Rape spam leads to secret patriarchy handbook
115 Comments Published by punkass marc September 28th, 2006 in Pr0n, Rape, Rights? What rights?This morning, I noticed a comment caught by our spamguard:
rape pornrape picturesrape fantasylesbian rapehentai rapegay rapegang rapedate rapeanime rapeanal raperape videorape videosrape
Subtle. With that “fantasylesbian” bit thrown in, I almost missed that this might lead to some rape porn.
I had a feeling the link provided would be [THE LEAST WORK-SAFE LINK I'VE EVER POSTED] one of the ugliest sites I’d ever visited. It was, but it also provided a surprise: it turns out that the patriarchy keeps its handbook at a “rape paysite portal.”
[Warning: This is disturbing, graphic stuff. Proceed at your own risk.]
The featured link was to BridalAbuse:
There is nothing more precious than a sexy bride on her wedding day… except when she has a huge cock buried in her tight ass and one in her cunt at the same time while she screams and cries for mercy!
Prima Nocta explained! Good to know. But that’s a little advanced for most patriarchamalists. Is there a more remedial course available?
Why, yes, at SleepingBitch:
Men always get what the want! Even if they have to break the rules and morale principals for that! This site is ready to prove it! Treacherous men with wicked desires are loading these babes with sleeping pills and drugs with the one and only purpose! To be in control of these delicious chicks!
Isn’t that just the best summation of the patriarchy you ever heard?
1) Men always get what they want.
2) They’ll do anything to keep it that way (though presumably they would break moral principles and not “morale principals” (would that be a patriarchally approved name for male cheerleaders?)).
3) Sex is about control of teh bitchez
But what kind of men are susceptible to this kind of teaching? Oh, right, the Nice Guys with their BrutalPassions:
Katrina is one of my long life friends. I have always wanted to fuck this little cock-slut, but she doesn’t want to risk out friendship. On I big night out we went dancing on a club, I sad all night in the corner watching this little fuck-toy dance sexy. She has the most stunning ass ever and I heard from friends that her pussy is so tight and that she likes it in the ass. I decided that I would try that slut no matter what!
Sometimes, though, women are actually willing to have sex with you, but as the patriarchy knows, that’s no excuse not to rape them. ForcedDB explains:
This slut decided to take home 2 strangers from a party… – See how The guys put drugs in her drink and start to violently forced Carrie’s Tight slutty ass and leaves her crying…
Remember, boys, it’s not about the sex, it’s about the control. And slut-shaming via violent rape. Textbook patriarchy, yo.
I’m sure some of you are wondering if you can be a racist and a member of the patriarchy. Of course you can, silly! Just ask ViolentAsians:
Asian women are famous for their beauty, their obedience and their submissive nature. They are the perfect victims!
They can never be too submissive. Better rape ‘em anyway to be safe. In fact, as ManiacDiaries will tell you, rape can be an excellent teacher:
I had no idea what that stupid chick was doing in the dark park. Girls like her usually sit at home and read smart books. But she was brave enough to head for the farthest exit alone in the darkness. And she was dumb enough to resist me when I grabbed her. I spent too much time calming her down with hard blows, but she still made weak attempts to set herself free.
Lesson learned.
But hey, the patriarchy doesn’t just have to humiliate women. It can incorporate the men dumb enough to like willful bitchez, too, and turn them into ForcedWitnesses:
A victim is raped, abused, humiliated, and her lover is made to watch the whole thing, tied up and powerless!
We’re getting into abstract territory again, though, so for those of you who’ve lost your way on the basic path to good patriarchy, maybe you should watch some ForcedSexTV:
Look at these exhausted faces! Look at all these tears and bruises! These are ordinary girls and women you see everyday out in the street. Look at this masked friends! They violate these poor babes? fuck them most brutally, humble them and jeer at them most mercilessly! Men can achive everything by force!
Excellent point. Let’s add to our 3-point patriarchy checklist above:
4) Men can achive everything by force!
ForcedGirls also has a helpful reminder:
He’s hot to have his dick plowing in deep into some slut’s warm, wet depths. It doesn’t matter if the slut he finds doesn’t want to have a dick in her, for her opinion is inconsequential. He wants to fuck her and he will FUCK her! All here screaming and pleading won’t change a thing.
5) Her opinion is inconsequential.
Don’t want to play along? Well, if you’re a woman, I think you get the idea. If you’re a man, don’t think you’ll get off easy with a raping of your woman. You pussyboys are also on the hitlist via GayViolence:
Swallowing, sucking and sticking down in the dirt is what these pussyboys want. It’s the base desire to be fucked like a woman at the hands of a violent virile stud who has no regard for the laws of man or even simple, common decency!
6) Fuck common decency. Right in its tight, bruised asshole.
115 Responses to “Rape spam leads to secret patriarchy handbook”
- 1 Pingback on Sep 29th, 2006 at 9:40 am
- 2 Pingback on Oct 26th, 2006 at 11:22 pm
- 3 Pingback on Dec 6th, 2006 at 3:45 pm
- 4 Trackback on Aug 22nd, 2007 at 8:38 pm
I think I’m going to puke.
Good thing I had my coffee before getting the full dose of hate. Not that I’m even remotely surprised.
raperape? Who the fuck needs to search for rape^2? What the hell is wrong with these people?
They’re just that patriotic about their patriarchy.
Some men should be kicked out of the human race.
Like Screech.
I think I should sue someone for psychological trauma.
LEGAL DISCLAIMER: Punkassblog is not responsible for the content available on Punkassblog. Any head-to-desk injuries or psychological trauma is the sole responsibility of the reader, who decided to click the “more” link on a rape porn thread.
[Note: Our legal department is also suffering psychological trauma from this thread. But by writing that, they have now been fired. That is all.]
punkass marc – in all seriousness I do think there should be a trigger warning on this post.
Good point. Done.
They owe me a new keyboard for the one I just threw up on.
Whoa, thought I was jaded until I read that.
ersatz,
definitely. good point. i was so stunned an enraged in ways i didn’t think i could be by words or even images anymore. for better or for worse, blogging can be about sharing that kind of anger. sorry if it was more than you expected.
I wish I hadn’t clicked that link.
I can’t remember where I read it, but I read recently an article about women working in crisis shelters. The article was actually about violent porn – however, it focused on the real life results of such thing existing. Anyway, there was a line in the article that said something to the effect of the consumption of violent porn is on the rise, meaning that men enjoy depictions of women being brutalized, and it hurt (the women working in the crisis centers) just to know that.
That’s precisely how I feel about this link. At the front end of being angry, or more jaded by this link is the painful fact that there are boys out there who get off on and can’t get enough of women being brutalized. And, that we have not come along way at all.
My own feelings about this are suffocating me. What do we do?
Great question, Lya. I think the rape porn enthusiasts are as near a lost cause as you’ll find, but their existence, even if it’s on a bit of an upswing, doesn’t mean we haven’t made any progress. It just means that we still have a long way to go.
As long as we keep after it, there will be fewer of these guys in the next generation, fewer in the one after that, and so on… unless we truly enter a police state. Then all bets are off.
So I guess we need to elect a liberal administration in 2008 and keep pushing feminist discourse so that it continues to take root over the long haul. That’s about as unflashy an answer as you’ll find, but it’s all I can think of. Anyone else?
It’s not surprising that this stuff is on the rise as women/girls get more power. It’s very angry, it’s about being angry that your privilege doesn’t get you everything you want. The solution will only come when boys are not raised to think of themselves as superior to women.
It would be nice, though, if the angry WATBs weren’t armed with drugs to offset their microscopic nutsacks. Then we could point and laugh at them instead of giving them the honor of being afraid of them.
“My own feelings about this are suffocating me. What do we do? ” Lya Kahlo
Thank you for saying what I couldn’t seem to put into words. Just when I think I have seen or heard something that makes me feel the heavyiest, saddest and most pained I have ever felt, something like this shows up.
I have a toddler son and not a day goes by that I don’t hope that I am doing everything in my power to ensure that he grows up to be a huge part of the solution.
So…please please tell me these photos and videos are of actresses. Not that it would make it that much less horrible, but…please?
It really wouldn’t change anything for me. Women still get raped, and worthless fucks still enjoy thinking about it.
I chose to stay away from the websites themselves, but the quotes almost made me puke. I’m against censorship on principle, but this should be prosecuted and banned, on a par with white supremacy and racist websites.
If this isn’t promotion of hate and violent crime, I don’t know what it.
Yeah. I just would like to know that those images in my head weren’t real.
(my first visit here, hello!)
R@pe p0rn is now mainstream. Just look at its influence in the recent (September) Italian Vogue shoot.
[WARNING, very disturbing, but fashion mainstream]
http://community.livejournal.com/foto_decadent/1403878.html
(the original slide show was far more disturbing, but it is gone now)
I don’t see any sign of the incidence of rape slowing down, but increasing. Especially when it has become ‘just another flavour’ of porn.
On the plus side, it has exposed the inherent misogyny of ‘regular’ porn.
Here in the UK, they are trying to pass legislation for the possession of violent porn. The civil libertarians are up in arms with ‘keep the police out of the bedroom’ and ‘free speech’ crap. But none of this will stop male-supremicists looking at this on the internet (just not allowed to save it on their harddrives!). Oh diddums.
Disturbing. Some days I just want to scream. Today is one of those days..
Verite, ignorance ain’t salvation since reality continues with or without you acknowledging it. Why lie to yourself?
Marc, I almost got mad at you for posting so much of this. Having slept on it, my anger would have been misdirected.
I suppose my politics align more with Dworkin (and MacKinnon) on issues of porn lately.
I’m with Scarlet: this is hate speech that does nothing but ignite hatred and encourage violence upon a group.
I was once very pro-porn, but the more I learn about it the more I can’t continue to support it and still call myself moral. It is just another thing made by boys for boys at the expense of all else.
This is not something that can hide behind “free speech”. This is a call for violence against another group of humans beings. Substitute pretty much any other minority of women in these quotes. It is hate speech. Period.
On another blog, on a topic concerning the sick fuck who invaded that Colorado high school to rape small blond girls – there’s a rising support for seperatism. The point was raised that for women there is no country, no police and no military. In a “man’s world” there is no safety for women. Once upon a time I would have never been entertained the idea of seperatism. Now . . . I’m not so sure. This is not to suggest it’s a practical or even possible idea or ultimately even an acceptable goal, but since there isn’t anything being done – and in fact this: http://feministlawprofs.law.sc.edu/?p=1040 suggest it will only get worse – it is an increasingly attractive concept.
I agree with Annie;
Verity, putting your hands over your eyes/ears and going lah-lah-lah ain’t gunna make it go away.
It is immaterial if ‘actresses’ were used, whether they were willing or co-erced, or even if these are real rapes.
The point is, there are sick fucks out there that WANT to view that material. That they JERK OFF to that material, and specifically to the thought of raping a woman.
By making this material ‘mainstream’ and an ‘acceptable’ form of porn, it encourages yet more on-the-road-to-being-sick-fucks, to join the party so to speak.
Men do NOT wank off to stuff that sickens them, but to stuff that turns them on.
And worst of all, the pro-porn camp will tell you that men can tell fantasy from reality. Bullshit. They can’t wait to try out what they’ve seen in porn.
No woman is safe whilst this shit exists.
“They can’t wait to try out what they’ve seen in porn.”
I can speak from personal experience that this is absolutely true.
