Friday, December 29, 2006
I admit it.
I was snide, smug, dismissive and slightly mocking, vis-a-vis Bea's new blog title, "Dead Men Don't Rape", to wit:
the phrase is not "dead rapists don't rape."
the phrase is "Dead MEN don't rape." sounds rather universally-condemning to me.
is it any different from saying "dead women don't complain?" "dead women don't cheat?" "dead women don't hit you on the head with a frying pan?" "dead women don't have abortions?"
I'm sure it feels good to declare that, with all its implications. I'm sure it feels...dare I say it...empowerful, both overtly and covertly.
has that "go sister" sort of vibe.
but as a human being who doesn't like to think about making people dead, usually, no matter how reprehensibly those living things behave, I'm not down with that.
if I were a man, I'm not sure I'd be offended so much as confused, especially if I had not prevailed upon any of my female acquaintances to give me nonconsensual sex.
so, I'm-a just fall on this handy sword over here, and apologize for being snide, smug, dismissive and slightly mocking, because that had some farther-reaching implications that I'm not so proud of, I gotta say.
I own my words, and I'm responsible for how people react when they read them. I'm sorry that my words helped trigger people's issues. I should have thought things through a little better.
And that apology is no less sincere for what I'm about to bloviate about, notably, this:
Way to go, all you wonderful pro-porn Feminists over at I'm not a Feminist, but... . This is what happens when your mouths overrun your brains and politics become more important to you than PEOPLE. This is what happens when you worry more about offending men who commit heinous violations against women and children and protecting your precious, precious porn than worrying about the feelings of PEOPLE who have experienced horrible trauma.
Feminists are supposed to be working to help women and children who have been the victims of abuse at the hands of men, not hurt them further. (from Feminist Nation)
and this:
I know that the particular women who I am talking about, if they read this, will feel absolutely no compassion for rape survivors - it's all about them and defending their own crap behaviour. (from The Axe Forgets)
See, for one thing, it's not really about my precious precious porn. I'll be happy to talk about my precious precious porn if that's what people want. But I thought we were done with that. And I am irritated that my views on the slogan "Dead Men Don't Rape" are conflated with my views on dirty pictures. The two do not join up in my head, and I didn't realize that I had to make that clear. (I guess I'll know for next time.)
It's about how I feel about men: that I'm as uncomfortable with cutting them out of the human race as I am with men cutting women out of the human race, even if I'm angry with them, individually or as a class - even if I even hate them sometimes, individually or as a class.
It's about how I feel about rape, as a survivor, as a victim of violent crimes: that no amount of making living things dead will ever return me to a state of grace, if that state of grace was ever real and true to begin with.
Yes, Dead Men Don't Rape. No doubt about it. So, for the next big rape-prevention campaign, we could round up all the men, make them dig their own graves with rusty shovels, and empty their pockets to pay for the bullets we use to shoot them with, and all cheer as they fall over dead - and what then? do we turn on those women in the crowd who don't cheer loudly enough? Women are not immune to the intoxicant of power, not by a long shot. in a world full of women, I'm sure we'd figure out how to wreck shit all on our own.
for what it's worth, Dead Men also don't change, grow, reconsider, modify their points of view, feel regret, open their hearts to love, all that happy crap. which Live Men sometimes do.
but you're right about one thing - this is what happens when politics become more important than people.
But I hasten to remind us all - I'm a member of Class People, who has been crushed under the wheels of Politics more times than I care to count. And no one has ever given me the kid-glove treatment just on accounta being a rape survivor.
Many of us who have been accused of lacking compassion are ourselves survivors.
I'm saying - who among us is NOT a survivor of something? I'd say many, if not most, of us who comprise (for good or ill) the population of the Feminist Blogosphere have found ourselves rocking back and forth on the bathroom floor, weeping silent tears and wondering how we could have let this happen, what we could have done to prevent it, what the hell we do now, so on and on - some of us more than once.
if it's the new thing, now, to be gentle to survivors - that's great. I applaud the new era of gentleness and enthusiastically welcome our new gentle overlords.
But gentle is as gentle does.
I was snide, smug, dismissive and slightly mocking, vis-a-vis Bea's new blog title, "Dead Men Don't Rape", to wit:
the phrase is not "dead rapists don't rape."
the phrase is "Dead MEN don't rape." sounds rather universally-condemning to me.
is it any different from saying "dead women don't complain?" "dead women don't cheat?" "dead women don't hit you on the head with a frying pan?" "dead women don't have abortions?"
I'm sure it feels good to declare that, with all its implications. I'm sure it feels...dare I say it...empowerful, both overtly and covertly.
has that "go sister" sort of vibe.
but as a human being who doesn't like to think about making people dead, usually, no matter how reprehensibly those living things behave, I'm not down with that.
if I were a man, I'm not sure I'd be offended so much as confused, especially if I had not prevailed upon any of my female acquaintances to give me nonconsensual sex.
so, I'm-a just fall on this handy sword over here, and apologize for being snide, smug, dismissive and slightly mocking, because that had some farther-reaching implications that I'm not so proud of, I gotta say.
I own my words, and I'm responsible for how people react when they read them. I'm sorry that my words helped trigger people's issues. I should have thought things through a little better.
And that apology is no less sincere for what I'm about to bloviate about, notably, this:
Way to go, all you wonderful pro-porn Feminists over at I'm not a Feminist, but... . This is what happens when your mouths overrun your brains and politics become more important to you than PEOPLE. This is what happens when you worry more about offending men who commit heinous violations against women and children and protecting your precious, precious porn than worrying about the feelings of PEOPLE who have experienced horrible trauma.
Feminists are supposed to be working to help women and children who have been the victims of abuse at the hands of men, not hurt them further. (from Feminist Nation)
and this:
I know that the particular women who I am talking about, if they read this, will feel absolutely no compassion for rape survivors - it's all about them and defending their own crap behaviour. (from The Axe Forgets)
See, for one thing, it's not really about my precious precious porn. I'll be happy to talk about my precious precious porn if that's what people want. But I thought we were done with that. And I am irritated that my views on the slogan "Dead Men Don't Rape" are conflated with my views on dirty pictures. The two do not join up in my head, and I didn't realize that I had to make that clear. (I guess I'll know for next time.)
It's about how I feel about men: that I'm as uncomfortable with cutting them out of the human race as I am with men cutting women out of the human race, even if I'm angry with them, individually or as a class - even if I even hate them sometimes, individually or as a class.
It's about how I feel about rape, as a survivor, as a victim of violent crimes: that no amount of making living things dead will ever return me to a state of grace, if that state of grace was ever real and true to begin with.
