Diana Russell: "Strossen keeps telling us how much women love pornography, so why not pictures of gangs of women raping men, sticking broomsticks up their asses as they smile and ejaculate and say, "Encore," snipping their balls off with pliers, sticking wire up their penile openings? Why haven't pornographers saturated the market with these kinds of images to match what they've done to women? Isn't this evidence that porn is discriminatory?"
Thought the first: Since when does all that not exist? (Barring the castration. I'm not at all convinced that actual pornography depicting real bodily harm done to women OR men has ever existed in anything close "saturating the market" level numbers. And as far as the wires go: Use sounds.)
Thought the second: I should get on that... :)
And then of course there's thought the third, which is that all this shocking description is really quite titillating. Giving anti-porners (of every stripe, not just rad fem) the benefit of the doubt, it's probably not wank material for them... still, it's the kind of copy designed, I think, to elicit a frisson of reaction. Like religious fundamentalists gathering to point fingers at the sinners because ooh! it allows us to talk about something so startlingly bad as all that!
A sanctuary for supporters of sexual free expression and the adult sexual media.
eyeroll.
ReplyDeletewhy do they always beg the question? "well, why don't women?" um, they do, actually. and yeah, with the extra-sordid/ishy. yes, that is what ALL porn is about: extreme torture and mutilation. oh no wait; actually that would be more like Hostel. and it apparently -does- involve men being brutally tortured. too. and it's still a misogynist, misanthropic, reactionary POS, according to many. (i'm taking their word for it; i can't watch that shit).
and you were going to go out there and start campaigning against that, when?
or, I don't know, ACTUAL TORTURE GOING ON RIGHT NOW?
"why do they always beg the question? "well, why don't women?" um, they do, actually."
ReplyDelete*scary music*
I AM YOUR ANTIFEMINIST APOCALYPSE
*scary music*
hee.
yeah.
off topic, but I wonder if y'all'd be interested in covering the rightwingers excuse me "family-oriented" groups a bit more, too. or put in the sidebar (hey, they're still in the anti-porn site sidebar, although i noticed, when i went to get the links, that she's moved those links off the front page post wrt recommended websites, under "100 things to do." hi, person! hi!) Citizens Against Pornography.
ReplyDeleteObscenity Crimes Org ("Morality in Media")
National Law Center for Children and Families
Yeah, it's a lot more obvious to point out where we don't agree there; but, it'd be good, i think, to pinpoint their tactics and especially what they've accomplished. they're the ones with more clout at the end of the day, and i expect more funding.
plus, to me theocratic atuhoritarianism is the bottom line: some of the feminist groups may be going lalala problem? what problem? when it comes to these people, but i think it'd still behoove to focus on the root of the problem. also a good way to hook up with other sympathetic progressive/anti-fascist (yeah, i used the word) folks. strength in numbers and all that.
and, this is where you'd -really- get a lot more connection with various lbgt rights groups as well as fringier sexual minorities (kink, poly, etc): we ALL are threatened by these people.
ReplyDeleteI've got a bunch of links to anti-porn groups, mostly right-wing, that I'll send to Ren to put on the sidebar.
ReplyDeleteRight now, they're saved links – still need to compile them into a list. I'll do this later today.
So...okay. I'm reading Russell, and I'm seeing cites from 1975, 1979, 1980, 1981, 1985 -- nothing newer, as far as I can tell, than 1986. And most of the other hard-core radfem literature seems to be roughly contemporaneous with it.
ReplyDeleteWhich is fine, but: I was four years old in 1986.
Is there anything out there that's remotely modern, at least enough so that it might have a chance of describing someone like me or some other male member of my age cohort? I mean, I don't want to say that all that literature is crap, because I don't think it is. But none of it's talkin' 'bout my generation, you know?
-- Aaron (aaron@acephalo.us)
aaron: the book "Pornified" has fairly recent data.
ReplyDelete"And most of the other hard-core radfem literature seems to be roughly contemporaneous with it."
ReplyDeleteYeah. But the thing is that feminist anti-porners are still linking to it, citing it, recommending it, etc.
It's undead, given second life by these folks really.
Aaron said:
ReplyDelete"Is there anything out there that's remotely modern, at least enough so that it might have a chance of describing someone like me or some other male member of my age cohort? I mean, I don't want to say that all that literature is crap, because I don't think it is. But none of it's talkin' 'bout my generation, you know?"
Eh? I don't think men, on the whole, have changed all that much since 1986. Keep in mind, overall change in social mores, lifestyles, etc, has changed a hell of a lot less from 1985–2005 than it had from 1965–1985.
Not that I think the studies that are quoted by Diana Russell were terribly accurate to begin with and I don't put much stock in the idea that these studies represent an accurate picture of an earlier generation.
I think the biggest difference, when it comes to porn, is that with the internet, porn, especially hardcore porn, is now way more accessible than it once was. There's a lot of panic over that, but I'm not so convinced its going to be the overwhelming disaster that people make it out to be.
well, and i expect that that's what the Wheelock conf and all that is supposed to be about: finding ways to update the literature so that it's relevant to the 'Net generation.
ReplyDelete