The American Family Association honcho and friends are working hard to impose his morality on the country, and it appears that moving to the top of the list of concerns is the possibility that members of the military might have their virgin eyes gaze upon some porno mags.
Dozens of religious and anti-pornography groups have complained to Congress and Defense Secretary Robert Gates that a Pentagon board set up to review magazines and films is allowing sales of material that Congress intended to ban.The AFA and other fundie organization had moles looking to ferret out the porn (research, ya know!), and they reported what could still be found on several bases:“They're saying 'we're not selling stuff that's sexually explicit' … and we say it's pornography,” says Donald Wildmon, head of the American Family Association, a Christian anti-pornography group. A letter-writing campaign launched Friday by opponents of the policy aims to convince Congress to “get the Pentagon to obey the law,” he adds.
• Andrews Air Force Base: Playboy, Penthouse, Perfect 10, Playboy College Girls, Nude Playmates, FHM, Celebrity Skin, Playboy’s Vixens.Amusingly, look at what, based on Pentagon review, isn't considered explicit:
• Edwards Air Force Base: Playboy, Playboy College Girls, FHM, Playboy’s Vixens.
• Fort Bragg: XXX, Playboy College Girls, Perfect 10, Curves, FHM.
• Fort Knox: Playboy, Penthouse, Nude, Perfect 10, Playboy’s Vixens.
• Pearl Harbor: Playboy, Perfect 10.
• Pentagon: FHM
• United States Military Academy: Perfect 10, Playboy Lingerie, Hot Shots 2007 by Playboy, Playmates in Bed
• United States Air Force Academy: Playboy, Lingerie, Playboy’s Vixens, Playboy’s College Girls, Nude, Perfect 10, Curves
• Naval Air Station Pensacola: DVD titles: “Blonde and Beyond,” “Sex Symbols,” “Wet,” “Import Skin,” “Girls Night In”
In response, a Defense Department official defended the decision to sell some of the magazines and promised to review whether some of the others are too explicit. Leslye Arsht, deputy under secretary for family policy, writes that “the board reviewed Celebrity Skin, Penthouse, Perfect 10, Playboy, Playboy’s College Girls, Playboy’s Lingerie, Nude, Nude Playmates and Playmates in Bed and determined that, based solely on the totality of each magazine’s content, they were not sexually explicit.”Hat tip, Steve Benen at The Carpetbagger Report.
147 Responses to “Dapper Don Wildmon to Pentagon: protect soldiers from porn”
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Well FHM is no longer published so the Pentagon is smut free!
I think the soldiers would rather be protected from bullets and bombs.
What, no porn for the women in uniform?
But really, I’d rather just bring them all back than worry about what they’re reading.
This is my rifle! This is my gun! This is for fighting! This is strictly for procreation in the course of a church-sanctioned marriage to a person of the same race and the opposite sex, man superior position, lights out!
Interesting that these “family values” types are always so concerned with the porn and not with the prevalence of rape and sexual assault committed by military men on their fellow servicewomen and local women. ANd children. And elderly. Etc.
So it’s porn to see pictures of naked bodies - but it’s not porn to see actual dismembered bodies. Amazing.
Ex-Fed @ 1:48, were you quoting look alike Markie Mark’s final speech in the moral values-friendly Boogie Nights from the church’s Opposite of Sex non-pron series? (The lookalike seemed a bit on the short side.)
“Explicit”, it would appear, means “shows people boinking.” I haven’t cracked open a Playboy since I left college nearly two decades ago, but at that time at least it did not show people boinking, just highly airbrushed photos of naked women.
Heh. I’m not sure if any of the news articles have covered this, but on base the “laddie mags” are only available at certain kinds of stores that resemble 7-11s. And they’re behind the counter. It’s not as if you can buy them in the family AAFES (like a Target or KMart).
In some overseas locations such as Japan, the distribution of “laddie mags” must adhere to local decency laws. So, somebody somewhere has to take an eraser or a nickel or something and rub out the crotchal area.
Playboy, Penthouse: must not be allowed for soldiers to see, even purchased with their own funds.