To the poster who says some men should be kicked out of the human race (presumably meaning the men in the photos):
What do we do with the women who earn their living posing for violent porn, use their websites to solicit for this, say they do it by choice, say it turns them on, call themselves sex positive feminists, and tell rad fems to get out of their face when rad fems say what they are doing is harmful to all women?
What do we do when they post this crap to blogs like this?
If you are a praying person, I’d suggest praying that their horrible choices don’t turn around to bite them in the ass.
Well, Pony, I guess if we’re you we attempt to conflate this kind of crap with people who like and pose for rough sex and BDSM (which is not in fact rape porn); suggest that whenever they try to speak for themselves they’re actually soliciting for more business and thus can be safely ignored; make fun of their physical appearance; and then go to their blogs and do it again.
which is totally pro-woman.
Fortunately, last I checked I don’t have springs coming out of my head, so I, for one, am -not- you.
You know. I think this crap is beyond vile myself.
But let’s say hypothetically that we -do- know that they are, in fact, performers.
If (big if) that’s the case, then is it actually that much worse than I don’t know something like the (mainstream horror) movie “Hostel,” where among other charmingly ultraviolent moments, a woman is tortured until she has an eye dangling from a socket; a man “helpfully” plucks it free for her, and then, horrified by her -appearance,- she commits suicide?
At least the rape porn, I don’t see posters advertising it screaming at me from every subway wall. or glowing reviews in the mainstream media (well, okay, most of them weren’t all that glowing, but that he got “real” critics to come see it at all tells you something).
on the other hand we do know that the actors for that and other horror movies actually aren’t dead or missing key body parts, on account of they have an imdb database and sometimes a media presence and you can see them walking around and making other pictures after the movie’s finished shooting.
and then again of course there is the widespread belief that if there is actual intercourse, it is somehow “real” in every respect in a way that no other sort of photo or movie can be. the act is real; the bruises may be makeup, and the actors may be all collecting their shit and going out for a beer after the shoot (I just don’t know) but 1) sitting here, we don’t know for sure 2) i have a feeling that for some people even knowing that this was the case would not make a difference.
but anyway, in terms of imagery:
you know, if it turns out that some or all of these really are coerced, that’s one thing. lord knows there isn’t exactly a lot of legal oversight in this area.
and yeah, there are probably de facto grey areas in this already really dicey subgenre even when it’s -supposed- to be all staged and consensual, i don’t doubt it.
but strictly in terms of imagery: in some ways i actually think it’s actually better to have it all out in the open (horror flicks and all). not saying “hey, groovy, it’s all good,” either; but i don’t know that simply waving a legal wand to make it poof go away actually changes anything substantial. i think that shit like this, if taken as fantasy, is a good insight into the nastiest shadow side of the collective consciousness. yeah, i do mean collective, i’m afraid.
then again, they just did pass or rather reinforce such a law in the U.K. (banning violent porn); i guess we’ll wait and see how and how well that works out.
i don’t know. “men hate women pure and simple” would be the easiest message to take away from this kind of porn; but, you know, I don’t know that that in itself really gets you very far.
I mean, it still doesn’t answer why some people get off on this, even make it, and others don’t.
I’m sorry, but the whole BDSM thing – just not good from any point.
It is an artificial dichotomy (based on patriarchical models) for the lesbian/gay community, and a re-inforcer for the het community. (The dom/sub thing)
Both parties, either sadistic or masochistic, need some serious therapy required. Neither (S/M) is a natural, well-adjusted, healthy human line of thinking/behaviour. Both need therapy. I don’t say this from a prudish point of view, but one of natural learning and behaviour functions for humans and most animals.
>The point was raised that for women there is no country, no police and no military. In a “man’s world” there is no safety for women>
And this, okay.
I mean, I get it; I sure as shit don’t feel safe, on any number of levels. especially today.
And if anyone wants or needs to go the separatist route for herself, goddess speed and goddess bless.
But that sort of language does sit particularly uncomfortably with me today. yeah, multiple ironies: we’re sitting here arguing over violent -porn-, which may or may not be “real,” and which i suspect that the current administration actually would be only too happy to crack down on; on the other hand, we learn, actual torture in a military context is A-OK.
Is this “free speech?” uncomfortable shrug. For me, again, it depends how it’s being made. Yeah, “hate speech,” okay; but, well, thing is, we’re all apparently all too eager to throw the whole idea of free speech and civil liberties down the toilet in general, on account of the fear, the fear, the FEAR;
and you know what: I’m sick of it. The whole goddam thing. Oh fuck, whoopsie daisy, there goes the terror panic button: quick, everyone get into fight or flight mode, extremism in defense of safety not a problem, we’re at war here (pick your monolithic Terror), yadda.
And today my -own- terror has been of the fucking government. And then there are the actual terrorists; and then there are the actual rapists; and you know something?
Fuck all this bullshit. All of it at once.
I don’t know what is to be done, but i am TIRED, BEYOND TIRED, of having it being dictates by fear, or even rage (which is only one step past the fear, let’s be honest: feels more productive, but it only takes you so far, too).
just. plain. sick of it.
And today my -own- terror has been of the fucking government. And then there are the actual terrorists; and then there are the actual rapists; and you know something?
That you can’t really control any of those things so letting pointless worry about them control your life is really really stupid?
I don’t know what is to be done, but i am TIRED, BEYOND TIRED, of having it being dictates by fear, or even rage (which is only one step past the fear, let’s be honest: feels more productive, but it only takes you so far, too).
Then fuck all that and find a different way to function.
Note that the operative word there is “function”, slipping into a depressive state doesn’t help anyone either.
Now who wants to join hands with me and repeat the litany against fear?
Fear is the mind killer…
Shorter Belldame222: If you criticize rape porn, the terrorists win.
In six years the Bush II administration has attacked things like abortion rights, and the economic security of the poor and middle class, but depite its studied victimization claims, the porn industry has gotten a free pass. Funny, that.
Whatever, I don’t think that I’m even close to trying to close my eyes to the reality of rape. You’re right, even if the sites aren’t real it doesn’t decrease the amount of rape or the amount of sick fucks who enjoy that stuff, and I never said it did.
I just wish they weren’t real. But if wishes were horses, blah blah blah.
Freedom of speech and civil liberties are not the holy grail, nor are they the only “true” way to liberation. A bunch of rich, slave-owning white dudes drew these conclusions from other rich white dudes, all of whom are now dead. Pounding the first amendment is a bit like bible-thumping, and don’t you think that’s a bit telling, given the trend to dissect radical feminist critique of pornography and damn it for being “prudish” or for calling to question the “unquestionable” first ammendment of the United States Constitution (which I would compell all y’all to read, I mean, to sit down and REALLY CLOSELY read it, then come back and tell me if you notice anything missing, like some sort of acknowledgement of anybody other than rich white dudes as full human beings, amendments or not.)
Tell Abir, the 14 year old girl that was raped and burned and murdered by U.S. marines after watching the same marines execute her entire family that it’s somehow abstractly OK to justify the pornification of her experience. Tell her that those marines are just fighting (abstractly) for her first amendment rights, and those of the women who are objectified in these images who live in the U.S.A., then explain that it’s “natural” for Men At War to be so stressed and freaked that they just have to rape somebody. Tell this to rape victims that you know and love. They’ll understand why pornography has to be “protected.” I mean, if the first commandment *ahem* I mean, amendment says it’s so, then it must be so.
I did a google search one day in order to find the correct spelling of Abir’s name, which I didn’t ever find. Instead I found horrible, dehumanizing rape-porn, advertising the “brutal rape of iraqi women.”
I think that maybe it’s OK to question how we define “logic” and “reason,” and the sources from which these abstract notions emerge. It has a lot to do with separating one’s self from the material world in which one lives in order to objectify it, and it makes it very easy for one to forget that we REALLY REALLY are made of flesh and blood and bone, and very easy to think that by just sitting on our asses and thinking hard enough the ills of the world will go away.
Pain and fear and rage are visceral. They exist in our bodies, and we feel them when we see our own species abused. They are chemical reactions that occur due to our increasingly dulled bent for “altruism,” something that could help us figure our way out of a lot of fucked-up shit if it weren’t barraged and battered and attacked daily; if we didn’t have to deal daily with a whole mess of imagery everywhere that links, somehow or another, and in varying degrees, with institutionalized (via porn industry and it’s big-affiliate and corporate links) and pornographic images that we see in the pages of pornographic magazines, and on easily accessible and highly popular websites, and in movies and in all kinds of popular entertainment.
I mean, did anyone notice the live journal comments that related to that post from Italian vogue? I’m nearly retarded when it comes to the blogosphere, but even I know that the big chunk of users there are teenagers. Isn’t that a little bit troubling, to say the very least?
Pioneer spirit and the force of free will and the might of the individual and the liberating power of one brilliant idea are just as fictional and contrived as Delilah’s removal of Samson’s strength via clandestine haircutting. Yeah, we all got the ability to do lots of stuff due to our big brains. Including hurt the hell out of one another. So we should start making smart choices and making up for stupid ones.
Making a choice to dabble in and/or make money off of pornography is a stupid choice, when there exists an option to make another choice without loss of life, limb, or health. It’s stupid, it’s irresponsible, and it borders on sexual sociopathy. It says that in this aspect of life, you don’t give a damn how what you do effects others.
Tell every woman who deals with a man who coerces her, one way or another, by sheer brute violence or by threatening to take his love away, to act like the “women in the movies” that what you are doing is actually good for them, in some abstract world where people are equal. Tell them that this is so because we think it should be so. That’s enough, right? *checks white bourgeious philosopher database*
Funny how those folks who claim to “question everything” sexually and do all this stupid horseshit in the name of “experimentation” fail to question the very bedrock upon which they build their alter to “freedom of speech.” Thing the radfem thing’s dogmatic? That whole argument and the myriad fractalesque offshoots of it just make me laugh nowadays.
Liberal law never works for the good of any more than the few at the top. I really don’t see any sort of “legal ban” of pornography as being the thing that will work. It will take activism, and it will take education, and it will take a people’s movement to erradicate this.
So sleep tight, for now, liberal feminists, you can keep your toys while we work out those kinks (if you’ll pardon the pun, there.) I dread that too many of us are unwilling to give up this particularly nasty form of privilege in order to start a movement. But if you’re not, I think we should maybe be in touch with one another. Who knows? Maybe we’ll come up with that “one brilliant idea” that will change the world into a place where women and children don’t have to live in fear and subjugation.
belledame222 et al–
I would give anything to have a moratorium on the “but it’s sex, so you have to stfu about it.”
No, we don’t.
How much do you want to bet that many of these women agree to “something rough” but have no idea just how badly they’re going to be treated? And think of how much this legitimizes the rape culture in the minds of so many men.
It’s not about legal issues, it’s about moral issues. For fuck’s sake.
And I’d also like to add that I find it a bit insulting, personally and on the behalf of others who have come through trauma, to deny the power of fear. Some of the strongest and most honest, intellegent, capable, and yeah, tough and caring folks that I know have been through HELL. There are people who know real fear real pain very close and very personally- it shapes parts of their lives and it moves them to action. Denial of fear is a complete lie. It’s how you confront what you fear that makes all the difference, and I’ve seen it move people to striking collective action. Life without fear is a delusional liberal fantasy. I’d just rather fear a flood or a hurricane than the hands of those of my own species.
