Only the unloved hate; the unloved and the unnatural. – Charlie Chaplin in The Great Dictator (1940)
Longtime readers know that I always publish my hate mail; newer readers may not realize it because I actually don’t get that much. In fact, I don’t recall getting a single piece in 2012, with the exception of the rare hate comment or “tweet”. Now, I’ve received a number of long anti-Semitic, anti-Muslim and misogynistic screeds (which I keep for archival purposes in a folder labeled “crazy people”), but those aren’t personal; genuine hate mail, as I define it, has to be directed at the recipient. The three previous examples appeared in the posts “An Angry Reply”, “Criticism and Response” and “The Country of the Blind”, and if you read the three of them you may be struck by certain similarities which also apply to the new piece I’m going to share today.
The most important unifying factor is that all of these people are incredibly narcissistic. They write to a complete stranger out of the blue and literally demand that she spend her valuable time engaging with them; one insisted that I change my entire writing style to conform to his notions of propriety, and another apparently imagined that I would totally rewrite several of my columns into a new comment for the benefit of an obviously-hostile stranger. None of these people has a shred of evidence to back up their assertions; it’s simply that the narcissist becomes angry and confused when someone challenges his weltanschauung, and demands that the offender defend himself to the narcissist’s satisfaction…however long that takes. The typical True Believer simply turns his back on an infidel, but for the narcissist this is insufficient; if he does not get the personalized explanation he demands, he becomes furious and begins hurling insults. The hate-mailer described in “The Country of the Blind” is a fine example, as is the one I’m about to discuss.
I first heard from him on December 8th, in a short email which asked the last question in yesterday’s Q & A column. Because I was so busy over the holidays I was unable to answer him until December 30th, but he replied within two hours of my answer; he did not thank me or even acknowledge my response, but merely fired off several more questions (the one on squirting and the multi-part one starting “Do most sex workers enjoy sex with clients?” are his, plus another one too vague and broad to be useful in a Q & A column). I answered those as well, and again his reply barely even acknowledged my response; he instead fired off a dozen new questions, most of which I’ve answered before and the rest…well, their tone made me uncomfortable, and also made it abundantly clear he had read virtually none of my columns. I therefore directed him to “Previously Asked Questions” and politely suggested he read the blog for a few weeks before asking more; within hours I got the following response (reprinted exactly as it appeared in the email), under the subject line “how dare you call yourself an honest courtesan”:
If you want people to accept you and whores, you do it by coming out into the open, not by hiding. If you do get abuse, you fight it. Thats how you change peoples attitudes. You cannot make any progress by hiding behind an anonymous name. The same reasoning applies to your second point about not trusting authorities. If what you are doing is legal, you should be open about it. Changes in laws are brought about not by hiding but by challenging peoples views. The same applies to your third reason. You have all these fears about the consequences of revealing your identity. You would rather live in fear through anonymity than face any opposition that might come about by revealing your identity. This is a cowardly act and does not support your cause to defend prostitutes and uncover the myths about them. Perhaps these are just excuses to hide the real reasons you want to remain anonymous?
By the way, you are not and can not be representative of all prostitutes. Different women do it for different reasons. You say that prostitutes are no different from other women. This is a lie. You are not only hiding behind an anonymous facade but suggest that what you write is representative of all prostitutes. This is a fallacy. Some are victims of trafficking and a lack of other job choices. Other prostitutes such as yourself who go into it specifically to profit from it, are the perpetrators. The victims are the men. Its the men who have a lack of choices here. Prostitutes in this case only serve to profit financially from meddling with the relationships between women and men. It does nothing to address the reasons men seek prostitutes.
Prostitutes of your kind, increase the demand for all sex workers. This means it fuels the more sinister form of prostitution, including trafficking which you deny even happens. There is plenty evidence available.
