DONATE NOW TO HELP UPGRADE LIBCOM.ORG

When White Males Attack: Larry Flynt, Racism and The Left

315 posts / 0 new
Last post
Wendal
Offline
Joined: 4-11-04
Aug 19 2005 20:30

Im not certain if Chester is still in the pager. He was there for quite a while tough and i think that they keep on publish him after and during the pedophile-trial.

I have read both that he is still published and that he used to be published but i guess that i read the first from older sources. I write a line for you as soon as i know anything for sure about it.

random
Offline
Joined: 7-01-04
Aug 20 2005 18:04
revol wrote:
Andrea Dworkin has been taken apart so many times on libcom that it seems pointless to go through the motions again.

no, she hasnt. some people here have come out with the same old lies you can find on any badly informed anti feminist site. those same people usually admit to never having actually read any dworkin.

heres a link to some dworkin info.

especially, heres a link to the andrea dworkin lie detector

im expecting the usual insults, and probably some false quotes and some taken totally out of context too.

god she must frighten the crap out of you. the andrea dworkin boogy monster. roll eyes

pingtiao's picture
pingtiao
Offline
Joined: 9-10-03
Aug 20 2005 18:15

yes, you are right.

It is mostly because- as you have pointed out before- we are all anti-women and revel in any opportunity to rubbish both women and the wider feminist movement.

random
Offline
Joined: 7-01-04
Aug 20 2005 19:10

i didnt ever say you are all anti woman. but i agree that there are a couple of people here that "revel in any opportunity to rubbish the wider feminist movement." and amongst this rubbishing is some lying and misrepresentation of andrea dworkin and her work.

why do you prefer to misrepresent or insult me than to either join or ignore the actual conversation?

Quote:
im expecting the usual insults

and how right i was. should i add "from the usual people".

dont you have anything better to do?

random
Offline
Joined: 7-01-04
Aug 20 2005 19:16

want to add - andrea dworkin hardly represents the wider feminist movement, if thats what you were implying. and as revol gets it wrong every time, ill quickly point out that andrea dworkin was a radical feminist, not a liberal feminist. there are many differences.

Wendal
Offline
Joined: 4-11-04
Aug 20 2005 22:41
random wrote:

im expecting the usual insults, and probably some false quotes and some taken totally out of context too.

You forgot statements praising "feminist porn" followed by broken links to commercial S/M-pages owned by Playboy with nude supermodels with piercings, punk haircuts and tatoos on them. grin

Cant have one of these debates without them. Its like smoke and fire.

Thanks for takning a stance for A.D.

You are probably right tought that debating her here would only create a Deja vu, so lets stick to Hustler(if her theories on porn for example will not be brought up).

lucy82
Offline
Joined: 31-05-04
Aug 20 2005 23:47
Quote:

im expecting the usual insults, and probably some false quotes and some taken totally out of context too.... there are a couple of people here that "revel in any opportunity to rubbish the wider feminist movement."....some people here have come out with the same old lies you can find on any badly informed anti feminist site. those same people usually admit to never having actually read any dworkin.

what usual insults? what usual people? what false quotes? what quotes totally taken out of context? who specifically revels in any opportunity to rubbish the wider feminist movement? who is rubbishing dworkin but admitting to never having read any of her writing? eek

down with this sort of thing.

random
Offline
Joined: 7-01-04
Aug 21 2005 10:21

search libcom for dworkin if you like.

Quote:
down with this sort of thing.

yep, i agree.

888's picture
888
Offline
Joined: 30-09-03
Aug 21 2005 22:34
revol68 wrote:
I don't know whats more shocking the paedo cartoon or the level of debate on that fucking chomsky zblog?

True, although most of this post is good:

Quote:
Oh, please, Noam, discard the identity politics that has killed the American Left.

HUSTLER mag is EXACTLY where you want to be! Their audience is THE core voting component of the Right--working class white males 18-45, especially blue collars. You need to get in their heads. How better to do that than spliced between porn?

And now let's move on to identity politics--meaning gender politics, feminism, racial-politics, racial-and-gender SPOILS politics.

What MORE could the elite want, than to have the Left divide itself up into factions, embrace victimology and spoils-politics, and demonize the white male, esp. the blue collars. THat is a WET DREAM for the elite.