Just an aside. Rant over. I promise.
It doesn’t make sense to argue legitimization of rape culture and then fall back on immediate physical harm. Either the promulgation of this imagery and language is wrong regardless of the presence of consenting actors, activists, labor unions, and however many layers of latex you please, or it’s not. I get the sense from your initial post that you take the former position.
Several people in this thread have raised the legal issues. The commenter right above yours, for example, is talking about legal issues related to pronography. While we’re at it, can we have a moratorium on labeling people rape apologists? Please?
To tell the truth, I was kind of squicked out by this post, admittedly for emotional reasons. My immediate visceral reaction was something like, Where do you live that this sort of thing is shocking to you, and what are their immigration policies like?
And think of how much this legitimizes the rape culture in the minds of so many men.
Hell, why stop there? We’ve got evidence in half a dozen punkass threads that this sort of crap legitimises the rape culture in the minds of many women also.
But hey, when silence is the greatest weapon used to oppress rape victims, what could possibly be wrong with going on and on again about how it’s okay to be raped a little bit? Just so long as a bit of miosgynistic justification from the 1950’s, that’s been parsed through the radsexist modulator so that “the bitch wanted it” now reads “but maybe the bitch wanted it” instead, can be whipped out in its defense.
But belledame wasn’t coming out in defense of rape porn in general, but rather begging a shit load of bullshit hypotheticals that serve no purpose but to reheat a fight she want’s to have out once more now that she’s forgotten how much she’d denounced all this feminist infighting which she so abors.
So could we have less of the strawmen, please?
I was referring to what marc said, which I happen to consider a strawman: I would give anything to have a moratorium on the “but it’s sex, so you have to stfu about it.” That wasn’t about being peevish about old fights.
Still, though–you’re right that it’s a derail in context. Feel free to delete comments as necessary, marc.
Actually, it can be sort of a gray area. It’s like fast food. The workers at the slaughterhouses and in the resturants do consent, but that doesn’t make worker abuses, factory farming and general shitty food perfectly alright, nor are some people OK with the general concepts of huge corporations homogenizing things across nations or gender divided happy meals, even if there were no worker abuses or factory farming.
Elaina, your long post is fucking genious. I love it! You’ve hit the nail on the head: consuming pornography has a lot to do with priviledge. Many of the “pro-sex” feminists that support pornography are middle and upper class white women and white liberal males who just give lip service to being “pro-woman”. The porn industry is not an underdog, or deviant at all. It is probably the best example of capitalist, white, classist, patriarchal BS on the planet. Porn is not free speech it’s hate speech! Two thumbs up for Elaina’s post.
Yes, this is hate speech. And I support its legal right to exist, just like I support the right of the Klan to spew bullshit about black people.
That doesn’t mean I’m not going to criticize it. A lot.
Elaina, your long post is fucking genious. I love it! You’ve hit the nail on the head: consuming pornography has a lot to do with priviledge. Many of the “pro-sex” feminists that support pornography are middle and upper class white women and white liberal males who just give lip service to being “pro-woman”. The porn industry is not an underdog, or deviant at all. It is probably the best example of capitalist, white, classist, patriarchal BS on the planet. Porn is not free speech it’s hate speech! Two thumbs up for Elaina’s post.
As opposed to, say, Catherine MacKinnon. Or Janice Raymond. Or Sheila Jeffreys. Is this a joke?
I’m sorry. I’m having a reaction to this post and what I’m reading into it that has nothing, I swear, to do with the radfem/sexpos debate that I’m honestly not even trying to bring up. I’m just going to bow out of this discussion.
Oh R Mildred, you know what, blow me. I don’t abhor infighting. I love fighting: it gets me wet. What I abhor is whey-faced little gits handwringing about how much they CARE about capital w-Women while simultaneously being nasty as shit to the actual women they’re supposedly fighting for. HELP HELP YOU’RE BEING OPPRESSED. Spare me.
You know: that last time this blew up in here, with Pony spouting her vile crap about Renegade Evolution: Renegade had a few things to say about that on her own blog. Among them her intense irritation at how the -only- thing people seemed to take exception to is her actually being called “whore.” Like, you know, that’s the worst thing you can call a woman. Still, yes. (Marc: I know, “that’s a terrible thing to say.” Save it). That in fact that that was by far the -least- objectionable thing in the slew of slurs and insults and speculations about her looks and mental capabilities and morals and so forth: technically, it’s true; yep, she’s a whore. And?
And, I’ll tell you what else, “and.” There is a woman posting on her blog who self-identifies as a Southern Methodist Republican housewife. When pony came in posting her bullshit in there, (to wit, you’re a real dog), know what she said to RE? “You are beautiful and fearless.” That’s it. That’s all.
And I have more respect for her for that than I do for any number of spavined “radicals” and other supposedly enlightened folks who can’t even be arsed enough to leave their own protected enclaves long enough to actually talk to someone like RE on her own turf, much less the god-forbid religious Republican woman. Who, yes, I disagree with on many, many things; and she says a lot of shit that makes me wince. As do a number of other people very far off from me on the ideological spectrum. And yet, I respect them, if, IF, they can -ever- turn it off for five minutes and listen to what other people actually have to say. To show some goddam motherfucking empathy, which is, guess what? -Not- the same thing as “oh, oh, I feel soooooo baadddddddd. You feel bad, too. Then we can all feel bad together: that is progress. That is MORALITY.”
Mildred. Marc. *nod*
And I certainly don’t deny the power of fear: what I am saying is that is one particular power dynamic I do not wish to consent to any longer, as much as possible, anyway. Your own mileage may certainly vary. I certainly don’t expect it to be easy. Never has been.
And yeah, the depressive position doesn’t help much; but working myself into a state of near-incandescent rage isn’t actually all that much better. Good as it feels at the time. Yes. Like right now.
and i agree with junk science: no problem with actual criticism, serious criticism. But, well, okay, “it.” Which it? Rape porn? This shite? Yeah, it’s vile. Where’s it coming from?
You know, Elaina: well, i think I’ve said some of this stuff to you before, in a different context. But looking critically at the roots of…whatever you’d like to call it, patriarchy. It goes farther than that. Like: this urge to tear oneself free and be “pure,” which I see a lot of in radical feminism (at the site at which we last had this conversation, for instance): that itself, as it turns out, in -also- in the template. Christianity. Calvinism, specifically, in this country. “Nearer my God to thee.” It’s just turning it on its head. Now the original sin is with Man, not Eve; the badness goes straight back to the source. Don’t punish the hookers, punish the johns. (For example). All of them: every man Jack. The notion that the sexual desire -itself- is bad still isn’t really tackled though, not really; more important, neither is the desire to -punish.- Both power and sexuality are, I think, a lot more complicated than we’d most of us like them to be.
I had already been thinking that the mythology of the Patriarchy a la Dworkin does sound a lot like Original Sin, only inverted. then I found this book called “Deadly Innocence” by a Christian feminist thealogian which pretty much spelled this thesis out. As it happens, she bases her thinking not on the porn/prostitution business at all, but (among other things) on her experience in a womens’ anti-nuke camp in England in the early 80’s.
But I’ll save that for my own site; I’ve been meaning to get back to it. Along with the Mary Daly she keeps referring to.
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUCK! I’m going to change my name. That’s all there is to it.
Elaina I’d love to read your blog. It sounds like you have things to say that I want to hear, but I can’t read dark type on a dark background.
I have never called any woman a dog. But I have called a woman a whore; she is me. I was a whore and said so here. I don’t whitewash. I didn’t do what I did out of choice or enjoy it, although if you’d have asked me at the time, I would have said so. One of the reasons I would have said so would have been people like BelleDame222 who surrounded me and praised and stroked me for doing it, “defended” me from the people who told me I should stop. I wanted love. I was as clueless as most whores and thought that’s what the john’s offered. I talked a good line; I was in sales. I loooooved what I was doing. I knew exactly what I was doing, thank you leave me alone. Bullshit.
Half-breed girls were born of whoring and a white man’s ownership two hundred years ago in Western Canada, and it still exists as the primary choice for them today.
Belle you’re a john plain and simple, it’s you and people like you keep women enslaved with your porn/rape fantasies, and it’s people like you rad fems are coming after.
Apologies R.Mildred, I won’t post again to this thread.
I think one of the worst things about rape porn is that it can desensitize people and break down any respect they do have for women. I’m all for first ammendment rights, but I can’t deny that I think stuff like this can be very harmful. There are many action movies that show violence, and those can desensitize people even if the violence isn’t glorified. But this porn is making rape look like something that’s good, and it’s really hard to separate fact from fiction.
Another issue I have with things like this is that it seems particularly angry. I won’t say I’m shocked by it, because I knew it was in existance. To me, I don’t think it’s as much about being turned on as it is about being angry at women. The language and terms show that–the women are portayed as being deserving of the treatment they get, which is what I find pathetic. And, honestly, if we were talking about a white supremist website that implied black people deserved to be beaten up for walking in certain places, there’s probably be a lot of outcry over it.
That’s one of the things I find particularly sad about rape. Even in cases where it’s not eroticized, you still have people who suggest the woman brought it on because she dressed provocatively, or flirted with the man before he attacked her. But rape isn’t about what the victim did or did not do, it’s about the horrendous choice of the person who assaults them.
I don’t think that BDSM is the problem, or that it’s necessarily unhealthy for people who know what they’re doing. Though I don’t believe I could be happy doing those sort of things, I think it’s more about trust than anything else. Being genuinely hurt or upset isn’t BDSM–it’s abuse. Unfortunately, rape porn is often passed off as BDSM porn.
You said in just about so many words that R Mildred was ugly, Pony (”she’d be barking.”) Then you went to her blog when she posted her picture and said “I was right!”
-You’re- ugly. No matter what you look like. And no matter what kind of ideology and/or wounds to your own inner moppet you hide behind. I’m sorry you had a shit time, but you know what: it doesn’t excuse your behavior now. And that’s the last thing I’m saying to you.
As for the rest: I found this apropos on a number of levels, today:
“But it is not enough to stand on the opposite river bank, shouting questions, challenging patriarchal, white conventions. A counterstance locks one into a duel of oppressor and oppressed; locked in mortal combat, like the cop and the criminal, both are reduced to a common denominator of violence. The counterstance refutes the dominant culture’s views and beliefs, and, for this, it is proudly defiant. All reaction is limited by, and dependent on, what it is reacting against. Because the counterstance stems from a problem with authority–outer as well as inner–it’s a step towards liberation from cultural domination. But it is not a way of life. At some point, on our way to a new consciousness, we will have to leave the opposite bank, the split between the two mortal combatants somehow healed so that we are on both shores at once and, at once, see through serpent and eagle eyes. or perhaps we will decide to disengage from the dominant culture, write it off altogether as a lost cause, and cross the border into a wholly new and seperate territory. Or we might go another route. The possibilities are numerous once we decide to act and not react.”
–Gloria Anzaldua, via Slant Truth
http://www.slanttruth.com/2006/09/27/transformative-politics-5/
…jesus. “that Renegade Evolution was ugly,” I meant to say there, of course. R Mildred you apparently like, now; now that she’s said a few things you -do- like; which I guess cancels out any such sentiment as
“and while some idiot who never got over am incident of abusive sex they experienced once and has decided that, due to the wonderful combination of being frightfully dull and being too shit scared to risk being hurt again, that all sex with guys is Teh Icky and anyone who has sex with guys is trying to cozy up to the patriarchy etc…etc… *yawn*, those of us with two brain cells to rub together and an ability to actually connect in a sexually intimate way with other human beings of a male persuasion tend to be able to find ways to invite men into our beds without turning it into a threesome with the patriarchy.”