Rush Limbaugh, FOX News: must be broadcast to soldiers at taxpayer expense.
Whatever happened to bread and circuses?
Betty Boondoogle - That’s the “ironically-named family values” types to you. Have you ever seen them support any policy intended to help families? SCHIP, maybe? After-school programs?
These people sometimes complain that homosexuals messed up the word “gay” for everybody. Meantime, they’re turning the word “family” into a synonym for “sexophobic.”
Oh, and they’re claiming to do it to protect women soldiers from having a hostile work environment. Yeah, right. (Not that that’s not a huge issue for military women, but letting Wildmon tell the military how to handle it is like them asking bin Laden how they should fight terrorism.)
Can I have that job? Pentagon board member who reviews porn sold to the military?
For the health of his prostate, every man must empty his seminal vesicles at least 21 times a month. Why does this Wildmon want our fighting boys to get cancer?
“Have you ever seen them support any policy intended to help families?”
That’s rather the point. Pro-life-until-the-kid-is-born, pro-family-as-long-as-it-looks-exactly-like-mine, pro-religion-if-and-only-if-you-obey-my-god. Etc, ad nauseum.
The “family values” crowd runs the gamut from lying, religionist bigots, to self-deluded, lying misoyngistic warmongers.
Although, exactly what is a ‘value’ in all that I’m still trying to figure out.
These folks need to watch Mrs. Henderson Presents, clearly.
As a military man, I am, like most men in the military, am an aficionado of porn. But I really can’t stand Playboy or Penthouse, and am more of a fan of Hustler, which is also more to my political taste (inter-racial sex). No matter where the military took me, it never seemed like any of my coworkers ever had any problem finding and acquiring porn. If porn wasn’t on base, then it could be found just outside of the gate, or if we were on deployment, then we could just order porn sent to us through the mail (or have our family members sent it to us in care packages). Mail call always produced boxes of goodies that we either read in our racks or watched on TV even thousands of miles out in the Ocean. Were we allowed to have porn on deployments? No. Did the rules and regulations stop us from possessing porn, or bringing it with us, or having it mailed to us while were we on deployment? Of course not.
Personally I credit Jenna Jameson, Asia Carrera, kobe Tai, and all the other porn stars with helping my coworkers and I keep our sanity while we were away from home.
Wow! Look at all the porn for women! And gays & lesbians! Woo-hoo!
HOLY MUTHA FUGGA!!!…These poor guys are over there without their wives or girlfriends risking getting their dicks or other body members shot off or killed, and this pious a**hole wants to deny them some sexual comfort because they might might want a date with old mother thumb and her four daughters for a little sexual comfort?
The hypocricy of the religious right never ceases to disgust and outrage me…
Just go away and STFU Wildmon!
fetboy just reinforces my initial thought - Wildmon and his ilk are looking to have a Few Good Men mutiny. Violently.
And to stop the hiccups, they must massage said prostate. I’m guessing Daddy Dobson would have issues with that too.
Betty Boondoogle
Interesting that these “family values” types are always so concerned with the porn and not with the prevalence of rape and sexual assault committed by military men on their fellow servicewomen and local women. ANd children. And elderly. Etc.
Interesting that feminists with empowerfully cutesy handles don’t see the correlations between the images in porn and what servicemen do to female soldiers. Oh, but I forgot, you saw “Christian fundie” and stopped thinking.
Funny how it’s the radicals that get called “black and white thinkers” around here!
Betty B. - Well, yeah. My point is, every time you see some political group calling itself or its policies “family,” “values” or some combination thereof, they’re invariably what you said.
They don’t even have the integrity to say “we think sex is basically harmful and gross, and the only normative version of sexuality is the way we claim that we do it–and here is our case for so believing,” like grown-ups. Instead, they hijacked the word “family” to imply–what? (I think the use of “family” in this context is supposed to make you think that they’re specifically protecting children from any sexual content without calling into debate whether that’s a good, or even doable thing. In fact, I think one of the more valid complaints of the sanitized childhoods they envision is noticing that everyone on the other side of puberty is acting like they’ve gone batshit crazy and not being able to get a straight answer as to why.)
