Misogynistic and problematic route names in rock climbing

Fritz Nuffer wrote:

An excellent, lengthy postmodern novel by Thomas Pynchon set in WW2 Europe. It was censored in America because of an explicit shit-eating passage that still gives me the willies every time I read it. 

Lit major in college and always meant to get to Pynchon, including the Crying of Lot 49, but where's the time?  What's the context of that passage to the rest of the book?  

Fat Dad wrote:

Lit major in college and always meant to get to Pynchon, including the Crying of Lot 49, but where's the time?  What's the context of that passage to the rest of the book?  

In my layman’s opinion, it doesn’t contribute much to the story, but dang, it’s a bit of a mindworm. Hard to forget once you’ve read it.

Compared to Infinite Jest, Gravity’s Rainbow is less accessible and sillier (limericks and slapstick abound). Kind of the crazy uncle of IJ. There are some real heartbreaker passages with exquisite description, but overall it didn’t hook me quite as hard as IJ (which I’ve read 4x).

GR is a desperate attempt to sound like a edgier Vonnegut imo… I tried to read it awhile back and felt like it was way too try hard on its "humour"

Spolier alert!

Scene is a big English countryhouse.  Timeframe is the final days of WW2.  The estate has been used to house a top secret program experimenting with paranormal activity during the war. The program is nominally run by an old English general, but has been taken over by a malevolent Pavlovian psychiatrist for his own ominous purposes.  The Pavlovian controls the general via Katja’s nighttime visitations.  Katja is a femme fatale/spy who is already doomed because of the many skeletons in her closet, so she’s got to play along with the Pavlovian’s scheme.  The Pavlovian discovers that the general has a shit-eating fetish caused by (or exacerbated by) his nightmarish experience in WW1during the mud-soaked Battle of Paschendale.  So, every few nights  Katja must rendevous with the general, during which time they symbolically recreate his wartime experience, which involves her shitting on his face while he eats it.

Hence:  Katja's Midnight Snack.

Zach Anatta wrote: ...So, every few nights  Katja must rendevous with the general, during which time they symbolically recreate his wartime experience, which involves her shitting on his face while he eats it.

And then GG Allin punches her in the face and smears his own shit on the general? I think I saw that one.

Tim Stich wrote:

And then GG Allin punches her in the face and smears his own shit on the general? I think I saw that one.

2020 climbing world needs more GG Allin influence. 

Zach Anatta wrote: Spolier alert!

Scene is a big English countryhouse.  Timeframe is the final days of WW2.  The estate has been used to house a top secret program experimenting with paranormal activity during the war. The program is nominally run by an old English general, but has been taken over by a malevolent Pavlovian psychiatrist for his own ominous purposes.  The Pavlovian controls the general via Katja’s nighttime visitations.  Katja is a femme fatale/spy who is already doomed because of the many skeletons in her closet, so she’s got to play along with the Pavlovian’s scheme.  The Pavlovian discovers that the general has a shit-eating fetish caused by (or exacerbated by) his nightmarish experience in WW1during the mud-soaked Battle of Paschendale.  So, every few nights  Katja must rendevous with the general, during which time they symbolically recreate his wartime experience, which involves her shitting on his face while he eats it.

Hence:  Katja's Midnight Snack.

How is this post still here with all the moderation on this site lately?

Really not thinkin of the name of the route while climbing it. Unless of course the name is like "Wise cracker" or "Long things don't have shape". I don't know, the more the merrier? I am really dreading the super easy on the ears and eyes names you proclaim will save these timid creatures that can not see the forest for the trees. Fukien sense.

B P wrote:

How is this post still here with all the moderation on this site lately?

Probably because the Mods are Thomas Pynchon fans and secretly think this is a badass route name.  

But perhaps also because this is all part of my broader argument about triggering route names.  My point, made pages ago, was that one could make an offensive route name that was simply so obscure, so that nobody except the FA and a few people would be in on the joke.  Or to invert that point, the audience who determines what is offensive is chosen by the FA who chooses the route name.  Hence my example.  It might be offensive (although TBH nowadays it would only offend the most easily offended).  But by picking something so obscure that only a a selected group of people (who find it funny) will be making that decision, I avoid all problems.  In other words, aggressively offensive route names choose their own enemies, so the FAs who name them that way can't really complain; they're getting the mob of their own choosing.

Zach Anatta wrote:

Probably because the Mods are Thomas Pynchon fans and secretly think this is a badass route name.  