Yes, Dead Men Don't Rape. No doubt about it. So, for the next big rape-prevention campaign, we could round up all the men, make them dig their own graves with rusty shovels, and empty their pockets to pay for the bullets we use to shoot them with, and all cheer as they fall over dead - and what then? do we turn on those women in the crowd who don't cheer loudly enough? Women are not immune to the intoxicant of power, not by a long shot. in a world full of women, I'm sure we'd figure out how to wreck shit all on our own.
for what it's worth, Dead Men also don't change, grow, reconsider, modify their points of view, feel regret, open their hearts to love, all that happy crap. which Live Men sometimes do.
but you're right about one thing - this is what happens when politics become more important than people.
But I hasten to remind us all - I'm a member of Class People, who has been crushed under the wheels of Politics more times than I care to count. And no one has ever given me the kid-glove treatment just on accounta being a rape survivor.
Many of us who have been accused of lacking compassion are ourselves survivors.
I'm saying - who among us is NOT a survivor of something? I'd say many, if not most, of us who comprise (for good or ill) the population of the Feminist Blogosphere have found ourselves rocking back and forth on the bathroom floor, weeping silent tears and wondering how we could have let this happen, what we could have done to prevent it, what the hell we do now, so on and on - some of us more than once.
if it's the new thing, now, to be gentle to survivors - that's great. I applaud the new era of gentleness and enthusiastically welcome our new gentle overlords.
But gentle is as gentle does.
# posted by antiprincess @ 7:03 AM 
Comments:
It just seems that it usually the ones that are adamantly pro-porn that tend to sling crap around with no regard for the possible fall-out.
Faith,
I'm curious to know where you have seen this? If you don't want to dig around a bunch of old blog threads to find citations, that is fine, I completely understand. It's a lot of work to do that, after all. But I am honestly curious. (And I promise I am not being snarky here. I know sometimes it's hard to convey tone online.) I am curious bc I've read on several occasions, radfems saying that "pro-porn" (a term they apply to certain feminists they disgaree with, not a term I've ever seen anyone self-apply) of "slinging crap" - but I read a LOT of feminist blogs and I have seen that happen, well, VERY rarely.
Also I don' tknow if you idenbtify as radfem so pls. don't take this as me trying to say you are. Just telling you what I've read elsewhere. Thanks.
<< Home
Actually, Anti, it really wasn't you that I believed was out of line. I didn't read through the entire comments; I got sick of them after awhile. But it was mostly the other pro-porn peeps that I was concerned about harming the victims reading.
That thread was just for some reason particularly vicious.
As for the slogan, I don't really give a damn about it one way or another. I have many men in my life I care about deeply; one of the ones I care about most reads my blogs daily. What I do care about is defending the voices of those who are trying desperately to speak out against the men who are guilty of being abusers/misogynists. When it comes down to deciding between defending nameless men and abuse survivors, I'm going to be standing right in front of the survivor helping them shout at the men.
It just seems that it usually the ones that are adamantly pro-porn that tend to sling crap around with no regard for the possible fall-out.
That thread was just for some reason particularly vicious.
As for the slogan, I don't really give a damn about it one way or another. I have many men in my life I care about deeply; one of the ones I care about most reads my blogs daily. What I do care about is defending the voices of those who are trying desperately to speak out against the men who are guilty of being abusers/misogynists. When it comes down to deciding between defending nameless men and abuse survivors, I'm going to be standing right in front of the survivor helping them shout at the men.
It just seems that it usually the ones that are adamantly pro-porn that tend to sling crap around with no regard for the possible fall-out.
well, maybe I did my bit to make a safe space for those folks who behaved in a way you thought inappropriate.
I get that a lot: "oh, it wasn't you I was offended by, but your friend..."
I must hang with some pretty offensive people.
But you know, I do consider your comments to be wise and thoughtful, and so I had to apologize for my part in it all.
I get that a lot: "oh, it wasn't you I was offended by, but your friend..."
I must hang with some pretty offensive people.
But you know, I do consider your comments to be wise and thoughtful, and so I had to apologize for my part in it all.
For the record: i know that at least one of the other people whom z cited is 1) not "sex/porn-positive" and 2) a survivor.
and you know, as i said over there: i am sorry that my discussion of the slogan and of the individual in question had me saying things that survivors found hurtful.
but as i also said: my tone there was colored slightly by my previous interactions with Bea, or rather her alter ego Phemisaurus, and the crap that she did sling, at other women including antip here, yes, for no good reason that I could see.
and while i don't doubt that your experience has been that it's the well? pro-porn? i don't label myself as such, but i know i can be harsh--who are the ones who are slinging crap wantonly about; i have to say, i've had a rather different experience. i'm not going to go hunting up all the different instances i've experienced and witnessed (mostly witnessed) of antiporn/radical feminists being absolutely appalling to other people, other -women,- for no good reason that i could see (often nothing to do with porn at all), seemingly feeling justified because of the ideology.
i agree that when it comes down to it, the actual survivor is far more important than "nameless men." or the attacker, god knows, or any man wandering by who happens to take offense at the survivor's anger.
but, i also think that actual people, actual women, rape survivors or not (as antip says, we're all survivors of something), come before ideology. and it's that that i've been objecting to with people like delphyne, Bea, stormcloud. the fact that physical assault isn't happening over the Internets doesn't mean they can't be hurtful in their own right, and i think they have been.
and you know, as i said over there: i am sorry that my discussion of the slogan and of the individual in question had me saying things that survivors found hurtful.
but as i also said: my tone there was colored slightly by my previous interactions with Bea, or rather her alter ego Phemisaurus, and the crap that she did sling, at other women including antip here, yes, for no good reason that I could see.
and while i don't doubt that your experience has been that it's the well? pro-porn? i don't label myself as such, but i know i can be harsh--who are the ones who are slinging crap wantonly about; i have to say, i've had a rather different experience. i'm not going to go hunting up all the different instances i've experienced and witnessed (mostly witnessed) of antiporn/radical feminists being absolutely appalling to other people, other -women,- for no good reason that i could see (often nothing to do with porn at all), seemingly feeling justified because of the ideology.
i agree that when it comes down to it, the actual survivor is far more important than "nameless men." or the attacker, god knows, or any man wandering by who happens to take offense at the survivor's anger.
but, i also think that actual people, actual women, rape survivors or not (as antip says, we're all survivors of something), come before ideology. and it's that that i've been objecting to with people like delphyne, Bea, stormcloud. the fact that physical assault isn't happening over the Internets doesn't mean they can't be hurtful in their own right, and i think they have been.
For what it's worth, AP, I don't think you were snide, smug, or dismissive at all. I thought your comment was pretty damn measured - much moreso than a lot of what I read from some of the radfems on that thread, that's for sure. You did not use personal attacks, you stayed on point, you acknowledged that other people may interpret the phrase differently and may have pretty good reasons for doing so, while at the same time you made your message loud and clear.
