in the Senate, an unprecedented eight years of on-the-job training in the White House, no masculinity to prove, the potential to tap a huge reservoir of this country’s talent by her example, and now even the courage to break the no-tears rule. I’m not opposing Mr. Obama; if he’s the nominee, I’ll volunteer....

But what worries me is that he is seen as unifying by his race while she is seen as divisive by her sex.

What worries me is that she is accused of “playing the gender card” when citing the old boys’ club, while he is seen as unifying by citing civil rights confrontations.

What worries me is that male Iowa voters were seen as gender-free when supporting their own, while female voters were seen as biased if they did and disloyal if they didn’t.

What worries me is that reporters ignore Mr. Obama’s dependence on the old — for instance, the frequent campaign comparisons to John F. Kennedy — while not challenging the slander that her progressive policies are part of the Washington status quo.

What worries me is that some women, perhaps especially younger ones, hope to deny or escape the sexual caste system; thus Iowa women over 50 and 60, who disproportionately supported Senator Clinton, proved once again that women are the one group that grows more radical with age.

This country can no longer afford to choose our leaders from a talent pool limited by sex, race, money, powerful fathers and paper degrees. It’s time to take equal pride in breaking all the barriers. We have to be able to say: “I’m supporting her because she’ll be a great president and because she’s a woman.”

Sing it!

The teddy bears have their picnic. Holy crap, pandas!

Make them boys go crazy. Happy Caucus Day, everyone! Here's a funny little snippet from a New York Times article about the plethora of attractive Democratic candidates:

Instead of the usual voter complaints about choosing among unattractive options, there are meditative conversations about Senator Barack Obama’s freshness versus Gov. Bill Richardson’s international résumé versus John Edwards’s commitment to the underprivileged versus the historic prospect of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s becoming the first female president.

That's the only good thing they can think to say about Clinton? That's all she's got, a uterus? Really?! Apparently there's no historic significance in the prospect of Obama's becoming the first black president. He has a penis, so therefore we can talk about other issues.