An honest thought would give these people a stroke.
And what possible pro-family purpose could be encouraged by interfering with lonely (and mostly scared) men jerking off? Why is the military not telling Wildmon and this jackass congressman to mind their own damn business?
fetboy
…more of a fan of Hustler, which is also more to my political taste…
Yeah, I’ve seen Hustler’s style, and I don’t doubt that kind of “political taste” is right up your alley. Ann Coulter getting raped is sure a funny way to put her in her place in a cartoon! Or is it the racist misogynist images of “ebony animals” in pain that do it for you? Hustler’s great.
Boy, if I were a female soldier, I’d love to know it was you who had my back on the field after looking at that. /sarcasm
K.A - It’s funny how assholes like you think that men in the military (or anywhere else) aren’t responsible for their actions just because they’ve seen some photographs.
It’s funny how assholes like you claim to know what’s in Hustler clearly without having seen it. Go jerk to to the stupid cunts being mutilated and get back to me when you have something less ridiculous to say.
Molly, maybe you could actually go read some of what we assholes like to call “scientific literature” about how people react and psychologically change their view of women after they’ve “seen some photographs,” as you passively like to call orgasming to more stupid cunts being harmed.
Oh noes, Navy boys might see porn! Heaven help him if he finds out about Cervantes street.
K.A., if you’re trying to convince anyone that you’re motivated by some concern for women’s welfare, instead of establishing that you came here for a spot of liberal-bashing (or as most of us know it, “what passes on the Right for political thought”), you might want to drop that “stupid cunt” bit. Save it for your mother.
And btw, K.A.– You’ve made it as clear as it’s going to get that it’s possible to be both anti-porn and a total misogynist.
My quasi-manager used to be in the submarine fleet- there was evidently only two quasi-private “heads” on the entire sub. And the line for them was allways a couple people long. It was a running joke that no one just went in there to use the bathroom.
I remember reading an earlier report from a medical corpsman in Iraq talking about the mental fatiuge usually first showing up with people who were jacking off 10+ times a day.
Stress and boredom and violence and having masterbation be your only real escapist activity sounds really unpleasent.
That being said, with the exception of them Pensacola folks, Mr. Wildmon is listing some really banal porn.
I hope they were well equipped with lube or lotion or something…OW!
Wow Molly, you have some major reading comprehension problems. I didn’t think the point I was making about Hustler by using those words was all that complex–it’s certainly not atypical of feminist analysis–but I’ll save myself the trouble of explaining it to you, since you clearly wouldn’t be able to understand the explanation either.
Come one, just give the troops this one things. Support them with at least porn if we can’t get the properly plated humvees out to their AO. Did anyone even think to consider when planning for this illegal war that getting women during R and R isn’t even an option in the Middle East for our men in uniform? This was never an issue in the past, except for maybe Gulf War I which ended very quickly. Men in uniform need some release! Come one religious right, give the troops just this one thing!
“Personally I credit Jenna Jameson, Asia Carrera, kobe Tai, and all the other porn stars with helping my coworkers and I keep our sanity while we were away from home.”
Aww, I forgot that it’s the job (patriotic duty?) of women to take off our clothes and get fucked & photographed so that the men in uniform can relax and stay sane! Because men are *entitled* to women’s bodies and sexual services! Teh poor menz, all alone out there with no real, live pussies to satisfy their “needs.”
Well, except for all the female civilians, children, and sex workers, it seems, whether they want to or not. And something tells me the more violent pornographic images (as seen in Hustler) are a teensy bit dehumanizing if not outright intimidating and threatening to female soldiers.
So, don’t get you precious porn? Cry me a fucking river.
“Personally I credit Jenna Jameson, Asia Carrera, kobe Tai, and all the other porn stars with helping my coworkers and I keep our sanity while we were away from home.”