I'm guessing that the use of the word "empowerful" is what would be considered the snarky part, but I have read that comment over and over, and that's the only thing I can find to criticize about it. And even then? Well, so what? e all have slips of the tongue (or fingers, as it were) from time to time... and besides, TF was the one who coined the term "empowerful" and she did so as a way to mock sex positive feminists and basically anyone else who deviates from her narrow, rigid, stultifying brand of feminism.
So... fuck you to anyone who takes issue with THAT.
I'm guessing that the use of the word "empowerful" is what would be considered the snarky part, but I have read that comment over and over, and that's the only thing I can find to criticize about it. And even then? Well, so what? e all have slips of the tongue (or fingers, as it were) from time to time... and besides, TF was the one who coined the term "empowerful" and she did so as a way to mock sex positive feminists and basically anyone else who deviates from her narrow, rigid, stultifying brand of feminism.
So... fuck you to anyone who takes issue with THAT.
It just seems that it usually the ones that are adamantly pro-porn that tend to sling crap around with no regard for the possible fall-out.
Faith,
I'm curious to know where you have seen this? If you don't want to dig around a bunch of old blog threads to find citations, that is fine, I completely understand. It's a lot of work to do that, after all. But I am honestly curious. (And I promise I am not being snarky here. I know sometimes it's hard to convey tone online.) I am curious bc I've read on several occasions, radfems saying that "pro-porn" (a term they apply to certain feminists they disgaree with, not a term I've ever seen anyone self-apply) of "slinging crap" - but I read a LOT of feminist blogs and I have seen that happen, well, VERY rarely.
Also I don' tknow if you idenbtify as radfem so pls. don't take this as me trying to say you are. Just telling you what I've read elsewhere. Thanks.
What z took offense at with me was apparently "childish acting out." I can see why that came off as patronizing to survivors. I was talking about the use of the slogan as a political tool, and had in mind not so much her blog but the description i read of people slapping stickers on bookstores and especially the whole...well, i wasn't there. i thought the whole inflatable penis-popping, throw a drink in the guy's face was...well, it doesn't matter what i think of that, i suppose.
i don't want to get in the way of anyone's anger, if all they're truly doing is venting. and i certainly don't want to deny the seriousness of someone else's pain.
it's just, when all i experience of a particular somebody is them virtually running around and throwing word salad and insults from what looks to me like from the clear blue sky,
or automatically casting aspersions on women who disagree with them about pr0n or anything else, calling them men, trolls, brainwashed, yadda...
...well, that tends to be the first thing i think of, when i think of that particular individual, and whatever campaign they start is at least somewhat colored by that impression that i have of them.
i don't want to get in the way of anyone's anger, if all they're truly doing is venting. and i certainly don't want to deny the seriousness of someone else's pain.
it's just, when all i experience of a particular somebody is them virtually running around and throwing word salad and insults from what looks to me like from the clear blue sky,
or automatically casting aspersions on women who disagree with them about pr0n or anything else, calling them men, trolls, brainwashed, yadda...
...well, that tends to be the first thing i think of, when i think of that particular individual, and whatever campaign they start is at least somewhat colored by that impression that i have of them.
Er, and one last thing, if I may...
I own my words, and I'm responsible for how people react when they read them.
I disagree. I feel that you aren't responsible for how people react to your words. They are responsible for how they react. Sure if you say something hurtful or offensive, you can expect people to react, well, defensively. But ultimately they are the ones who decide what their reaction is.
Hope that makes sense.
If not, maybe I can make more sense once I'm a little drunker here.
I own my words, and I'm responsible for how people react when they read them.
I disagree. I feel that you aren't responsible for how people react to your words. They are responsible for how they react. Sure if you say something hurtful or offensive, you can expect people to react, well, defensively. But ultimately they are the ones who decide what their reaction is.
Hope that makes sense.
If not, maybe I can make more sense once I'm a little drunker here.
Oh oh oh AND...
I'd say many, if not most, of us who comprise (for good or ill) the population of the Feminist Blogosphere have found ourselves rocking back and forth on the bathroom floor, weeping silent tears and wondering how we could have let this happen, what we could have done to prevent it, what the hell we do now, so on and on - some of us more than once.
Beautiful. Just fucking beautiful. And so true.
I'd say many, if not most, of us who comprise (for good or ill) the population of the Feminist Blogosphere have found ourselves rocking back and forth on the bathroom floor, weeping silent tears and wondering how we could have let this happen, what we could have done to prevent it, what the hell we do now, so on and on - some of us more than once.
Beautiful. Just fucking beautiful. And so true.
Amber,
"I'm curious to know where you have seen this? If you don't want to dig around a bunch of old blog threads to find citations, that is fine, I completely understand. It's a lot of work to do that, after all. But I am honestly curious...Also I don' tknow if you idenbtify as radfem so pls. don't take this as me trying to say you are. Just telling you what I've read elsewhere. Thanks."
I'll just say this. The only time I've been truly offended by Rad. Feminists has been over at Twisty's blog. That woman is just a bit over the top and doesn't seem to really be concerned about anything other than stroking her own ego. All the other times I've ever been concerned about what feminists were saying or felt that what I or other women in the thread were trying to say wasn't being heard has always been when women I understand to be "pro-porn" were involved.
As to how I identify, I guess I'm basically radical. I don't believe that all porn in harmful. I don't believe that simply taking a picture of a naked woman or videotaping two or more people having sex is harmful. There is, however, no denying that much of the mainstream porn is becoming frightfully degrading. By degrading I'm referring to depicting all women as being sluts, hoes, and whores and as being nothing other than objects to please men. I have no objection to bondage or flagellation. It's the attitudes that are interwoven into the porn, along with the forced/trafficked victims and extreme violence (whether real or staged) that concern me. Rape porn in particular is just disgusting and I don't see how anyone can support it.
"I'm curious to know where you have seen this? If you don't want to dig around a bunch of old blog threads to find citations, that is fine, I completely understand. It's a lot of work to do that, after all. But I am honestly curious...Also I don' tknow if you idenbtify as radfem so pls. don't take this as me trying to say you are. Just telling you what I've read elsewhere. Thanks."
I'll just say this. The only time I've been truly offended by Rad. Feminists has been over at Twisty's blog. That woman is just a bit over the top and doesn't seem to really be concerned about anything other than stroking her own ego. All the other times I've ever been concerned about what feminists were saying or felt that what I or other women in the thread were trying to say wasn't being heard has always been when women I understand to be "pro-porn" were involved.
