Tag Archives: radfems go wild again

Nine Deuce = Four Six * 2 + BS Raised To Infinity

Posted on by
1

Oh, and I thought that she was just doing a Good Cop/Bad Cop scene.

But it seems that Nine Deuce has now totally drank the Kool-Aid, and has dived all in. And she offers this “News Flash” to all us idiots who still can’t understand why she’s so down on those who don’t quite agree with her and her GenderBorgian friends.

Allow me to break down each of her talking points one by one.

The existence of gay porn does not disprove the argument that non-gay porn is degrading to women. There might be a different dynamic going on in a lot of gay porn (I remain unconvinced), but that doesn’t really mean anything other than that maybe gay porn needs to be analyzed by itself rather than under an umbrella with hetero porn. What we’re talking about when we talk about het pornography is the comingling of power with sex, which is THE CENTRAL FEATURE OF PATRIARCHY.

Well…if the existence of gay porn shows that men who are into gay porn don’t quite care about “degrading” women (or, simply like to see men fucking and sucking other men), well, it probably doesn’t prove anything. Unless, you happen to believe, as some of your own allies and bomb throwers just so happen to believe (*cough*Luckynkl *cough, cough* Satsuma *cough*) that male sexual obsession for gay sex only replaces the recipient of gay sex for the woman in the “submissive” (and thusly, “degraded” and “abused”) role. Otherwise, you’re right, it proves not a Goddess damn thing about how straight male desire for porn inherently “degrades” women. That, I guess, is a given that needs no proof whatsoever…at least not to pure “feminist” masters such as you.

Choice does not equal progressiveness. You can choose to do heroin if you want to, and it might feel fucking awesome, but that doesn’t make you a freedom fighter. You can be a feminist and be into BDSM, but you can’t claim that BDSM is feminist. Just because something feels good does not mean it’s feminist.

No, some choices are not necessarily harmless to one’s self or others. Injecting a syringe full of heroin into your body certainly can do much harm to one’s person. Engaging in consensual sex with someone whom you want to be with, and who wants to be with you sharing the pleasures, however, isn’t quite so harmful as injecting heroin, now isn’t it?? Not, at least, unless it fundamentally upsets certain fee-fees of certain lunatic “radicalfeminists.”

And no, ND, you just don’t get to dictate to other women what acts become “feminist” and what acts aren’t. Feminists can be into BDSM, and even feminist who would never do BDSM sex themselves can respect the rights of those women — whether they call themselves feminists or not — who are. Unless you are endowed by the Goddess upstairs or the Rulers Above (hey, wouldn’t the latter be, like..a PATRIARCHY?!?!?!) with special powers to dictate their personal likes, then I don’t think you have the authority to read their minds and rule their brains.

F/m BDSM (generally) does not fetishize and sexualize the oppression of people who are still oppressed. Therefore, its existence does not prove that there’s nothing problematic about the mingling of sex with oppression in M/f BDSM, burlesque or not. Again, it’s a matter of the need for separate analysis.

Oh, hold the fuck up here….so female dominant/male submissive sex is perfectly OK with you even if it goes horribly awry because it doesn’t involve mixing sex with “oppression”??? In other words, it’s perfectly OK to harm men BECAUSE men innately harm women by merely THINKING about dominating them through sex?? I thought that radicalfeminism was opposed to ALL forms of domination and submission equally across the board?? Ahhh..OOPS.

Questioning a practice does not equal abuse or oppression. And you can’t spend 15 paragraphs explaining that BDSM, as a “choice,” fits the (warped) definition of feminism and then compare the consequences of your choice to the oppression that lesbians and gay men face. Unless you are ready to say that female submission is innate or that being gay is a choice.

I guess that means, then, that religious conservatives really do have a right to question BDSM sex as a “choice” on their terms?? Because , ND, if you are saying that being a gay person really isn’t a choice, but being into BDSM sex IS one that can be “undone”, when what’s to say that that Christian Rightist might not use your argument to support the opposite view (i.e., that BDSM sex is merely a perverse “lifestyle” that defies God’s plan for sex, just as homosexuality or non-procreative sex does?? And why should we not compare you to the fundies when you use terms like “consequences of your ‘choices’”??

In order for me to oppress you, I have to be in charge of something that directly affects your life. I’m not.

Ahhhh, WRONG…..all you have to do in order to oppress someone is to deny that person his right to full humanity and dismiss his/her right to free will. You and your GenderBorg sisters do that almost every other post.

If I were truly denying anyone’s agency, I’d refuse to question their assumptions and behavior. I assume we are all responsible for the choices that we make, even though social forces tend to influence those choices. I know that there are people who are aware that M/f BDSM and/or porn are tinged (or saturated) with patriarchal oppression and choose to participate in them anyway, either because there is some benefit in doing so or because they think they can do them “the right way.” I doubt that’s possible, so I’m asking people who think it is to explain how that might be. Would it be better for me to treat other adult human beings like babies who can’t bear to be asked defend their beliefs?

Well…it would help if you actually respected those who attempt to defend themselves from your bromides, rather than simply use their answers as fuel for your cannons to shoot them down even more.

I can have a theoretical problem with something and speak my mind about it without specifically addressing an individual. If you don’t fit the definition of the kind of person I’m discussing, don’t take it personally. Everyone has the right to judge everyone, but we don’t have the right to enforce our judgements. Therein lies the difference between free speech and oppression.

Oh, why should we even take it seriously?? Especially when you deliberately temper your responses with ad hominem attacks on people’s looks or personal tastes, or basically call people you disagree with as rapists and child molesters even when they have done nothing wrong?? Even when you attempt to wave the exclusive “feminist” flag to rip down anyone who happens to disagree with your analysis of their personal practices?? When you even go as far as to deny and dismiss their own freakin’ testimonials about their lack of personal harm?? Gee, now that’s a really good question there, ND….why should we take you seriously??

Your bigotry and ignorance, on the other hand, should be taken very seriously, simply because it is being spewed in the name of a movement that is supposed to stand for something progressive rather than reactionary.

This is “Logic 101″, ND?? More like Bullcrap One.

——————————————————————————————————-

The comments section is dominated by the usual voices with the usual boilerplate…until right to the end, where ND exposes her true paternalistic self. First, the comment before hers as a background:

[Comment by thorne on 2/26/09 @ 6:00 PM]

“Gayle – No shit, right? It’s incredible to hear the language of the oppressed co-opted by people who fetishize oppression.”

Did your read the part where we explained that we can be jailed or lose our kids? have you heard of the spanner case? Does it amuse you to play “this group is more oppressed than that group”? Our community has real life problems hate speach being the least of them.

We do not fetishize oppresion. What we do is power exchange. Power exchange does not magically turn evil whe it is MF instead of FM or FF or whatever.

I get that you want to make the point that the kink community is just and excuse for a bunch of male sadists to justify their abuse of woman. I get that the hundreds of comments by men and woman and the ocean of websites that explain otherwise will make no impression here.

I am also not taken in by the wide eyed, “all we are doing is questioning bdsm. If you lifestyle is ok why does it bother you when I we question it?”