Aww, I forgot that it’s the job (patriotic duty?) of women to take off our clothes and get fucked & photographed so that the men in uniform can relax and stay sane! Because men are *entitled* to women’s bodies and sexual services! Teh poor menz, all alone out there with no real, live pussies to satisfy their “needs.”
Well, except for all the female civilians, children, and sex workers, it seems, whether they want to or not. And something tells me the more violent pornographic images (as seen in Hustler) are a teensy bit dehumanizing if not outright intimidating and threatening to female soldiers.
So, don’t get you precious porn? Cry me a fucking river.
. . . those words . . . [are] certainly not atypical of feminist analysis . . .
Actually, yes, they are atypical, and they weren’t relevant to the point you claim to be making. You weren’t being ironic. The phrase genuinely reflects your thinking.
Your mother must be so proud.
Sorry Molly, your brain failed when you read my comments, but rather than be embarrassed by your reading comprehension skills, you are choosing to stick by your first assertion that I’m a misogynist after my long anti-Hustler comments. Right. Whatever you need to do to preserve your ego, I guess.
Molly NYC, I think K.A. actually knew what he/she meant. I definitely read it as sarcasm the first time, and certainly not more extreme an example of such than one might find, say, from Twisty Faster. Less well-executed of course, but what can you expect.
Seriously, it’s clearly a sarcastic description of what the notional porn-users think about the women in the magazine, not an earnest comment.
Actually KA it was the reporting about Senator Vitters extramarital affairs that I was referring to when I said Hustler is more in line with my politics. Also I love seeing who makes Hustle’s asshole of the month (almost always a conservative blowhard).
Though I will agree with you that most of what Larry Flynt does is pretty tasteless. But it’s porn, what do you expect? Larry Flynt took a bullet for inter-racial love making, and for that he has my undying respect.
molly —
i’m confused. i don’t think KA is being a rethuglican blowhard. i think sie is just a non-sex-positive feminist (i don’t know if there’s a word of y’all, so uh, that’s the phrasing i’m using)… who tend to be common in some circles. this wouldn’t be the first pandagon thread of feminists condemning porn.
K.A. wrote
“Interesting that feminists with empowerfully cutesy handles don’t see the correlations between the images in porn and what servicemen do to female soldiers.”
To the best of my knowledge there is no correlation between the amount of porn that people enjoy, and the committing of violent crime, or at least no study I have ever heard of has ever proved that there is a correlation. But there are several studies that have shown that there is a correlation between PTSD and the committing of violent crime.
You can be assured that the increase in GI on GI rapes in Iraq is due to the extension of tours to 15 months, and the tremendous amount of violence that our GIs are exposed to other there, and not due to the amount of porn that they watch or look at.
Actually Iraq is the hardest place for a US soldier to obtain porn.
Most porn aficionados are decent people, but a lot of porn haters are sexually repressed deviants.
Watching my coworkers watch porn, I noticed they all became a lot more calm and relaxed. Watching 2 people make love on the tube, definitely takes the stress off. Asia Carrera gave me more stress relief than alcohol ever did.
Indy: Stress and boredom and violence and having masterbation be your only real escapist activity sounds really unpleasent.
It was when applied to monkeys, which is why zoos go out of their way to provide stimulation to primates. I dunno whether this includes porn, but someone might suggest it.
GIs, presumably, are easier to come by than chimpanzees.
MAJeff: I hope they were well equipped with lube or lotion or something…OW!
I foresee some smart Iraqi resistance fighter spiking KY jelly with ground glass or something…
Whatever happened to the days of pin-up girls painted on planes ‘to raise morale’? This is incredible– the right-wingers accuse liberals of not supporting the troops and then want to take away what is probably THE most traditional way of keeping the male soldiers happy during the wait portions of “Hurry up and wait”?
My sole complaint would be that there wasn’t anything that sounded appealing to women on that list. (as for gay and lesbian, yes, there should be, but the lack is in line with DADT, and until that policy changes, neither will the erotica)
” GI’s lined up for blocks, two abreast, to get at the Japanese girls enslaved in ‘comfort stations’ for them—with the full cooperation of the American and Japanese authorities. Destitute, vulnerable girls were raped into unconsciousness as the men joked and laughed and jostled in line, waiting their turn. Some girls bled to death. Some committed suicide—that is, the lucky ones who could escape.”