As to how I identify, I guess I'm basically radical. I don't believe that all porn in harmful. I don't believe that simply taking a picture of a naked woman or videotaping two or more people having sex is harmful. There is, however, no denying that much of the mainstream porn is becoming frightfully degrading. By degrading I'm referring to depicting all women as being sluts, hoes, and whores and as being nothing other than objects to please men. I have no objection to bondage or flagellation. It's the attitudes that are interwoven into the porn, along with the forced/trafficked victims and extreme violence (whether real or staged) that concern me. Rape porn in particular is just disgusting and I don't see how anyone can support it.
# posted by 
: 12:58 PM
: 12:58 PM
I'm completely in the dark about what you all are talking about, since I haven't seen any citation with regards to the specific dialog in question (though I am on the drunk side about now), and pretty much the only thing I really take issue with is the:
As for the slogan, I don't really give a damn about it one way or another
That's fine, in and of itself. Men rape women on average 8 to 15 times more than vice versa. Rape is, for the horribly overwhelming majority of instances, an inherently male problem, and anyone who doesn't think so is an MRA fuckstain, in my opinion. That said, I find it hard to relate to anyone who thinks that killing men is going to solve anything, and what, specifically, does thatslogan entail, if not preemptive murder of men, regardless of who they are, what they are trying to become, and, most importantly, how they act? Can we not talk about rape as a male problem without saying that men, as a group, deserve to die because of that problem? Or is that way too much to ask?
Regardless, I'm also open to the notion that it is snark. It is, however, extremely ineffective snark.
As for the slogan, I don't really give a damn about it one way or another
That's fine, in and of itself. Men rape women on average 8 to 15 times more than vice versa. Rape is, for the horribly overwhelming majority of instances, an inherently male problem, and anyone who doesn't think so is an MRA fuckstain, in my opinion. That said, I find it hard to relate to anyone who thinks that killing men is going to solve anything, and what, specifically, does thatslogan entail, if not preemptive murder of men, regardless of who they are, what they are trying to become, and, most importantly, how they act? Can we not talk about rape as a male problem without saying that men, as a group, deserve to die because of that problem? Or is that way too much to ask?
Regardless, I'm also open to the notion that it is snark. It is, however, extremely ineffective snark.
Men rape women on average 8 to 15 times more than vice versa.
Very sorry about this, but this is extremely incorrect. It's more in the range of 50-75 times more common. I'm, as I said, on the drunk side, for various reasons.
WV: MIMLW
Awww....Mim. :-(
Very sorry about this, but this is extremely incorrect. It's more in the range of 50-75 times more common. I'm, as I said, on the drunk side, for various reasons.
WV: MIMLW
Awww....Mim. :-(
i know that at least one of the other people whom z cited is 1) not "sex/porn-positive" and 2) a survivor.
My ears are burning.
Hrm.
Faith, if I specifically hurt your feelings, I'm sorry. I can see how what I said might have come across wrong, and I apologize. I really didn't mean to say, "All women that have been raped are crazy and should be collectively ignored concerning all opinions they may utter."
Laura asked a question about a specific slogan, and I gave an opinion about a specific slogan.
I'd say, oh, "I'm so hurt you think I'm sucking rapist dick hoping for a patriarchal pat on the head," but that wouldn't be constructive.
As for the slogan, I don't really give a damn about it one way or another.
Well, ya know, it's might really inhibit hearing what people are saying to decide that you don't care about the slogan when that was the topic at hand.
When it comes down to deciding between defending nameless men and abuse survivors, I'm going to be standing right in front of the survivor helping them shout at the men.
I'm totally willing to help them shout at actual abusers. Or, plaster his face in his neighborhood (which I've done.) Or, call up his significant other and tell her what a rapist piece of shit she's dating (which I've done.) Etc.
Righteous anger at an attacker is something that I'm totally on-board with.
But, that's not what we were talking about in that thread.
We were talking about someone that admits in her own blog that she blames all men for all violence against all women.
If that's what makes her feel better about things... then good on her. But, I personally cannot go there with her. As I said at Laura's, "So, while I would say, hey, she's gotta do what she's gotta do to feel better, I wouldn't say that a link from ME needs to be part of that process."
And, yeah, I personally cannot go there because I think it's symptomatic of a psychiatric disorder... I specifically mentioned post-traumatic stress. Maybe I was concern-trolling, but, just so that we're all aware, I've got my own head mess to deal with and I'm doing the very best I can with it. I don't mean to be smug or dismissive. When I said, "I mean... anyone that has that much of their I identity tied up in sexual assault?" I'm coming from a place where I did that for a while. I thought I was put on this earth to be sexually abused after my ex-boyfriend raped me one morning, because I'd been sexually abused as a child, too. That's what I was in my own head for a while--the girl that gets sexually assaulted. But... that was fucked up. That was me being traumatized and crazy. And, I DID act out in a lot of traumatized crazy ways during that period. Did I have every right to? SURE! But that doesn't mean that it was healthy or that it even did me any good in the long run. It did me harm. And, I have the scars to prove it.
"Angry" feminism is no substitute for actually working through your own post-assault head mess.
And, I'm not going to apologize for thinking that.
I dunno if I dug the whole deeper and look like a bigger asshole. Hopefully not.
My ears are burning.
Hrm.
Faith, if I specifically hurt your feelings, I'm sorry. I can see how what I said might have come across wrong, and I apologize. I really didn't mean to say, "All women that have been raped are crazy and should be collectively ignored concerning all opinions they may utter."
Laura asked a question about a specific slogan, and I gave an opinion about a specific slogan.
I'd say, oh, "I'm so hurt you think I'm sucking rapist dick hoping for a patriarchal pat on the head," but that wouldn't be constructive.
As for the slogan, I don't really give a damn about it one way or another.
Well, ya know, it's might really inhibit hearing what people are saying to decide that you don't care about the slogan when that was the topic at hand.
When it comes down to deciding between defending nameless men and abuse survivors, I'm going to be standing right in front of the survivor helping them shout at the men.
I'm totally willing to help them shout at actual abusers. Or, plaster his face in his neighborhood (which I've done.) Or, call up his significant other and tell her what a rapist piece of shit she's dating (which I've done.) Etc.
Righteous anger at an attacker is something that I'm totally on-board with.
But, that's not what we were talking about in that thread.
We were talking about someone that admits in her own blog that she blames all men for all violence against all women.
If that's what makes her feel better about things... then good on her. But, I personally cannot go there with her. As I said at Laura's, "So, while I would say, hey, she's gotta do what she's gotta do to feel better, I wouldn't say that a link from ME needs to be part of that process."