It depends what the questionis doesn’t it?

Is it just innocent inquiry when someone wants to know if gay men are more likely to abuse children, and then asks the question over and over?

Oh, but get a load of ND’s reply to that one:

[Posted by Nine Deuce on 2/26/09 @ 6:27 PM]

Stop comparing your situation to the plight of homosexuals. And stop comparing my arguments to those of asshole homophobes. There is something to the idea that M/f BDSM fetishizes women’s oppression, and you aren’t going to take attention from that by setting up a false and easily discredited analogy.

Why are people getting fired for being into BDSM? Ah Talking about sex at work isn’t cool, whether you’re straight, gay, into BDSM, or celibate. It’s just not appropriate. And to be honest, if I were a parent, I’d be concerned if my child’s other parent were into BDSM because I wouldn’t want my child exposed to it. It’s absolutely ridiculous to think you ought to have the right to normalize that kind of behavior in front of children who haven’t got the critical thinking abilities to understand what’s going on.

We all know that the vast majority of child molesters are straight men, which has been shown in study after study. I’m asking the questions about BDSM because what I’ve seen on a lot of websites amounts to serious emotional and physical abuse, and because I have, whatever you guys want to claim to the contrary, read women’s writings about being upset and frightened by the treatment they receive. The fact that I’m not yet convinced that what you’re into is cool and meshes with feminism doesn’t make me dishonest, it just means that I’ve yet to be convinced that black is white and up is down.

Yup….people into BDSM who happen to get fired from their workplaces deserve to be fired because they boast about their work there. And….obviously, people who do BDSM should not be allowed anywhere around children..or, I assume, even to have or raise children, lest they be pollluted with such “degradation” and violence. Spoken like a true feminist, indeed…who happens to be an agent for the local Sex Morality Police Squad. Lou Sheldon would be proud of ‘ya, ND.
P.S. Ren Ev dispatches ND’s crap with the usual flourish here….and check out Ernest’s comment within, too.



P.P.S.: Natalia adds her own personal smackdown here…and Ren has a sarcastic follow-up. And also, see Trinity.

Share

More Anti-BDSM Whackoid Smack From The GenderBorg (Your Turn, Polly!!)

Posted on by
4

Just as I promised earlier….more highlights for the mighty FAILFest that is the Great GenderBorg Anti-BDSM Crusade.

If you remember, all this started when Nine Deuce over at Rage Against the Manchine decided to mine her radfem credentials to blast women who are into BDSM sex as mere tools and “slaves” of men and perpetuators of “female slavery”…since the men who are into male domination in that particular subculture are nothing more than rapists. (Actually, ND tends to think that any and ALL men who are into ANY kind of porn or “patriarchial” sex not to her liking are prima facie rapists and abusers of women….it’s just that male doms are, to her, the most open and explicit examples.) A couple of male doms and their significant other “slaves” came in to defend themselves and their professed tastes; whereapon the rest of the GB tribe ambushed them as ignorant, blind traitors (for the women) or outright rapists (for the men).

I won’t reset all of the debate, since ND, Renegade Evolution, and the usual participants have more than enough documentation for you to ponder.

But I will today reference a particularly “brilliant” (in the way that serial killers, Dick Cheney, and Newt Gingrich  are brilliant) piece of GenderBorgian anti-BDSM agitprop produced by Polly Styrene at her own blog which attempts to make the case of how BDSM is so innately anti-woman. Basically, it says a lot more about the thinly-veiled biases and deep assumptions of GenderBorgian ideology than it does about the men and women who freely practice BDSM sex.

The prejudice comes right out with the title:

BDSM is violence against women

Yup…..even if the woman is dominant and the man is the submissive, it’s all about the woman being “violated”. But I guess that that doesn’t matter to Polly, since fem dommes don’t even exist.

Polly then begins with the usual mocking snark at women defending their sexual kinks:

You heard. Oh but oh noes, menz get beaten up too! Hmm, yes and men are sometimes sex workers, as Mr Douglas Fox constantly points out.

Now of course y’all are sitting here now, and going “But I’m into BDSM, and all that ever happens is that my manz handcuffs me with the  pink fluffy Ann Summers handcuffs and spanks me lightly. It’s a power exchange doncha know”

Only men who are “pimps” and “punters”, of course….never real live sex workers. And of course, only rich and privileged and pampered women who are so stupid as to partake in such anti-woman sex practices would ever come forth to defend such brutality.

She then resets Nine Deuce’s “experiment” of placing an ad in a local paper pretending to be a sub looking for a “power exchange”, which results in the usual biased and tainted analysis of the respondents:

The dudes in the first group were the least overtly terrifying of the bunch, but they were creepy and offensive in their own way. Most of them wrote what could best be described as novellas and used the word “art” in their comical and terribly written blatherings about their BDSM “philosophies.” Their descriptions of their sexual fantasies were like letters to Penthouse Forum written by dudes who wear eyeliner, with a lot of “trembling,” “aching,” and “quivering” in between the generous helpings of “pussy” and “cock.” They all described the mental and physical sensations they would cause our poster to experience down to the last detail with the kind of confidence that only men who are terrible in bed possess. Nearly all of them explained that their ultimate purpose was to help their submissives grow as human beings and that they understood that feminism had caused emotional conflicts for women who felt the “natural” “feminine” urge to submit to a (much older and wiser, naturally) man/dad/teacher (for a bunch of purportedly countercultural motherfuckers, these guys sounded an awful lot like Promise Keepers). Many of them addressed our poster as “little one.” Honestly, I thought I was reading the lyrics to a George Michael song half the time. Retch is right. These guys may have even fooled themselves into believing that their particular sexual fetishes are the kinds of things that women “crave deep within their souls,” but they’re kidding themselves with all their talk of transgression.

Now, let’s ignore the smack that ND implies that she knows from these respondents that they really would be “terrible in bed” based on their responses to her “ad”. (OK…you don’t really know these blokes, but you can pass judgment on their personal sex lives merely based on their responses because…what?? Special GenderBorg ESP??? Or merely imposing and projecting your pre-imposed biases about men and sexuality on them?? And remember, these were the least offensive of the bunch.

Then there were the dudes who didn’t bother to pretend there was any kind of philosophical basis for their desire to dominate and humiliate (their words, not mine) women. Their responses were all detailed descriptions of the kinds of sex acts they’d be carrying out on her, with nary a question about what she might fancy. They got very specific about the kinds of tools they were bringing to the table (literally and figuratively) and exactly how they would restrain our poster so they could “rape” her “asshole” and whip her “tits” and “cunt” with whatever instrument their shockingly uncreative minds could come up with (usually a belt). They too described the sensations this would cause for the poster, because they were just positive that they could make her “cum over and over” by hitting her and calling her a “filthy little slut,” a “cum slut,” or a “little whore.” These dudes made no attempt to disguise the fact that they get off on humiliating and hurting women, though they did dress that up a little with candle wax, leather, and various bizarre implements. (A lot of them were really into shibari, a — surprise! — Japanese bondage technique involving rope. Seriously, fuck Japan.)

