bah, humbug

[freckles_and_doubt]

Ah, yes. LJ's toolbar is all over pink and hearts, and the price of roses has gone into orbit around what used to be Pluto. Mental torment! I can't work out if I loathe the merry commercial festival of Wellington's Day more or less than I loathe the merry commercial festival of Christmas.

Fortunately, help is at hand for the terminally romance-challenged. Anti-Valentines! Since her site allows you to send them, I'm hoping it falls under Fair Valentine's Use to blog a select few as a valentine to you witterers. They include useful sentiments such as



and

.

I like the site particularly because (a) it's rude, and (b) it explicitly objects both to the commercialisation of romance, and to the ingrained cultural assumption which constructs coupledom as the norm and singletude as some kind of failure. To which I say Tchah!, and also:

.

Comments

[ex-wytchfyn.livejournal.com]

Also, wait: you read a sentence starting with "personally" as a directive of some sort? Lollerskates! Clearly I need to work on my conciliatory debate tone.

[extemporanea.livejournal.com]

Yes, probably :>. I didn't read it as a directive, but I did read it as a value judgement - i.e. you find the logic illegitimate. This narks the small, shrivelled bit of my soul which still pretends to academic rigour, causing me to leap madly back into a fray out of which I should probably be wimping for the good of my mental health.

I also don't think it's fair to suggest I'm whinging about VD because I'm feeling lonely. I dislike it just as much when I'm actually in a relationship, if I can peer that far back into the mists of time. (Although I do cherish the memory of strawberryfrog giving me a switchblade for a Valentine's gift, a gesture I found nicely subversive).

Also, you are rendering down the fat of this discussion with your usual absolutism. No-one ever said that singles are targeted equally with couples by the VD hype. Most of it is indeed aimed at couples, but there's a subtext. A subtext is surely a marginal reading by definition?

[extemporanea.livejournal.com]

Oops. Actually, re-reading, w-n did say that singles are targeted equally. I fear I disagree ;>. Subtext, subtext, subtext.

*goes off, chanting quietly to self*

[wolverine-nun.livejournal.com]

meh
By "as much as" I meant (clearly in defiance of the words themselves) "as well as" or something. I didn't actually mean "equally". Less Subtext, subtext, subtext and more semantics, semantics, semantics.

*shuffles off, embarrassed*