And, yeah, I personally cannot go there because I think it's symptomatic of a psychiatric disorder... I specifically mentioned post-traumatic stress. Maybe I was concern-trolling, but, just so that we're all aware, I've got my own head mess to deal with and I'm doing the very best I can with it. I don't mean to be smug or dismissive. When I said, "I mean... anyone that has that much of their I identity tied up in sexual assault?" I'm coming from a place where I did that for a while. I thought I was put on this earth to be sexually abused after my ex-boyfriend raped me one morning, because I'd been sexually abused as a child, too. That's what I was in my own head for a while--the girl that gets sexually assaulted. But... that was fucked up. That was me being traumatized and crazy. And, I DID act out in a lot of traumatized crazy ways during that period. Did I have every right to? SURE! But that doesn't mean that it was healthy or that it even did me any good in the long run. It did me harm. And, I have the scars to prove it.
"Angry" feminism is no substitute for actually working through your own post-assault head mess.
And, I'm not going to apologize for thinking that.
I dunno if I dug the whole deeper and look like a bigger asshole. Hopefully not.
Faith - I get what you're saying.
but look - the whole porn thing is complicated, to me. of course I'm not FOR things that are damaging to their participants.
BUT - problems arise when you try to figure out the definition of "damaging".
what's damaging for me, you may not even notice - what crushes my soul out of existence, you may consider so trivial as to not even mention. Then again, what my sister finds damaging, I might find arousing. and on and on and on.
wrt pornography, a lot of folks make the argument that if it looks nonconsensual, it probably is nonconsensual, and even if it really is consensual, there's no way to be 100% sure, so best to avoid.
Which, if your mind works that way, well, I can't argue with that.
I posted once or twice about some random pictures of me floating around the blogosphere - if I recall correctly, I look tortured and agonized and traumatized and humiliated. But it was cool. I was more concerned with my very itchy corset and wondering what we'd have for lunch, than with how "cruelly and violently" I was being treated. At the time, I did not feel demeaned, disrespected, degraded - I felt itchy and hungry.
now, I know good and well that there are many many women who are in grave danger, even as I type these words, and that the picture I painted in the above paragraph does not accurately reflect their reality. I get that.
but it does accurately reflect MY reality, and the realities of others of my acquaintance. which sometimes gets smothered under a blanket condemnation of all things "pornified."
So I talk about my reality, and people call me "pro-porn," like I serve dinner to Larry Flynt every night on my knees.
but you're entitled to whatever opinion you come to - and for what it's worth, I do appreciate your contribution here.
but look - the whole porn thing is complicated, to me. of course I'm not FOR things that are damaging to their participants.
BUT - problems arise when you try to figure out the definition of "damaging".
what's damaging for me, you may not even notice - what crushes my soul out of existence, you may consider so trivial as to not even mention. Then again, what my sister finds damaging, I might find arousing. and on and on and on.
wrt pornography, a lot of folks make the argument that if it looks nonconsensual, it probably is nonconsensual, and even if it really is consensual, there's no way to be 100% sure, so best to avoid.
Which, if your mind works that way, well, I can't argue with that.
I posted once or twice about some random pictures of me floating around the blogosphere - if I recall correctly, I look tortured and agonized and traumatized and humiliated. But it was cool. I was more concerned with my very itchy corset and wondering what we'd have for lunch, than with how "cruelly and violently" I was being treated. At the time, I did not feel demeaned, disrespected, degraded - I felt itchy and hungry.
now, I know good and well that there are many many women who are in grave danger, even as I type these words, and that the picture I painted in the above paragraph does not accurately reflect their reality. I get that.
but it does accurately reflect MY reality, and the realities of others of my acquaintance. which sometimes gets smothered under a blanket condemnation of all things "pornified."
So I talk about my reality, and people call me "pro-porn," like I serve dinner to Larry Flynt every night on my knees.
but you're entitled to whatever opinion you come to - and for what it's worth, I do appreciate your contribution here.
Regardless, I'm also open to the notion that it is snark. It is, however, extremely ineffective snark.
exactly my point. it's also lame as agitprop, and as a way of striking fear into mens'/rapists' hearts, well, again: (i can't believe i'm being this cynical, but) if you don't back it up, it's kind of useless as a threat, innit?
PLEASE NOTE I AM NOT SUGGESTING THAT ANYONE -SHOULD- ACTUALLY GO UP ON THE BELLTOWER OR HAUL OUT THE MACHETE. THANK YOU.
and so, since it fails on all those levels, and it isn't about dialogue, what is it?
...venting. which i think a lot of people have pretty much said that that is what it is, and who are we to get in the way.
And my answer, just to be clear, is: as far as on her own website goes, per her owning it, i wouldn't dream of getting in the way. vent away.
the stuff wherein she's been 1) virtually running around spamming other people and 2) i -guess- something or other with the stickers, and some sort of righteous revelry on Take Back the Night! as i was reading about it...
...well, y'know, i still don't think it -much- affects me, except insofar as, as people were saying, people, -women- who might otherwise be attracted to the very real and important goals of feminism can see this and think, (as i see not infrequently),
"Well, if this is feminism, count me out."
and you know, as long as people have other venues and other ways of y'know helping to prevent rape and care for survivors, or helping to safeguard reproductive rights, or dealing with welfare, or family law, or the wage gap, or daycare, or somehow otherwise working with/for women or at least voting for the people who will...well, what's in a name, really.
but i wonder, sometimes. maybe some good activists get burnt out from this crap. and while i think venting is important, -politically- speaking, it's not effective. in that sort of form, it's an expression of impotence. i'm not interested in that, and it dismays me when i think that the movement(s) are going to dissolve into that. empty imprecations and waving fists fruitlessly.
that is of course in addition to my personal exasperation with the way people i like and respect get treated by some of the more self-righteous shall we say hardcore people.
exactly my point. it's also lame as agitprop, and as a way of striking fear into mens'/rapists' hearts, well, again: (i can't believe i'm being this cynical, but) if you don't back it up, it's kind of useless as a threat, innit?
PLEASE NOTE I AM NOT SUGGESTING THAT ANYONE -SHOULD- ACTUALLY GO UP ON THE BELLTOWER OR HAUL OUT THE MACHETE. THANK YOU.
and so, since it fails on all those levels, and it isn't about dialogue, what is it?
...venting. which i think a lot of people have pretty much said that that is what it is, and who are we to get in the way.
And my answer, just to be clear, is: as far as on her own website goes, per her owning it, i wouldn't dream of getting in the way. vent away.
the stuff wherein she's been 1) virtually running around spamming other people and 2) i -guess- something or other with the stickers, and some sort of righteous revelry on Take Back the Night! as i was reading about it...