Until the Left discards identity politics, and turns its aim SOLELY upon the elite, the Left in America will remain moribund, save for a major economic collapse.

Fire away, meat puppets, tools of the FauxLeft elite....

I'm more concerned about the shite state of the american left, which has also affected US anarchism, than I am about some wanker millionaire, and more about actual organising (e.g. of sex workers) than fighting against abstract concepts like "degrading women" without even asking those women.

Wendal
Offline
Joined: 4-11-04
Aug 22 2005 08:54

Damn! This is realy fucked up!

http://www.hustlingtheleft.com/images/Catalog6sjpg/racistmonkey.jpg

888 wrote:
revol68 wrote:
I don't know whats more shocking the paedo cartoon or the level of debate on that fucking chomsky zblog?

True, although most of this post is good:

Quote:
Oh, please, Noam, discard the identity politics that has killed the American Left.

HUSTLER mag is EXACTLY where you want to be! Their audience is THE core voting component of the Right--working class white males 18-45, especially blue collars. You need to get in their heads. How better to do that than spliced between porn?

And now let's move on to identity politics--meaning gender politics, feminism, racial-politics, racial-and-gender SPOILS politics.

What MORE could the elite want, than to have the Left divide itself up into factions, embrace victimology and spoils-politics, and demonize the white male, esp. the blue collars. THat is a WET DREAM for the elite.

Until the Left discards identity politics, and turns its aim SOLELY upon the elite, the Left in America will remain moribund, save for a major economic collapse.

Fire away, meat puppets, tools of the FauxLeft elite....

I'm more concerned about the shite state of the american left, which has also affected US anarchism, than I am about some wanker millionaire, and more about actual organising (e.g. of sex workers) than fighting against abstract concepts like "degrading women" without even asking those women.

Abstract concept. Oh give me a break! I know that many of you have not tought about that, but the people used in porn are actualy real people.

Warning Misogynic Porn:

http://www.hustlingtheleft.com/gallery/hustlervertical/Images/HustlerS249.jpg

And how would you feel if i published a few milion copies of a picture like this of your mother, sister or girlfriend beacuse she said something that iritated me, as Hustler did towards this politician?

http://www.hustlingtheleft.com/gallery/hustlervertical/Images/HustlerS22.jpg

An image like this can be intepretated by the person pictured as a rape threat, a classic way for males to shut up women that says things that they dont like, and is in no way less sublte than a burning cross in a bleck persons backyard.

Like the Klansmen the Hardcore porn-industry is not to be taken lightly. Hustler has declared a war against feminsts and they have put a bounty on specific women's heads. Acording to Larry's daughter he has threatend to kill her. Unlike other hardcore porn-papers it is published and spread in a much wider way and is not limited to hardcore porn-stores and with the 40 milions in his pocket Flynt can do a whole lot of damage towards an individual if he want to.

This woman pushed over a toilet and dragged in her hair is a real human, no matter how much the photo is still constructed it is still a humiliating act for the woman and the woman who sees it or now that it exists, just as Minstrel shows are for black participants and a black audience as well as black people knowing of its existance. Even if some few people apreciate to be humiliated as minstel-performers it still dont legitimate the suffering it effects on the rest,

Porn is just as abstract as an Oklahoma lynching.

And about Zmag being some working class paper... I have seen statistics on the ecomical background of people reading Hustler. It was rather midle class and upper midle-class than blue collar. Still Flynt has sold his image to the left as an owner of a proleterian magazine just as well as Mc Donalds has sold their image to the American public of being a manifestation of the American dream.

Most working class people would pretty fast be ofended off the cartoons in hustler. Many of them beacuse they are black an women, and others beacuse of the hatefull working class stereotypes that are used in the cartoons.