Oh, please…do we really need such a literal reading?? And since when is “making her cum over and over” (that would be called in the civilian world “giving her an orgasm”, ma’am) considered a part of “humiating and hurting” her….unless you happen to believe that orgasms are part of the problem with BDSM sex…if not, THE WHOLE FRACKIN’ POINT of it all. (And Hello, ND….you were writing as a fem sub wanting a sexual encounter; I’d figure that you’d expect that your respondents would assume that and speak about that they had in mind. If you can’t deal with the answers, don’t ask the question to begin with.)

And then there was the third, and most shocking group, at least in ND’s mind:

The third group was by far the most frightening. They read the word “submissive” and creamed their shorts at the idea that there was a woman out there who’d let them act out Max Hardcore vignettes on her. None of them had anything to say about the “art” of BDSM or the sensations our poster would experience, but rather just told her which hole they’d like to rape her in (guess which one came in at number one) before they ejaculated on her face. Her wishes did come up a few times, always in the form of the insatiable desire to lick semen up after being raped. That’s about all I can say about that lest I break something or kill myself.

First off, Max Hardcore isn’t BDSM; he’s hardcore extreme gonzo.  Second, people responding to sexual fantasies tend to be a bit over-the-top and extreme in private one-on-one sexual conversation, and say things that they would never say or do in the public realm. And third…female dommes can think about “raping” their sub men with the same intensity (men do have mouths and anuses, you know).

The point of all this is that Nine Deuce takes what amounts to be mere extreme sexual fantasies — extreme ones, I’ll acknowledge, but no less fantasy — and makes them out to be actual ACTS that these men want to impose on her “submissive”.  In other words, these men are nothing more than potential rapists, if not ACTUAL rapists for merely speaking of these evil desires to “humiliate” and “abuse” women. The proper analogy here is to call for castrating people for not merely committing adultery, but merely THINKING of it in their brains or speaking of it to another person in private conversation.

But….that’s Nine Deuce’s particular myopia. What Polly Styrene does is simply run the pattern, catch the pass that ND offers, and, like Larry Fitzgerald knifing through the Steeler defense in Super Bowl LXIII, runs with it to the end zone….or, more appropriately, over the edge of Sanity Cliff.

Ok let’s look at what happens in real BDSM. It’s ’safe, sane and consensual’ right?

Well the dude below might have disagreed on BDSM being ’safe’. If he were still alive to disagree that is.

The “dude below” reference is to a tragedy that took place in 2007 where a British businessman was killed in a terribly botch bondage scene when he got suffocated.

Not good.  Also, not representative of what counts for the majority of BDSM. Yes, scenes can go horribly ary with calamitous results….just as planes can go down into the ocean and NASCAR drivers can lose their lives driving at 200+ miles per hour on oval tracks. But we’re talking about sex here, not stock car racing or flying….the rules are different.

And keep in mind the date: 2007. Yeah…one act in two years outweighs countless scenes where nothing even close to tragedy happens.

Polly continues:

And as for consensual. Well this is the argument that was recently put on ‘comment is free’ about why BDSM is different from christian cults. Namely that BDSM has a ’safe word’ and that consent is not given once, but can be withdrawn at any time.

Well even if that IS the case, there are still problems. But let’s be  honest, that’s  not always the case. Because if you are a ’slave’ you give consent once and that’s it.

Actually, the “safeword” is only one means of enforcing consent; another, as Ren Ev has pointed out, is to simply negotiate before the scene takes place what will happen and what is to be expected of both the dom and the sub.

But that is only the tip of the iceberg for Polly to prove the deadliness of BDSN:

Let’s consider the case of Glenn Marcus. Now if you google this guy you will find lots of people on BDSM boards defending him and saying what a great guy he is.

She then quotes freely from Ann Bartow’s Feminist Law Professor’s blog on the story of Glenn Marcus, who apparently is a especially brutal dom who especially loves his BDSM sex excessively violent and “degrading”. (And, who just happened to be a BDSM webmaster of a site (slavespaces dot com) which was a target of the federal government anti-trafficking laws….back in 2007.)

And of course, such evil can only lead to the ultimate slavery, according to Polly (and Ann Bartow), as in the case of “Jodi” (quoting from court testimonials, with emphasis in original):

In October 1999, the defendant arrived in Maryland, where he handcuffed Jodi to the wall and told her that he would punish her after he took a nap. (Tr. at 104.) While she was on the wall, Jodi testified that she had a moment of clarity and decided that she wanted to leave. (Id. at 104-5.) She told Celia, another woman serving the defendant, and Celia helped her get down. (Id. at 105.) Joanna awakened the defendant, who ordered that Jodi be returned to the wall. (Id.) When Jodi informed the defendant that she wanted to leave, he told her to shut up. (Id.) He then put a whiffle ball inside her mouth, closed her lips shut with surgical needles so that she was unable to speak, and placed a hood over her head. (Id. at 105-7.) While she was on the wall, he whipped and beat her with a cane extremely hard for an extended period of time and had sexual intercourse with her. (Id. at 106.) The defendant then took Jodi off the wall and attached her with handcuffs to a flat board, at which point he attempted to sew Jodi’s vagina closed using a sewing needle and thread, only stopping when the needle broke. (Id. at 106-7.) A butt plug was inserted into her anus (Govt. Ex. 2C, at 369, 1223), and the defendant used a knife to carve his initials into the soles of her feet (Tr. at 107). While this incident was taking place, Jodi was crying and screaming. (Id. at 107.) The abuse was photographed and Jodi had to write a diary entry about it, and these were placed on the defendant’s website. (See Tr. at 109; Govt. Ex. 2C at 365-74, 1217-24.) This was the most extreme punishment to which Jodi had ever been subjected. (Tr. at 123.) Prior to this experience, Jodi believed that she would be able to leave any time she wished. (Id. at 108.) However, after this episode, Jodi testified that she felt “completely beaten down,” “trapped and full of terror.” (Id. at 108.) She no longer wished to be involved with the defendant and remained with him only out of fear. (Id. at 170.)

The fact that she did ultimately leave him and even testified about his extreme abuse at his trial means not that much to Bartow or Polly….it’s all about smearing all male doms with the taint of Glenn Marcus.

The article goes on to the usual bit about whacking “feminists who claim that BDSM is a sexuality and we shouldn’t criticize it” as the same old privileged, “elitist” women who masturbate on the backs of “poor women” being ultimately abused and raped.  And then, Polly goes for the jugular:

Yes BDSM takes place in gay relationships, and yes men like to be dominated. But – as the response to Nine Deuce’s ad showed, there are still plenty of men out there who want to dominate and abuse women in horrific ways.

And yes, yawn, yawn, yawn, a BDSM community *controls* these guys. Oh give me strength. Look at all the defence of Glenn Marcus by the ‘BDSM community’. And anyway what about all those women outside the “BDSM community”. Those women who just read an article on the F word. Who are maybe a bit confused, not sure what their feelings are but hey – a feminist website says BDSM is feminist. That’s ok then!