...well, y'know, i still don't think it -much- affects me, except insofar as, as people were saying, people, -women- who might otherwise be attracted to the very real and important goals of feminism can see this and think, (as i see not infrequently),
"Well, if this is feminism, count me out."
and you know, as long as people have other venues and other ways of y'know helping to prevent rape and care for survivors, or helping to safeguard reproductive rights, or dealing with welfare, or family law, or the wage gap, or daycare, or somehow otherwise working with/for women or at least voting for the people who will...well, what's in a name, really.
but i wonder, sometimes. maybe some good activists get burnt out from this crap. and while i think venting is important, -politically- speaking, it's not effective. in that sort of form, it's an expression of impotence. i'm not interested in that, and it dismays me when i think that the movement(s) are going to dissolve into that. empty imprecations and waving fists fruitlessly.
that is of course in addition to my personal exasperation with the way people i like and respect get treated by some of the more self-righteous shall we say hardcore people.
First time poster here. Hi, Antiprincess! I've seen you over at belledame's and other places.
so, I'm-a just fall on this handy sword over here, and apologize for being snide, smug, dismissive and slightly mocking, because that had some farther-reaching implications that I'm not so proud of, I gotta say.
You spoke, some people responded and were hurt in ways you did not intend. Since Burqagate and the FDL fiasco, it's been a joy to see how sensible people react when their words spawn an unwanted reaction although your intent was quite different. You did good and I was glad to read it.
My response to the DMDR phrase (not the blog, I haven't read the blog) is sorta ho hum. I often use the phrase, "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers." from Shakespeare's Henry VI. But that's because my partner works in an affordable housing agency and deals with fucked-up lawyers trying to shove poor people onto the street for their evil landlord masters. Grrrrr......
I've also been known to say, "I hate white people." when I see some asshat waving their privilege all around (although I'm white as well). Since I got injured in a hit-and-run accident by a bicyclist, I often fantasize running down bicycle messengers when I drive. Well, too much about me, eh?
Just want to send props for this post and for showing how it can be done without losing credit or throwing your political beliefs overboard.
Is DMDR a good political slogan? It can be one of those in-group slogans that help us recognize each other and bond. My latest favorite, of that ilk: "After the rapture, can I have your car?"
Or by slapping stickers up in scary areas, it might give other women who have to be there (for whatever reason) some comfort.
So it's good for us insiders and it probably doesn't scare potential allies too much.
As for it's effect on rapists? Not bloody likely. But did anyone really think it would?
so, I'm-a just fall on this handy sword over here, and apologize for being snide, smug, dismissive and slightly mocking, because that had some farther-reaching implications that I'm not so proud of, I gotta say.
You spoke, some people responded and were hurt in ways you did not intend. Since Burqagate and the FDL fiasco, it's been a joy to see how sensible people react when their words spawn an unwanted reaction although your intent was quite different. You did good and I was glad to read it.
My response to the DMDR phrase (not the blog, I haven't read the blog) is sorta ho hum. I often use the phrase, "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers." from Shakespeare's Henry VI. But that's because my partner works in an affordable housing agency and deals with fucked-up lawyers trying to shove poor people onto the street for their evil landlord masters. Grrrrr......
I've also been known to say, "I hate white people." when I see some asshat waving their privilege all around (although I'm white as well). Since I got injured in a hit-and-run accident by a bicyclist, I often fantasize running down bicycle messengers when I drive. Well, too much about me, eh?
Just want to send props for this post and for showing how it can be done without losing credit or throwing your political beliefs overboard.
Is DMDR a good political slogan? It can be one of those in-group slogans that help us recognize each other and bond. My latest favorite, of that ilk: "After the rapture, can I have your car?"
Or by slapping stickers up in scary areas, it might give other women who have to be there (for whatever reason) some comfort.
So it's good for us insiders and it probably doesn't scare potential allies too much.
As for it's effect on rapists? Not bloody likely. But did anyone really think it would?
welcome, ravenm!
yeah, I...er...live to serve.
It's not like I was trying to do the right thing in order to gain approval. and it's complex - I feel at least somewhat responsible for triggering some sensitive folks, yeah, BUT I also feel indignant and hurt for this reason:
when I (or other "pro-pornies")say "hey, don't put politics before people", we get heaps and heaps of shit for caring about "tender fee-fees", making it "all about us", stubbornly refusing to see the big picture, etc.
and we're women. and we're survivors.
and I feel like saying this makes it seem like I'm not sorry. which I am.
but there it is. both at once.
Veronica - that was a very heavy comment. it took some major guts to share that.
Mr. Goff, you clearly need more to drink. come back when you're drunker. ;)
yeah, I...er...live to serve.
It's not like I was trying to do the right thing in order to gain approval. and it's complex - I feel at least somewhat responsible for triggering some sensitive folks, yeah, BUT I also feel indignant and hurt for this reason:
when I (or other "pro-pornies")say "hey, don't put politics before people", we get heaps and heaps of shit for caring about "tender fee-fees", making it "all about us", stubbornly refusing to see the big picture, etc.
and we're women. and we're survivors.
and I feel like saying this makes it seem like I'm not sorry. which I am.
but there it is. both at once.
Veronica - that was a very heavy comment. it took some major guts to share that.
Mr. Goff, you clearly need more to drink. come back when you're drunker. ;)
As a survivor of, oh hell, a whole lot of shit, I don't whatsoever blame you for the "smug, dismissive and slightly mocking" tones WRT to this "Dead Men Don't Rape" bit.
Lines from a poem I wrote, some years ago now:
When you sprayed Dead Men Don't Rape
across the facade of the furniture store downtown, I thought
dead women don't either...
The poem was about my oh-so-politically correct (female) partner who was a serial batterer and rapist, who got away with (and, more than a decade later, would still be getting away with) this behavior by presenting herself as a radical, man-hating feminist. When she was anything but. (Rather, she was a man-emulating, self-hating woman with both internalized and externalized sexism and lesbophobia.)
This is why this 'dead men don't rape' stuff gets under my skin so much. Not that any woman who goes about saying such stuff is a closet batterer aiming to deflect attention from her own oppressive behavior (I have to assume my situation was at least somewhat unique), but because it's just such a dangerous 'slippery slope', to be talking about dead anyone.
Just my two cents...
Lines from a poem I wrote, some years ago now:
When you sprayed Dead Men Don't Rape
across the facade of the furniture store downtown, I thought
dead women don't either...
The poem was about my oh-so-politically correct (female) partner who was a serial batterer and rapist, who got away with (and, more than a decade later, would still be getting away with) this behavior by presenting herself as a radical, man-hating feminist. When she was anything but. (Rather, she was a man-emulating, self-hating woman with both internalized and externalized sexism and lesbophobia.)