See for example:

http://www.hustlingtheleft.com/gallery/hustlervertical/Images/HustlerS10.jpg

http://www.hustlingtheleft.com/gallery/hustlervertical/Images/HustlerS23.jpg

In Hustler cartoons, the white male is constructed as anything but the protector of white womanhood. He is a lower working-class, middle aged male whose flabby body is no match for the muscular, enormous black body. In stark contrast to the big black penis is the small to average white penis which is rarely erect and never threatening to white women. On the contrary, the size of the white man's penis is a source of ridicule or frustration to his sex partner

Since the target audience of Hustler is white men, it would seem surprising that the cartoons regularly ridicule white men for being sexually and economically impotent and for failing to contain the black menace. However, when class is factored into the analysis, it becomes apparent that it is not white men as a group who are being ridiculed. The debasement of white masculinity in Hustler cartoons is played out on the caricatured flabby, unkempt body of the lower working-class white male

http://www.hustlingtheleft.com/CRAPP_E_LIB/dines.html

Wendal
Offline
Joined: 4-11-04
Aug 22 2005 12:39
revol68 wrote:

anyway, Dworkin, what can we say, she did make an alliance with relegious headcases and conservative scum to empower the state to censor "porn"

They were aware of the effects that censorship would have, exspecialy Dworkin who is a writer with a pretty raw language.

Therefore they have never been fighting for censorship(which is obvious for anyone checking out real sources rather than smear campaigns) and Dworkin is anti-censorship. What she did was making it posible for women to sue porn that they found misogynic, just as all people can sue hate speech against ethnic groups. They where in other words giving more power to women in one state rather than giving a state more power ower woman. A step towards equality for women and thus good for feminism(and real anarchism) and a decentralisation of the state power that created some room for direct democracy by having the people attacked by hate-speech being able to decide what material that should be tested instead of the state.

Power to the people.

Wendal
Offline
Joined: 4-11-04
Aug 22 2005 12:56
revol68 wrote:
as for the anne coulter cartoon well yes it's not very pleasant and not the kind of propaganda i would ever envision to get a point across but you've got to contextualise it to a women whose more to the right than mussolini and would be happy to see every Iraqi women violated by US cruise missiles/ marines. If you want to read it as a threat to "women" in general i think your wrong. insulting or tactless, yes.

You must for one reason or other mixed up the parts of my post.

The picture of Anne Coulter being raped by a Donkey is an attack/threat directly aimed against her. Like a lynching it works as a warning towards other "uppetiy niggers"(to use the Klan-speak) and belive me, the cartoon has nothing to do with the war on Iraq*.

War means profit for any capitalist and if Iran would be bombed as well tomorow Flynts only reaction would most likely be to celebrate it with buying a pair of golden pimpwheels to his wheelchair covered with diamonds as well as tigthening the leach** around Greg Palast neck so that he is not writing anything that would seriously create a negative stance in the public against the war to fast***.

*= I dont remember excaktly how but i have a vague memory of it being made as a result of her critique against hustler, just as most threats from hustler are.

**= did i spell it right? I mean that piece of rope that dogs are kept in by their masters.

***= So you are writing for a multinational milionare now Palast, and think that you will have any room to say anything controversial at all? Oooh you are so smart. Did you get your fine journalist awards as a christmas gift?

Wendal
Offline
Joined: 4-11-04
Aug 22 2005 13:16
revol68 wrote:
no offence wendal but your defintion of degrading is your own interpretation, what do you think of S&M?

I look at S&M as a concentration on the essence of heteronormative sex.

I would like to remember you of this old anarchist slogan by the way:

Be neither a ruler nor ruled

A bit hard to combine with SBDM and S/M, aight. wink

Quote:
I think you are overlooking the erotic potential of power dynamics, my only problem is when such "play" gets intertwined with real power relations and you can't get much more real than economic power.

And i think that you, my dear comrade is overlooking the sexual and euphoric potentials of revolutionary sex. Its da boooomb. wink

And belive me, it is a whole lot more fun than to switch between old and dull gender-roles or play around with power dynamics.

I would also say that our power relations to some degre effects our sexuality(as well as the norms of what it means to be a sane/good/sexy man/woman)

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Aug 22 2005 14:36
Wendal wrote:
I look at S&M as a concentration on the essence of heteronormative sex.

I would like to remember you of this old anarchist slogan by the way:

Be neither a ruler nor ruled

A bit hard to combine with SBDM and S/M

No no no! You cannot possibly extent anarchism to some kind of lame forced "equality" in consensual adult sex. Jesus it's a shame the puritanical anti-sex feminism isn't just a straw man sad

Wendal
Offline
Joined: 4-11-04
Aug 22 2005 15:29

John>>I am not antisex i am antisexxx.

Many so called queer-feminists points out the equality is unsexy.

I dont think that is werry constructive and if i had such issues then i would deal with them rather than praise them.