To translate, if you are a “feminist” defending BDSM sex, even if it is freely wanted and consented to by the participants, and even if no injury or harm occurs within the scene, then you are an enabler of rapists and murders and misogynists..and MEN. Doesn’t even matter if you’ve never even heard of Glenn Marcus (or his court case involving prosecution of his website for “sex trafficking” due to its BDSM theme, which is much of the point of all the “defenses” of him)….if you defend him, you are a murderer.  Just as if you defend Douglas Fox’s right to exist as a sex worker, then you are a pimp and a rapist…because we say so.

Q. E. Frackin’ D.

And just in case you forget which side Polly Styrene chooses to roll with, her comments section includes all the usual GenderBorg participants….Stormy, Bonobobabe, mAndrea, Laurelin, and even Nine Deuce gets in on the fun.

I’ll simply let Ms. Bees and Wasps Agent speak for the collective though this comment:

OK, I need some “help” here radfems. I am now fully edumacated on “proper BDSM” and “whoopsies, accidents do happen BDSM”. So, into which category does the following, involving a paid professional, fully empowered and consenting, get put into?

Natel King (porn stage name of Taylor Sum(m)ers):
http://www.oneangrygirl.net/natel_king.html

It’s all just harmless, empowering fun right? Lots of safe words, an “industry” in which a shit load of sex pozzie feminist bloggers promote as being the ultimate achievement of womanyness. In fact, I believe there is a former radfem blogger on the F-Word promoting BDSM as fluffy kittens because her boyfriend likes it, so she does too. (geez, don’t all stampede to point out the lack of even basic feminism in that scenario)

OK, I lied. I don’t really “need help” with this one. Lots of women (and girls) get used up, injured, murdered, in BDSM and porn (and let’s face it, mainstream porn pretty much looks like BDSM porn these days). It is NOT feminist to promote such activities to females as “em-fucking-powering”. It is NOT prudish to be against such mainstream and voluminous damage to the specific females involved and the knock on effect to females in general.

Stop promoting BDSM to other women as empowering and “just play”.

Stop promoting porn (even so called nice porn) to women as empowering and a valid career option.

Stop promoting prostitution as empowering and a valid career option.

It is NOT healthy for the majority of female participants. It is NOT healthy for womankind in general. And it certainly ain’t feminist to promote it.

Now grow up you dim-witted third wave / librul / sex pozzie feminists. And get a fucking clue.

Yup…instead, start promoting the new fourth wave/neoconservative/sex-fascist “feminism” as the new movement??

I think I’ll end this now before I end up throwing my monitor at the wall.

Share

Today's Worst Persons In The World (SmackChron Edition)

Posted on by
Reply

Since I quote freely from KO and use his words freely in this space, I figure that why not go all the way and borrow one of his classic scthicks??

Thusly, I give you my own version of today’s Worst Persons In The World.

This won’t be a daily feature like Olbermann’s, but it may become an ongoing series based on the degree and intensity of nuttiness I find.

The BRONZE: Anti-Porn Feminists for What Are We Reclaiming For

Once again, we have the instance of antiporn “feminists” attempting to speak for every woman, even those who don’t manage to agree with them; and imposing their own personal myopias about sex and men on everyone else.

And lookee here…they even must have the power of ESP…as in knowing what really happens inside strip club VIP rooms, even when they never have stepped foot in them: (quoting from Caroline’s excellent fisking of their myopic screed):

The women standing outside Spearmint Rhino identified themselves as socialist and anarchist feminists; there is something truly bizarre in the idea of anarchist women defending one of the biggest, most exploitative global industries there is.

If those women were so concerned about the welfare of the women working there, why weren’t they inside making sure they weren’t being raped in Spearmint Rhino’s ‘VIP Booths’?

Oh, I don’t know..because the bouncers already there to protect the performers from harm would protest??? Or maybe it’s because in most titty bars, little or no touching is allowed other than lap dancing?? But, you do know that lap dancing in and of itself is prima facie rape, since it involves contact with an erect penis, even cloaked by clothing…and you know how men get when their dicks get hard, right???

And a bonus for this incredulous blast:

Once upon a time, socialist feminists campaigned for universal, free, twenty-four-hour childcare, now, it seems, they campaign for the ‘right’ to prostitute because, it is claimed, it’s the only well paying job a woman can fit around her childcare responsibilities.

Oh, really??? I mean, the fact that some “socialist feminists” might defend the right of sex workers to fight for their rights to improve their profession certainly doesn’t mean that they have abandoned the fight for universal child care, doesn’t it?? Or perhaps, the writer really meant to say that only approved antiporn/anti-sex work radicalfeminists have the right to label themselves as “socialists” or “feminists”, and that all those who don’t agree with them are simply pretenders or liars…or worse??


The SILVER: Jabba the Fat-Ass Oxycontin Addict (aka “Comedian” Rush Limbaugh)

It’s so delightful seeing Fat-Ass making himself the defacto head of the Republican Party and leading the Conservative Resistance Underground against President Obama’s policies. Especially considering how much the GOP politicos are simply genflucting to his nobile leadership of his….right off the damn cliff. Apparently, that fat $280 million contract re-up that Premiere Radio Networks gave him last year (please…Jim Rome deserves more of that cache a hell of a lot more) must be getting to his head faster than the Oxycontin is kicking in. Note this justification he made yesterday for his latest riff hoping that BHO should “fail”, in an on-air interview he did with CNBC commentator Chris Haines, who isn’t exactly much of a liberal, either (transcript courtesy of Crooks and Liars, emphasis included within):

Haines: I’m sorry a week after the inauguration you said you hope he fails. Are you now admitting that it was a stupid and mean-spirited thing to say?

Rush: No, it was an accurate thing to say, it was an honest thing to say and it came…

Haines: Well then how is that bipartisan?

Rush: Well, if you’ll let me explain.

Haines: Well so far you haven’t.

Rush: You’ve been contentious for no reason. It came after a thorough explanation and my belief that liberalism is what Obama represents destroys the free market, destroys capitalism and this stimulus plan is all about re-FDRing America, the New Deal and as a conservative I want liberalism to fail. I want the country to succeed. And that’s what I meant and that’s what I over and over again., You’ve got to stop reading these left wing media sites…

Haines: I just listen to you Rush, I don’t read anybody, I listen to you. And I what I hear is hypocrisy.

Rush: You hear hypocrisy?

Haines: You’re saying in this piece, you say “in our economy the difference, this is about jobs now, leave politics aside,” and the first thing out of your mouth is politics. Not liberal or conservative or democrat.

Hey, Fat-Ass…I don’t know how to break this to you, but, as Obama said so clearly: “I WON.” Your side got toasted in the last election; you are down, like 70 seats in the House, and you are one Judd Gregg appointment to Commerce Secretary away from losing your filibuster powers in the Senate. Besides, didn’t Obama actually try to meet you half the way on your treasured tax cuts, even to the expense of triangulating away his progressive wing…and still you managed to get your GOP sycophants in the House to vote in unanimity against the proposal. Because…you don’t want the nig….errrrrr, the “Magic Negro”….to actually reverse all the mess and clean out all the shit that your and your side made for the past 30 years (never mind the last 8 of Dubya’s reign)??

