QotD: “The connection between patriarchy and capitalism is not a question of what came first and what came later”
The connection between patriarchy and capitalism is not a question of what came first and what came later. It is the exploitation and oppression of women by men which is the fundamental base for both systems. Today I would not talk of two systems but rather as one capitalist-patriarchal system. I also do not use the model of “Man the Hunter” any more to express how these two systems are related. I rather think that capitalism is the latest avatar of patriarchy. Therefore one cannot separate the struggle against patriarchy from the struggle against capitalism.
Maria Mies, ‘Ecofeminism': a talk about hard work and great joy
Her blog is gone, she is the last person I would imagine doing this, I hope she is ok.
QotD: “Slurs are not oppressive because they are offensive, they are oppressive because slurs by nature of being slurs draw upon certain power dynamics”
Slurs are not oppressive because they are offensive, they are oppressive because slurs by nature of being slurs draw upon certain power dynamics to remind their target of his/her/their vulnerability in a certain relation to power and as an extension of that, to threaten violence and exploitation of that vulnerability.
QotD: “A 23-year-old Long Beach man was sentenced to 47 years and four months in prison for pimping two women, sexually assaulting them and forcing one to tattoo his pimp moniker on her forehead as punishment for wanting to go home”
A 23-year-old Long Beach man was sentenced to 47 years and four months in prison for pimping two women, sexually assaulting them and forcing one to tattoo his pimp moniker on her forehead as punishment for wanting to go home, according to the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office.
Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Tomson Ong sentenced Lebrette Stacey Winn at the Long Beach Superior Court Thursday. Winn was also ordered to register as a sex offender for life and pay a $10,000 fine. Additionally, the defendant was ordered to stay away from the two victims for 10 years.
Last month, a jury found Winn guilty of two counts of pimping, two counts of pandering by procuring, and one count each of human trafficking to commit another crime, sodomy by use of force, forcible rape, aggravated mayhem and kidnapping.
On May 15, two women, age 18 and 20, escaped from a locked car sitting in a Culver City mall parking lot, according to authorities. One of women found a good Samaritan who drove them to a nearby police station.
Winn and Eric James Avery, 25, were both arrested after Long Beach Police officers found a hotel key in Avery’s pocket. When investigators went to the hotel room, they discovered a 16-year-old girl who said she had been working as a prostitute for Avery.
Avery is scheduled to be sentenced Oct. 17.
The victim with the tattoo on her forehead has begun the process to remove the marking, said Sarah Ardalani, spokeswoman for the DA’s Office.
QotD: “So many people that attempt a gender-reversal in which to objectify men instead of women do it completely, totally wrong”
So many people that attempt a gender-reversal in which to objectify men instead of women do it completely, totally wrong. Showing images of muscular men flexing their muscles is not sexual objectification. It doesn’t accomplish the objective of reversing the gender roles of men and women. And it fails to give men the slightest taste of what it’s like to be a woman surrounded by sexually objectified images of women.
The factors that make images of women sexually objectifying are the stripping away of human qualities and the removal of agency. Images of hyper-sexualised, objectified women affirm the sexual availability and violable status of women. In ads, they conflate the characteristics of the woman with the characteristics of the object being sold, thus relegating the woman to an object. Just a picture of a naked or partly naked attractive person does not an objectifying image make. Sweaty, hairy men fresh from the gym are subjects of their environments, not objects.
You don’t see fashion photographs of helpless, bruised men lying near garbage dumps that vividly suggest brutal victimisation. You don’t see used car ads depicting ~sexy~ men’s bodies with jokes about being able to enjoy the man even though you’re not the first to have him. You don’t see awareness campaigns about testicular cancer that focus on SAVE THE BALLS and lament the loss of manliness after orchiectomy.
If you want to do a proper gender swap to give men an idea of how sexual objectification affects women, you can’t just switch out feminine women and insert masculine men, as if femininity were not an inherent component of sexual objectification. What the fashion and advertising industries do to women, you have to do to men. Get rid of the fucking muscle men. Get a pretty face skinny boy and put him in makeup; impractical, feminine-coded clothing; and a pose that looks explicitly like he wants to get spanked. If men squirm in discomfort when they see it, you know you did it right.