Sex can be a part of a committed long term relationship or a casual encounter. Where do whores like you fit into the picture? They are the opportunists who come along and profit from any reason a man can give for seeking sex. They may be unhappy with their marriage, or unable to find a partner. People like you do nothing to foster healthy relationships between men and women, it only undermines it. Just because men have difficulties having a fulfilling sex life, it doesnt make it right for you to exploit their needs for your profit. Its clear now why you would want to remain anonymous. You swindle men and pretend you are doing them a favor. That is quite shameful.
As you can see, he dropped his previous veneer of politeness and pretense of seeking knowledge as soon as I refused to waste my time answering questions he could easily have answered for himself just by reading the blog. The commenter has an Asian name, and this mixture of authoritarian statism, moralism and misogyny is not unusual in that part of the world; the “sex trafficking” mythology and “end demand” rhetoric are Western additions to the mess, and the Madonna/whore rubbish, sleazy accusations and straw man fallacy are common among muddleheaded individuals around the world.
My answer to this was a single line: “Thanks for revealing your true motivations before I waste any more time on you.” His reply was even more pugnacious, daring me to post his message so we could “see what others have to say in response.” When I informed him that I always posted hate mail and had already transferred his letter to a draft document, he made a logically-incoherent reply about my “defensive behavior [being] indicative of guilt”, but then asked if I would refrain from publishing his letter if he asked.
My reply? “Nope.”
Postscript: This column was originally scheduled to appear Tuesday, but when I reshuffled a number of columns to make room for “The Truth About ‘The Truth About…’” it was moved to today. Like clockwork, the hate mailer (whom I had told when to expect his letter) emailed me on Tuesday, demanding to know where it was and launching into a new torrent of abuse. Now go back and reread the paragraph about narcissism.
How does anybody become so stupid that they can say something like “There is plenty of evidence available” and then not actually offer any and expect anyone to believe them?
my default guess would be that they’re still new at Teh Internets (and have been deprived of, or managed to avoid, other opportunities to observe/develop communication skills), not that they’ve “become” stupid… just parroting whatever diverts/shields them from critical examination of feelings of comfort/disgust/superiority, like [seemingly] most humans.
I have a news flash for this moron—everybody, both male and female, who goes into the world and gets a j-o-b does so specifically to profit from it. Why should prostitutes be any different?
Thanks for sharing, Maggie and I’m sorry you had to put up with that @$$hole.
I am one of those men who are regularly “victimsed” by prostitutes, and all I can say is that I eagerly look forward to my next victimisation.
It seems like he is just throwing everything that he can think of in the hope that something will work as an argument. Quite sad, really.
As for Asian attitudes, have a look at http://www.sammyboyforum.com for a glimpse of an enthusiastically pro commercial sex approach. The language may be a bit hard to follow as much of it is in Singlish.
“You have all these fears about the consequences of revealing your identity. You would rather live in fear through anonymity than face any opposition that might come about by revealing your identity.”
LOLDONGS. Needless to say – this guy is anonymous, yes?
“Prostitutes of your kind, increase the demand for all sex workers.”
I have trouble seeing the logic, here. What do we mean by “of your kind”? Prostitutes of a different kind don’t increase demand? Which ones? And by what mechanism do the wrong kinds of prostitutes increase demand?
Not that it matters. Doesn’t matter the topic (eg: creationists), if people have strong feelings about it you get this kind of commenter: this same veneer of reasonableness that cracks open to reveal illogical ranting.
As a long time controversial blogger, all I can tell you is that feeding the trolls is never a good idea. Publishing their ramblings is an even worse idea, since it encourages them to try their best to see their opinion published in the website they so fervently criticize.
But Maggie, bless her heart, seldom follows the conventional wisdom.
What’s the conventional wisdom?
1) Don’t feed the trolls.
2) Don’t become a prostitute.
3) Once you leave prostitution, don’t tell anyone that you used to be a prostitute, even anonymously.
4) Don’t become a librarian unless you’re ugly. Men don’t like educated women. 😉
I do understand what you’re saying, but I’m honestly not worried about trolls; as I said in the introduction, this is only the fourth genuine “hate mail” I’ve received in almost three years, so I’m not exactly being overrun with them. Plus, keeping total control over the comments helps immeasurably; a (very rare) few have tried to start flame wars in the comment threads, only to find – whoopsie! – that I only allow them the one comment and then reject the rest of their garbage. A troll is a pathetic monster to be locked into a cage and ridiculed, which (in moderation) is IMHO a far more effective deterrent than simply exterminating them. And if this guy tries to send any more emails, he’ll find himself on the wrong side of a filter-daemon.