Do you have two brain cells to rub together, Pony? Personally I don’t see it; but I would never connect it to your having been an abuse survivor. I think you’re a hateful idiot DESPITE being an abuse survivor; it really has fuckall to do with whether or not you’re able to connect in a sexually intimate way with men, or anyone. Frankly.
>Another issue I have with things like this is that it seems particularly angry. I won’t say I’m shocked by it, because I knew it was in existance. To me, I don’t think it’s as much about being turned on as it is about being angry at women. The language and terms show that–the women are portayed as being deserving of the treatment they get, which is what I find pathetic. And, honestly, if we were talking about a white supremist website that implied black people deserved to be beaten up for walking in certain places, there’s probably be a lot of outcry over it.
That’s one of the things I find particularly sad about rape. Even in cases where it’s not eroticized, you still have people who suggest the woman brought it on because she dressed provocatively, or flirted with the man before he attacked her. But rape isn’t about what the victim did or did not do, it’s about the horrendous choice of the person who assaults them.
I don’t think that BDSM is the problem, or that it’s necessarily unhealthy for people who know what they’re doing. Though I don’t believe I could be happy doing those sort of things, I think it’s more about trust than anything else. Being genuinely hurt or upset isn’t BDSM–it’s abuse. Unfortunately, rape porn is often passed off as BDSM porn.>
Yes to all of that.
And you know what else: it’s angry at women and it also betrays implicit disgust at the (male) self, I think, for having such “weak” desires in the first place. Which itself is, yes, patriarchal; but it is inextricably interwoven with the fear and hatred of -sex.-
So they turn it around into something more “acceptable:” punish the woman for turning me on and threatening to sap my precious bodily fluids. Here you have the most extreme outcome. Well, no; like I said, actually strictly speaking such images as you find in horror movies, and the glorification of serial murder, is probably the most extreme outcome: then you have the ultimate penetration, with the knife instead of the phallus. No need to dirty himself at all; and now the threat is dead dead dead.
But you don’t get away from all that by turning right back with “punish the man for his filthy -sexual- desires.” If anything, you -reinforce it.-
You focus on the BEHAVIOR. You focus on the RAPE. You focus on the POWER. To keep talking as though I don’t know sexy lingerie and blowjobs and cleavage-baring tops and “naughty” Bettie Page-type images and this and that and the other thing–and, by implication if not outright declaration, the men, for being turned on by such things–are responsible for upholding the “patriarchy”–well, you know what, in fact: as I’m seeing it, no. Not as such. Certainly it is not helpful to continually separate out such cultural signifiers from the greater context of the -flip- side of all this, the Bible-based (primarily) one that says any such indulgences are wicked filthy dirty bad. You will -never get past this- by talking as though it isn’t still very much alive, lap dancing, “pornstitution” and all. All of that is a very thin layer indeed over MILLENNIA’S worth of “just don’t do it at all. Don’t look. Don’t touch. Don’t even -thnk- about it. Filthy, filthy harlots. Strumpets. WHORES. PUNISH THEM.”
You can talk about the semiotics of such things, of course. Or you can speak for your own damn self, say, “I experience high heel wearing or blahblahblah as disempowering.” Sure thing. That’s all swell.
But that’s not the kind of discourse that’s been happening, and frankly it really pisses me off when it is suggested–again!–that those of us who object to the -sloppy- and frankly often irresponsible (do y’all -really- see what happened with Random Bird as significantly different from what happened with Jessica? oh, right, one’s “one of us” and the other’s not) ways in which all this gets talked about on these here blog O’ Spheres, are in fact saying that “oh don’t talk about sex, sex is off limits from criticism.”
Well, y’see, the problem -is,- just plain offering up something that disgusts you–even something like this here rape porn, which is clearly disgusting by pretty much everyone’s standards here, I think that’s clear enough–just doing that and then going “ooh, ahh, ain’t it awful”–know what? That’s not -criticism.- That is -wanking.- Yes. The money shot are the tears of shock and horror and recrimination (and, lest we forget, Blame); but ultimately it amounts to the same damn thing.
Yes. Okay. This shit is vile and foul. No shit. Now what?
And meen and nasty as I’ve been, in the spirit of “now what,” I will offer this as an example of the kind of criticism of sexual imagery I find useful, or at least an attempt at a hint of a beginning:
As it happens, I went with some friends to the Museum of Sex yesterday. Among the exhibits was a history of Japanese erotica/porn, from the Edo period till today. Rather an eye-opener. The early woodcuts and drawings were, on the whole, depictions of pleasurable intercourse between adults. Prostitutes, perhaps; nobility, in some cases; but relatively mutual and enjoyable-looking nonetheless. Realistically portrayed, for the most part, apart from a feitsh-y emphasis on exaggeratedly huge penii (status symbol, said the cliff notes). One caption said, forget the exact words, but something along the lines of: “her pleasure is so great that it lifts her off the ground;” and indeed the position looks like she’s almost floating. Or at least as really good quads.
Then we flash forward to the current crop of manga, hentai, yadda: big BIG difference, stylistically, although as the placards noted, some themes do remain consistent. But now the women are these doe-eyes elfin looking things, often resembling children with large breasts. As it turns out, for a long while any representation of pubic hair was censored; therefore that became part of the convention, the hairless look. This is not true of the early woodcuts. It’s also far more mechanical-looking, which is perhaps not surprising: technology’s advanced a lot, and so has the -worship- of technology. Man, especially, as Machine.
More relevant here, perhaps: for the most part the women, and/or the penetrated (there’s some stuff about shemales, and yes, the yaoi, male-on-male, which interestingly enough quite a lot of women are into these days) look quite unhappy, on the whole. Tears and cries and…it’s all quite disturbing. (to me, the cutesy-wootsy faces and squeaky-clean lines just makes the hardcore rape and incest imagery all the more upsetting).
So we’re looking at this, the timeline, and going, “so what happened?”
And, well, it looks like there are a few answers, some hinted at in the placards. For one thing, when Japan started trading with “Western” countries it started to cater to “Western” sensibilities in many ways; this included erotic art; and the sensibilities of the time were heavily repressive.
And then, too: we’re looking at a quote by..somebody wrt being invaded by the outsiders; and suddenly: of course. Well, that’s -one- thing:
As we know, those who were abused tend to replay their abuse later in life. Sometimes it’s a simple (well, never -simple-) re-enactment, in an attempt perhaps at resolution; in other instances the abused becomes the abuser, switching roles, as it were.
That’s the micro scale: literal sexual abuse. As we know.
But how does this play out on the larger scale?
Well, let’s see: men feel “invaded.” Powerless. Colonized, perhaps. How to get their power back? Why, turn to the next available subject, the next one down the power rung. Hey, I’m fucked in the rest of the world but in the bedroom I’m KING, dammit.
And so it is here as well, I do believe; yes, the anger and rage is there, yes, it comes out directed at women.
-But where is the anger coming from?-
Until that can be satisfactorily addessed, this will go nowhere.
What I am saying is: first of all, it’s clear to me that it’s not because they’re mustache-twirling villains. They may well be sociopaths, the particular men who produced this porn. But you want to look at it on a cultural level, O.K.: this:
“Men can achive everything by force!”
…is so patently a defense. Dude, if that were true, would “men,” THESE men, really be putting this much energy into furtive wank material on the Internets?
No.
They -feel- *powerless.*
There’s a lot of that about these days. Increasingly so.
And no, for fuck’s sake, this is not about “well then let’s pay as much or MORE attention to the poor poor menz; let’s just forget about the women…” Fuck no. This is not about sympathy. This is about–what was it now? Examining. Looking for roots.
And the problem I keep seeing–from radical feminism as well as from the more mainstream currents of thought from which I believe this is in fact derived, “radical” moniker notwithstanding– is this assumption that in fact the act of fucking -or- raping is always only reducible to itself. That it can’t be symbolic of anything except what it is. Penetrating the woman’s body. And any other sort of “invasion” is symbolic of that fleshly act.
Well for damnsure it’s concrete enough to the -victim- of an actual, physical rape.
But if we’re talking about -imagery.-
For that matter, if we’re talking about what’s going on in the sordid little mind of the rapist himself.
What does it all mean, dear?
Me, I just keep flashing on this song title. it was a favorite of my best friend’s abusive asshole brother. “I Want You To Hurt Like I Hurt.”
These feelings of powerlessness and invasion are unbearable. Quick, pass them to someone else. -dump the load- Ah, that’s better.
-That- is a transaction that is pretty damn universal if anything is.
Now, where feminism and particularly radical feminism comes in handy is that it helps to break down exactly where and how -women- get to -collectively- be tag-you’re-it in this little game. That’s crucial, that analysis. Because it’s real. Women Are It. A lot. Bigtime. You see it here. For instance.
But it’s not enough, ultimately. Because -if- it boils down to:
Men did it! The Patriarchy did it! THEY did it! or at least invented it…
… you’re still not really seeing the game itself. You’re not getting at the roots of “why,” not really. And in this instance, particularly, the ways in which repressing sexual desire–hell, repression in general– is -also- part of the game. You don’t get one without the other, point o’ fact: sex-phobia and misogyny. Go together like chocolate and peanut butter, if less delicious.
Which I think a lot of people here understand;
what’s less clear, I think, are the subtler ways in which most of us reiterate and reinforce the sex-phobic part of the equation. I see it as a big blind spot, in fact.
There is also a problem in that there are other “macro” aspects to the culture that simply never get addressed at all. And the net result is…well, as I’ve been seeing it, a big old incoherent mess at best; reinforcement of some of the shibboleths we’re all supposedly against at worst.
So, you know. It’s certainly possible to spend one’s entire life just cleaning up the mess that has been made of actual raped womens’ lives. There are a number of excellent organizations which will help facilitate one should one wish to become more of an activist in this regard. And if one decides that in fact, after all this, YES “pornstitution” is part of the problem, can never ever in any way be part of the solution, well, you know, there are organizations for that, too. As I expect Elaina or at least some of the other radical feminists here already know quite well. For those who don’t:
http://www.catwinternational.org/
…is Janice Raymond’s (co-run) organization: against trafficking, against prostitution, certainly against rape; favors the Swedish model. They accomplish quite a bit, apparently. They have other resources for anti-porn and so forth as well, I do believe. Knock yourselves out.
Personally I’m more interested in adddressing rape as rape, exploitation as exploitation, and sex work as at least potentially distinct from those things; but, you know, I could be wrong.
What I -do- know is that simply pointing and going “oooooh, ICKY! GROSS! RAPE PORN!! (or whatever) Horrible, foul” …really? Not serious. Not of itself. I mean, if that’s where you need to be, then O.K.; just, you should know that this shit? Is not news to many of us. Really. And suggesting (again) that you have Considered this whereas those of us who happen to disagree with you on certain points have not: really fucking irritating.
In societies in which women had no ability to earn a living tha same ways that men did, being a prostitute or concubine was one of the few options that took the burden of support off the family. Appearing to enjoy the sex that was required might lead to better treatment; appearing not to enjoy it probably lead to beatings and/or deprivation. You can choose to believe that women who had no choice but to service men sexually were treated to wonderful, orgasmic sex, if you want to. It’s not like women had much opportunity to write or paint contradictory accounts of their lives, is it?
