Posted by Bitch Lab at 7:06 am and filed under No more Ms. Nice Bitch, So 1998 ::
Share with social bookmarking sites or email this post
:: 1 Views
Nipply Arm’s length lovers Barry weighs in
Possibly Related Posts
For what it’s worth, I don’t like Bitch Lab, I don’t read her, I don’t think she’s very bright, and I think the main thing she piggybacked on recently was a comment thread to a post she didn’t author. Nice appropriation, that.
So: Don’t like Bitch Lab? Join the club, and don’t read her. Read the women she rips off instead. They’re better.
So: Don’t like Bitch Lab? Join the club, and don’t read her. Read the women she rips off instead. They’re better.
06-07-2006
Just go ahead and bitch
Skip all this. Take me straight to the comment form »
Trackbacks
Leave a comment, a trackback from your own blog, or subscribe to an RSS feed for this entry.
Leave a reply
Oh, dear gaaaah!
Given your usual writing style, I wasn’t sure how much of this might be your usual sarcasm.
So I looked up the book in Amazon, and used Amazon’s search inside feature.
That blockquote “script” with Chorus et al is really in the book!
Just wanted to share that for any doubters out there, you can see it for yourself. Here’s a link to the book Search inside for “chorus” — it’s in the Front Matter.
BTW, BL, any advance word on a theme for the next Carnival of Feminists, now that the current one has been posted and you’re up next?
I’m probably going to try to compile my collected definitions of feminism, but themes are fun ideasparks, too.
My very first contact with a radfem was in college, and we were having quite a reasonable debate when she blurts out ‘I identify as a woman first, then everything else.’ And was sort of speechless, and as she kept on going, I remember thinking, ‘How nice for you!’ If I could reduce my world to my vulva, I’d do it in a heartbeat, because it would make everything so easy. Unfortunately, I like reality in my coffee.
ugh. i can’t even form a cohrent response to that.
>Guess what assholes? Since you can’t be bothered to read what I (and others) write and are going to willfully ignore what I’ve said, if you do bother to read it, then I just don’t give a crap anymore.>
Welcome to the Church of Flame, dear Sister.
and yeh, persecution complex kind of sums it up.
i also find it instructive to note how the person in question behaves in contexts outside of sociopolitical thrashes (or whatever the ideology in question is). If you notice that the person manages to work herself into a fine lather over (oh, just for instance) what is and isn’t acceptable to write about in the wacky world of fanfic; or has stopped speaking to/alienated people because of insanely trivial shit, and that this appears to be an ongoing pattern: frootbat. Don’t waste your time.
’cause the great thing about persecution complexes in such cases is, they’re self-fulfilling prophecies.
or, as has been said by I forget whom, first:
“If you’re walking down the street and someone kicks you, they have a problem. If you’re walking down the street and *everyone* kicks you, *you* have a problem.”
Of course, you could also argue that it’s the culture of the street itself that has the problem; this is of course the root of many sociopolitical theories, and in many cases have quite a bit of truth to them (scapegoating is real, yes).
However (my own corollary) if you move? and find some brand-new streets to walk down, and it STILL keeps happening, and this doesn’t seem to be happening to anybody else…then, you know, just maaayyybbeee it might have something to do with the fact that you barrel other people over left and right yourself, in your pursuit of the straight, narrow path.
(I think from now on I’m going to identify as a hedgehog, first. Hedgehogs are nice. Also it would simplify matters quite a bit, I bet).
“Isn’t it interesting that just as “woman†began to speak in her own voice, of her own realities, she was told that was naive there was no unitary self.”
I am not sure what “unitary self” means, but I know good and well that the “woman’s own voice” means nothing to THEM unless it sings in unison with THEM.
I know, I am guilty of otherizing, and monsterizing, and “Them” is not a cite-able source, and there’s no excuse for that. I hate it when people do that to me.
Nonetheless, I just wish some of THEM would come right out and say “we don’t want you to stand next to us. you’re dirty.”
I am still more than happy to determine asshattery (or not) on a case-by-case basis, regardless of the self-declared label or ideology.
that said: personally, Fuck Guilt. I am not MotherFuckingTheresa.
I think what you were saying over at my blog, Lis? about how you can’t possibly relate to every single person on a deep interpersonal level? i agree, and that goes double or triple for people I find personally toxic. if anything, I’d like to remove whatever remaining hooks these people have so’s I can give them *less* energy. I simply haven’t the resources for endless patient pouring into energy sinks, or waiting for blood to come from a stone.
(sing it, Sisters!!
“I’m every wo-man…it’s all in…meeeeeeee”)
then again i note that the book in question is ten years old, and it’s yet to receive its first customer review.
mebbe it is time to move on, i am thinking. so many windmills, so little time…
Ouch.
then again i note that the book in question is ten years old, and it’s yet to receive its first customer review.
After seeing belldame’s comment, I went looking thru the archives to see what kinds of professional reviews it received.
Elayne Rapping [Women's Review of Books, Oct96] begins:
Later in the same review:
[If you want the whole review, BL, let me know and I can email it to you.]
Formatting note: somehow, paragraph breaks were omitted in the excerpt above. They come before
and
lis - sling that review my way, too, if it’s not too much trouble.
@lis
yes. please! As I’ve taken breaks throughout the day, I’ve been flipping through it and the reviewer is quite right. most of the entries that caught my eye so far are more or less hostile attacks on what’s wrong with feminists these days. e.g., I just came back from reading a short blurb about the horror that is today’s ‘gender history’.