“the men who lined up to use the prostitutes on Hotel Street in Honolulu: women were raped 100 times a day—a different man entered the girl every three minutes.”
“pimps considerately laid out mattresses so the GI’s could fuck starving Italian girls comfortably, for a dollar or two a turn.”
“homeless, prostituted girls in Berlin doing it in the rubble for a few cents and agreeing to ‘share’ a GI bed so they would simply have a place to sleep that night.”
“in Okinawa where GI’s raped every woman, girl, and child—the victims were too sick and starving to even try to run from their attackers.”
This is not just history, it is an ongoing chronicle of how male soldiers treat, and are encouraged to treat women in war.
Because we can’t deny our good little soldiers the comfort of using women’s bodies as wank rags can we ? There ickkle dicks would all shrivel up if they couldn’t reduce female human beings to toilets, right ? Bet all those rapists felt really “relaxed” aferwards.
Pretend all you like it’s not part of the same disgusting misogynistic package - but Jesus frigging Christ people - just how fucking deluded are you ?
Now, what on earth does being anti-porn have to do with being “non-sex-positive.” I think part of the problem is that “feminists” who like porn, use porn, promote porn, and defend porn ought to call themselves pornhounds instead of feminists. Then there wouldn’t be any question as to who gives a shit about women and their degrading representations in media on the one hand, and women who care more about men getting off than they do about women’s safety and self determination on the other.
Why, on Heart’s blog today she updates us with the news that over a dozen rapists who lured a cognitively disabled 17-year-old girl to a park and videotaped themselves gang-raping her, pissing on her, and setting her hair alight have all been spared jail time. Couldn’t be that the porn-loving judge and jury empathized with the porn-producing rapists, though, because that would mean porn has a negative effect on the way society reacts to women and girls. No, can’t have that at all. As long as it puts a little cream or a stiffy in your pants, it’s just sex, right?
And speaking of sex, if your idea of sex is looking at visual records of exploited naked women, whether they are depictions of genital display, intercourse, sodomy, or fellatio, forced (rape, sexual assault, criminal) or merely bargained down to cheapest possible compensation (exploitation), well, you’re more anti-sex than I am.
Gee, big surprise. The citizens of rape culture incensed that the rape and hatred of women be curtailed in any way.
If it were any other oppressed group on the planet being depicted in such a manner, there would be outrage. But hey, it’s a-ok if it’s women. Because they don’t count.
Hypocrites.
In the meanwhile, 80% of the casualties in any war are women and children. The boys don’t target each other, silly. There are relatively few male casualties. Who your big, strong he-boy soldiers target, ladies, are innocent, unarmed women and children. It’s women they wage war on, as the statistics clearly show. It’s something the entire brotherhood can agree on and unite under, regardless of race, creed, nationality or color. How much they hate women.
But we must feed these poor, poor boys porn and keep their morale alive. So they can continue looking at women as inanimate objects and fuck holes and continue their rape, mutilation and slaughter. Wouldn’t want these boys to go and start thinking women might be human. It would ruin all their fun.
As for the women that support these cowardly bullies, your masochistic, self loathing can be counted on. But understand this. Kissing the boys ass isn’t going to save your own. In the end, they can’t tell the difference between you and the women they rape and slaughter in Iraq. All the fuck holes look alike.
The solution is really quite simple. All women need do is refuse to bring another male into this world. It’s not like they’re a fact of life and grow wildly in cabbage patches or can self-produce. They only get here one way. Through women. They all come into this world an inch away from a woman’s asshole.
The boys must have been amusing at one time. Why else would women have created them? But I don’t think many women are finding them very amusing any more.
Oh well. No big deal. We create and produce males. We can stop creating and producing them any damn time we like. We always could. The ultimate power has always rested in women’s hands.