The entire point of keeping women from owning property or from indepently earning a living is to force them into some sort of servitude – perhaps as a wife who must put the needs of her husband first in every instance, perhaps as a very poorly compensated “housekeeper,” or in some sort of sexual servitude. In every case the women who can perform her duties in a way that is particularly pleasing to men receives better treatment from men. She is still being coerced.
Objecting to coerced sex is not the same thing as opposing sex generally, but the porn industry and its cheerleaders would have us believe that it is.
See the concern troll for what she is – someone who claims not to like rape porn but almost against her will is forced to defend it because sex, free speech, the very fate of the Republic is somehow at stake. Note what she is doing, and wonder why.
Me, I just keep flashing on this song title. it was a favorite of my best friend’s abusive asshole brother. “I Want You To Hurt Like I Hurt.”
These feelings of powerlessness and invasion are unbearable. Quick, pass them to someone else. -dump the load- Ah, that’s better.
Nice theory, belledame. If the anger that leads to rape is caused by feeling powerless, then women should rape more than men since we feel that powerlessness more than men. But we don’t. Why?
Because it’s not about powerlessness. It’s about feeling entitled to have what you want on demand and then, when you don’t get it, throwing a temper tantrum like a spoiled brat.
This anger at not getting what isn’t yours will only disappear when we quit coddling and spoiling men and telling them they are entitled to have what isn’t actually theirs.
Shoot, I just lost my post somehow.
Anyway, I was trying to agree with Amanda and say I’ve often heard Belledame 222’s line of reasoning applied to bullies. And this is bullying, in its most extreme form.
Neither GW Bush nor the Marquis de Sade came from backgrounds of pain or neglect or hurt. On the contrary, they were both infamously coddled and spoiled, reared with a sense of privilege most of us can barely comprehend.
Both notorious bullies.
Because it’s not about powerlessness. It’s about feeling entitled to have what you want on demand and then, when you don’t get it, throwing a temper tantrum like a spoiled brat.
I agree that’s what the anger is actually based in, but I think it ends up feeling like powerlessness. Women don’t like you, whatever, you can’t talk to a woman, you’re not a sociopath exactly, but someone who can’t connect with people and suffers a great deal of loneliness for it, and you end up feeling powerless, even more so now that fewer people are willing to indulge your temper tantrums. Which, of course, probably wouldn’t have happened if it hadn’t occurred to you to not think of women as human beings in the first place. But I don’t see how you can reach a real misogynist with that argument. They’re so often full of self-pity and bitterness that they won’t or can’t hear that other people have feelings just like they do. Calling them out as the entitled assholes they are will only drive them further into their own shit, as far as I can see.
“See the concern troll for what she is – someone who claims not to like rape porn but almost against her will is forced to defend it because sex, free speech, the very fate of the Republic is somehow at stake. Note what she is doing, and wonder why.”
Benita, is there a difference between being a “concern troll” and simply disagreeing?
I don’t see BD as concern-trolling so much as bringing other ideas to the table.
But I can see where even that would cause alarm bells to ring in a discussion that is so heavily charged.
So, I note what she’s doing, and I think that WHY she’s doing it is to make sure that a broader and more inclusive analysis is possible. It may later be rejected, sure, but it can’t even be discussed unless someone brings it up. And most of the time MORE discussion is better than LESS.
Why do you think she’s doing it?
Is it somehow wrongheaded/foolish/stubbornly contrary to be nervous about free speech issues in these times? even if one of the reasons you’re nervous has to do with restrictions on depictions of sexual activity?
“Because it’s not about powerlessness. It’s about feeling entitled to have what you want on demand and then, when you don’t get it, throwing a temper tantrum like a spoiled brat.
This anger at not getting what isn’t yours will only disappear when we quit coddling and spoiling men and telling them they are entitled to have what isn’t actually theirs. ”
Thank you!
Marc, you posted about rape porn, plain and simple. Along the way some of the commenters tossed in BDSM. Many of us are BDSMers or pro-SSC-BDSM, and some of your readers are simply certain that BDSM of any kind is inherently patriarchal. There is not a lot of room for common ground.
My question to you is this: are you going to let a post on rape porn become the big BDSM fight? Do you think it’s all the same issue, or do you think that’s a big thread drift?
I know I said I wouldn’t, but I’ll just jump in briefly in response to Thomas:
This thread, unlike virtually every other, did not in fact turn into a BDSM trainwreck. Maybe that’s because the SSC’ers are tired, or maybe, like me, they had adverse reactions to this post for completely different reasons. I think it’s an appropriate objection in general, although I’m not curious as to marc’s answer, but I don’t see a real example here.
Somebody help a newbie out – what is SSC?
It stands for safe, sane, and consensual, which refers to a number of different things. Some BDSM’ers use it to distinguish conscientious practice from practices they see as lazy, reckless, and likely to result in abuse.
Yeah, Thomas, this was actually a thread about how stunned I was that a rape porn portal openly communicated so many patriarchal ideas that often are only implied. They come right out and say things like “it is about the control, not the sex” and really spell out explicitly why and how men like to use sexual violence to control women. Stunning stuff.
Where it goes from there is sort of up to other people. I find a conversational drift acceptable from time to time, especially on topics like these, where it’s all interrelated. Though I made my opinion known that I am tired of the theory that even rape porn should be above criticism because of “choice,” I don’t feel like I should start banning people for drift unless it’s extreme.
Yeah, Thomas, this was actually a thread about how stunned I was that a rape porn portal openly communicated so many patriarchal ideas that often are only implied. They come right out and say things like “it is about the control, not the sex” and really spell out explicitly why and how men like to use sexual violence to control women. Stunning stuff.
And I think that was why I was so squicked out and furious about this post–I don’t know if I can hang out here even now. I’m hoping to post about the drifted issue myself, eventually, and maybe then.
You know, it’s really easy to have a long “geez, men who like this stuff are so creepy” debate, but reading this whole thing (belatedly–a commenter on feministe linked to it) has made me uncomfortable for an entirely different reason: I’m a woman, and I get off on “this stuff.”
To clarify- I didn’t actually go to the portal, because I was at work and I’m squeamish, but upon reading the excerpts I immediately recognized one of the sites as one I’ve viewed (at least their sample videa clips) multiple times through a different portal.
So this totally makes me a sick fuck, right? Apparently. But I really have to challenge the idea that people (the original wording was “men,” but since we’ve established that I’m female, I’ll broaden it) jack off to what they find arousing, and never what they find sickening. I don’t think I’m the only one who is actually aroused by what I morally find sickening. In fact, most of my fantasies (and thus what I find visually arousing) are things so completely disconnected from my sexual reality that I would be really enraged if I saw them happening in front of me. I mean, for starters, I’m a lesbian, yet I get off on straight porn.
To be clear, the site I’ve visited isn’t one of the more brutal ones (or so I gather from the original post)–I’ve seen it with various names, but it’s of the drugged and asleep variety. In reality? Totally disgusting, morally reprehensible, all the rest. As a porn site? I see it as clearly staged, which somehow makes it okay for my brain–quite frequently you can see the actresses moving, and they’re usually in positions that simply wouldn’t be possible with a truly unconscious woman.
Anyway I just wanted to chime in because a) I’m a sick fuck, and thought y’all should know you’re not just dealing with male porn consumers b) I do think for a lot of us the distinction between reality and fantasy is important, and maybe makes some of us not quite so sick fucks and c) this is NOT BDSM, and it makes me sad how quick some of the commenters were to condemn the whole kit n caboodle.
I’m not at all surprised that there are women who get off on this. I wouldn’t know if all the men who like rape porn secretly want to abuse women, although I would think a good percentage of them do, but deep down, lots of people identify with victims. Unless, of course, you’re fantasizing about raping the women yourself, which would be different.
You’re not a sick fuck, MK.
I think a lot of people get off on violent porn because much of our cultural understanding of sex is heteronormative and reliant on power and control. Which is why rape porn shouldn’t be so much of a surprise to any of us. It’s a pretty natural extension of “regular” porn, which in turn is a natural extension of what we see in our day to day lives, and how sexuality is generally structured.
I’m sure many of us are disgusted, but I can’t imagine that anyone is shocked.
MK, I don’t think you’re a sick fuck. I personally dislike that kind of porn, but i do get that there are reasons why someone would eroticize it besides “i am a rapist.”
i realize that this probably sounds like it’s contradicting
>Nice theory, belledame. If the anger that leads to rape is caused by feeling powerless, then women should rape more than men since we feel that powerlessness more than men. But we don’t. Why?>
Perhaps because the patriarchal society is not set up so that that is a culturally acceptable option for us. There are, however, other ways of discharging that anger that -are-, more so (downward, kick-the-dog). Beating the crap out of your children, for instance. Verbal and emotional abuse. And so on. They’re not as dramatically obvious, sometimes, but i would not argue that they aren’t also devastating.
It’s also not exactly a theory i’ve invented; there’s plenty of evidence that abuse fosters abuse. It is true that there is “entitlement,” but..well, it gets complicated. Yeah, by all means: if someone’s being an asshole, you say, “hey, stop being an asshole: I’m not going to tolerate this.” If that’s what you mean by not “coddling.”
But actually, that’s a good question, “why.” I mean, by the answer you follow it with, it tends to suggest, perhaps, that actually being in the one-down position has been a -good- thing for women; in that at least it means we’re “put down” enough to not go around killing and raping people; and that the way forward is to bring men to a similar place. Through, apparently, -more- shaming. That is: not “you fucked up, go fix it” but “YOU are BAD.” anyway it’s really easy to tip over from one to the other, as I’ve been observing it. and one needs to be fucking careful about this. not because it hurts the mens’ delicate little feelings; because it doesn’t -work.-
..That, or a kind of implied essentialism, cultural if not actually biological. Women are the moral sex, you know. That notion has actually been around for quite a while, and is pretty damn patriarchal its own self. The Victorian angel in the house, don’t you know; she pops up in more ways than you might think; she wears a lot of disguises, but she hasn’t gone away. The goal then is to “civilize” the men, pretty much. I could talk for a long while about that one. not here, though.
>Because it’s not about powerlessness. It’s about feeling entitled to have what you want on demand and then, when you don’t get it, throwing a temper tantrum like a spoiled brat.
This anger at not getting what isn’t yours will only disappear when we quit coddling and spoiling men and telling them they are entitled to have what isn’t actually theirs>
First of all: “we” who? Personally I don’t feel that I particularly spend a lot of time “coddling” or “spoiling” men; but then, as I’ve said in other contexts, what often seems to be tacitly accepted as a kind of universal experience for women is not in fact -my- experience, or many others’.
Second: as I’ve said: “understanding” =! “oh, that’s all right, then, you poor dear. Do what you will.”
But if one is really going to blame the System, then one has to look at -all- the possible angles, not just the ones that map to one’s own experience.
…it is also possible that the “entitled” -have- in fact been cheated, and rather badly; just not in the way they think they were. The “entitlement” serves the system in that it is a kind of consolation prize for what was originally denied. No; sorry; you don’t get unconditional love; you don’t get to have a soul-satisfying career; you have been set up to believe you must be THE #1 winner in a rigged game of lotto where you cannot possibly be the winner by those terms; and your emotional and inner life must be limned by xy and z; but on the plus side, look! nookie! beer! flattery! years’ supply of Rice a Roni! there, that makes everything feel better, doesn’t it? –hey, look, those feminazis are trying to take the nookie and beer and flattery away from you! that was your BIRTHRIGHT. ATTACK ATTACK KILL KILL
…works, too.