Another article attacks lesbian and gay studies programs and queer theory.
and all of it’s kind of this bizarro attack on intellectuality, thinking, thought, theory, abstraction spoken from the position of women IN THE ACADEMY.
I love how academic feminists attack others by appealing to anti-intellectualism in the US. It’s really quite annoying: another version of “I’ve read this. It sucks. Trust me. You don’t need to worry your litttle head about it.”
I’ll have to write henwood, too. He once pointed at some research that showed that, contrary to claims that contemporary theory is opposed to political practice, today’s practitioners of said Horrible Theory are actually far more politically active than anyone imagined — e.g., anti-capitalist movement, anti-globilization, ant-sweatshop movements, labor movement and organizing, etc.
The review is kick-ass.
and I love that her name is “Rapping,” p.s., and fervently hope that that is her birth name
My mind is doing silly things…
Ahem. We now return you to your regularly scheduled ranting, already in progress…
>I’ve read this. It sucks. Trust me. You don’t need to worry your litttle head about it.â€Â>
heh, leading up to the spat with witchy-twee, when I’d first asked for clarification wrt MacKinnon’s claim about the “lies” being spread by “a PR firm hired and funded by the pornographers,” (i.e. name of the PR firm, please?), she pointed me at her transcript of Assiter’s talk; MacKinnon’s comment was in the follow-up discussion. she sez she’d recommend skipping the talk, you know; nice of her to want to spare me from Assiter’s assiness. so i read the whole thing and go, oh yeah, i remember reading that one before, she did seem ill-prepared. anyway it’s still not clear from that context what the PR firm is, so I’m gonna assume she probably is referring to FACT, based on this googling i’ve been doing
(”you know how to google, right? you put your fingers together and type.”
i did not say this, at the time).
*that’s* when she got all huffy and called out my creds.
apparently I, unlike the people who have Been There, am talking out of my ass. hence, Fraud, and Not A Feminist.
i don’t know how i’ll ever get over the shame of it
i’m still baffled by said radfems.not inability to conceptualize one complex thought.
as in: i can see how much our culture absolutely hates women (and i do see it now more as a man than i ever did before as a woman) and claim as valid other feminisms.
these radfems.not remind me of a kind of fervor i’ve seen in some catholics. the ones that constantly say the “hail mary” for fear that they will sin.
alas, if they were christians i’d think they’d be like “AtMs are signs of the Devil!”
I have been wondering how many of these-types have a fundamentalist background.
“I have been wondering how many of these-types have a fundamentalist background.”
Fwiw, the two radfems that I argued with the most in grad school were ex-nuns. Maybe they identified with the Blessed Christina, a figure of the 12-13th century in France. To wit:
“She exhibited both unusual traits and abilities. For example, she could not stand the odor of other people because she could smell the sin in them, and would climb trees or buildings, hide in ovens or cupboards, or simply levitate to avoid contact. She lived in a way that was considered poverty even in the 13th century, sleeping on rocks, wearing rags, begging, and eating what came to hand. She would roll in fire or handle it without harm, stand in freezing water in the winter for hours, spend long periods in tombs, or allow herself to be dragged under water by a mill wheel, though she never sustained injury. Given to ecstasies during which she led the souls of the recently dead to purgatory, and those in purgatory to paradise.
People who knew her were divided in their opinions: she was a holy woman, touched of God, and that her actions and torments were simulations of the experiences of the souls in purgatory; she was suffering the torments of devils - or she was flatly insane. However, the prioress of Saint Catherine’s convent testified that no matter how bizarre or excessive Christina’s reported actions, she was always completely obedient to the prioresses orders.”
The radfems I’ve tangled with come off as smelling the sin in us all, and boy howdy, I stink! Hallefrigginlujah!
>or simply levitate to avoid contact
oh, KICKASS!! i wanna learn how to do that, too!
@ Belledame
Church of Flame. heh. But women are no fun to flame, I must say. I have much more fun with men. It’s not that I don’t want to hurt feelings, it’s just that there is something else… hmmm. I can’t put my finger on it.
levitating: as a kid, I was totally into all that stuff and used to try to levitate. I was pretty convinced i could do it, too. I think I must have read all these weird 70s books on my mother’s shelves and at the corner drugstore about Edgar Cacey, some which named Sybil (no, not the multiple personality disordered Sybil), etc. What a weird decade, the 70s.
>But women are no fun to flame, I must say. I have much more fun with men. It’s not that I don’t want to hurt feelings, it’s just that there is something else… hmmm. I can’t put my finger on it.>
actually I normally feel the same way.
I think though it has more to do with style than with actual gender per se. well, style and subject matter. mainly i end up flaming about politics, which 1) tend to have a higher proportion of men (the feminist sex wars thing being my first exception) and 2) are probably best suited for flaming, since one is invested enough in the subject matter to be passionate about it, but at the same time it’s usually not personal enough to feel squicky about skewering someone who’s just laid her/his heart bare.
mostly it’s more fun to flame men because…
well there are a couple becauses.
i also think that (huge honking generalization alert) in U.S. culture, at least, or a number of them, men seem likelier to be able to get into a huge-ass, knock-down fight; but then, when it’s finished, it’s finished. you can even be friendly afterward. not that there aren’t ongoing feuds and all, and lord knows there are all kinds of weird male vanities and grudges that pop up, but…something about strong language, vehement disagreement, even insult-flinging, doesn’t seem to carry the same weight as it does for (many) women. brawling is fun. feeling like i’ve caused a deep wound that won’t heal: not fun.
if I flame a woman, it’s usually because her posting style has convinced me that whatever i post is going to just bounce off her hide anyway; she’s essentially off on her own trip already. (actually, that pretty much goes for men, too)
and then, too, flaming for me is usually about cutting someone down to size, and generally speaking it tends to be the men who run toward overinflation. not always, of course, but…statistically. here, I have charts.
anyway my bozolist and target practice on the vee cee has been overwhelmingly male. this is not the case with a lot of other women, I note, who tend to be more likely to fight with each other. (as do the men, with each other). i have wondered about why this might be so. i suspect i still haven’t gotten to the bottom of it.
i think you are on to something re flaming and gender. If anyone’s bared their soul, they’d have to be an insufferable asshole to elicit a flame from me.
and you’re right about the brawling, it’s all over, let’s move and have a beer.