The conection between BDSM and the anarchist statement that i draw was not totaly serious tough, as i hope most people understood.

It still show an intresting conection tough, since several anarchists(anarchism being based on liberty and equality the bigest amount of pleasure and the smalest amount of pain for the bigest amount of people) holds up BDSM and S&M as if not anarchic then at least revolutionary.

Then it is worth to bear in mind that the only revolutionary gay/sexual movement(as far as i know) that has existed was Gay liberation front and their goal was to break with heteronormative sexuality and find new forms for sex rather than play around with old ones.

random
Offline
Joined: 7-01-04
Aug 22 2005 15:46

im not antisex either, but isnt it just the easiest way to try and shut people up? "you're so frigid" god its like being back in school. its called making unfair assumptions, and, erm, bullying. "you must agree with me or its proof that you're victorian/frigid/anti sex".

Wendal
Offline
Joined: 4-11-04
Aug 22 2005 18:15

Random>> You are right on spot. I am glad to have you here and im glad that you can listen to yourself even if you are being bullied. Its a rare gift.

nikkicraft
Offline
Joined: 17-08-05
Aug 22 2005 19:52
random wrote:
im not antisex either, but isnt it just the easiest way to try and shut people up? "you're so frigid" god its like being back in school. its called making unfair assumptions, and, erm, bullying. "you must agree with me or its proof that you're victorian/frigid/anti sex".

I've been reading in on these pages since they went up and was disgusted to see where the beginning discussion got stopped with the snotty grammar elitist telling Jennifer McLune how to write her words so they'd be approved for some academic journal. Things are much better in this forum now the way the discussion has evolved since that time.

Wendal and Random's posts do not strike me to be written from defenders of sexual repression. wink In fact, those who defend a swastika to set up a sexxxy, hot, power imbalance--as in the defenders of Hustler--are the real sex haters, needing to make it nasty with hairless, dehumanized body parts using each other for their own selfish reasons with a corporation at the helm counting the millions all the way to the bank. That is true corporate fascism.

Why don't you spend your time and energy defending the rights of your sexuality to be in *your* hands and the hands of your lovers and stop defending pornoCRAP (Corporate Racist Atrocous Patriarchal). It needs to be challenged, but some on this blog are obviously not able to be so radical and truly risky. Still, that's the only true position any anarchist can assume, isn't it?

Nikki Craft

:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:

Hustling the Left

Deconstructing Manufactured Contempt

Entrenched in Larry Flynt's Corporate Sexxxism Empire

http://www.hustlingtheleft.com/

:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:<>:

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Aug 22 2005 20:08
Wendal wrote:
Random>> You are right on spot. I am glad to have you here and im glad that you can listen to yourself even if you are being bullied. Its a rare gift.

What so you're being bullied now? By people disagreeing with you? roll eyes

nikkicraft wrote:
pornoCRAP (Corporate Racist Atrocous Patriarchal)

...

meanoldman
Offline
Joined: 15-01-04
Aug 22 2005 20:28
Quote:
stop defending pornoCRAP (Corporate Racist Atrocous Patriarchal). It needs to be challenged

So do acronyms as atrocious as that. Don't ever let yourself make a poster.

nikkicraft
Offline
Joined: 17-08-05
Aug 22 2005 20:41
meanoldman wrote:
[qoute]stop defending pornoCRAP (Corporate Racist Atrocous Patriarchal). It needs to be challenged

So do acronyms as atrocious as that. Don't ever let yourself make a poster.

embarrassed well u do make a valid point that I'm not prepared to attempt to argue at this moment. smile

Wendal
Offline
Joined: 4-11-04
Aug 22 2005 21:25
John. wrote:
Wendal wrote:
Random>> You are right on spot. I am glad to have you here and im glad that you can listen to yourself even if you are being bullied. Its a rare gift.

What so you're being bullied now? By people disagreeing with you? roll eyes

nikkicraft wrote:
pornoCRAP (Corporate Racist Atrocous Patriarchal)

...