>but deep down, lots of people identify with victims
actually, i think more men than one would tend to think identify with the women, at least in fantasy. anyway there is a reason why professional dommes far outnumber pro-subs.
>See the concern troll for what she is – someone who claims not to like rape porn but almost against her will is forced to defend it because sex, free speech, the very fate of the Republic is somehow at stake. Note what she is doing, and wonder why>.
Well, you just keep wondering there, that’s what you’re good at.
I really don’t know how to make clearer that in fact I am not -only- concerned wrt free speech here, although yeah, i am a bit dismayed by just how lightly people toss it aside (d’you think you’d be posting here at all if it weren’t for “free speech?” I think some people take a fuck of a lot for granted, frankly; among them that “oh, well, i am a good person and this shit is sick; therefore when i send the PO-lice after ‘em they can’t ever come after ME);
but, no, in fact, that is not my ONLY concern here; i think that in fact the theory/worldview that says that (roughly) “men do and women are done to and that is how it is no matter how you slice it and ain’t it awful” is not, in fact, terrifically useful from a FEMINIST viewpoint; certainly not if you STOP there.
>Neither GW Bush nor the Marquis de Sade came from backgrounds of pain or neglect or hurt. On the contrary, they were both infamously coddled and spoiled, reared with a sense of privilege most of us can barely comprehend>
Oh, you really don’t want to get started with me on “bullying.”
But as per GW Bush, for example: -as- a matter of fact, if you read his bio, that is an excellent example of someone who was simultaneously coddled, yes; made into an entitlement monster, yes; and also abused. Yes. Know the story about his sister? Dead and buried and parents back playing golf the next day; no one bothered to tell Geeb till after she was in the ground. What difference would it have made. This was a kid who was taught early on to be divorced from his feelings and even his words; years later, essay for school, trying to write about dead sister; Mom had drilled into him never to use the same word more than once (crap writing lesson too, but whatever); having already used “tears,” consults dictionary; “the lacerates ran down my face.” Ha, ha. Teacher gives him an “F” and a scathingly acidulous review.
Boo hoo, right? Poor little Dubya, right? Gee, that excuses everything, right? Fuck NO. Whatever he was, whatever happened, he’s paid his money and he’s made his choice: he is a monster now. Yes. And the fact that one can see echoes of fucked-up familial dynamics in the way he runs the administration (I am hardly the first person to observe that the secrecy and walking on eggshells and, yes, coddling, are all reminiscent of the abusive alcoholic’s family) hardly means that one must therefore stop all political activism trying to just stop the motherfuckers from doing any more damage to the entire goddam -world- (”all the world’s a stage,” and some peoples’ psychodramas get more airtime than others, by dint of that very entitlement you mention, yes).
But the fact remains that the monstrosity does -not- comes simply because he’s a happy little camper who always got whatever he wanted.
Monstrosity, as it happens, never comes out of -happiness.-
It’d be much easier to believe that it did. Makes one’s morality much simpler. Hey, look, over there. Evildoer. Thank God, -I could never be like that.-
Truth? We could all be Bush. (or deSade, or u-name-it).
The difference between us is that for whatever reason, Bush isn’t apparently capable of being anything -else.- Not at this stage of the game, anyway. Can’t or won’t; it doesn’t much matter. Too late. Too bad. Much more so for the people he inflicts his shit on, alas.
Most of the rest of us are, at least to some degree.
But you need to actively cultivate it, that “anything else.” And you don’t do it simply by pointing and blaming. Yeah, you probably do need to do that for a while if it’s what’s gonna get you out of that stage of “fuck, I blame myself. I am Bad. Despair.”
But it isn’t enough, I’m afraid; not for actual transformation on a deep and lasting level.
Via Bitch | Lab; on a kind of related note:
http://blog.pulpculture.org/2006/10/04/genny-screamers/
>>I think we all know that domestic violence happens to lots of people, rich and poor, of any race, etc. etc. and to think that a working class woman is somehow more likely to experience DV and is, therefore, the ‘authentic’ voice of the abused was silly at best, a harmful reproduction of bigoted stereotypes at worst.[2]
But what was more problematic was that, if there is a correlation between economic conditions and DV, then might the spotlight best be turned on the economic conditions and what we can do about them — and not on the spectacle of the “tangle of pathology” that is supposedly the special feature of family life among the poor and working class of any race? (The “culture of poverty” thesis goes back to the 1950s in a study of Mexican poor.)
Because, yeah, my gramps was an abuser. He used to lock my granny in the attic for not mopping the floor to perfection. But what my mom came to understand late in gramp’s life was that he lived a world of pain where his wife was the stable breadwinner and he always seemed to get laid off from one job to the next because the community experienced plant closing after plant closing due to structural economic change,
And that makes it a little more complicated doesn’t it? It’s not about sexism alone, it’s about capitalism, too. And my gramps had to be understood as a man beaten down by the vagaries of the economy.
This, of course, will be read as relativism — that I actually dare try to understand why people who go through economic crises turn on each other. I obviously don’t condone anything my gramps did. Rather, I understand it. Verstehen. And I seek understanding so as to find a way to explain the situation, without resorting to reduction to a single causal factor necessarily, because I want to figure out how to *fix* it.
Hence, it was necessary to turn the spotlight away from the “pathological” and on to issues of social structure — and that doesn’t mean ignoring gender at all. But it might mean asking questions that are uncomfortable because the spotlight might just be turned onto the very things people in positions of privilege can’t bear to question. They are, after all, almost invariably far more invested in and are the beneficiaries of the very economy that turned my grandfather into a man who was crippled by the age of 40, crippled by early onset athritis from working hard labor jobs. Crippled emotionally from never being able to hold down a steady job as factory after factory was shuttered. The victim, too, of interlocking systems of gender and class relations where he hung his head in shame, unable to aspire to the hegemonic ideal of masculinity dominant at the time: man = breadwinner. Anything else means not a man.
I can’t get up here and do the mainstream white feminism thing where we just talk about gender and sexist oppression. It doesn’t fucking work that way.>>
It strikes me as incredibly condescending to think that people don’t understand that men who beat women might have pressure on them. In fact, that’s not a hidden thing at all. Domestic violence is constructed in the media as precisely that, a lashing out under pressure. Maybe the people who think are ignoring this aspect just happen to think it’s so obvious it’s not worth mentioning.
Yeah. there’s been a lot of condescension all around going on.
For instance, that some people might not understand that other people who don’t constantly go “OH MY GOD, RAPE, AIN’T IT AWFUL” pretty much take -that- for granted, and thus when they say anything -else- in relation to a rape porn thread (for instance) are not, in fact, “rape apologists.” it’s just, you know, they kind of take it for granted that we’re already on the sme page in that regard?
and yes, wrt domestic abuse; and yet BL (for example) apparently feels frustrated enough with the versions of feminism as have been presented to her that she does not feel many people take into account her own understanding of class analysis. having been privy to a number of the same conversations, i can’t say i blame her.
and what -isn’t- talked about much is how the “pressure” might translate into (for example) some fantasy images as seen in certain kinds of porn.
If one continually talks as though it can all be boiled down to “aha! ‘they’ DO just want to dominate and hurt women! because they are entitled and dominating and mustache-twirling villains!” –well, again, 1) this sort of imagery was not news to a number of us, nor is the understanding that yep, gross, horrid misogyny -and- irredeemable assholes exist (funnily enough) 2) so now what? BadBadBad? Stop the evildoers? -Is- that all there is? Well, let me know how that works out for you.
>I am tired of the theory that even rape porn should be above criticism because of “choice,”
Do you understand that no one here is actually making that argument, nor ever was?
By the way:
>Both parties, either sadistic or masochistic, need some serious therapy required. Neither (S/M) is a natural, well-adjusted, healthy human line of thinking/behaviour. Both need therapy.>
Hi. Been in therapy for 7 years and counting. Looking to go into the profession myself, as it happens. I’ve found talk therapy intensely helpful. I’ve found psychodrama group therapy helpful. I’ve found certain kinds of somatic therapy helpful (including, but not limited to erotic-somatic therapy). And yes, BDSM and related erotic “scenes,” while not a substitute for talk therapy, fuck knows, can in fact be -therapeutic- for many people. They can also simply be a rollicking good time, and in ways that have fuckall to do with prior abuse, or indeed anything other than strong sensation play (for example). I would go into some of those ways, but you know: not now. Not here. I’ve made that mistake before. and yes, it’d be derailing, and i’d no doubt be preaching both to the choir and to stone walls, judging from the responses already made here.
But HELLO, speaking of fucking condescending. Did I mention the part about “blow me?” Well, consider it mentioned, Miz “I am the very model of well-adjusted feminism.”
Just to say, though: Thomas, piny: you’re not alone, here. And piny, I wish you would write about all this from your perspective at your own spot. I’m happy to join in, although, it’s not an area where i exactly feel -expert;- it’s not my -primary- erotic focus. I’ve just been around it long enough to understand sanctimonious bleatings such as the above as the patronizing bullshit they are.
Yeah, you might lose some people. If so? Fuck ‘em. This is how we learn and grow.
and some other people who’ve been turned off by all the ignorant, self-righteous, unconscious crap and just stopped posting or even reading might actually join in, and then we could maybe finally have a more interesting, sophisticated discusson about (for example) BDSM or porn from a feminist perspective. I for one would love for that to happen. because this shit is -tiresome.- same exact goddam argument for how many years now? how many -decades?- ehhh.
It strikes me as incredibly condescending to think that people don’t understand that men who beat women might have pressure on them. In fact, that’s not a hidden thing at all. Domestic violence is constructed in the media as precisely that, a lashing out under pressure. Maybe the people who think are ignoring this aspect just happen to think it’s so obvious it’s not worth mentioning.
Are these the same people who think that women reading a feminist blog need to be informed about the existence of rape porn?! on the internet?! And also that it’s kinda, y’know, extremely misogynist both in content and presentation? By the guy who hasn’t internalized similarly obvious ideas like the importance of trigger warnings on this kind of material?
Belledame’s point may well be a basic one; given that at least a couple of commenters disputed it, I don’t think it’s so obvious as to be beneath mention. Particularly in the context of this conversation. The one that sprung out of an OP that fisked violatedbride.com for sexism.
Belledame, it’s really not mine, either–not in the way I understand it to be Thomas’. I wouldn’t mind writing about it, but I really don’t want to set up an oppositional relationship between the theories I use to order that aspect of my life and (most of) the thoughts and ideas being promulgated here. That would be counterproductive and inaccurate. I’m not sure it’s really appropriate to discuss it here. It seems as wrong to derail a discussion of this subject whether the comments take stormcloud’s position or Thomas’.
No; sorry; you don’t get unconditional love; you don’t get to have a soul-satisfying career; you have been set up to believe you must be THE #1 winner in a rigged game of lotto where you cannot possibly be the winner by those terms; and your emotional and inner life must be limned by xy and z; but on the plus side, look! nookie! beer! flattery! years’ supply of Rice a Roni! there, that makes everything feel better, doesn’t it? –hey, look, those feminazis are trying to take the nookie and beer and flattery away from you! that was your BIRTHRIGHT.