But, please, by all means, go right ahead and be the last defender of Hooverism and the Old South..or better yet, why not recruit yourself as Sarah Palin’s VP candidate for 2012. I’m sure that you two will make a great team to win those 3 Rocky Mountain states plus Alaska in the final meltdown of your party.


But for the win (at least today): Buggle76

Just another sista souljah for the GenderBorg reaching out with more truth and vision on “sex workers” (her air quotes, not mine) and how they must be faking it about not being abused and raped…and how they simply ignore the “majority” who are (emphasis added by me):

[...]

Now, I have a really hard time believing these women when they claim to never have been hurt, because I think they are so out of touch with what being hurt even means. But let me just suspend my disbelief for a minute here. Ok, you’ve never been hurt, raped, abused, or anything. So that’s great for you. I mean, really, that’s extremely lucky. But you know what that means? That means that you are in a teensy tiny little minority of “sex workers.” Hear that? A minority. An extremely LUCKY minority. A very exclusive minority.

So that makes me think, what business do you have trying to “speak” for other prostituted women? You are in the minority, the tiny minority of women who somehow aren’t abused in the “sex” industry. So what gives you the right to speak for other women? You should be listening to the 99.9% of women who ARE hurt. Who ARE raped.

One lucky sex workers’ experiences do NOT speak for the rest of women. One lucky women does not prove millions of other women wrong. Your “right to choose” to prostitute yoruself is not more important than millions of women and children being raped, day in and day out. If you think that your sex life is more important than people being raped, and sold, and beaten, then you have SERIOUS problems. And you sicken me.

Oh, I get it now….it is all about the personal sex lives of those who don’t fall in perfect synchronous rhythm with the GenderBorg thought police, isn’t it?? So, women who manage to survive in the sex industry without being abused or raped (never mind the scores of women who don’t do sex work but manage to become abused and raped nevertheless; or even the majority of women who manage to survive overall without suffering abuse or being sexually assaulted) don’t even exist in your vision…am I correct, Buggle?? And that means that radicalfeminists should be more than able to pass judgment and decry a woman’s personal sex habits because she doesn’t share the same collective hatred of men and sex as you apparently do??

Oh….and it’s now 99.9% of all “prostituted women” being raped and abused??? Gee, what happened to the 95% quote you put forth by Fairley?? Updated research taken right out of her ass??

As Ren Ev put it so well in her rejoinder: Do Dick Cheney. Seriously.


Buggle76 — representing Radical Right Feminism with pride and a sharp knife — Today’s SmackChron Worst….Personnnnn..in the WORLLLLDDDDDDD!!!!!!DUH!!!!!!!!


Share

…And Then, Heart(less) Finally Goes Off The Cliff On Jill

Posted on by
Reply

Part Deux of our adventure featuring Heart of Women Spaces and her “pornstitution” myopia….

When we last left, Heart(less) was dispatching Renegade Evolution for the evol slut and sellout and enabler of rape and rapacity that only the God Emperor of Rome would represent in the eyes of the Good Radicalfeminist Womyn.

Now entering, from Stage Left: Jill from Feministe, the blog that a few months ago actually featured Ren Ev as a guest blogger on many topics, which probably steamed Heart(less) that much more, considering that in her mind, only like-minded GenderBorgians should be allowed to post in “feminist’ blogs. The main point of Jill’s post was to challenge Heart’s premise that women who enjoy sex for free (or at least say that they do) are doing a bad deed for women who are actually raped and abused (or those women who Heart claims are raped and abused and degraded by association with porn or prostitution or even a simple male erection.

[Posted by Jill on 11/14/08 @ 6:41 PM]

Huh. So when I have sex with men for free. I’ve never been paid for sex (at least not explicitly — I suppose some might argue that maybe dinner counts). Am I lowering the standards to rock-bottom? I mean, all these women giving away sex for free helps to create and sustain a market for sex, which means that some men will choose to pay for it. Are all of us who have consensual not-for-pay sex now complicit in the abuse and torture of women who are trafficked, raped and otherwise brutalized?

I have very conflicted personal views on pornography (my views on whether or not it should be legal to make and distribute are far less conflicted), but I don’t buy for a minute that a woman who does porn for free because she’s making it herself — in other words, because she’s going to make money off of its eventual sale — is somehow responsible for the exploitation of other women who don’t have that same privilege. Privilege is a tricky thing to navigate, and feminism doesn’t give us clear answers, but in my understanding, neither framework is supposed to be used to beat other people over the head with. Feminism is not a tool to shame other women. Understanding the dynamics of privilege isn’t a way to bring everyone down to the lowest common denominator, or to guilt people for what they have.

We are all part of complicated systems of oppression. We are all complicit to one degree or another; the difference is, some people are outright exploitative of others and seek to cause harm. I don’t know Ren personally, but I read the same blog of hers that you do, and I cannot for the life of me understand how anyone would put her in that category.

And anyway, this post isn’t about Ren. It’s about the systematic exploitation of women. And yet somehow, the villain of choice is a sex worker herself, demonized simply because she doesn’t consider herself to be a victim? Come on.

Now…considering the usual brand of censorship that takes place at Womens’ Spaces, you’d think that that post would still be in moderation….but it was approved by Heart. Probably, because, in her mind, it enabled her to unfurl her banner, clear her throat, and unleash her pixellized wrath, and settle all the scores and vendettas that she had with Feministe for allowing a infidel and a slut like Ren Ev to post there.

The result is this long, windy, and quite telling comment that more than anything else reveals the madness behind Cheryl Lynn Seelhoff’s methods. Just sit back, relax, and allow me to be your friendly guide though this maze of bullcrap….and I’m providing running commentary all the way through just for langiappe and clarity.

[Posted by admin (Heart) on 11-15-08 @ 11:02 AM]

Jill, women having sex “for free” on their own terms in the privacy of their own bedrooms is not on a par with women creating videotapes of brutal, violent sex, or apparently brutal, violent, sex, and disseminating them over the airwaves, over the internet and into the homes and sexual psyches of however many men and boys, and girls and women for that matter, watch that stuff. Pornography and prostitution are “constructors.” We talk a lot as radical feminists, and other kinds of feminists, for that matter, about “social construction”, about the way nothing is “essential,” nothing is “inherent” or “immutable,” in other words, about the way people are not “just born that way.” People are the way they are not only because of accidents or incidents of their births but because of what they see in the world, what they learn in the world. The sexuality of little boys and little girls, of men and women who grow up seeing, or, in whatever manner, end up watching brutal sex in which women are tortured, brutalized, degraded and shamed are in fact having their sexualities *constructed* in that watching. They’re learning this is what sex is, this is what is really sexually exciting and titillating, this *humiliation of women*. This torture of and brutality towards women.