Mostly, I am just assumed to be a man, even when I use my real name. I find it quite fascinating, but I always test male on the gendered writing test. Which is pretty funny, to me, since it’s interesting to see how markedly different you’re treated once people learn you’re a woman when they thought you were male.
more on that later, though.
I was gonna say that generally my chosen logic means that people don’t mistake me for a guy.
last time i did a technorati search tho’, i did notice that some dude had linked to me as “Fetching His Axe.”
i’m not sure what to make of that, really.
–ha! chosen LOGIN. is that a Freudian slip or what?
Love this post!
I’ll never forget, a few months ago on Twisty’s blog, in one of the big-ass threads about BDSM, sex-pos feminism, etc., a guy (yes, a *guy* dared to comment, so already you can see where this is going) pointed out that some of the radfems reminded him a little too much of some of the themes emphasized in Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale. The point was very well made, but what does the next radfem come along and do? She just says, “A* Handmaid’s Tale? Nope, never read it.” - and goes on to criticize him! Um, hello, how can you be that dismissive and still expect people to take you seriously?? I was floored.
Anyway. Can’t wait to read your book. :)
* sic
I’ll never forget, a few months ago on Twisty’s blog, in one of the big-ass threads about BDSM, sex-pos feminism, etc., a guy (yes, a *guy* dared to comment, so already you can see where this is going) pointed out that some of the radfems reminded him a little too much of some of the themes emphasized in Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale. The point was very well made, but what does the next radfem come along and do? She just says, “A* Handmaid’s Tale? Nope, never read it.†- and goes on to criticize him! Um, hello, how can you be that dismissive and still expect people to take you seriously?? I was floored.
It was worse than that! She implied that he’d insulted her or something–she made it clear that not only had she never _read_ the book, she had no idea what it was! She thought it was porn or BDSM literature, not a classic work of feminist fiction.
IIRC; I wish I could remember Lucky’s exact words. I remember being floored by her response when I saw it, too.
The level of ignorance from some of the born-again Dworkinites is…yeah. no, not even ignorance, that’s not the right word.
somewhere I was looking at some young woman’s blog, who may or may not have been actually ID’ing as a radfem, but was clearly enamored with BB and her blog. anyway, somewhere in there she said BB had invented this clever term, “pink collar worker,” wasn’t that great?
or the thread at Bitch PhD’s where people were asked to name the feminist who’d inspired them most. a bunch of people cited bloggers, and one said she’d started with Bitch PhD, moved onto Twisty, and now had “advanced” (I’m pretty sure) to BB, her new favorite.
funnily enough it’s BB herself who bills her brand of feminism as “advanced.”
pays to advertise, I guess.
>in one of the big-ass threads about BDSM, sex-pos feminism, etc., a guy (yes, a *guy* dared to comment,
o but of course Radgeek and the formerly known as Dim can hold forth at length and bully and whine and condescend–hell, Dim even had that ridiculous “I joined my college BDSM club and all I got was this lousy guilt complex exacerbated” post spotlighted by Twisty. we love the radical feminist Mens! yes we does!
Hah! I hate Dim. …I know I sound like Lucky here, but the day a straight man has the right to tell me when and how I’ve internalized misogyny is the day I become a Latter-Day Saint.
You know, BDSM has come up on my blog. I put up a post about the kink/fetish/fantasy component that you are not interested in. I chose wrestling. The Femme Who Understands would be another one.
Then I, um, fled.
The thread turned to BDSM-ish stuff, which bothers a lot of people for various reasons, and someone asked me what I thought about the burden of consent resting on the top.* I feel like I should post, but yeeessh.
There are bloggers I respect and like a great deal who are anti-BDSM; Chris Clarke’s one of them. I’m afraid to out myself on my own blog. Which is pretty pathetic.
*Fan-fucking-tastic. There are tops who complain about having to worry about every little thing, and I have about as much sympathy for them as I do for men who whine about being extra careful not to rape anybody.
You know, it occurs to me that one of the other reasons I hate wrestling is that I’m such a submissive? I want to get pinned.
I like and respect Chris Clarke for a number of things, of which his wonderfully dismissive filleting of the Dim One was one small but shining highlight. but yeah, I…well, don’t agree about that, with him, obviously, nor on porn. at least he doesn’t seem to go on and on about it.
one of these days soon I’m gonna do a BDSM 101 post, I guess.
mostly I just think: look, you’re smart, you understand the whole “consensual” business, right? groovy. so let’s have a tacit understanding that you feel this is Not Feminist and therefore don’t partake, and get on with talking about the 8,000,000 other important things we could be working on together.
that’s as far as I can go, anyway.