This is why this 'dead men don't rape' stuff gets under my skin so much. Not that any woman who goes about saying such stuff is a closet batterer aiming to deflect attention from her own oppressive behavior (I have to assume my situation was at least somewhat unique), but because it's just such a dangerous 'slippery slope', to be talking about dead anyone.
Just my two cents...
# posted by : 6:42 PM
: 6:42 PM
yup. and damn, thank you, Victoria, for sharing that. and for pointing out the often tacit corollary to the whole, all men are potential rapists, you can't trust any of 'em, to wit:
-women- are safe, though.
that does not help. not that obviously we should go, okay! can't trust ANYONE then! but, really we ought to be learning better discernment and self-protection and yadda tools than simply divvying it up by naughty bits, and calling it political solidarity.
yeah, the heteronormativity of that 'sphere has bugged me for a long time; this is one of the more important reasons why.
-women- are safe, though.
that does not help. not that obviously we should go, okay! can't trust ANYONE then! but, really we ought to be learning better discernment and self-protection and yadda tools than simply divvying it up by naughty bits, and calling it political solidarity.
yeah, the heteronormativity of that 'sphere has bugged me for a long time; this is one of the more important reasons why.
Quoth belledame: not that obviously we should go, okay! can't trust ANYONE then!
Actually, I tend to think exactly like this. Which is a problem, obviously. When I do reach out, though, in provisional ways to people (regardless of gender or other identity category) whom I might or might not be able to trust, I'm as contradictory as possible about it; never siding wholly with one camp or another, etc., and thus earning the quiet suspicion of folks in all camps.
My identity has been shattered so many times over that, for me, to look in any metaphorical mirror is to attempt some crazy feat of gathering up mirror-shards from a thousand far-flung places. I'll never find them all, much less get them assembled in some coherent order. But there are, I sometimes think, fractals of light bouncing off all those shards - stuck as they are in all kinds of oppositional places - which sometimes prove to have more encompassing illuminating qualities, and (as a writer, anyhow) I end up benefiting from that. Even if I never wholly belong with any 'camp' or, for that matter, gender, and even if in my daily life I'm profoundly isolated, and speak my mind to almost no one.
Actually, I tend to think exactly like this. Which is a problem, obviously. When I do reach out, though, in provisional ways to people (regardless of gender or other identity category) whom I might or might not be able to trust, I'm as contradictory as possible about it; never siding wholly with one camp or another, etc., and thus earning the quiet suspicion of folks in all camps.
My identity has been shattered so many times over that, for me, to look in any metaphorical mirror is to attempt some crazy feat of gathering up mirror-shards from a thousand far-flung places. I'll never find them all, much less get them assembled in some coherent order. But there are, I sometimes think, fractals of light bouncing off all those shards - stuck as they are in all kinds of oppositional places - which sometimes prove to have more encompassing illuminating qualities, and (as a writer, anyhow) I end up benefiting from that. Even if I never wholly belong with any 'camp' or, for that matter, gender, and even if in my daily life I'm profoundly isolated, and speak my mind to almost no one.
# posted by : 12:31 AM
: 12:31 AM
Anti,
I am actually experienced as a submissive and pretty well versed in BDSM. Even though I support the right of consenting/informed adults to participant in whatever they want in their own bedrooms, I'm still concerned with the direction porn is going in these days. Even as an extraordinarily open-minded individual when it comes to sex, there is virtually no porn on the internet I can look at without getting upset and/or worrying about the possible implications and feelings of those who are participating and viewing. Also, as I already stated, I'm very concerned about the forced/trafficked victims which number in the thousands. For all we know, maybe even millions.
As for everything else, I just made another post on my blog offering an apology and further explanation of my feelings.
I am actually experienced as a submissive and pretty well versed in BDSM. Even though I support the right of consenting/informed adults to participant in whatever they want in their own bedrooms, I'm still concerned with the direction porn is going in these days. Even as an extraordinarily open-minded individual when it comes to sex, there is virtually no porn on the internet I can look at without getting upset and/or worrying about the possible implications and feelings of those who are participating and viewing. Also, as I already stated, I'm very concerned about the forced/trafficked victims which number in the thousands. For all we know, maybe even millions.
As for everything else, I just made another post on my blog offering an apology and further explanation of my feelings.
# posted by : 6:20 AM
: 6:20 AM
I'm still concerned with the direction porn is going in these days.
I can't argue that.
and yeah, trafficking nibbles on the edges of my already guilty conscience.
and yet, I feel like a return to the Comstock Law is no good for women either.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Comstock
and would a nationwide (or worldwide) ban on porn halt trafficking?
look, this keeps me up nights the same as the rest of y'all.
I'm not insulted or angered at the anti-porn position. (I'm afraid of it, to be sure.)
I'm insulted and angered at the idea held by some folks that the non-anti-porn position is stupid, un-thoughtful, worthless, unexamined, etc.
I can't argue that.
and yeah, trafficking nibbles on the edges of my already guilty conscience.
and yet, I feel like a return to the Comstock Law is no good for women either.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Comstock
and would a nationwide (or worldwide) ban on porn halt trafficking?
look, this keeps me up nights the same as the rest of y'all.
I'm not insulted or angered at the anti-porn position. (I'm afraid of it, to be sure.)
I'm insulted and angered at the idea held by some folks that the non-anti-porn position is stupid, un-thoughtful, worthless, unexamined, etc.
yeah, what antip said.
i have never had a problem with anything like, being concerned with the direction porn is going in, concerned about trafficking. hell, i agree with it. certainly the trafficking; and well, i don't know if the 'net porn thing represents more acceptable actual violence or not, but you certainly won't hear any argument from me that mainstream porn on the whole is not exactly what you'd call great for women.
it's just annoying (in general, this has happened fairly frequently) to be shoved into the position of "pro-porn" because i don't automatically go, oh yes! porn! all porn! bad icky! down with it! or even oh noes "use" it (indie, lesbian made, but i realize that for some people that's just equivocating; porn is porn) from time to time. or, you know, even if i do think the particular porn under discussion is dicey or disturbing, to say something other than an immediate and sound castigation of not only the makers but anyone who would even think such a thing, and...
mostly, just, you know, porn was never exactly high on my list of priorities either way, until i hit the feminist blogosphere and the Doc kept showing us all the dirty pictures.
i have never had a problem with anything like, being concerned with the direction porn is going in, concerned about trafficking. hell, i agree with it. certainly the trafficking; and well, i don't know if the 'net porn thing represents more acceptable actual violence or not, but you certainly won't hear any argument from me that mainstream porn on the whole is not exactly what you'd call great for women.
it's just annoying (in general, this has happened fairly frequently) to be shoved into the position of "pro-porn" because i don't automatically go, oh yes! porn! all porn! bad icky! down with it! or even oh noes "use" it (indie, lesbian made, but i realize that for some people that's just equivocating; porn is porn) from time to time. or, you know, even if i do think the particular porn under discussion is dicey or disturbing, to say something other than an immediate and sound castigation of not only the makers but anyone who would even think such a thing, and...
mostly, just, you know, porn was never exactly high on my list of priorities either way, until i hit the feminist blogosphere and the Doc kept showing us all the dirty pictures.