In 2 short generations, they’ll be no need to worry about the boys in the military being deprived of porn. Cuz they’ll be no boys, no war and no need for a military.
I really don’t think the boys will be missed much. Our sisters will thank us. Children will thank us. All of the plant and animal kingdom will thank us. Heck, all life on the planet will thank us for stopping production on the mutants.
Isn’t it time we women were a little more responsible for what we create and ceased the production of the deadly, little viruses we have unleashed upon this planet that have all but destroyed everything in their path? Including us?
Sheesh. Talk about Dr. Frankenstein creating a monster.
Thank you, justicewalks. Thankyouthankyouthankyou.
Anti-porn is not “anti-sex-positive.”
What does “sex-postivie” even mean? Does anyone here under 35 actually believe that feminists older than 35 don’t like sex, don’t want sex, think sex is bad or dirty? ‘Cause you’re way off.
That’s rather the point. Pro-life-until-the-kid-is-born, pro-family-as-long-as-it-looks-exactly-like-mine, pro-religion-if-and-only-if-you-obey-my-god. Etc, ad nauseum.
Perhaps we should start admitting that their attitude isn’t so much pro-life, pro-family, etc etc etc as it is “pro-me”
“You can’t abort that fetus because it might grow up to be me”
“Your family should look just like mine because I am the best thing since loaves and fish.”
Etcetera.
I’m 42. I like some porn. Not all of it is anti-women. Those who condemn it all as exploitation are anti-sex.
Ohh come on all you NoFunRadFemmies!! Don’t you know porn is just some *fantasy*? It happens in the beautiful freeing liberating rahrahrahHubbaHubba Collective Conscious of the Human Soul.
Of course there is no relationship between what people get off on and what they get off on!
geeeeeeeez
Meanwhile, back on Earth….
Mine certainly isn’t.
That’s one thing I hate about porn discussions, the refusal to acknowledge the complexity, of the images, of the reactions to those images, of the production of those images, and of the use of those images. Complex shit. Not something amenable to totalizing statements.
Like clockwork, Luckynckl, like clockwork, they can be depended upon to defend their boys’ access to pornographic sexual superiority fixes. Case in point:
No, we’re anti-porn and -prostitution.
Those who want to focus on the miniscule proportion of visually recorded genital display, intercourse, sodomy, and fellatio that is neither exploitative nor coerced (not that you’d know the difference just looking at it anyway; after all, the girl referenced on Heart’s blog actually forced a feeble smile to her lips as she was assaulted) so that they don’t have to feel guilty about getting their rocks off are pornhounds, not feminists. The existence of porn, period, both encourages and reflects a social attitude of male entitlement to female bodies. If a man can’t attract a real woman for sex (and, hell, even if he can), he most certainly is not entitled to visual recordings of splayed and used women. One would think, reading the comments around here, that images of splayed and used women are a human right that should be provided to men and male-identified women at all costs. Frankly, the only porn that isn’t “anti-women” is porn that doesn’t depict any women (or feminized, male woman-proxies). It really isn’t so complex, MAJeff.
Also, if porn isn’t exploitative, Helen H, why aren’t you out there offering up your own 42-year-old ass for videotaped fucking, sucking, and golden showering? Why aren’t you performing in porn movies to be sold for $5 a pop to the nearest gaggle of misogynist school boys or farthest battalion of misogynist soldiers? How much would the porn hawks have to offer you for a non-retractable videotape or photo portfolio depicting that kind of performance? I can guarantee you there aren’t many porn “stars” making the kind of money you’d charge (if you can even fathom a value; I certainly can’t), which means the work is exploitative (and I’d say the same thing about janitorial work). I guess you just call it the invisible hand of the market or something?
(And, yes, I acknowledge that there are both janitors and pornstituted women who feel they are fairly compensated [not talking about owners and producers here]. They are the exceptions that prove the rule. They certainly don’t comprise a sizable enough minority of pornstituted women that their experiences should determine policy.)