I mean, that’s what eventually pissed me off about Twisty; it’s like, if it bothers you so much *and* you understand that no one’s being coerced (which frankly a lot of your readers still don’t seem to, but whatever), why not, you know, just drop it?
i mean, in theory she did do eventually, at least wrt BDSM (haven’t been back much since her “last word” on the subject), but. and then the snide about “sexbots” and how women who wear fetishy heels belong in a home and…
enough already.
slip, heh. I’m sure there must be wrestlers who’d be more than happy to accomodate that…
@ piny — my apologies, btw. i’m a flake. right after we talked, i got very very ill and was in pain for five days or so. i’ve recuperated but am still not quite keeping up with things.
@ Belle
for some folks, both pornography and BDSM are simply seen as the fulcrum from which all women’s oppression turns. it’s there, at the root of contemporary sexual practices, that women are dominated, violated, abused, raped, etc. Against their will.
They can’t give up the idea that there must be an end to it, any more than some of us could give up the idea that women must have complete control of the reproductive capacities: abortion on demand, affordable health care, freedom from coerced birth control, etc.
The rallying cry to unite against BDSM, porn, prostitution may — may — have made sense when there was an all-fired and het up social movement, where women felt the revolutionary fervor.
but it kind of reminds me of the comRods calling each other comrade on a marxist e-mail list. uhm. dudes. the revo ain’t anywhere close, so give it a rest mmkay?
so, you have people with very strong feelings about it, particularly if they’ve ever been brainwashed by the infamous presentation on the horrors of porn that focuses almost exclusively on BDSM — and completely out of context. There’s a great inteview of Gayle Rubin (by Judith Butler) where she talks about how ridiculous the infamous presentation was and there are not a few analysis of the film and literature the radfems produced which is, basically, full of distortions, some of which had to be retracted.
So, these people read this — they’ve never experienced this world, they haven’t a clue. the only thing they know is the propaganda.And, ofcourse, if they’ve read AD, etc., then they’ve gotten an earful of how BDSM is nothing more and nothing less than THE representation of male domination of women.
So, you can talk ‘ti you’re blue in the face…
Meanwhile, like I said, there’s not muchr eovlutionary fervor these days. For, the only way to get people to stop practicing BDSM is through education and commitment to a personal politics that you understand to be a politics that _will_ transform the world. and it’s gonna hppen soon…
but it’s not and there’s no coherent social movement, only scattered individuals and pockets of communities that barely stay in contact with one another.
and, so, you have people who aren’t really content to just let it be.
Another tagentially related item: i’ve noticed that a LOT of radical feminism is incorporated into the environmental movement. I’d hazard a guess that this is where most people are exposed to radfem ideas.
I’m not sure I’m following you. Perhaps a typo ? Don’t you mean “For, the only way to get people to stop *ranting about* BDSM is through education and commitment to a personal politics…” rather than stopping them practicing it ?
And so that’s why just talking about it fails to convince ?
As regards radfem’s relationship with environmental politics, are you thinking of ecofeminism, which does indeed fit with the utopian essentialism which is one aspect of radfem ? ( see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecofeminism )
What about feminism and the Green Party in the US, though ? Am I wrong in detecting a more socialist feminist influence there ?
ilestre
*grin* well, maybe you and I see that it could only be at the level of “ranting” but I think they see it quite differently.
I think they believe that, were people convinced of its horrors via the anti-porn/BDSM roadshow (the film, lectures, and demonstrations antiporn feminists put on) they wouldn’t do it. I mean, to them, it’s just a truism: it’s bad and the only ppl who engage in it are people who are falsely conscious. once we rip away the veil of ideology, they’ll stop doing what they do.
Sort of like people who are convinced of the evils of modern farming will believe that, if they just show people a documentary film about the horrors of agribusiness and the treatment of animals, people will stop eating meat.
You wouldn’t say about such a documentary that it would only get people to stop *ranting* about eating meat, would you?
yes re: ecofem. i don’t know much about the green party in general. in this part of the world — at least with the antiwar activists who are green — socialism seems to be anathema and it’s a lot of talk about women’s natural peace-loving ways, the earth as our mother, yadda.
i don’t know what the green party is like elsewhere.
My knee jerk reaction, though? Greens strike me as folks who completely lack a marxist or socialist analysis of the economy. They seem to want a kinder, gentler capitalism: anti-walmart campaigns, etc.
or forfuck’s sake, that godamned sneaker “no logo” or whatever it is. that stuff pisses me off.
I remember seeing the advertising/porn/BDSM slideshow back in college and hanging out with the campus Womyn’s Coalition (yes, that’s how they spelt their name).
Caused me no end of distress trying to reconcile my feminist ideology with the fact that most of my fantasies were of bondage and submission. I truly believed there must be something wrong with me, and made myself miserable over it.
My road to happiness was realizing that feminism meant being free to make my own choices, including the choice to be sexually submissive.
And the thing that anti-BDSMers don’t seem to get is that submissive does NOT equal doormat. In fact, it’s often quite the opposite, with people who are Type A in every other facet of their life enjoying being able to relinquish control now and again…
Right, well it’s just I really did misunderstand you. I thought you were talking about our getting them to stop going on about it ;)
Of course stopping people from practising BDSM is not one of our goals, is it ? So I have no idea how you would stop people doing it, and I’m not terribly interested in finding out - and telling radfems theirs is not the way to do it sort of justifies the notion that it is a worthwhile goal at all.
Some might say that in the anarchist communist world of the future, people will not be interested in BDSM, but as Engels says, the people of the future care not a jot about what we think they will enjoy, they’ll make their own public opinion about it and that’s the end of that.
