Saturday, May 14, 2011

Thoughts on Being Groped by Ron Jeremy and Joel

Occasionally, I have readers write me thoughts on my blog. I am going to devote this blog to Joel, New York and Ron Jeremy (, .

From a New York Lawyer (cue David Bowie’s Blue Jean on Pandora):

“Regarding Joel, I was perhaps being too judgmental about him when I described him as a failed lawyer. I have seen iterations of his type quite a bit over the years, people who can't hack the practice of law for a whole host of reasons, including because the practice of the law is not for everyone. But, I should have given him the benefit of the doubt and, if you insist the law just wasn't for him and acting is then who am I to say otherwise.

I will say this though, what you describe of him in the blog suggests JERK in all capital letters.

Funny that people did not like your Ron Jeremy blog. In some ways it was your most interesting post. You seem to have been quite engaged by the encounter, and the post suggests that you viewed RJ as some kind of decent guy. That is quite interesting, however, because despite that obvious sentiment, the facts of the encounter you describe paint him as a gross pig who completely objectified you.”

My response:

“I do think Joel is a smart user- it all just seems so forced.

As for RJ (Ron Jeremy), nothing felt forced. He is unapologetic but honest and straight forward. Yeah he groped me, but there was something adolescent and mildly charming about it since it was brief and we were just passing in the night.

If I were a man and you saw how I joke with my friends and co-workers, you might call me a pig. I would also be facing several lawsuits. I am sexually inappropriate with almost everyone in my life. I don’t know why.

Maybe because I never grew up, maybe because my parents were so open about their sexuality or maybe I just enjoy testing boundaries in general.

In that regard, RJ did nothing I haven't done to a few people this week at work

Speaking of . . .
Back to work!!!”

Response from New York Lawyer:

“Thanks for the further explanation re RJ. I guess I understand his appeal and why you were not offended by what, at first blush, seems like grotesque behavior intended to objectify you in the manner one might expect from a 9th grade boy who has never been laid. Upon reflection, I can see how you might have been legitimately struck by the frank honesty of the exchange.

It is interesting that you describe yourself as sexually inappropriate with almost everyone in your life. I must be an exception to your rule, because you have been downright PG-13 with me. In fact, your exchanges with me have been almost consciously devoid of flirting or sexual banter. I guess that results from some combination of the fact that I am not available nor apparently your type.”


“Interesting. It’s interesting that I think I portray myself totally on-line, but you wouldn't really understand what I mean unless you were in my life.

#1) I don't really know you. We email one another occasionally but have never met in person. Therefore, banter of any kind would feel inappropriate.

#2) Most of the people I banter with are homosexual, therefore there is no risk of someone misunderstanding the joke.

#3) I don't banter with men who have a sexual/romantic interest in me unless I definitely want a relationship or have a relationship.

#4) The banter is cartoonish in nature, way over the top. Its meant more for laughs than any kind of real sexual flirtation.

My blog is revealing of my life, but perhaps the tone is something that can only be understood in a filmed scene or in person . . .

How are you?”

No comments:

Post a Comment