Remember, now, we are talking about “gonzo” porn here, featuring women who actually say that they not only consent to doing such stuff, but say that they enjoy the acts they do…or at least, they act like they do. Some people would say that that probably doesn’t meet the qualifications for rape, which consists of violence that is imposed without the consent of the victim (and usually with direct physical violence and injury. Some people, though, never met the likes of Cheryl Lynn Seelhoff and the Womyn Warriors of the GenderBorg, who have a…..well, a different view about consent and will and human nature.

Also note the implication that Heart raises that young impressionable girls and boys, if exposed to such evil, degrading, and essentially violent sex, will automatically respond that it must be “acceptable” and that that must be the ONLY way to engage in sex…thusly, gonzo porn (if not ALL porn) must be censored or banished to save womanhood and girlhood from the degradation of the male penis. Riiight…like rape and torture of women never existed beyond the tainted walls of a porn studio (or that men have never been abused or tortured or even raped).

Are you putting that out in the street? Are you filming this kind of sex and putting it out there for public consumption? Are you talking about what you’re doing 24/7 on your blogs in the company of, for example, guys who are the creators of extreme SM pornography and magazines affiliated with Hustler Magazine, in the company of various dungeon masters and you name it, all of whom are creating these kinds of materials — brutal, violent, degrading, humiliating sex for public view — for the general public? I don’t think you are. And no, whatever you’re doing, or other women are doing, for free in their own houses is not what I’m talking about there.

Shorter translation of Heart:That’s right, Ernest Greene…I’m calling your ass out right now, you brutal slaveholding rapist murderer male leftist MAN. You might be able to force Nina Hartley to be your concubine and “willing slave”….errrrrr….life partner and wife, and sell your brutal S&M deSade festivals and mass rapes to the public as “consensual BDSM”, and collude with that child molestor/serial racist Larry Flynt in imprisoning women with meat grinders…but we radicalfeminists are hep to ‘ya. And that goes for you too, Kink.com….we know that you were really behind Abu Gharib just fess up and admit it.

I mean, if someone puts a noose up in their yard in a threatening manner, or burns a cross, that person can do time and well they should, absolutely, because they are engaging in hate speech. If someone decorates their home, yard, business with Nazi insignia they may well do time as well. Because our society has determined at long last that at least some forms of “speech” are so destructive, so toxic, so hateful, so murderous, such a blight on the psyche of human beings that as a society we will not tolerate this kind of thing in the name of “speech.” And why? Because this kind of “speech” is only free speech for some. It’s free speech for racists. It’s free speech for white supremacists. Nobody is going to go into somebody’s home and arrest them for drawing their own pictures that only they see or for enacting their own racist scenarios, and why? Because they’re not disseminating that in the public sphere. When stuff like this is widely disseminated in the marketplace and just among the general public without legal consequences or ethical or moral sanctions — in magazines, in books, on the internet, television, movies– the message to one and all is, this is fine, this is good, there is no harm in this, this is all good times, this is free speech. And what gets lost is, for the victims of this stuff, or those who were victims and those who remember, there is no free speech. There is only, again, free speech for racists and white supremacists.

Ahhh…first off, Heart(less), most hate speech laws attempting to regulate away such actions as cross burnings and nooses on trees have been declared unconstitutional abridgments of First Amendment rights of free speech…the very same First Amendment that allows you to render your speech as well. Secondly, isn’t the answer to such “hate speech” not censorship but to simply overwhelm it with speech that promotes the truth and exposes the inherent lies and smears that such “hate speech” inevitably relies on?? Plus, burning crosses and hanging nooses on other people’s lawns isn’t just “hate speech”; it’s also tresspassing on other people’s property and threatening them implicitly….which, last time I checked, didn’t require any notions of “hate speech” to be considered illegal and actionable BEHAVIOR.

Oh…and just because such “hate speech” may be put out on the Internet or on television or in the media does not make it any more actionable merely because it is considered to be “hate speech”. Or, perhaps, you really do believe that people should be held responsible for their innermost thoughts if those thoughts don’t meet some politically correct criteria?? (I mean politically correct as in right-wing, centrist, OR left-wing standards of conduct.) If so, then that makes you, Ms. Seelhoff, to be the very person that “hate speech” laws were created to control and prevent….namely, a fascist.

And all this is to compare neo-Nazis and Klansmen and White Citizens Councilmen to…..gonzo porn starlets?!?!?!

In the same way, it’s one thing, again to do whatever a woman does in private. I’m not saying that what a woman does in private is meaningless– it is not. I think what she does in private is always political. But there’s a difference between that and filming something and sending it out into a world that basically endorses ANY — that means ANY — depiction of torture, rape, murder, humiliation of women.

Oh, I see….a woman’s private sexual affairs should be grounds for political critique and correction if those affairs don’t meet your “feminist” criteria….especially when it is used to depict “torture, rape, murder, or humiliation”.

You blog at Feministe. You know what that’s about. You read your spam queue, you read your incoming searches. You know that haters are out there 24/7 looking for incest materials, torture materials, rape materials, brutal sex, and you know what? They are finding that stuff. And they are getting off on it. And the abundance of it reassures them that there’s nuttin wrong with that, all the cool kids do it, I mean, what are women for, after all, but to be bound, gagged, tortured, humiliated, debased, why, after it’s all done, they put a big SMILE on their face, it was nuttin’ but a thing, you know?

Oh, really??? Does Heart(less) know that much about Feministe that she can read their spam queue to know that people over there are looking specifically for incest porn or kiddie porn or “brutal sex”?? Never mind that they can get plenty of that without ever setting foot in Feministe…or that they could just as well use search engines connected with sites like…Womens’ Spaces???

And what about the millions and millions of men who use the same search engines for the overwhelming majority of porn that displays….well, none of the above?? You know, like…..simple things like….single women masturbating, or couples having vanilla sex, or a couple sharing their spouses with another willing person?? Or, even…two or more WOMEN having sex??? Oh, but that doesn’t even exist in the GenderBorgian mind….ALL sex not approved by Heart IS by nature “brutal” and rape.

I don’t know whether to laugh or cry over your coming here to my blog in your, as far as I know, inaugural comment here, to scold me for “shaming” women and “beating women over the head” and for being a bad feminist. Ha. Bitter and really, really cynical ha. I think in the context of this discussion, your scolding and apparent self-righteousness are absurd. I am thinking about all of the little 12 and 13 year old girls — yes — on Myspace posting photos of themselves in degrading, debased sexual situations and positions. I am thinking of all of the little 12 and 13 year old boys all the way to one-foot-in-the-grave men getting off on what these little girls are posting. I am thinking about the way those little girls and those boys and men have the view of sexuality they do, and of women’s place and women’s bodies they do, in part because the internet, the airways, the movie houses, the theaters, the publishing world are FILLED with this kind of imagery, imagery in which women, again, are gang raped, raped, period, bound, gagged, brutalized, manhandled, cuffed around, and again, this is what women really LIKE, the message is, this is what women are FOR. And so as women and feminists we say NO, some of us, we have to say NO, this is NOT what a girl’s body is for. This is NOT what a woman’s body is for. We were not born to be gang raped. We were not born to be brutalized, tortured, bound and gagged and to LIKE it. This is not the world we created and want. When we say this, we pay for it big time, and why? Because this IS the world as many men and many boys do want it, they want it to stay that way, witness your and my spam queue, witness your and my incoming searches, read the newspapers, watch the news, all we have to do is look around.