About the US Green Party, I realise they’re not marxists, nor claim to be, but I thought that perhaps feminists within it might tend towards less divisive theories, where economic or race issues are not as divided from gender issues as they are in radfem. Then again perhaps not.
I mainly hear about the US Green Party from US socialist friends who have been working with it during the Nader-Camejo campaigns , so I suppose I see more of the socialist-friendly side of it than you perhaps (but of course the last such campaign in 2004 was precisely without the Green Party, which kind of split over it).
The French Green Party is hopelessly wedded to actually existing capitalism, they were in government between 1997 and 2002 and very much adapted wholesale to the status quo. Still there’s a few decent people in it.
The only thing I’ve done or can think of doing wrt getting people to stop going on about it is to voice my point of view to them politely, and then not-so-politely. And then rather rudely, in separate spaces.
After that, there’s not much I can do. Hey, they can rant on about the evils of pr0n and BDSM, or how all women are a class, or whatnot, all day. I’m not their keeper any more than they are mine, after all. And if some particular issue comes up where we could potentially work together (i.e. reproductive rights), fine. But I’m not on board with them, sorry.
which is kind of what I think the complaint of this whole book is (sounds like): those ungrateful postmodernists (and so on and so on)! why why why are they splitting off and attacking us when we had the Answer? well, it *can’t* be because any of their criticisms were legitimate; it must be a problem with them. Selfish, deluded, whitestraightrich-hating, consumer-good obsessed patriarchy fuckers.
which, well, yep, you just keep thinking there, that’s what you’re good at.
BL: yeah, I did notice an eerie similarity between certain Peter Singer supporters and certain Dworkinites, tone-wise.
“tsk, you’re so selfish. Nobody NEEDS (meat, porn, this kind of sex, dairy products). How many (women, animals) must be sacrificed to your degenerate sensual lusts? Just try abstaining! It’s not that hard! All this attacking of poor little us just for pointing out the Truth: you must feel terribly guilty. Well, you should.”
you must feel terribly guilty. Well, you should.
This reminds me of a friend’s essay on the problem with lactivism (as it’s currently practiced) and the horrible shaming tactics they use. Specifically, this comment near the conclusion:
Why do so many purportedly-pro-women activists seem to take delight in tactics that primarily make women miserable in the short-term?
@ ilestre
I hadn’t thought about getting them to stop going on about it, actually.
but now that I think about it, why not?
rightwingers go on about — rant against — queers and part of what we do is engage in agit prop, polemics, education, protests, etc. to get people to knock it off.
the more tenacious aren’t ever going to stop. they have issues. but the audience isn’t those people, it’s people like my son’s friends who sometimes have knee-jerk reactions to talk of gay men.
as lis points out, these people can do a lot of damage to the psyches and self-understandings of sexual minorities — because it doesn’t just stop with BDSM sometimes. It’s also all bound up with pornography and prostitution.
One of the reasons I give a shit is not that I’m interested in BDSM in the way, say, that my friends Brian and Anastasia are, both whom believe they were _born_ sadists just as people feel they were born queer.
but it’s becaseu my friends, Brian and Anastasia, wrote convincingly of their views and made me see, of course, that I didn’t know much about it, but it was a lot more complicated than anyone had led me to believe. Not that I would have been inclined toward denouncing it, but….
Even though in my heart of hearts its really *hard* for me to understand what they are saying because *my* sexual proclivities are to my mind all about my actual lived history and not something I feel I was born with. this may be the result of being bi — but I don’t identify, for example, when people say they feel “right” or “at home” with women whereas they don’t with men (or vice versa). it makes no sense to me.
but enough other ppl tell me otherwise and experience their sexuality otherwise, that I have to respect that. (I just fucking want the same back, which too often I don’t get and, rather, get told a lot of bullshit about how i’m in denial or a la BB a fakester bisexual who’s just in for the increased opportunity for cock.)
where was i going with this? Oh yeah and so I’m not a sex worker either — though I would like to do the phone sex thing because it’s easy money and I have a great Lauren Becall voice :) I’d be ace at it. Plus, I want the data! HA!
Seriously, though, I’ve lived with too many sex workers. They are my friends. They are bright, beautiful, wonderful people like anyone else and I’m sick fucking to death of these pipsqueaks who claim that they just want to protect them. and in the name of protecting and saving them, though they may not mean to, they demonize and often LIE about their lives.
the things they say about them are simply not true for these women (and some men) that I knew — though they surely may be true for many others. I’m just tired of their bullshit because the fact is, it makes the lives of women and men I love that much more difficult. because the radfem saviours are out there encouraging everyone to think of it all as nasty evilness,. encouraging everyone to erase the diversity of their voices.
well, that’s a rant. but you get my drift?
this may not affect me personally, but it sure as hell affects people I love and in a very negative way. I want an end to it.
so yeah, the sooner they shut up about it, the happier I’ll be since I think it can make it easier for us to unionize, organize, etc.
and, furthermore, here in Tampa Bay there is a concerted attack on the industry on the part of the rightwingers. they aren’t content to let these people be. not in the least.
so, while i may never convince a single radfem to shut up about it, I may help educate people who don’t have much of a position one way or another. if even in the smallest way, something i write or say convinces people not to vote for the nimrods in the local elections, great. if it gets people to stop saying shitty things to sex workers and gets them to stop staring at them or gossiping about them or denying them a rental unit or making it hard for them to find daycare (things that have happened here), great.