Even as an extraordinarily open-minded individual when it comes to sex, there is virtually no porn on the internet I can look at without getting upset and/or worrying about the possible implications and feelings of those who are participating and viewing. Also, as I already stated, I'm very concerned about the forced/trafficked victims which number in the thousands.
I hear that loud and clear, Faith. And you know, one thing that REALLY upsets me when certain radical feminists dismissively refer to those who disagree w/ them as "pro-pornies" is that many of us AGREE WITH THEM on this point! I can't speak for anyone else here, but I can speak for myself in saying that yep, most mainstream porn is shite as far as I'm concerned, and with some of it I cannot stop my brain from wondering about the people involved.
The main difference between those of us who are cast as "pro-pornies" and the radfems who cast us as such is, I think, that we - well, at least, I - see this type of porn as a SYMPTOM of a larger, deeper problem, rather than the problem itself. I see absolutely nothing wrong with porn in and of itself - that is, photos or videos of consenting adults having sex. I see nothing wrong with material that is designed with the express purpose of sexual arousal.
So, again: fucked-up porn is a symptom, not the problem. And it's disingenuous to speak of porn as if it's a monolith. There is no "all porn."
I hear that loud and clear, Faith. And you know, one thing that REALLY upsets me when certain radical feminists dismissively refer to those who disagree w/ them as "pro-pornies" is that many of us AGREE WITH THEM on this point! I can't speak for anyone else here, but I can speak for myself in saying that yep, most mainstream porn is shite as far as I'm concerned, and with some of it I cannot stop my brain from wondering about the people involved.
The main difference between those of us who are cast as "pro-pornies" and the radfems who cast us as such is, I think, that we - well, at least, I - see this type of porn as a SYMPTOM of a larger, deeper problem, rather than the problem itself. I see absolutely nothing wrong with porn in and of itself - that is, photos or videos of consenting adults having sex. I see nothing wrong with material that is designed with the express purpose of sexual arousal.
So, again: fucked-up porn is a symptom, not the problem. And it's disingenuous to speak of porn as if it's a monolith. There is no "all porn."
Er, ok, Belledame just said basically what I said. sorry for the repetition!
And, funny about Anthony Comstock, innit? 'Cause these days, filmmaker Tony Comstock makes some of my favorite porn.
And, funny about Anthony Comstock, innit? 'Cause these days, filmmaker Tony Comstock makes some of my favorite porn.
"So, again: fucked-up porn is a symptom, not the problem. And it's disingenuous to speak of porn as if it's a monolith. There is no "all porn.""
There ya go. I was going to make a post on my blog saying exactly the same thing. I agree completely. The problem is, how do we cure the disease? And if we all acknowledge that the mojority of porn being produced is a symptom, doesn't that mean we should clean it up? Basically wipe the slate clean and start all over again with educated women leading the way?
There ya go. I was going to make a post on my blog saying exactly the same thing. I agree completely. The problem is, how do we cure the disease? And if we all acknowledge that the mojority of porn being produced is a symptom, doesn't that mean we should clean it up? Basically wipe the slate clean and start all over again with educated women leading the way?
# posted by : 8:00 PM
: 8:00 PM
""So, again: fucked-up porn is a symptom, not the problem. And it's disingenuous to speak of porn as if it's a monolith. There is no "all porn.""
There ya go. I was going to make a post on my blog saying exactly the same thing. I agree completely. The problem is, how do we cure the disease? And if we all acknowledge that the mojority of porn being produced is a symptom, doesn't that mean we should clean it up? Basically wipe the slate clean and start all over again with educated women leading the way?"
Ok, so I'm drunk. That was supposed to be me, Faith.
There ya go. I was going to make a post on my blog saying exactly the same thing. I agree completely. The problem is, how do we cure the disease? And if we all acknowledge that the mojority of porn being produced is a symptom, doesn't that mean we should clean it up? Basically wipe the slate clean and start all over again with educated women leading the way?"
Ok, so I'm drunk. That was supposed to be me, Faith.
# posted by : 8:02 PM
: 8:02 PM
And if we all acknowledge that the mojority of porn being produced is a symptom, doesn't that mean we should clean it up? Basically wipe the slate clean and start all over again with educated women leading the way?
Maybe I misunderstood what you're saying, Faith, but... no.
Prohibition didn't end alcoholism, did it?
And so on.
Trying to get rid of a symptom does nothing for the underlying cause... and I hear you saying loud and clear that you agree with that, so... I'm a little confused as to what you mean by "clean it up" and "wipe the slate clean."
I also know you're drunk, so I don't want to be too nit-picky right now. Christ knows I didn't make a whole hell of alot of sense last night when I was three sheets to the wind!
Maybe I misunderstood what you're saying, Faith, but... no.
Prohibition didn't end alcoholism, did it?
And so on.
Trying to get rid of a symptom does nothing for the underlying cause... and I hear you saying loud and clear that you agree with that, so... I'm a little confused as to what you mean by "clean it up" and "wipe the slate clean."
I also know you're drunk, so I don't want to be too nit-picky right now. Christ knows I didn't make a whole hell of alot of sense last night when I was three sheets to the wind!
I don't believe in clean slates, as a rule. i believe in thesis-antithesis-synthesis, more, i think. i am always leery of the "raze it to the ground" impulse, no matter what we're razing, with very few exceptions. i don't think something as diffuse and rooted in y'know "art" as pornography/erotica needs to be "razed," especially. also it tends to be My People who get razed first, in such purges, so i'm doubly leery.
also it tends to be My People who get razed first, in such purges, so i'm doubly leery.
which - why is that so quickly forgotten?
which - why is that so quickly forgotten?
I go away for the holiday and this is what I miss...
I think actually a whole lot of issue was taken with me over there. Surprise, surprise. I don't like the title. Did I ever question her right to use it, or her right to be angry? Nope. Yet still because well, I happen to be who I am and do what I do I get to be the easy target. And called out in other blogs because of it. Joy.
Eh, more about this later, and guess what, it won't be nice...
Post a Comment
I think actually a whole lot of issue was taken with me over there. Surprise, surprise. I don't like the title. Did I ever question her right to use it, or her right to be angry? Nope. Yet still because well, I happen to be who I am and do what I do I get to be the easy target. And called out in other blogs because of it. Joy.
Eh, more about this later, and guess what, it won't be nice...
<< Home
