The Political Issue
Vol. 4 Issue 2

"Fuck Her" Response
by Amy Sciaretto

     The laughability meter has been exceeded. Now, I am just dumbfounded.by the narrow stupidity of those who have read the untitled poem written by Bruce Kramer on page 2, in Volume 2, Issue 3 of the Iconoclast. Some refer to it as the "FUCK HER" poem. Others guffaw and shudder at the blatant misogyny.Well, misogyny is a subjective term and depends on what you consider misogyny. I have been tracking the response to this poem and astounded by the way readers -namely womyn- have been foaming at the mouth over the misogyny of this poet.
     The author has created a PERSONA -who'da thunk it- in a 41 line poem. Go ask any reader and enjoyed of poetry -I'd suggest one with 3 three letters after his or her name so there is no doubt in your mind- and maybe they can further illuminate you on a little universal poetic truth that I am about to reveal.
      Ready?
     Write it down.
      I even put it in mathematical terms for you.
      POET DOES NOT = SPEAKER.
      Maybe if one could put aside the misreading of this poem and look at some of the brilliant and humorous turns of phrase and the verbal originality that spices up this poem, the response might be different. This is a damn good poem, even if it houses a despicable speaker.  
     All of the elements of an enjoyable poem are present in this untitled verse. There is an obvious tone of sarcasm; it reeks of attitude, even the parenthetical references highlight this for the poetically and lyrically challenged. One gets the sense that even the poet himself is laughing at his pathetic speaker. There is a literal situation: a loser fantasizing about the women who dance in front of him at a strip bar. This fantasizing leads to a musing over the state of his sorry life. He's a slob, too. The sexual metaphor of the 71 is not just a vulgar porn line. It's clever, and hones in even more on this loser. It's all in his mind. He fucks in his mind.
      There are other instances of figurative lines -a strippers who is a canvas to paint your eyes over, writhing on the floor as if the music is her lover. The opening line "you want her" are just three phrases where one can cull the idea that the speaker wants the strippers to want him, but he can  never have them, so he uses his mind and mind-created scenarios to make them want him.
      Don't we all make our own subjective realities in our heads?
      I am not gonna do any line by line analysis and explicate this work. I just gave a general once over. Take what I have said and re-read it. And I am not a traitor to my sex. I even consider myself a feminist. I just know when a poem is given a bad rep.