Talking of which, here’s a concrete example from right now of where this nonsense leads : a group of feminists in France have been leafletting around the petition by the CATW against prostitution during the soccer World Cup in Germany, in the sensational yet abstract moralising style beloved of abolitionists (by abstract I mean it doesn’t really demand anything apart from condemning prostitution as A Bad Thing). ( http://catwepetition.ouvaton.org/php/index.php )
A group of sex workers have reacted by pointing out that the same group has been rather less active at protesting the new anti-sex workers laws in France over the past couple of years… ( http://www.lesputes.org/home.htm ).
Yes! That is one thing that really chaps my ass. I have several friends who are sex workers, one of whom is one of my closest friends. She is intelligent, well-educated, talented, self-aware, and basically just fun to hang out with. And then I read bullshit like this…
(I had the misfortune of finding that post only because the author linked to a post of mine and thus I saw it in my stats. And I would still like what s/he said explained, because to me it makes no sense.)
Just to agree (and provide further data):
as lis points out, these people can do a lot of damage to the psyches and self-understandings of sexual minorities  because it doesn’t just stop with BDSM sometimes. It’s also all bound up with pornography and prostitution.
And porn can be a very powerful first step to self-acceptance. The realization that “I’m not alone” and “there are others who feel this way” is an unbelievably liberating feeling.
One of the reasons I give a shit is not that I’m interested in BDSM in the way, say, that my friends Briand and Anastasia are, both whom believe they were _born_ sadists just as people feel they were born queer.
I can trace my desires back to when I was 3 or 4 years old. I distinctly remember playing Robin Hood with some friends. I was Maid Marian, so was (consensually) tied to a post and blindfolded… Far before I was in any way sexual, I was always fascinated with bondage and immobilization.
And, believe me, I’ve scrutinized every inch of my upbringing, and could find no instance of abuse anywhere. I do feel guilt about the unwarranted suspicion I put my caregivers under, and anger at the anti-BDSM feminists who planted such doubts in my mind.
Or Twisty with her whole sneery dismissal of BDSM as being “conformist, anti-intellectual” (among other things) I was all, sweetie, spend an hour conversing with Midori sometime (who has some really interesting things to say wrt the difference between “shame culture,” as she understands Japan, and “guilt culture,” as she understands wrt the U.S.). Or any number of other people–some of the smartest, most interesting people I know are into kink, and no, quite a lot of it does *not* look like the stand-and-model people you once witnessed for fifteen minutes at that goth club your friends dragged you to.
Yeah, what really pisses me off about that whole tactic-”sexbot” talk and all–is its not-conscious-but-still-there reinforcement of the *very* patriarchal trope:
“A woman can be smart, or she can look/act like a ‘bimbo’/slut, but she can’t be both.”
As per the guilt thing wrt the lactivism and so forth–gahhhhh.
So here’s my question:
The anti-abortion people would say that you, too, must be in denial about your guilt, otherwise why fight them so hard? And after all, they’re talking about *killing an innocent living human being* (from their pov at any rate), which is clearly far worse than any of this other nonsense. How can you live with yourselves, how?
and of course no queer person *ever* experienced guilt simply for her/his/hir sexual desires toward the Wrong People.
oh butbutbut that’s Different. Gay is OK. A woman’s body belongs to her (as long as we’re just talking about reproductive freedom and not frivolous shit like kinky sex or selling it for a living). That’s Just The Way It Is. duh?!?! what on earth do you mean by asking all these questions, anyway? We’re trying to usher in a world of freedom and equality and caring relationships, so sit down, shut up, and get with the program!
Heh… just found this…
The site is mocking Christian fundamentalists, but damn if that quote ain’t applicable to the radfems, too.
Amber
I love Betty!
This was her latest, on Ann Coulter:
Mrs. Betty Bowers reviews “Godless” — A book from one who knows
This week, sweet Ann Coulter released her latest in a series of pre-rehab books, entitled Godless. Naturally, the title led me to believe that it was an unexpectedly candid autobiography. Alas, she may be saving that book until after she’s been strapped to a bed at Hazelden for a month. Instead of using this book to dabble in the bracing novelty of introspection, Miss Coulter turns her two-setting mind (”off” and “off her rocker”) to hector us about religion.
Let’s be honest: Reading a book about religion from Ann Coulter is tantamount to reading a book about dieting from Michael Moore. After all, who wants to be lectured about not being Christian enough by an almost-50 year-old boozehound in a black leather miniskirt who has never been married? Count me as having a healthy skepticism over whether Miss Coulter has saved herself for marriage. Or anything, for that matter.
In Godless, Miss (oh, how it pains me to refer to that serially-rejected spinster as “Miss,” but something Miss Coulter usually eschews — accuracy — compels me) Coulter turns her shrill furnace of brayed invective, fueled by a bottomless quarry of prickly psychological damage, at the most despicable people in the world. No, not the maniacal murderers who flew planes into the World Trade Center towers, but the blameless Americans who had their flesh burned off of their bodies in those buildings — and the inconsolable spouses they left behind.
Yes, she directs an anger that shirks all management on women whose husbands were murdered on 9/11. Apparently, in Miss Coulter’s religion, the meek may inherit the Earth, but not before she’s had a shot at making them cry first. With a mouth so busy frothing it apparently has no time to eat, Miss Coulter claims to be livid at these opportunistic widows for being crass enough to remember the event that killed the father of their children. She also gets prickly about them being compensated as a result of the catastrophe.