So how did nookie, beer, and flattery come to be considered “birthrights” in the first place? Did that happen by chance, or was it magic? Why do men who don’t feel oppressed feel entitled to women’s attention just as well? Your point that thwarted entitlement leads to feelings of powerlessness is well-taken, but where did that entitlement come from in the first place?
They don’t want to hurt women because they’re mustache twirling villians. They want to hurt women to feel powerful. You do not need to feel powerless in order to desire to feel powerful. Look at the President.
Then why don’t women who feel powerless want to hurt men, as a rule?
The point is that they’re not powerless; they just think they are, because they think a birthright that was never theirs is being taken away from them. The question is how they got to thinking it was their birthright in the first place.
FDL: already wrote about the Resident and his own very likely feelings of powerlessness underneath it all. scroll upward.
o yeah, piny, that’s why i was saying maybe some of us should seriously start that discussion somewhere else.
as for the rest, wrt junk science (and others): just cracked open a new library check-out, “Sexual Violence and American Manhood,” by one T. Walter Herbert, as it happens. thus far, a sampling:
“A company of sociologists and psychologists–including Gary Brooks, Ronald Levant, David Lisak, Joseph Pleck, and William Pollack–analyze manhood as a socially conditioned role that possess built-in liabilities. Their work has shown that the traditional male role is traumatic for boys entering the process of socialization and entails humiliation and perplexity throughout a man’s life.
Boy babies, it turns out, are more emotionally expressive than girls; they show delight and irritation more readily, and they cry more. But boys are trained through systematic shaming and rebuffs to bottle up their distresses and joys, and by the age of six they are far more inhibited than their more emotionally confident sisters. The early attack on the emotional vitality of boys bequeaths a familiar set of troubles. Adult men find their intimate relationships blighted by emotional dilemmas they can scarcely discern in themselves. Afflicted by a craving for emotional comfort that is crosscut by resentment, they demand compensation in the here and now for the traumas of boyhood. (Levant, “Nonrelational,” 16,21)”
****
So to answer junk science, “here and now” includes beer, babes, trampolines, and whatever else the culture wants to market, to market. On the whole we’re pretty good at selling “instant gratification;” and I don’t have to reiterate here how the male-directed marketing is influenced by sexism, misogyny, and alienation all toxically wrapped up with, yes, a sense of entitlement. (A good sociological-type example to flash back on: that stupid Burger King commercial “I Am Man” from not long ago. yep, lame, mocking the feminist movement, insulting to pretty much everyone…and at the end of the day it’s also just one damn more example of how “Have It Your Way” has been substituted in a lot of peoples’ minds for “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness” without much fanfare or conscious registering of the bait and switch).
Herbert continues:
“The classic pattern of traditional manhood demands an impossible performance of self-reliance and self-command. Men test their manly mettle against other men, in which there are always more losers than winners; and even winners are subject to the uncontrollable mischances of living. American men are not exempted from the the tragic limitations and vulnerabilities of human experience generally, yet the code of masculine toughness requires denying their reality. It is impossible to maintain stoic compsure–to “take it like a man”–when distress is overwhelming, so that a compulsively self-reliant man refuses to believe that overwhelming distress can ever befall him. He cannot afford to acknowledge what everyman suffers: the contingencies of his economic fate, his need for intimate companionship, his exposure to illness, to emotional tumult, to accident and misfortunre. However strenuously banished from consciousness, these realities continue to exert pressure onhis psychic life.
…Sexual desire is among the subversive experiences that disconcert masculine self-command and thus menace masculine self-respect. Sexual yearnings place a man at another person’s disposal, subject to that person’s impulses and decisions. Michael Warner has noted that gay men become targets of phobic hatred not only because they desire other men but because they *desire*; same-sex preference calls attention to a disquieting fact, namely that they are sexual men. The politics of sexual shame trap heterosexual men as well, especially if their lives suggest a sexuality not wholly under voluntary command. (”Trouble,” 17-40)…Sexual intercourse also poses the prospect of interpersonal closeness, which…men perceive as a danger to their autonomy.
Students of contemporary masculinity have noted the prevalence of a “nonrelational” sexuality in which sexual intimacy is divorced from emotional intimacy. The “centerfold syndrome” is an example of this: men caught up in a persistent fantasy life that feeds on images of women with whom they will never exchange a word, while they feel sexually awkward with actual women who love them. Traditional manhood encourages men to be aggressive, moreover, and to funnel emotions of vulnerability and neediness into anger, and this syndrome can generate a sexuality in which coercion is routine (Brooks, “Centerfold,” Levant, “Nonrelational.”) Gary Brooks and L.. Silverstein argue that the “dark side of masculinity–including violence against women in the family, rape and sexual assault, sexual harassment in the workplace–is not a problem of aberrant men who have somehow failed to fulfill the conventional role. On the contrary, such pathologies represent hypermasculinity, the accentuation of traits entailed by manhood as traditionally defined.”
****
[In other words: not news to most people here, I expect, that last bit; and yet, slightly different framing.
Continuing:]
“”The dominant American tradition of manhood visualizes a lone figure against a vast horizon, on horseback in the Wild West version [hello, Brokeback Mountain, anyone?], a myth that denies the interactive dramas that make us who we are and sustain us in the selfhoods by which we know each other and ourselves.
Groups in power take roles that require the disempowered to assume…subordinate postures that acknowledge and bolster the position of their superiors. **Yet the powerful are also required to sustain the existence that their place demands** [emphasis mine]. “Why can’t they live like white people?” a racist white woman once asked me about her white next-door neighbors, whose house and yard were unkempt. Men face similar imperatives to “be a man,” behind which lies a gender bigotry enforced against women [and gay folk, and other "deviants"].
…Pornographic fascination is not provoked exclusively by images in movies and magazines; it is widely accepted as a romantic ideal, and it gives form to living relationships. Code manhood produces pornographic marriages, Terrence Real notes, in which the woman’s compliance–whether voluntary or coerced–performs the man’s need…
[again, this bit: not news]
…Men who chronically batter and rape their wives further illustrate the syndrome in which men project the maladies of their own manhood into women. An abused wife is most acutely at risk when she seeks to terminate her relationship with the abuser, because this awakens the man’s deep-lying dread of abandonment. But, as Donald Dutton asserts, “the men need never frame the abandonment in terms of needing the woman and depending on her emotional support.” In order th preserve the illusion of their masculine self-sufficiency, such men **project their self-loathing onto their mates** [emphasis mine]. Dutton describes the resultant diatribe as “playing the bitch tape,” which invariably contains the same four words: bitch, cunt, whore, slut. The man’s stereotyped but unconscious self-hatred sets this tape running in his head, and it then comes to consciousness as a torrent of abuse aimed at his spouse. Unaware of his dependency on her because he is ashamed of it, and unaware of hating himself for his neediness, the man projects on her the “bitch, cunt, whore, slut” that he feels himself to be. Like Captain Ahab in his demoniac hatred of the white whale, the abusive husband believes that his hateful inner womanhood is visibly embodied and made tangibly assailable in his wife.”
–”Sexual Violence and American Manhood,” T. Walter Herbert
…so, iow:
>>Why do men who don’t feel oppressed feel entitled to women’s attention just as well?
…is perhaps not the best way to frame the question. The problem isn’t that some men (consciously) feel oppressed and others not so much; the problem here is **the construct of masculinity itself.**
This is why I personally don’t separate my feminism from queer theory/activism and sex-pos (my understanding of which is i think perhaps a bit different from some of the other folks who call themselves “sex-positive feminists” here).
>> The question is how they got to thinking it was their birthright in the first place.
Well, and -that- part, “how,” has been pretty amply covered by the feminism(s) that have been discussed here and elsewhere: sexism, entitlement, the “patriarchy” if you insist (a particular aspect & manifestation of it). What I’ve been trying to get at with these last couple of posts is more “why.” which, imo, hasn’t really been addressed so well in a lot of these blog discussions, at least.
I guess however it happens, men are taught to think they need women more than women need them, and this is cruelly unfair and entitles them to compensation. They’re simultaneously taught to think they wouldn’t need women at all if they were real men. So it does come from insecurity and feelings of powerlessness, but it’s all baseless, since women don’t actually need men less than men need women. The idea needs to be pointed out and ridiculed like it deserves.
Sure.
Or, well. Ridicule the idea; and yet i guess for me at least, also try to listen for the downbeat.
I mean: if you want people to let go of old shibboleths they’re clinging to, you first have to point out that it IS a shibboleth, yes; but also be able to point to something that might be a better replacement.
Or, well, that’s vague. I am trying to find a way to convey this without making it sounds like i am all about “o poor poor menz” (as opposed to or more so than women), because, honest, I’m not, here.
But, like, as you say: yep. Both taught to think they need women and simultaneously be too ashamed of needing -anyone- to even be able to acknowledge this. So there are layers and layers here. And if you -only- mock the “needing”/entitlement bit, I think it tends to reinforce the “strong, stoic, fuck you i don’t need anyone” deal. I mean, look at the MRA’s: they bought that angle lock, stock and barrel. “Women? Pah! Who needs ‘em!” (go off to huddle and hate and spit)
The other part of it is…well, again, I have a particular perspective here, but as far as I’m concerned it’s not even all about the heteronorm of men need women/women need men (romantically), although, sure, that’s a big part of it (esp. for het men, obviously).
But I would argue (and the book does this too, later, i think) that also men are taught that they don’t need -men,- either; in fact that’s even more taboo than needing women. And, regardless of sexual orientation, I think that’s a goodly chunk of the problem as well.
At any rate, someone, Bark/Bites was it? long time ago was talking very astutely about the homosocial verging-on homerotic bonding that happens in such activities as gang rape, and even less extreme forms of “male bonding” over misogyny. Understandably, if you’re a woman you’re gonna be focused on the misogyny: they do, they really do hate women!
But what gets missed is in fact that this is -one of the only acceptable ways for men in a patriarchal culture (which includes both misogyny -and- homophobia) to connect.-
That, perhaps, is something that needs to be addressed on a wider scale.
iow, i am saying, again, that i think male homophobia and misogyny are inextricably intertwined; and that a genuine “men’s movement” is gonna have to seriously address the straight-gay thing as well as homoeroticism among “straight” men (for example).
Just a few thoughts…late and everything…
classifying all people, male and female, who might enjoy BSDM as “psychologically flawed” and in need of therapy is not going to stop rape, in life or on film. Nor is downgrading porn performers, or peoples personal sexual desires, in fact, it just alienates them even more, and people who feel as though they are seen as lesser will tend NOT to work with those who insult them on very real issues like rape prevention and real abuse.
please keep that in mind.
pony- go to hell. you are a liar, and if you have issue with me and what I do, have the ovaries to say it to my face, as it were, and not drag me up every time someone mentions ‘rape porn’. i have stated that I do think porn created, with consenting actors or not, that depicts obviously ultra-violet, OBVIOUSLY unwilling sexual activity is ‘not good’. Stop speaking for and about me already.
BD- that book sounds fascinating. I may have to check it out. I tend to agree that a lot of male aggression is rooted in individual males sense of powerlessness, the ways they are raised, and a sense they might have that whatever power they do have is being erroded. Interesting stuff.