Who is the question aimed at. The piece i wrote him about bullied is refering to how he described school, which was rather vague and i understand that it could be intepretated in the wrong way. Totaly my bad. Sorry.

lucy82
Offline
Joined: 31-05-04
Aug 23 2005 01:42

Corporate Racist Atrocous Patriarchal crap em..

i don't see it as so terrible. on a scale of one to ten of what actually gets to me about the way it is for women i can think of shitloads of other things that have far more revelance to everyday life and those i can be more bothered about. homeworking for example. where women are clearly getting fucked over for little reward. or women losing their job because they are pregnant or finding it fucking hard to keep because of commitments to their kids.

in porn, like in any other industry, some women win. its an industry that expolits and rewards. i can't really see it as any more intrisicly exploitative than numerous other industries.

i don't get why whenever some women start talking about what it is to be female it defaults to porn. ooh porn is so nasty. well so fucking what. you don't think capitalism is nasty? you don't think women kill themselves because they can't meet debts? believe me, porn can be a solution. and sometimes a good one.

get real about this. fuck dworkin. did she ever have to live in a non-academic world?

maybe porn as a concept is actually healthy. maybe giving people a way to live their fantasies is not wrong. maybe whats wrong is the way the more exploitative edges of the industry fuck people over. which is a different argument altogether.

the whole feminist anti-porn argument worries me. its weak because it doesn't see men in the porn industry except as exploiters when many men are workers in the industry too. it doesn't see the many women who are there by choice. it sees this industry as somehow special in terms of domination and oppression.

how this society views and treats women in loads of areas related to women and mens real experience in those areas is something i'd love to talk about a bit more sometimes on libcom but to be honest i just get pissed off even going there. because i know it would just become yet one more polarised women/bullying/victim thread.

it pisses me off when women who are challenged start crying bullying when other people disagree with them, then i wonder what the fuck is going on. i hate that response to argument because when its used it seems to me its just a way of using your gender to shut people up.

dot
Offline
Joined: 21-08-05
Aug 23 2005 02:56
Quote:
the whole feminist anti-porn argument worries me. its weak because it doesn't see men in the porn industry except as exploiters when many men are workers in the industry too. it doesn't see the many women who are there by choice. it sees this industry as somehow special in terms of domination and oppression.

yea, to take that another step, when i was doing support work with prostitutes, one of the reasons they wanted to decriminalize was that anyone who they were connected to - no matter sex or even age in some cases - could be harassed as a pimp. so pros couldn't have boyfriends, couldn't give friends money, etc. without a whole lot of finagling.

and all the people crying about the abusive pimps out there, and how the women need to be protected, were ignoring the protection that already exists for people who are being abused (never mind that i'm talking about legal protection which is bullshit anyway), and making it even harder for working girls to have relationships.

it's weird that you all don't know about hustler though. chester the molester was around for decades for sure. playboy isn't much better, from what i can recall...

it's a drag that these conversations get so polarized.

there is a lot of bad porn. Porn is lucrative because it's forbidden. people wanting to make it more forbidden aren't thinking strategically.

and just to weigh in on the (really irritating) rob mills post, puh-fucking-leeze. what is the "moral/immoral" bollox? rob's moral language and meta-theme doesn't seem any more relevant to me than the strident original article, which had a valid point to make (and could have made it in a paragraph).

Mitch
Offline
Joined: 14-01-05
Aug 23 2005 09:54
lucy82 wrote:

the whole feminist anti-porn argument worries me. its weak because it doesn't see men in the porn industry except as exploiters when many men are workers in the industry too. it doesn't see the many women who are there by choice. it sees this industry as somehow special in terms of domination and oppression.

how this society views and treats women in loads of areas related to women and mens real experience in those areas is something i'd love to talk about a bit more sometimes on libcom but to be honest i just get pissed off even going there. because i know it would just become yet one more polarised women/bullying/victim thread.

Yes, it worries me too, and the worry is to do with class differences of experiences between women, and an arrogant and detached feminist academic bubble which has made no effort to understand the real experiences of women - and what's more seeks to speak on their behalf.

This focus on an anti-porn argument seems to me to pull the focus away from the everyday and womens' oppression accross the spectrum of work and home life, and working class women in this profession are represented as victims, ditto with prostitution. Instead of speaking for women in porn that they have no connection with, might their time be better spent looking at their own profession, and in the case of Greer the courting of the media and their own complicity in misunderstanding the different experiences of women by lumping all women into one group.