Feeding a troll does give some perverse pleasure if only to watch them go well into crazy.
I use the term troll with qualification as it’s too often used to mean those who disturb the group think, consensus if you will, of a particular blog. Daily Kos and DU are great examples of where dissent is trolling. A real troll hijacks a thread, moves goal posts, seldom if ever quotes others in their reply so as to avoid a direct response to a rebuttal, uses straw men extensively, etc. I am, of course, not guilty of any of these.
What an idiot.
> Kewilson
> “see what others have to say in response.”
> What an idiot.
I totally agree. A loathsome, illogical creature.
>The victims are the men. Its the men who have a lack of choices here.
You know, never once have I drug a man, kicking and screaming into my bed. And as I worked in several major cities, the men had hundreds, if not a thousand choices. And quite a few saw me regularly. They must have enjoyed the victimization.
It’s sad how twisted this person’s thinking is.
That doesn’t mean some of us don’t fantasize about it. 😀
Now, that’s a great one krulac. Is it a corollary of Rule 34? Or of Rule 36?
“You know, never once have I drug a man, kicking and screaming into my bed”.
Nor have I a woman. In some convoluted way, I think he meant he couldn’t get a woman without paying for it (dinner and a movie? Earrings or a diamond necklace?) and thus he is victimized. Hey, we’re all victims, pick the subject; I have small teeth…
Ahh, Comixchik, I’m pretty sure some of us would willingly *be* dragged to settle the Karmic debt of your earlier sexual generosity to the male of the species.
Hope you’re feeling better today 🙂
I’d like to drop this guy out of a helo onto a hot Taliban LZ – let him argue with those boys for a while.
Anonymity. You are NOT doing anything wrong by remaining anonymous. The fact of the matter is – the world is a shit hole and none of us is going to completely fix that within our lifetimes. Why destroy our lives on such futility? Everyone should do what they can do – and sacrifice what they can. You haven’t had the easiest life in the world – and now you have a great hubby and a ranch with blackberries and dogs and shit – so you should be allowed to enjoy it. You wouldn’t be able to do that if you came “out of closet” so to speak. You’d be harassed by stalkers and you’d very likely have to get armed guards for security.
This fucker … I’m telling you …
On whores and men. What law of nature says that any man who sees a whore feels bad about his marriage? Even some hookers buy into this notion. Several times I’ve been asked by an escort about how “bad” my marriage is and I just say … “My marriage is great – I just like variety and my wife is still my number one girl and best friend.”
He also reveals himself to be a sissy-boy beta male – with all his crying about whores taking advantage of men as if the whole entire race of males out here is enslaved by this vast whore-conspiracy to castrate us all. WTF? I just don’t know how many times I have to say this but … playing the victim is NOT a masculine trait, hoss. This guy was an anomaly since most of the time the complaint is about how all us “poor males” are doomed because the Feminazis have taken control of the planet. Dammit man! Grow some balls!!
I have a sneaking suspicion that balls have to be grown in boyhood, or it’s too late. If you manage to become a ‘man’ without growing a pair, you probably can’t grow a pair.
I’m sure there are exceptions, men who are nutless wonders until thirty or forty, and then surprise everyone. Or maybe that’s even common, and my premise, grow balls early if want them, is just wrong. But that’s my basic feeling about it.
My experience of prostitutes is that they would be highly frustrated if all men were castrated, maybe he just hasn’t been to any good ones.
It would also be bad for the budget.
I so suffer your angst. Luckily all my time at sea was on the surface, if I had to go deeper…
I get the feeling your “creep radar” was pinging on this guy early in the conversation. Good to know it works in electronic media as well as real life.