WOW….if we are to believe Heart, MySpace is now a hotbed of kiddie porn. Really. All those teenagers in bikinis and short skirts and sports bras…you know they are really attracting the pedophiles. Now, MySpace is pretty damn hard on adult images, enough so that several adult performers have had their journals removed for even linking to their sites or even posting suggestive pictures. But 13-year-olds posing suggestively and allowing themselves to be “brutalized” and “raped”??? Fine with them!!

But all this is a moot point anyway, because, in the mind of Heart, it’s all about the MEN and the BOYZ, who seek women like Renegade Evolution and conclude from watching her that ALL women are worthy of being raped and brutalized…because that is what MEN and BOYZ REALLY, REALLY WANT!!! KIIIIIIIILLLLLLLL THEMMMMMMMM!!!!!!!!1111ONETHOUSANDONEHUNDREDELEVEN!!! (Or at least, castrate them and save their sperm so that we can propagate the species.)

The demand that is created by all of the above and similar things and phenomena for brutal, misogynist sex ends up fulfilled for the most part by the most marginalized women and girls in the world — children, the poor, the abused and abandoned, drug addicts, homeless women and girls, kidnapped women and girls, women who endured the “boot camp” of rape, gang rape and incest coming up. They are openly kidnapped and trafficked throughout the world, or because of their limited options and vulnerabilities, they end up trafficked throughout the world in some other manner, and then they can’t get out because they don’t have the power to, because they are sick, because they are debilitated, imprisoned, beaten by their pimps or procurers or johns, disocciating, and so their lives are an endless, enduring hellhole of pain, torture, degradation and shame that many do not survive. The pain and torture will not end even if they are so fortunate as to find a way out. Ahead of them will be years and years of post traumatic stress and physical infirmity, often manifested as severe pain in their bodies, pain for which doctors and health professionals have few answers.

Not that I deny that any of that doesn’t exist….but what about the rest of the women whose porn experiences aren’t even close to being that brutal, Heart?? Do they even have the right to even exist?? What about the overwhelming majority of men who actually consume sex work or porn that do manage to treat their clients/performers with respect and dignity?? Do they fall through the Matrix and get dissolved into the GenderBorg Memory Hole because they don’t quite fit into your fantasy world of Woman-as-Essential-Rape-Victim and Man-As-Thrusting-Penis???

You know, my concern is about the men who are “shaming” these women and girls every moment of every day throughout the world or who can’t wait for their next opportunity to do so. My concern is for the girls and women so shamed. My concern is for every girl whose initiation into sexual encounters is or will be brutal and degrading, humiliating, because boys and men think that’s what sex is about or because the girl thinks that’s what sex is supposed to be about and she is trying to be, as a girl, what she is supposed to be. My concern is for all of the women exited or escaped from the sex trade who battle agonizing pain and debilitation every single day because of their experiences of rape, torture, brutality at the hands of men, some of whom read this blog, and not only one person, there is quite a number of women exited from the sex trade who read here. So when I encounter women who have allied themselves with powerful white, heterosexual men (Hustler and its affiliates) and who every day are making a public statement that really, brutal sex is good times, really torture is good times, when I encounter women who agree with male power that the fact that money exchanged hands equals consensual sex, I’m calling it out as publicly as it is being put out there by whoever is putting it out there, and particularly if they are identifying as profeminist. When I encounter women who do this for free because it’s just so damn much fun, guaranteed, I’m calling that out. Because what they are doing harms all of us — men and women, boys and girls — in a way that what each of us does in private never can, does or will. (Which does not mean we should not be talking a lot about what we all do in private, we should be.) What they are doing is promoting, advocating for, phenomena, practices that shore up male heterosupremacy at its very core. And in the process, of course, they shame and erase all the girls and women in the world victimized byall the men who want and buy and make this shit and who are enriched and benefitted by it, with the result that these girls and women are effectively “beaten over the head” and “shamed” for men’s sexual pleasure. I’d suggest, Jill, that your outrage might be misplaced and better directed to those who end up even more likely to be victimized because, heck, privileged white women do it for free, the cool kids do it for free, put a smile on their face and tell the whole world how great it really is, as a cast of male porn publishers, Hustler Magazine, Larry Flynt and consumers of violent, misogynist imagery applaud wildly. Yeah, that’s helpful. That really brings us closer to our full humanity as women.

Ah, yes…so the very existence of “pro-sex” and “pro-porn” feminists (or simply feminists who don’t manage to drink the GenderBorg Kool-Aid) poses a real threat of “silencing” those “prostituted women” who want to speak “the truth” about how damaging and degrading male sexuality (as expressed specifically by the kind of porn that Heart so opposes) really is….and stupid elitist, “privileged” sluts like Renegade Evolution are simply traitors and sellouts as well as mere cumdumpsters and sexbots and Sparkle Ponies who sell real women down the drain by giving approval to such “degradation” and “humiliation”.

Yeah. Just like those dirty queers and Leathermen and their public sex give real homosexuals a bad name with their spreading of HIV/AIDS and mindless pursuit of orgasms rather than searching for the true liberation of monogamy and “intimacy”. Sounds familiar, Heart???

I suppose the substance of, again, this inaugural exchange between us is somewhat unfortunate. But I tell you what, I lay awake nights thinking about how we might end the hate speech that is pornography and prostitution. Lots of us do. Because this causes grave, grave harm to girls and women. I will never stop saying that, I will never stop supporting girls and women so harmed (ALL of us) and I will never stop calling out those who are publicly insisting that really, it’s not all that. If that means I get called out for “shaming” or “beating women over the head” or being a bad feminist, then it will, I guess. I will point out, as I have here, how ludicrous that really is though. I actually do agree with you that feminism is not about shaming women or beating them over the head, but again, I think your indignation is misplaced. There are feminists who do that all the time, it’s the mainstay of their blogging careers, it’s the way they get people to read — shaming and beating other women over the head — and some of them have guest blogged at Feministe’s invitation. You might check that out.

I don’t do that kind of thing, though. You can scour my blog, you will not find it. And calling out apparently profeminist pornographers is not, I don’t think, that.

And so Heart concludes with the ultimate in projection: blaming “feminists” like Jill for allowing the likes of Ren Ev to “shame” and beat down antipornfeminists, and allowing infidels like Ren Ev to freely attack “feminists” and “silence” them.

Not at all like Heart, who has such an open door policy regarding critics of her philosophy. Just ask her friends, like Stormcloud (inventor of the infamous “Bee Anthology”, and stalker of Ren Ev, who threatened to out her to her family); or Witchy-Woo (who showed off her open-mindedness by taunting Ren Ev for her getting fired from her battered women’s shelter two years ago); or Sis/Pony (who flat out called Ren Ev a “whore” ); or Ginmar (who openly spoke that Ren was denying that she was a victim of rape when she had her nose broken recently) or….the list could go on and on, I’d dare say.