Frankly, I think she is simply exhibiting a fierce territoriality on behalf of herself and other Republicans who have used 9/11 to win elections and sell books. Her attitude seems to be: Exploiting 9/11 is our shtick — find your own way to make money! This must account for why she doesn’t take Lisa Beamer to task for registering “Let’s Roll!â„¢” on the trinkets she sold on the Internet.
Ann Coulter (billed as “Joan Van Ark”) in a television gig preceding her current role as Sean Hannity’s concubine on the Fox sitcom Hannity and Colmes
Of course, Ann’s every utterance is a carefully choreographed gambit to convert sensationalistic bad taste into sensationally good sales. In this way she is like another rapidly aging blond sex kitten, Madonna, someone else with no discernable talent other than getting people to ask, “Did she really say that?” Miss Coulter mocking the widows of men incinerated by burning jet fuel in the World Trade Center is just her competitive one-upmanship of Madonna showing up on a mirrored crucifix, all but screaming “Look at me! Isn’t this SHOCKING?” And you have to give credit where it is due: Miss Coulter could squeeze ink out of a tombstone.
But in her mercantile zeal to say what sells, Miss Coulter endeavors to create an image that has apparently had a nasty falling out with reality, leaving them no longer on speaking terms. Indeed, to hear Miss Coulter speak (in that Martha Stewart-on-helium Connecticut lockjaw voice of hers), you’d think she is someone who actually embraces heartland, Christian, American values. In reality, however, she is less like June Cleaver baking pot-roast than she is like Samantha Jones baked on pot. Indeed, this is no piously serene Christian wife, but a braying loud mouth who wears super-slutty clothes, powders her bony nose more often than Lindsay Lohan (if you know what I mean), knocks back scotch with an alacrity that eludes Ted Kennedy since the advent of rheumatoid arthritis, lives only in cities filled with homos and screws anything willing to bang an anorexic skeleton. [Had I typed any of that I would have included the word "allegedly," but the Lord apparently countenances no such quibbles when he uses my keyboard to throw His voice.]
This brings me to Miss Coulter’s teen tramp wardrobe. Miss Coulter showed up to the Today show this week wearing a black cocktail dress three sizes too small. At seven in the morning, mind you. No woman in New York wears a little black dress that early in the day unless she is burying someone dead, or looks like someone death, as she makes a Whore of Babylon predawn retreat from the previous night’s licentious debauchery. This may account for why Matt Lauer told me that the poor thing smelled like an ashtray.
But it wasn’t the color of the dress that was so telling. No, it was the “Look! I got myself one of those Brazilian waxes!” length that spoke more to a Jackie Stallone determination to hang on to youth with knuckles no longer white but bleeding. Indeed, it seems that Miss Coulter’s whole sense of self comes from thinking she is a “hot young babe” who drives, presumably myopic, men wild with a sexual desire so ardent they no longer hear the nonsense she is saying. Goodness me, who would have ever guessed that the Achilles heel for most Republican man would be the sight of pre-operative transsexuals in dresses made for someone 20 years younger?
Miss Coulter suffers from an affliction I like to call Mariah Carey by Proxy. Celebrities who suffer from this debilitating disease so seldom seek help before some ruthless person takes a photograph of them. Mariah Carey by Proxy afflicts menopausal woman who think they would break the hearts of teenage boys throughout America if they ever showed up in public with a nipple-baring “Love Waits” tube-top. NOTE: Call your doctor if you find yourself wearing clothes that flash undernourished, middle-age legs and surgically-levitated bosoms, particularly when such revealing clothing is not appropriate for the occasion. Side affects may include wearing your hair like a junior high school cheerleader even though you are rapidly approaching 50.
Please join me in prayer for dear, sad Miss Coulter, as plastic surgery and Photoshop do not seem to be sparing this one-note minx from becoming the Baby Jane Hudson of the easy-to-fulminate set.
Miss Coulter’s muse, Sylvia Miles (right). Miss Coulter has been overheard bellowing in bars the words made famous by Miss Miles in the film Midnight Cowboy:
“You were gonna ask me for money? Who the hell do you think you’re dealing with, some old slut on K Street? In case you didn’t happen to notice it, ya big Texas longhorn bull, I’m one helluva gorgeous chick!”
TIP FOR READING MISS COULTER’S BOOKS: For those of you pressed for time, but still don’t wish to miss out on the tedium of being regaled by one recycled thought spread out over 300-odd pages: You can finish any Coulter book in less than15 minutes by simply skipping over the word “liberals.” Try it! This time saving technique is even more effective with anything typed by Sean Hannity, who has shown the bracing resourcefulness it takes to parlay basically two thoughts into an entire career.
Or Twisty with her whole sneery dismissal of BDSM as being “conformist, anti-intellectual†(among other things) I was all, sweetie, spend an hour conversing with Midori sometime (who has some really interesting things to say wrt the difference between “shame culture,†as she understands Japan, and “guilt culture,†as she understands wrt the U.S.). Or any number of other people–some of the smartest, most interesting people I know are into kink, and no, quite a lot of it does *not* look like the stand-and-model people you once witnessed for fifteen minutes at that goth club your friends dragged you to.
And this is kind of where the discussion just has to end, isn’t it? Because I’ve never been able to convince anyone on those comments threads that I was not deluding myself about the personal and political significance of BDSM.
I was Maid Marian, so was (consensually) tied to a post and blindfolded… Far before I was in any way sexual, I was always fascinated with bondage and immobilization.
…And I’ve loved spicy foods all my life. Why is it okay to inflict those on myself?