Looking at another area, for example you mentioned a certain HR woman recently. Human Resources, or more appropriately Human Remains, call it personnel, is a profession with large numbers of women workers. HR managers are often men, but women are working in the lower tiers of this profession basically pushing through horrendous employer biased policies that put the health and safety of frontline employees increasingly at risk. They are complicit in this, and they are paid well for it and the Chartered Institute of Personnel (CIPD) is a dire bureaucratic organisation keeping women in HR focused on pushing through hard HR policies and procedures.

There is a similar situation in banking with women in the lower tiers pushing through credit to people who can't afford it and so forth.

I wonder if we need to be looking back to that period in the 1970s when women were working more together and working class women were to the fore, speaking for themselves and gaining in self-confidence and consciousness - like in the Leeds Clothing Strike where women workers were rising up often having to challenge male union leaders who were selling them out.

There are many professions to look at where women have been ghettoised in low pay - cleaning, supermarkets, homeworking (on the increase in the UK is homeworking), and care workers. Unfortunately though there are problems with some feminists looking at this - again they are guilty of speaking for such workers instead of carving spaces or supporting so that they speak for themselves, and many feminist commentators on low pay make no critique of capitalism and indeed some deny the very existance of class now, focusing totally on legislation and the legal route.

We need to get back to consciousness raising amongst women - and I think there is an argument for women organising amongst themselves to build self-confidence and consciousness (I am bored with the petty snipping and digs from anarchist men). The working class women of Mujeres Libres in Spain recognised that this was needed in their day - they saw the need to challenge male leadership within anarchism and the expectation that they would follow along.

To start in one's own backyard, wot wot - the photo that Woodbine put up of the Libcom admin team does - urrrrr - not seem to me to be representative of posters.

By the way woodbine, were you the one in the metal helmet ready for battle. grin

random
Offline
Joined: 7-01-04
Aug 23 2005 10:51
Quote:
t pisses me off when women who are challenged start crying bullying when other people disagree with them,

just a quick note on this.

i dont mind being challenged. i dont think many people here do. what i call bullying is not when discussion is happening or views are challenged. bullying is when the "challenge" is merely an insult, calling someone victorian or repressed or whatever.

on "working class women" and porns effect on them. well, im working class, im a woman, but apparently what i think and how prostitution or porn has affected me doesnt count because its not what some of you want to hear. there are lots of prostituted women, in and out of porn, some working within it currently and some in the past, that are adamantly against the "industry", just as there are those who are "the winners". what ive found here is a complete denial of one side of the debate.

the way i or wendal or nikki or countless others feel cannot be dismissed with an insult, we are not necessarily "anti sex" or "middle class" or whatever. andrea dworkin did not spend her life in an academic bubble, lucy. andrea dworkin herself had experience of being a prostitute. as ive tried to point out before, she had a lot of experience, decades of it, of talking to and working with women survivors of sexual violence. shes probably known more prostitutes and porn actors than any of us have. i think its pretty disgusting the way she is misrepresented and lied about.

i dont think its at all relevant to talk about the expolitative porn as if its just the fringes of whats available. thats not the case and we all know it. whats on the fringes is anything remotely resembling real sex, anything remotely 'empowering' for the people involved.

there are lots of other important issues for women too, yes. and they get discussed on any number of feminist boards. it would be great to see them getting discussed here, but i cant see it happening while the anti feminists keep making it their business to ruin every thread with insults and bullshit.

lucy82
Offline
Joined: 31-05-04
Aug 23 2005 12:03

mitch and dot, you talk sense smile interesting point you made there dot about what happens to the personal relationships of prostitutes. i'd never thought about that and mitch..

Quote:
the worry is to do with class differences of experiences between women, and an arrogant and detached feminist academic bubble which has made no effort to understand the real experiences of women - and what's more seeks to speak on their behalf.