No, she doesn’t shame at all. It’s only the others who do it.

Karl Rove couldn’t have built a fascist movement much better.

Two words in conclusion for you, Ms. Cheryl Lynn Seelhoff (and this goes for the rest of the GenderBorg Collective, too): FUCK. OFF.

[Update: Ren Ev sends her finest middle finger salute here.]

Share

Why Porn Starlets Having Children Beats Right-Wing Racist Asshats Having Children (Or…An Open Letter to Asukasan)

Posted on by
Reply

….or should that be, YouSUCKasan…

First off, the rantage which fuels my current rage, as appearing in the original:

How does everyone in the community feel about Jenna Jameson’s pregnancy? Jameson and boyfriend, Tito Ortiz, recently announced that they are expecting twins together, and I was wondering how you felt about porn stars(or I guess ex-porn stars in Jameson’s case) having children.

Personally, I’m against it. Even though my opinion means nothing to these people, or even to others around me, I don’t think that porn stars should be allowed to have children. I feel that it is a bad environment to raise children in-and I don’t even want kids of my own-and I don’t think porn stars deserve to be parents. If prostitutes are demonised for having children, then why not porn stars? Because doing porn is “legal” and somehow less harmful for children.

I don’t care if Jenna “has always wanted children” or that she said she would quit porn after getting pregnant.. I don’t think that she should have children. If Jenna worked a legitimate job and made legitimate money, maybe I feel she would be more deserving of children. I feel pain for her twins when they grow up, being known as Jameson’s children. Imagine when they go to school, “Isn’t your mom a whore*? Does that mean you’ll be a whore when you grow up, too?” “Is your father your real father, since your mom has had sex with so many men?”

I would hate to see a child put through that kind of life, because Jameson’s career as a porn star will be with her for the rest of her life-doing porn is the only thing she will ever be known for; it’s the only thing she ever wanted to be acknowledged for: “Right now, my goal is to be the biggest star this industry has ever known.”

Not much of a goal...

Now, others more accomplished than moi (namely, Ren, Trinity, Debs, Natalia, and Caroline, among others…and especially Ernest Greene, who has actually worked with Jenna enough to know that her motherhood skills are greatly underestimated) have commented on the vileness of such comments….and even some of the most virulent antiporn feminist activists came out in the discussion thread which followed this blast in challenging asukasan’s main point. Suffice it to say that the notion of someone who herself is unwilling to have children by her own choice attempting to get into Jenna’s uterus and dictate to her when and if she should bring children into this world merely because she happens not to like Jenna’s chosen profession — or simply Jenna’s use of her body for her own “selfish” sexual pleasure — strikes me as just one notch short of outright Nazism. No, check that….it IS Nazism.

I would guess that dear asukasan would probably not be so keen to the idea of forcing women not to have children if it was directed towards, say, poor people or dark-skinned people or the differently abled. In fact, if any male even came close to openly advocating that any woman should be denied her right to control her own uterus, he would be — and rightfully so — banished to the Patriarchy where he belongs.

But, there is the real world..and then there is the GenderBorg world, where all rules collapse to the black hole of the Sisterhood of Womyn Warriors, and where women who insist on their right as women to make decisions about their own bodies are condemned as sellouts, traitors, “sexbots”, “sparkle ponies”, slaves to TEH COCK….or just plain MEN. Especially if you just so happen to like the wrong kind of sex that doesn’t meet Teh Movement’s rigid standards.

That, though, is totally secondary to my main point, which may come to a surprise to folk like asukasan when (or if) she ever leaves the protective cocoon of groupthought and actually talk to and listen to women in the real world: Porn performers are ALREADY HAVING CHILDREN, and HAVE BEEN HAVING CHILDREN SINCE TIME IMMORTAL……and the world hasn’t spun off its axis yet.

I personally know of several moms or soon-to-be moms who happen to be porn performers — whether active in movies or on the Internet — and for the most part, their children happen to grow up to be responsible, respectable, and, for the most part, normal human beings, with no more neurosis than what normal kids endure.

And as for the particular case of Jenna Jameson cited in the OP: I’m guessing that considering all the bank that Jenna has saved up, and her skills as a business woman (you do forget that she actually RUNS a freakin’ website and has actually produced films featuring performers other than her…she didn’t make all those millions only on her back, you know), I’m guessing that she will make a pretty damn good mother….a hell of a lot better than a lot of “normal” women. In fact, I’d say that her experiences in porn and her skills in the art of sex will actually be a bonus for her kids, in that she will have a hell of a lot of knowledge in the subject to pass on to her kids….not to mention that she will be more than able to inoculate them from the very bullcrap that asukasan thinks that they will get thrown at.

Besides…don’t you think that Jenna has already steeled herself against the old “‘Ya mamma’s a cumdumpster WHORRRRREEEE!!!!ONE!!!11111!ELEVEN!!!ONETHOUSANDONEHUNDREDELEVEN!!” insult enough?? After all, she’s had to fight that chant all her life from everyone, including Judith Regan (who produced her bio) to Bill O’Reilly (who openly called her a “slut”…right before soliciting her for a copy of her videos….for research purposes only, of course), to detractors from the “mainstream” media (one lovely quote from when her pregnancy was released to the public from a tabloid: “What if the baby gets stuck in the uterus from all the semen collected from all the sex she’s had in porn??”)

Of course, having all but outed Jenna and all women who engage in sex not meeting her “feminist” standards, asukasan issues the all-so-typical “But….but…I’m not really a bigot!!” fake disclaimer:

(*Note: I hate using the word “whore” when describing women, and my use of the word is strictly for thought process, because not many people-kids and young adults anyway-would ever refer to a porn star as just that. They’ll use some kind of derogatory form, such as “whore” to describe a porn star.)

Oh, but of course…we “radical feminists” would NEVER, NEVER, EVER resort to calling a “prostituted woman” or any “victim of male patriarchy” such a BAAAAAAD name….that’s reserved only for sellouts and traitors and “cumdumpsters” and “sexbots” who are in denial of the true nature of their sin…..ahhhh, I mean, their victimhood!!

Oh, and they even get it wrong on the fundamentals: Jenna Jameson met Tito Ortiz (star of the Ultimate Fighting Challenge series and father/husband) right after she formally retired from making porn….which means that she won’t even be an active porn performer when she finally raises her twins. That makes the question of her being in porn kinda moot, doesn’t it??

Not that it would matter if Jenna or any other woman performing in porn was raising a child while performing; that is their right and their privilege, and none of anyone’s damn business.

This is the molten lava of stupid, folks. This doesn’t just burn…it melts steel. And it is the fool’s gold of “feminism”, too. David Duke looks like a freakin’ liberal compared to this shit.


ADDEDUM: A bonus SYAD/STFU to the commentor who decided to add the “SO’s/boyfriends/husbands of porn stars are simply pimps” smack. I guess that these women were much too brainless to get into porn on their own, right???


Share