Because that’s DIFFERENT. god. stop changing the subject. i suppose next you’re going to trot out those tired old lines about extreme sports and wrestling and sports massages and so forth. none of which have anything to do with any sort of cultural influence (patriarchal or otherwise–waitm there *is* no “otherwise”) *or* pain-as-pleasure; or, well, not so’s they’re really worth mentioning. rape fantasies! rape fantasies!!!! but you’re the one showing me all the dirty pictures, Doc!
>the Baby Jane Hudson of the easy-to-fulminate set.
oh god, that’s lovely, just lovely.
Because that’s DIFFERENT. god. stop changing the subject. i suppose next you’re going to trot out those tired old lines about extreme sports and wrestling and sports massages and so forth. none of which have anything to do with any sort of cultural influence (patriarchal or otherwise–waitm there *is* no “otherwiseâ€Â) *or* pain-as-pleasure; or, well, not so’s they’re really worth mentioning. rape fantasies! rape fantasies!!!! but you’re the one showing me all the dirty pictures, Doc!
That’s the problem, and that’s why it’s so irritating. It really is–in this specific intance, even. The whole “pain-as-pleasure” phrasing misses the point. It’s not pain-as-pleasure any more than tickling someone is.
well, yes, mileage varies wrt “what word, dammit?” i mean, i do know what you mean. it also depends on whether you consider “runner’s high” (along with aching muscles and all the other attendant sensations) “pain” or even “masochism,” or if you’re all, “but no! that’s COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from getting a punch in the nose or stubbing your toe! sheesh!”
but also, if you’re a chile-head or a runner and go, “yeah, I like to feel the BURN, baby,” or even “no pain no gain” (I guess)
people will either nod appreciatively, knowing just what you mean, or shake their heads indulgently, but without any real judgment: hey, horses for courses, right?
but talk about liking to “feel the BURN (sting, thud)” from oh say a good flogging, and people immediately go into pathologizing headspace.
Moron question, but how many anti-BDSMers also advocate natural childbirth?
…I mean, for my own purposes I prefer “sensation play” or “percussion play,” but I also have kinkster acquaintances who are quite clear: no, it’s PAIN, dude.
it also depends on what’s driving you. if you’re primarily on the sensation spectrum and aren’t terribly interested in the power dynamic, then most likely what you’re after is the “high:” it could be more intense, but you’re still basically going for something that’s not (at least, only) physically synonymous with “pain.”
whereash if you’re a sub I guess, you could be experiencing something as physically painful/unpleasant, (i.e. not wired that way), but the pleasure is coming from the dom/sub context.
or it could be some of each.
Lis: heh.
am now reminded of Susie Bright’s essay about her birth experience; how she actually found it deeply orgasmic (and also running a vibe on her clit for an extra frisson, as she pushed, I believe). course, you don’t get to that point without *lots* of warming up. what’s lamaze compared to fistfucking? (or both…)
“sensation play†or “percussion play,â€Â
I know several people who have done this for the macho endurance thing. Just like someone might push themselves to run a marathon or take pride in the number of pushups they can do, it’s about proving to onesself and the world how tough one is.
[Not me, I'm a pain wimp, but I've watched others.]
Yup. Then it takes on more of a ritualistic tinge, I think, sometimes. Trial by fire, you know.
what’s driving you … sensation spectrum … power dynamic
Many years ago, when we were more closely involved in the “scene”, my husband graphed out multiple axes for the primary kinks, and used to pride himself on being a six-way switch.
Here’s his explanation of the divisions he drew. [This was written in response to a different kind of One-True-Way-ist]
Looking at it a decade later, I see some signs of age… No mention of fetishes, for example, and furries were much rarer then than they appear to be now. Still, it’s a useful breakdown.
Midori did a similar breakdown in the topping workshop I took from her.
there’s also a meditative aspect to bondage, or can be.
I’m not much for the meditation. I’m more like a kitten getting tangled in a ball of yarn. :)
I know several people who have done this for the macho endurance thing. Just like someone might push themselves to run a marathon or take pride in the number of pushups they can do, it’s about proving to onesself and the world how tough one is.
I know the impulse. It can be a pretty reckless way to bottom, though, and your top might not be comfortable with it.
Well, that’s why consent is a two-way* street
*or involving as many people as will be participating in the scene…
That’s another thing that anti’s don’t get — all parties have to consent. Sometimes the catcher may want more than the pitcher can deliver. It’s not just about the pitcher’s demands…
[Pitcher/catcher -- because top/bottom tend to be used for SM and dom/sub for powerplay, pitcher/catcher is a more generic term.]
That’s another thing that anti’s don’t get  all parties have to consent. Sometimes the catcher may want more than the pitcher can deliver. It’s not just about the pitcher’s demands…
I’ve heard Chris talk about this in quid-pro-quo terms, etc. I think that it’s not that they disagree with the existence of consent, but rather that they envision it being the technical kind.
The tops I play with are not interested in taking all they can get. I hate to sound like a suspicious bottom here, but those people are proto-abusers, and I stay the fuck away from them. The people I play with are interested in my enthusiastic participation. Nothing would scare them off faster than someone who seemed not to know or care about their own boundaries, or someone who really did believe that being a bottom meant they owed the top anything.
For me, the pleasure of topping is about the bottom’s reaction. Sure, my own fantasies play into it somewhat, but ultimately it has to revolve around what’s going to get the bottom’s motor running. if I ignore that and just do my own thing, not only is it unethical, but–frankly, where’s the fun? The fun is in being attuned to the bottom, of that empathic high, as well as the feeling of competence and knowing I’ve taken her/him on that trip.