This focus on an anti-porn argument seems to me to pull the focus away from the everyday and womens' oppression accross the spectrum of work and home life, and working class women in this profession are represented as victims, ditto with prostitution. Instead of speaking for women in porn that they have no connection with, might their time be better spent looking at their own profession, and in the case of Greer the courting of the media and their own complicity in misunderstanding the different experiences of women by lumping all women into one group.

i couldn't agree more

i take back what i said about dworkin not having a real life btw, although i disagree with her peculiar brand of feminist separatism she is a bad example of the cosy world of feminist academia. Greer would have been a better one.

random
Offline
Joined: 7-01-04
Aug 23 2005 15:45

but if you accept that there are women who do think similarly to dworkin about prostitution, who arent middle class, who arent academics, who are sometimes prostitutes or ex prostitutes, then maybe the "porn is like any other job" bit isnt quite so simple.

besides, the theory goes that prostitution or porn doesnt just affect women immediately involved in it. porn affects the way young men and women think and feel about sex, it pretends to 'inform' us about sex, but in reality porn has very little to do with real sex. it gives a twisted view of sex. it perpetuates myths about women and womens sexuality that in turn allow rape myths to continue. it affects other media products, so we have the playboy brand on pencil cases or whatever, so that boys mags and daily newspapers carry images that we're all subjected to, my toddler sees them at her eye level for gods sake. porn doesnt just have an effect limited to those that appear on it or those that choose to purchase it.

osmic
Offline
Joined: 22-08-05
Aug 23 2005 16:05

I don't get the intrinsic problem with porn and it doesn't really bother me that it gives people the wrong idea about sex, the only people who think sex is like in porn and womens roles are like in porn are people to ugly to get laid. My mum was a prostitute before she married my dad tho and her attitude to sex is a bit fucked up (she seems to think the only reason anyone would ever show an interest in her is because they fancied her and tolerates that sort of attitude *shakes head*) so maybe I'm just nieve.

But I don't think whether porn is a issue or not that its a solely feminist issue, it just as much objectifies men as it does women. Heh, if you got rid of it, would you just get rid of hetero porn because obviosly man on man is totally cool because men always want sex and cannot possibly feel degraded by it roll eyes

lucy82
Offline
Joined: 31-05-04
Aug 23 2005 17:44
Quote:
but if you accept that there are women who do think similarly to dworkin about prostitution, who arent middle class, who arent academics, who are sometimes prostitutes or ex prostitutes, then maybe the "porn is like any other job" bit isnt quite so simple.

but you could argue that about any job. the fact that some women agree with dworkin and some of those are working class, not professional academics and some might be sex workers or ex sex workers doesn't make porn automatically either more or less explotative than other jobs. the question is why have feminists fixated on the porn industry rather than other industries which have far more relevance to the ordinary every day life and struggle of most women and are far more relevant to the real experiences of relationships that women have with other women and men?

the feminist dialogue around porn constructs a particular form and focus of the debate which does exclude certain experiences whilst admitting others. andrea dworkin may well have talked to many women survivors of sexual violence and had experience of sexual violence herself but that does not mean that prostitution and porn are necessarily always expressions of sexual violence, nor that women sex-workers are by default always exploited. and to construct the argument around those terms ignores and silences some women whose experiences of this industry are equally valid. there is as mitch puts it, an arrogant and detached feminist academic bubble which seeks to speak on behalf of women.

personally i get far more incensed by the causal exploitation of young people like my daughter in her first job aged 17yrs old. left to clean human tissue off attack alarms without training or health and safety precautions working long hours for little pay and treated like shit than i can ever get about a woman getting paid a reasonable wage to take her clothes off and have sex on camera. and yes, i know much porn is worse than that but the fact remains that for many workers porn is no worst than any other shit industry and possibly better than some.

as for the whole idea of porn giving a twisted view of sex. this seems to me to be an argument on the same level as saying that watching violent videos turns us all into axe murderers. my mum used to leave copies of playboy and forum around the house and i used to read them. the main effect on me was a hankering after those silky pink costumes the playboy bunnies used to wear and a nice pair of rabbit ears. that and discovering masturbation which i quite enjoyed, thank you very much.

you cannot say that watching violent videos leads to violence because for most of the population, it clearly doesn't. you cannot say that porn twists a persons view of sex either. lots of people enjoy porn and also enjoy good consensual sex. the difference between fantasy and reality for most people is fairly obvious.

Quote:

My mum was a prostitute before she married my dad tho and her attitude to sex is a bit fucked up (she seems to think the only reason anyone would ever show an interest in her is because they fancied her and tolerates that sort of attitude *shakes head*) so maybe I'm just nieve.

it sounds like your mum doesn't rate herself too highly. there could be lots of reasons for that and those reasons could include the work she did before marrying your dad. i'm only saying that cause one of my friends is just the same but she works for a catalogue company..