Yeah, that one just sent my knee jerking through the roof on a number of levels: hi, how many people can we insult at once! BDSM practitioners -and- people who get mental health treatment! who believe it or not may actually be the -same people- in some cases!
but yeah: that is such a fucking nasty move. “Oh, your sexual preferences aren’t like mine. I can’t be bothered to understand it; You must be sick in the head.” AND: “needing mental health treatment is something to be sneered at.” FUCK YOU.
I got enough of that shit from homophobic assholes -and- from ignorant jerks who yelp about how no, really, there is no such thing as clinical depression, i need to just “get over it”; i have NO tolerance for any of that bullshit in -any- circumstances. Go out and fucking learn something, brain trust. Read a book. LISTEN to people. And meanwhile, if you can’t manage that, fuck off.
BD, the Bush’s behavior after their daughter’s death wasn’t particularly odd or even unusual among Yankees of their generation. A lot of New Englanders still react to tragedy by pretending all is well. And no, it doesn’t excuse or explain GW’s sadism in any way.
I agree. And with due respect, Marc, its one thing to see a thread “drift” and quite another to let it get hijacked. Having read this thread a few days ago and just coming back to it today, I see some clearly trollish blogging behavior above.
Your blog, your discretion, I know. IMHO, a little moderation can be a very good thing.
There’s more to it than that, Gayle; it isn’t just Yankee stoicism, and it wasn’t just that incident. i would go into it more, based on a number of sources, but that truly would be a derailment.
as for trolling: i’ve a feeling that we may be seeing things differently wrt who’s trolling and who’s not. perhaps not. but i for one, though steamed, have been trying to engage with the topic in good faith, and am beyond irritated at the suggestions that -i- am not.
You’ve already derailed the discussion. Over and fucking over again, BTW– why would you suddenly choose to stop now?
And you are…?
gayle, belledame has brought valid criticisms to the discussion. She is not trolling, unless attempting to discuss where rape porn comes from in terms of societal conceits goes against the gist of the theme of this post. It doesn’t. You want to merely shut her up, which no tiene sentido. If you have objections to her argument, address it. Don’t merely call her a troll for talking about the main point of this post, namely that rape porn is fucked up, why does it exist?
Apparently I didn’t hew closely enough to the premise that rape porn is fucked up and ain’t it awful and DAMN THEM, DAMN THEM TO HELL y punto. also i have a problem with certain people being eternal gratuitously nasty harassers, like say f’r instance pony. that’s the best i can make of it, unless gayle has something else specific on her mind. Gayle? Care to share? Standing right here.
oh well, that’s fine really; Amanda just honored me with a chunk of an entire post suggesting, once again, that i am trying to STOP “analysis” of any such shit. i love it; it gets me wet. I mean, not that i suppose i particularly expect fair n balanced from someone whom i once stormed into her space shouting to suck my tampon, and further the -reason- i did it was because i was beyond steamed at her using someone -else- as a handy, as Bitch Lab puts it, “pivot babe for the circle jerk,” but whatthefuckever. Yes indeedy. Stop talking about rape porn, and the evil that Men do! Stop it stop it stop it! It is part of my sinister Agenda. Because -I am all about protecting the Menz.- YES. some people just know me -so well,- it’s fucking incredible.
eternal gratuitously nasty RADICAL FEMINIST harassers, I should say, is the problem. because Pony is a Radical Feminist ™, and clearly the only reason she went to Renegade’s blog and called her ugly -and- here attempted to derail (yes) the discussion by insinuating that she, Pony, was right all along and RE -was- a bad bad enabler of the nasssty rape porn and the only reason she, RE, had been here before was to troll for more menz for her evil trade, which means Pony was -right- to try to get her thrown out, even as is Gayle doing to me right here; but she only did it, Pony, Because She Cares So Much.
and is the only reason i entered into this godforsaken thread in the first place, because, once again: supremely pissed.
which must mean that i hate radical feminists and am out to Destroy Them All. clearly.
especially since as long as i’m here and am aware that -other- people i care about have legitimate beefs with the thread as set up, i’ll try to address it and bring some context wrt some of the shit i’ve been reading lately.
silly me. RAPE APOLOGIST! CONCERN TROLL!!
right.
not that the truly radical are happy with the way things are run here -either,- but at least they were starting to be on the right track, dammit, with gasp horror ain’t it awful my god I SEE IT NOW, I SEE THE LIGHT!!! PUNISH THEM! PUNISH THEM ALL!11! uh, not really sure HOW, but…YEAH!!! GRRR! SPIT!!
sucks when people get in the way of that, i realize. and i mean, it’s not like there’s anywhere ELSE on the Web where people can huddle together and Blame. eternally.
and of course, clearly, anyone who suggests that, y’know, there might actually be other angles to this has NEVER CONSIDERED ANY OF THIS BEFORE, NO, and/or finds it -threatening.- Which, well, of course! I am deeply threatened by the suggestion that lipstick and high heels and rape porn might be sexist! Can’t bear to give them up! Can’t HANDLE THE TRUTH that this is a Fallen Creation, and even if i don’t like -those- things, whatever i might like is -tainted.- By (drumroll) the Patirarchy. well, fuck! My preconceptions! My preconceptions! My good standing at the Male Enabling Patriarchy Fuckers Club! Curses! Almost foiled again!
because clearly we are -all coming from exactly the same place,- are capital w-Women. Yes! Coddling! I love coddling men! Almost as good as soft-boiling!
and i have NEVER READ OR EVEN HEARD ANY OF THIS THEORY BEFORE!
how else to -possibly- explain my willful obstinancy? How?
p.s. just for future reference: Amanda, the bit you quoted in that wormy post of yours was not from a “rant.” THAT, just now, was a rant. Thank you.
p.p.s. you know: i wasn’t going to say anything, truly. I thought, bury the hatchet and let it go, finally, and hell, y’all’ve got enough on your plate with the whole, ‘fuck, people of color are kind of pissed at us.”
and you know, i have mixed feelings at best about REPRESENTING.
but as long as we’re here. Amanda? Marc? Some other people? There is a common denominator between Bitch Lab and piny and me and some of the other people (RKB, for instance) who have continually rubbed you the wrong way in these-type discussions. Can you guess what that is? Think carefully.
hint: it has to do with the general theme of “actually, we do NOT all come from the same experiences or even share the same…oppressions, what you will. And you aren’t paying attention, except when it suits your own needs”
hint 2: starts with a “q” and ends with an “r.”
I realize to the outside viewer that “rape porn” and similar depictions of violence may lead one to think that those who view it and enjoy it are actually in favor of rape or violence towards women, or have such viewpoints outside of their sexuality. While this may be true, in some cases, I think it is a rather dim view of how human minds work. People who watch a violent movie (and what USA movie is not violent?) may share a propensity towards killing and fighting, but usually they do not. By the same token, whether it is rape porn, or bondage, when it is done as a form of sexual fantasy and involved willing (often well paid) actors and actresses, it is the domain of free thought. Does it lead to actual rape, violence or sexism? Again perhaps in some. But I suspect the majority of those people who think or act in such a way either had this in them prior to seeking out rape porn, or intentionally used rape porn to propel them in this direction. Many couples share an interest in rape porn, as in fact the fantasy of rape/submission etc. is often as vibrant or stronger in women than in men. In fact some women complain they cannot get their men to act out rape fantasies with them, because the men find it repulsive while they have an interest in it. Does that mean women want or should be raped? Of course not. But does it mean men who fantasize over rape content should be presumed guilty of harboring ill intent or as it is called here: patriarchy? I think a clearer view would be that if rape fantasy remains fantasy, and that all involved in making/selling/subscribing to it maintain the division between fantasy and reality, then it akin to playing video games or watching movies. The fact that the general public, particularly women or victims of actual sexual offenses would find this subject matter and content offensive or disheartening, means only that it should be distributed in a way that respects their right to avoid it. In other words, if a person searches for “nice tits” on Google, links to rape porn should not show up. That is largely a technical issue though, nobody selling rape porn has ever taken the approach of trying to put it out into the mainstream – aside from a rare search engine link showing up under the wrong search it is something you have to choose to view. And you always have the free choice to hit the back button. I for one am thankful that we have free expression to the extent that it allows such diverse views, while rape porn might seem like a strange subject to use as an example of democratic rights… the people who would restrict its production and sale are the same people who are the true patriarchs and is such thinking that has been fought by feminism and by minorities and anyone oppressed over time. The right to judge what is right/wrong is the true cause of saying to a person that their right to select can be compromised, at which point that persons status is lowered and their rights trespassed. Rape porn is no doubt violent, graphic and so on, at the same time it is also symbolic of the downfall of oppressive censorship and prejudice that has often caused the majority of violent towards both men and women. The actual crime of rape, is intolerable to most viewers of rape porn, and most responsible publishers make it clear they do not condone any such activity. For those who cross this line, we have complex legal systems designed to provide some measure of justice.
The actual crime of rape, is intolerable to most viewers of rape porn, and most responsible publishers make it clear they do not condone any such activity.
They’d pretty much have to, wouldn’t they? I’m sure they are greatly conflicted by the fact that only by selling rape porn can they continue to fund their traveling sexual education and consent awareness activities, free for schools and community events! If only there was a less tawdry way! Or by “not condone” did you mean “put some kind of disclaimer on the DVD to protect them from being sued by the victim’s family when that crazy guy, the one we all know is out there, re-enacts his favorite scenes from their impressive video library.”
In other news, psychic hotlines are for entertainment purposes only, and the oversupply of hydroponics equipment sellers in my area are very pleased that everyone around here is as interested in growing tomatoes as they are.
For those who cross this line, we have complex legal systems designed to provide some measure of justice.
Which would be great, if it did, but it generally doesn’t, so we still have a little problem here.
Belledame, I really don’t have time to read your obsessive melodramatic long-ass posts in which you, who are obviously mentally unstable, rationalize your very very stupid, privileged position, but I thought I’d chime in here (since you’ve made it sort of difficult to contact you via your blog, possibly because other people had the same idea as me) to let you know that you are indeed a horrible horrible person.
Yeah, I know I’m trolling and I don’t care because you are such a horrible person that all laws of internets-decency have been revoked for anybody dealing with you. But if you really want me to add something “legitimate,” here goes:
1. The reason I hate you is that as someone who was a sex-worker, who had assholes like you cheering me on when I was an emotionally damaged teenager to the point where I wasn’t even allowed by my closest friends to say I didn’t like it when men payed to rape me all day long, I feel that apologists like you directly contributed to the violence that was committed against me on my body. I also feel that the verbal spew you just got all over my new favorite blog will be a small contributing factor to the violence that is committed against all other women who are coerced into making the same bad decisions.
2. Having been a full-service escort, I can tell you that there are far far far far more professional subs than professional dommes because the average hobbyist views and treats every single prostitute he sees as a “sub,” whether she is marketing her services that way or not. It’s just what he thinks of as sex.
I’ll be slinking off now. I expect you’ll rip me a new one sometime in the next day or so, as you seem more invested in using this thread to promote and apologize for violence against women than most people are in continuing with the discussion, thereby being forced to read and respond to your shlock. Rest assured not only that I won’t read it but that if I ever meet a young student from New York who espouses your views I will kick them very very hard on the off-chance that it’s you.
Whoo, I feel better now.
In fact, you could say that post was therapeutic for me.
Note to punkass-mods: I am very very sorry for trolling and totally understand if you want to ban me. I’m not usually like this. She just makes me want to *explode*.