Re: “sissy-boy beta male”: Have to admit that as I was reading this I was thinking that it didn’t sound like a man’s voice at all…
I think what the commenter meant is that the man who goes to a prostitute has no other choice than to pay for it. So he feels it is wrong for the prostitute to benefit financially from such people.
I can’t get water myself, so I have to pay for it.
I can’t hunt and slaughter my own meat, so I have to pay for it.
I can’t plant and grow my own vegetables so I have to pay for it.
There are so many necessities that we in modern society are dependant on others to provide for us – yet no one belly aches about that, why?
Because, sex! Dirty, dirty sex!
Mmmm… dirty, dirty sex….
Something about Napoleon to Josephine and washing makes good scents.
I should be ashamed of that…
Message from the front : “Beloved: Home in three days. Don’t wash – N” 🙂
Yep. Why do I have to pay for food? Or clothes? Damn it, it should all be free. No one should profit but me. I think I have his gist. (I’m not sure I’m comfortable with that last sentence.)
The day is coming when everything, or most everything, will be either cheap or free. I don’t know that anybody in government is giving any thought as to how to deal with this.
They have; the word is borrow.
Even when governments give out welfare or food stamps, they say that this is just until the person can get a job. When they give out unemployment checks, they only do it for so long, because you should have gotten a job before it runs out. Even direct government stimulus spending is either in the form of tax breaks, in the belief that this will create new jobs (it doesn’t), or things like building roads, because THAT creates jobs. We hear things like, We need to spend more on education, so that when today’s children reach adulthood they can get good, high-paying jobs!
It’s all jobs, jobs, jobs. What happens when almost any job can be done better (and cheaper) by machine? When their just aren’t that many jobs? Tell the private sector they can only use so many and so advanced machines, thus putting them at a competitive disadvantage with other nations? The government hires all those extra people, perhaps as an even more gigantic standing military than now? Have them build roads with (comparatively) primitive equipment? It might be cheaper just to send them all a check and tell them please don’t try to find work; only the extremely skilled have any business working.
I still hear talk of a national sales tax. Fine, for a while. But what’s 2%, or 7%, or 99% of almost nothing?
Re: Going public.
Dr. Martin Luther King gave us his face and his name, as well as his message. Harvey Milk gave us his face and his name, as well as his message. Result? They’re both dead by assassination.
Okay, let’s say Maggie contacts her local TV station and comes out completely. What next? I can see a few roses-and-unicorns outcomes from that (spacial guest on Rachel Maddow), but it’s a lot easier to imagine many truly ugly outcomes.
Of course, it’s really easy for a troll to say, “Gee, Maggie, you should come out, or you’re not really sincere” — after all, the troll doesn’t have to live with the consequences.
Anonymity is a personal choice. Are there reasons for going public? Yes. Are they sufficient reasons? Obviously, not for you. And unless the commenter is on the same playing field (a former female prostitute with an established record as an escort), then they can’t know what they’re talking about; they certainly aren’t taking the same risks.
As for narcissism; not necessarily. Some people quickly figure out that if you demand something, loudly, insistently, and hostily; that many people will comply just to get rid of you. And so, they resort to this tactic at all times to get what they want. And they get genuinely angry when someone doesn’t follow the system and defies them. This is when they realize that they truly have no power, get even more angry (and frightened), and go off to find easier prey again.
Off topic. The Stacie Halas decision make me very upset.
My oldest daughter is in junior high and it wouldn’t bother me to have Stacie teaching science.
What bothers me is that her mother and I had to sit down and teach the skipped 4 chapters covering evolution, formation of the earth, and human reproduction.
If your past can disqualify you to teach science, then let’s start with disqualifying people who have been seen holding a bible.
Ok that was bad form. Feel free to edit or nuke comment. I shouldn’t have posted off topic with flame bait at the end.
I will stand by: the decision makes me upset.
I feel no need to nuke that; your anger is understandable. More news about Halas is coming on Saturday, though.