But perhaps also because this is all part of my broader argument about triggering route names.  My point, made pages ago, was that one could make an offensive route name that was simply so obscure, so that nobody except the FA and a few people would be in on the joke.  Or to invert that point, the audience who determines what is offensive is chosen by the FA who chooses the route name.  Hence my example.  It might be offensive (although TBH nowadays it would only offend the most easily offended).  But by picking something so obscure that only a a selected group of people (who find it funny) will be making that decision, I avoid all problems.  In other words, aggressively offensive route names choose their own enemies, so the FAs who name them that way can't really complain; they're getting the mob of their own choosing.

Yes, your point is not rocket science. 

What I’m saying is that I sarcastically called someone a pussy in a forum and had my account deleted, where I think the graphic nature of someone shitting into someone’s mouth is, IMHO, much more offensive. (Not necessarily to me but to a lot of the snowflakes on here). 

You’re  not being very obscure in the post I referenced.

B P wrote:

How is this post still here with all the moderation on this site lately?

exactly.....or many posts on the last 4 or 5 pages.....yet mine gets axed for saying the thread should have been called climbers butthurt over route names....

B P wrote:

Yes, your point is not rocket science. 

What I’m saying is that I sarcastically called someone a pussy in a forum and had my account deleted, where I think the graphic nature of someone shitting into someone’s mouth is, IMHO, much more offensive. (Not necessarily to me but to a lot of the snowflakes on here). 

You’re  not being very obscure in the post I referenced.

Touché.  The original name was obscure, the explanation is firmly PG-13.  
I think we can all agree that if this thread gets more people reading Thomas Pynchon that will be a boon for everyone involved.
The number of Pynchon fans on here doesn't surprise me much though.  There's a lot of intellectual types in the climbing scene.  

[Edited:  Deleted a wall-name suggestion to avoid encouraging people].

I feel like answer might be yes and no. There is obviously a line that you don't need to cross to be creative, vulgar, and hilarious. For example something like "C*m Guzzler" isn't sexist because yeah, anyone can guzzle c*m. But I don't really think "going too far" is the main issue here either, I mean, I'd be sad too if there weren't any absolutely f*cked route names. So my solution isn't to rename routes or end vulgar route naming. What makes something biased is when one group is treated one way and the other is not. Sooooooo, what do we do? Make MORE vulgar route names about men too! Can't we get creative here? Don't be a fragile little b*llsack, make fun of yourself too! I'm not saying there aren't any already, I'm sure there are. But why don't we get out there and make some more route names that debase men, cause I would personally find that pretty damn entertaining too.

"Rancid Rumpleforeskin" or maybe "Crooked C*cktapus"? "Mike's Micro Muppet"?

Pretty sure if you name a route GG Allen the PC police will break your neck 

Claire Bradywrote:

I feel like answer might be yes and no. There is obviously a line that you don't need to cross to be creative, vulgar, and hilarious. For example something like "C*m Guzzler" isn't sexist because yeah, anyone can guzzle c*m. But I don't really think "going too far" is the main issue here either, I mean, I'd be sad too if there weren't any absolutely f*cked route names. So my solution isn't to rename routes or end vulgar route naming. What makes something biased is when one group is treated one way and the other is not. Sooooooo, what do we do? Make MORE vulgar route names about men too! Can't we get creative here? Don't be a fragile little b*llsack, make fun of yourself too! I'm not saying there aren't any already, I'm sure there are. But why don't we get out there and make some more route names that debase men, cause I would personally find that pretty damn entertaining too.

"Rancid Rumpleforeskin" or maybe "Crooked C*cktapus"? "Mike's Micro Muppet"?

Ardvark 

Lyle Mwrote:

Ardvark 

I believe the spelling nazis were such fiveskin lovers they gave aardvarks two As. And then another a little bit later. 

Anteaters Need Love Too.

Lyle Mwrote:

Pretty sure if you name a route GG Allen the PC police will break your neck 

GG Allin. Don’t spell a legends name incorrectly.

 I am working on 5-10 climbs all named after his songs in NH. 

Insert namewrote:

GG Allin. Don’t spell a legends name incorrectly.

 I am working on 5-10 climbs all named after his songs in NH. 

Don't tell me how to live my life. 

Todd Berlier wrote:

seriously? memorializing anything GG Alan has done...what?

GG is a legend. Not saying he is a role model, But he was made by the society he was surrounded with.

Watch the documentary and it makes more sense why he was a nut.