Despite our best efforts to dissuade you, many of you have still decided to write to us with your problems, complaints and crises of the moment. We don't have a trained therapist on staff, and this isn't "Dear F*ckin' Abbey", but we DO have Bonnie, who has graciously volunteered her time and heartless perspectives in order to minister to (or macerate) the misguided, with "Dear Fuckin' Bon..."

November 1, 2002

Hi Bon. The young male in me nearly "fell in love" with the mesmerising maidens posing on the top-left of your web pages. Things were getting interesting when unfortunately the clock chimed, and the man woke up to make, for what they're worth, the following hypothesis (1), the ensuing allegation (2), and a disclaimer (3).

(1). The virtual vixens on the top-left are, among perhaps other things, used as visual rhetoric in a way similar to how it's commonly done in advertisements.

The *most* prominent feature of these images is NOT confidence or power, but physical beauty. They subtly, yet significantly contribute to the readers' mental image of a heartless bitch, encouraging them to "buy" the concept. If, say in a gedanken experiment, these images are removed or made conventionally un-sexy, the content looses appeal **tangibly**, because the heartless bitches "are" no longer beautiful.

Since you have displayed some dating requests that you got, I am assuming that you are aware of at least the plausibility of this phenomenon. I guess the same can be said about things like "lovely jadesirens".

(2). *If* the above is true, then their use is contradictory to the values you seem to espouse.

An argument, satirical or not, made for winning equality and honour for women is *inherently contradictory* if, to sell the argument, it must subtly highlight the role played by women in sexually pleasing men. It would be something like promising alcohol to an alcoholic if he/she would *quit* taking alcohol.

The equal status that is the aim should *NOT* depend on women's ability to be attractive and appealing to men, and neither should the arguments made to achieve that status. If they do, it would not really be equality that is argued for, but a gift in return for looking pretty and sexy.

A rhetorical question that addresses this would be: are you afraid to hand one of those guns to a physically plain looking and fully clothed heartless bitch? Or is such an entity nonexistent in your reality?

(3). Personally, I have nothing against these sensual sirens, and in fact hope that you will bring in even more of them. I have no agenda (and if I do, I am not conscious of it) behind this feedback, and *SURE AS HECK* am not morally castigating you to bring you to any misconceived "right path". I think (in a Cartesian fashion) that I am intent-free here.

I suppose I am merely interested in your views on how (1) is not true, and if it is, how (2) doesn't follow from it, and if it does, how it doesn't really matter!

Big V

Dear BV,
*SNORT, whuffle, chortle*

There, I just had to get that out of my system. OK, let's start with this; If you're "falling in love" with a graphic on a website, I suggest you take your inner young male out on an actual date with an actual woman, *that* should take care of old testosterone-head.

Second, your entire premise regarding the use of the graphics are faulty. We don't need to "sell" heartless bitchery. In fact your concept of the site as "represented" and "sold" by the artistic graphics blares loudly and clearly that you don't get it at all. Incidentally, in MY opinion, the graphics are not about the physical beauty, but rather an interesting and unique set in terms of not being bikini-clad twats poised in position waiting for a mayan to come and ogle her assets. And again in MY opinion, even the sexy "poses" have the look of a woman who knows who she is and what she wants. None of those illustrations suggests brainlessness or submission or ONLY "pleasing a man". That and the majority of them are in fact "fully clothed" and in comfy looking clothing. Full sweater and jeans; full sweater and skirt; superhero outfit with helmet... So the girl with the gun is wearing a bra-top. We notice the gun was not your focus. That's YOUR problem.

Third, while fun and all, this was a set of graphics by a particular artist, not an attempt at literal representation of Heartless Bitches. How often in this column alone do I need to point out that not all HBs are even WOMEN, and how can you even skim through the site without reading dozens of stereotype-bashings? You just aren't paying attention. People will always whine about our graphics, whether they're ice-covered hearts, axes and hearts, whips or women or plush dogs. Get over yourselves.

Finally, I think you DO have an agenda, and not just to get a little bit of internet attention. Your "challenges" would be quite manipulative emotionally if we bought them (or cared).
to wit:
- I guess the same can be said about things like "lovely jadesirens"
- The entire "alcoholic" analogy is WAY over the top (or under the bottom, or whatever) in terms of the suggestion that men or women are going to lose control somehow, helplessly be convinced or "sold" based on "attractive advertisement". Again, miss the HBI content, or what? If someone (*cough*) doesn't get it to the extent that a random graphic will brainwash and confuse them in regards to the content, they aren't an HB and they probably aren't enjoying their visit to the site.
- are you afraid to hand one of those guns to a physically plain looking and fully clothed heartless bitch? Or is such an entity nonexistent in your reality?.
Best for last baby, this says loud and clear that you not only have missed all such points on the site, but that you are in fact very emotionally invested in ... let me think, *denouncing* the HB concepts, or perhaps passive-aggressively expressing hostility. I'll say it one more time, YOU are the one having an issue about HBs in relation to their looks, and what is "right" and what is "misrepresentative".

And I believe the artist who drew those graphics is dead, so we can't ask him to update based on our personal appearances. (Though I bet that's what you'd REALLY like, isn't it? Come to think of it, so would I. Heh.)
bon