QotD: “She masturbates to her own objectification, commodification, dehumanization and sexual punishment”
When a man watches a woman get fucked on screen, he sees his conquest, his fuck doll, his wet-dream inspired perfect sex object, served up for him on a silver platter, gift wrapped and ribboned, ready for his consumption. But a woman – she sees herself. She masturbates to her own objectification, commodification, dehumanization and sexual punishment. She masturbates to ‘shut up and take it, slut’. She masturbates to ‘I’ll shove two dry fingers in your cunt, that’ll teach you’. She masturbates to ‘this is what your body is for. A vessel for my cock. A meal to chew up and spit out. A body to wipe drool and semen on. This is who you are’.
Every time someone calls BDSM a “counter-culture”, an angel loses its wings.
Honestly, there is nothing in your culture that opposes the mainstream, centuries-old norm of violating women’s bodies & minds. You just perfected that art and convinced the oppressed that their oppression is freedom.
Give me a counter-culture of kindness, tenderness & respect. Otherwise fuck off.
I’m reading like, all these articles on how men respond violently to women like Emma Watson because they’re afraid of feminism or they legitimately believe they’re fighting the good egalitarian fight, and that’s just so wrong. Because those men aren’t afraid, and they’re not fighting for anything. They hate women, that’s it. I’m really loathe to go down into the murky waters of the misogynist way of thinking and construct some sort of hierarchy but it does exist. Like, there’s the sad idiot who’ll call feminists illogical harpies who stand in the way of true equality; maybe he’ll even refer to them as “feminazis.” He’s terrible but he won’t go as far as threatening death or rape or actually leaking nudes. That person, I believe, actually is threatened by feminism, and actually deluded enough to think he’s doing something noble by opposing it. There’s even a slight chance he’ll have a visitation from G-d and grow out of it, if he’s young enough.
The men who leak naked pictures or threaten to, who send rape and death threats, they are not fighting for anything. Their only belief is the hatred of women. They are not deluded about this. Look, I grew up around men who said things like, “I’m glad Hermione finally got some tits.” And now Hermione is up on a forum in a sharp suit saying things that sound important (no matter how declawed and watered down they actually are in terms of what we typically consider ~acceptable~ levels of feminism) and they hate that, and they will teach her a lesson. The same way Jennifer Lawrence and Jill Scott needed to be taught a lesson without even providing a prompt. The prompt is this – you’re too rich, too unavailable, too successful, you’re a woman. Think of a witch burning, or a public stoning, or something on a more private scale – the abusive husband using beatings and rape to intimidate and humiliate. Here, the mob doesn’t have physical access to their targets, so they settle for something that’s almost even better in the lack of accountability it affords – internet death threats and the humiliation and shame that illegally obtained nude photographs are supposed to bring. She won’t be talking again.
I’m just saying, that dude who told me “you need a dick in your mouth” because he didn’t like the way I was conducting my feminist dealings was not threatened by me nor was he under the impression that he was fighting for men’s rights. He was just hating women because he could.
It was late in my career and I was already famous with hundreds of movies under my belt, but nothing like this. I’d shied away from the BDSM culture. It scared me. Despite signing paperwork and a checklist of dos and don’ts, I was in way over my head. What I thought I was agreeing to felt a lot different in reality. I was groped by hands I didn’t know. There were masked people everywhere, but only the ones wearing wristbands were my approved scene partners. If I balked at an act or found it difficult to perform, I was “punished” for my defiance (which is the nature of a BDSM scene). It felt more like a party for the extras than a professional scene. Experienced as I was, it was new to me. I’d never used a safe word before (and forgot to), so when things became too much to bear and I began protesting, no one listened. The word “No” doesn’t work in these types of scenes.
I met my breaking point in this particular scene—halfway through, I had to be untied and calmed down. I was shaking. I felt a catch in my throat when I tried to speak and I could barely keep the tears at bay. I felt like I’d been beat. Yet I was hugged, inundated with compliments, and told how strong I was for being on the receiving end. I was caned, electrically prodded, and slapped around. I didn’t feel powerful. In the interim, I had to decide whether I was going to quit or be a professional and finish the scene. After everything I’d gone through, leaving would have made it worthless. So I stayed.