Dave and Maggie,
One of the great things about comment sections on blogs is the occasional OT outrage sparked by something in the post, however tangential. I just looked up SH and her past has no more bearing on her teaching Science than my atheism in teaching Comparative Religion (I don’t, but my two favorite religious books are Ecclesiastes and the Bhagavad Gita so I’m weirdly objective enough to give it a fair shot).
Thank you, Dave, for bringing it up, and, Maggie, for allowing it and look forward to your essay on it.
Hey, gang, just so y’all know “Jim” the hate mailer just tried to post a comment. It’s pretty much more of the same, but I figured I’d let y’all know anyhow.
What a sad, pathetic, little pseudo-man.
I’m reminded — again — of this:
He that can not think is a fool,
He that will not think is a bigot,
He that dare not think is a slave.
I am amazed and relieved that you don’t get any more hate mail to be honest. The internet can be a crazy place.
I kind of think most of them are afraid of me; perhaps they imagine me like this:
Nice…are there two more? 😉
Yes, I think a few of them probably think you’ll hex them with a man-eating thesaurus or something.
Totally unrealted but still very funny; when you said you lock trolls up in a cage and ridicule them, it sort of reminded me of Nigel Molesworth in the book “Down with Skool” and the section “tour of the Masters”.
“A man-eating thesaurus?”
Oh, yeah! I remember it from The Harvard Lampoon’s “Bored Of The Rings” – a large corduroy monster with wide lapels, long dangling participles and a pronounced gazetteer, that chased the Ringers through Fergus Fewmet’s doors into the Black Pit of Nikon-Zoom …
Dear Gawd above, how I wasted my childhood on such trash ….
Am I odd, or is it strange that an image like this I find sort of attractive?
You’re kind of supposed to. 😉
I always liked this cover when I was a kid:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-798uKKOQTzw/Tq8MEox3XyI/AAAAAAAAAbw/HhbMj46KqsI/s1600/witch+cover.jpg
It got huge numbers of complainst from “Feminists” and White Knights though.
Why?
Because some man might look at it and get a hard-on, and hard-ons are the cause of all evil things.
Depending on the culture, no more than wetness. One is so obvious, the other so devious.
Oh, those devious women!
No, oh those devious men. Oh, wait, both sexes are devious. Never mind.
I mean, seriously, when they say “temptress”, they say it for a reason.
But instead of living in fear of our sexual natures, why don’t we celebrate them?
I wonder how many prohibitionist men are like the proverbial New England minister who was rounding up girls as witches because he liked to watch them in their frocks, and couldn’t deal with their “tempting” his sexual desires, … same goes for the entire Islamic argument in favor of women covering up.
I seriously think most of these men just need to get properly laid.
As for the women, … well, eliminating sexier rivals is a time-honored tradition among both men and women, and neofeminists – prohibitionists – are often pretty good at it. As a mating strategy, you have to admire its duplicity and tenacity.
But that’s what it is.
Don’t sell yourself short, Maggie. I am sure you are much, MUCH hotter than that picture! >:-)
That picture reminds me of one of the best episodes of “Two and a Half Men”, not “Supernatural” (though Meg and Ruby have their moments). Something about the eyes…
Is it just me, or is that incarnation of High Priestess Maggie as intensely alluring as she is intimidating? 🙂
❤
uhm… wow. Yeah that person obviously hasn’t read many of your posts… weird. *shaking my head*
The movement towards decriminalization DOES need prostitutes and former prostitutes who come out in the open, identify themselves, and speak in their own names. There are several who do so.
But there is room, and there is use, and there is a need for those who, for reasons which do matter in a world and in a country where prostitution is illegal and hookers are despised by many, choose to remain anonymous.
There is room, and there is need, for both Xaviera Hollander and Maggie McNeil.
This letter-writer was brilliant, in the same sense that Hitler was brilliant at explaining why it’s too dangerous to leave politics to his ilk.
I have a Nazi-approved (certified by the Nazi party as accurate), English-German side-by-side 1934 edition of Mein Kampf. Neither the letter writer or Hitler are brilliant; disturbed yes, brilliant no.