After the scene, I did a brief on camera interview about my experience—a standard company procedure. I nodded my head, smiled, and said all the right things. To me, that interview was also part of the job. It’s also filmed before performers are paid, or at least that’s been my experience.
After watching an intense scene that will make your eyes water, it’s reassuring to see an interview stating that everyone had a good time. It’s that kind of feel-good integrity that Kink.com, one of the most successful BDSM (bondage, dominance, submission, and sadomasochism) porn companies works hard to promote. It’s a fascinating company that operates out of the historic San Francisco Armory, offering a variety of productions, tours, live shows, and kinky parties on the upper floor. I can’t think of another XXX company quite as diverse or dark that’s also so commercially successful.
The point of the scene in some cases is to find the raw edge of a performer’s limitations. In a typical scene performers are offered numerous breaks, catered to in between takes, and treated like royalty after a mental and physical beat down. Which is why Kink can be a total mind fuck.
While there are plenty of porn stars who regularly work for Kink and sing their praises, those that have had a negative experience are hesitant to speak up, fearing what it would do to their workload. Kink is one of the few large companies with the budget to offer steady work. Some people in the porn industry, it seems, would rather have work they don’t like than no work at all.
EDIT to add:
Oh, is this the same James Franco who was caught propositioning a seventeen year old even after she said she was seventeen?
And the same Kink dot Com whose premises were raided for a drug charge, and DEA agents found an unlicensed and active gun range in the basement (along with ammunition), along with cocaine and other Scheduled substances?
And the same Kink dot Com that forced one of their performers to finish a scene where she lost her virginity live, despite her complete lack of arousal and inability to be penetrated without pain?
And the same Kink dot Com where a workers comp claims stated that management, including Peter Actworth, refused to even consider that their actions may have caused enough harm to one of their models that she needed time to physically recover, and where she says she was told, “the words workers comp shouldn’t leave your lips or you’ll never work here again”?
Is it THAT kink dot com?
Tell me again how any of that sounds like ethical anything. Shit, they’d shut a McDonalds down for less, and these bastards are touted as being the creme de la creme of ethical ass-beating.
Fuck em all.
My grandmother (and this was before I was ever born) had made an appointment with the doctor, very upset as she was that my manic-depressive father and his schizophrenic girlfriend had just announced their intention to marry.
‘She wanted to know what could be done. How could this marriage be stopped? How could these two very unwell people be allowed to go ahead and marry? The doctor told her that mental illness could not be used as a reason to curtail a persons civil liberties and that was his view of the matter. But what, my grandmother wanted to know, would happen to any children born into that union?
‘I wish I could go back in time and give my grandmother a hug for having the compassion and the foresight to think of where that situation would leave us. She was right to worry. It left us in state care, one after the other. And as a young teenager it left me homeless, hungry, and prostituted, in that order.
‘The constraints of my own choices began even before I did. And if we were to shift this situation into the deli-counter analogy, there is no young girl standing there deliberating on what choice to make.
‘There is only a young girl standing waiting for what’s already been selected and pre-wrapped for her, and she can take it or leave it. Those are her options. That is her ‘choice’.’
People will say (and rightly say) that the trafficked child or woman and the destitute child or woman constitute two different situations. Yes, they do – but what is so often ignored is that they also constitute two different situations that culminate in exactly the same place; with both sets of women lying with their legs open on a brothel’s bed. In both situations, choice has been severely constrained. In both situations, the fear of one outcome leads to another. In both situations ‘choices’ have been made that lead to women’s bodies being sexually accessed against their will, which is lived as sexual molestation, in both cases.
In the case of the trafficked woman, she can ‘choose’ to keep kicking and screaming and ignoring the threats against herself and her family. Nobody sees this as a choice that she might be maligned for not making. In the case of the woman who is either in destitution or in fear of destitution, she can keep kicking and screaming mentally, and ignoring the reality of the economic threat against herself and her family, but people do see this as a choice that she is maligned for not making. The bald-faced reality however is that both women are caught in two different versions of the same bind, and both women pay the same price for it. The difference is that the latter group of women pay an additional price – it is the price of a socially-assigned culpability.