You know, I can’t even sell the book for what any book of that time period would go for with the same credentials. Something about the need to wash…
So we don’t need to even buy you a book or anything, but can get a column dedicated to our questions just by packaging them in insults? How dare you hold yourself out as a typical librarian when you haven’t ever explained what might motivate a library to chose Library of Congress over Dewey Decimal?
> So we don’t need to even buy you a book or anything, but can get a column dedicated to our questions just by packaging them in insults?
John, if you want to go that route, be aware that–
a) She prints your email IN FULL, then eloquently shows how and why you’re a moron;
b) then her readers, at least half of whom are eloquent as well, pile on to tell you why THEY think you’re a moron;
c) her blog is widely read, leading to the risk for you that people who know you in real life will recognize you from you email, and tell others that you’re an internet troll.
Yes, but, ALL publicity is good, Right? right? rig…
Oh, let me try!
Maggie, how Dare you, um… be so cute?
I don’t think that’s gonna do it.
“what might motivate a library to chose Library of Congress over Dewey Decimal?” It’s the only time Congress has gotten anything right.
I twirl my lariat. It was a start for a great satirist, not that I’ll ever amount to that.
Died in a plane crash. The biggest civil airport in Oklahoma is named after him. Always made me feel a little more secure as I boarded a plane.
I think of him everytime I drive through Guthrie and see the signs for the Cowboy Hall of Fame.
I think of him every time I think of Congress. I just can’t disconnect Rogers from Congress, something about babies and hammers or liars and politicians. He was the Lenny Bruce of his time.
http://www.willrogerstoday.com/will_rogers_quotes/quotes.cfm?qID=4
Sorry Maggie to hear that. Its the inferiority complex narcistic people suffer. These people wonder that even active or former sex workers are much stronger than them. This undermines their creepy projections. Each person with some sense and empathy knows why most of former or active sex workers dont get out. Its risky, not only in states with prohibitionist laws. To mention Dr. Martin Luther King and Harvey Milk was a good point.
To deal with narcistic characters its always the same: If the idealised person doesnt answer their needs of ‘love’, recognition and assumptions they start to terrorize the ‘beloved’ with nasty, insisting and interrogating questions to convince them of their ‘truths’, undermining the ‘idealised’ persons to weaken them, not to keep them strong. They cant deal to get refused and are constantly on the move to victimise others. I think we live in a narcistic age.
Narcissistic people don’t suffer an inferiority complex; they enjoy a superiority complex. It’s all about them: life, the Universe, everything. They are the number 42.
The only problem is when we tools don’t recognize it, but that’s just a speed bump on the road of life for them.
Yes I agree, I guess the superiority complex comes from a genuine inferiority complex. Thats my obversations.
There’s something comforting about reading the rantings of a narcissist. It reaffirms faith in the basic nature of the human animal. I’m not saying this is always a good thing, but it’s nice to know humans, statistically, are at least consistent.
There’s got to be a good Marx quote in rebuttal, but I just can’t find it. That’s Groucho, not Karl.
I’ll get back to you if I find one; I may have to go to W.C. Fields or H.L. Mencken. There’s got to be something about humans, consistent, and stupid, between the three.
Update: The Emperor Narcissus has just emailed me DEMANDING that I reiterate all the arguments I’ve made over the past three years just for him, that I waste hours “debating” him when I could be writing, and that I allow a flame war in this comment thread.
One wonders what he believes I will gain by acquiescing to these demands; perhaps he imagines he can command all governments on Earth to decriminalize if I win? 😀
Ah, if only he could. It would probably be worth the tooth-scraping annoyance to you. ‘Course, that’s easy for me to say.
Then we get get him to pester Krystal Cole in exchange for decriminalizing/legalizing a dozen drugs of her choice.
Maggie,
What the hell is your problem? Life is all about him; you’re just a prop. As a prop your purpose is to support him in his endeavors, not claim some fictitious, independent intellectual life. Your purpose is to aquiesce, you have no other purpose. You exist for him.
What are you thinking?
(Me? I think my tongue isn’t just in my cheek, but welded to my cheek. Someone call a doctor.)