Right, it’s totally feminist to object to military guys not being allowed to read instruction manuals for rape and disrespect of women when they’ve already been having, um, “issues” with rape and disrespect of women–both Stateside with American women, soldiers or not, and in Iraq with the local
womengirls there.And please do not roll your eyes at me. Recovered porn reader right here. I know what’s in those pieces of trash, and I understand it’s gotten worse since I read it. The military is correct that Playboy is one of the tamer examples and it does have interesting articles, I guess, but how about those ads in the back, huh? Or Hugh Hefner not batting an eyelash about preteens wearing Playboy thongs and saying, “I don’t care if a baby holds a Playboy bunny rattle”?
This is supposed to be a feminist blog, among other things, right?
And here’s my thing. This has NOTHING to do with whether sex is OK outside of marriage. I do think it irresponsible and stupid to have sex with random strangers but I wouldn’t legislate that. This thing here, this has nothing to do with sex. Men certainly have the freedom to fantasize about sex if they want to. Porn isn’t fantasy. What’s more, porn has become so standardized both in how it talks about women and in the women it presents that it is actually STUNTING men’s sexuality–it limits their imaginations, and not in a good way.
Not to mention, if these magazines were presenting people of color, say, or Jews, in a similar spirit and saying things of a similar nature about them, those magazines would have been banned from military bases long ago, and who here would object?
Why is it “free speech” when it treats women like garbage, but not quite so much when it’s other political minorities?
Why am I seeing this shit defended in a feminist blog?
P.S. Playgirl sucks. It’s just your typical vapid women’s magazine talking about diet, celebrities and “relationships” with the addition of naked guys. So not only have you got the objectification of guys thing going on, you’ve got the insulting the readers’ intelligence thing going on. The one thing it’s got in its favor is it doesn’t call the guys cum-dribbling sluts. But presenting it as a way to “balance” out, say, Hustler, is fucking lame.
Oh, and incidentally, I don’t believe for a minute that Wildmon objects to this stuff for the same reasons I do; history shows the Right doesn’t give a good goddamn about women being exploited by the culture. So I’m not gonna be his best friend or anything over this.
And when I speak of women being exploited let me point a few other things out.
1. I do not refer to women being helpless children who must be saved from ourselves. But this is along the lines of having laws prohibiting people from stealing, raping (not that those laws are sufficient OR sufficiently enforced), or murdering. If people are doing something that demonstrably causes harm–and we are a cultural animal, we learn best by imitation, and you better BET men are imitating this trash at women’s expense–then they should be legally stopped. This has NO bearing on women’s ability to protect ourselves, but WOULD help us do so.
2. It doesn’t matter whether individual women like being Uncle Toms about this. Want a cookie? Everybody wants to make easy money. Lots of people want to be liked badly enough that they’ll want to be liked by their own enemies. That has nothing to do with the larger point that this shit is exploitation and needs to go away. And if that means some women have trouble getting jobs, well, welcome to real life in which people have trouble getting jobs. You aren’t a special sparkly princess who deserves jobs more than other people. Just sayin’.
I think my other comment got eaten. WTF? Lemme go find it.
Here’s the one that got lost…
Right, it’s totally feminist to object to military guys not being allowed to read instruction manuals for rape and disrespect of women when they’ve already been having, um, “issues” with rape and disrespect of women–both Stateside with American women, soldiers or not, and in Iraq with the local
womengirls there.And please do not roll your eyes at me. Recovered porn reader right here. I know what’s in those pieces of trash, and I understand it’s gotten worse since I read it. The military is correct that Playboy is one of the tamer examples and it does have interesting articles, I guess, but how about those ads in the back, huh? Or Hugh Hefner not batting an eyelash about preteens wearing Playboy thongs and saying, “I don’t care if a baby holds a Playboy bunny rattle”?
This is supposed to be a feminist blog, among other things, right?
And here’s my thing. This has NOTHING to do with whether sex is OK outside of marriage. I do think it irresponsible and stupid to have sex with random strangers but I wouldn’t legislate that. This thing here, this has nothing to do with sex. Men certainly have the freedom to fantasize about sex if they want to. Porn isn’t fantasy. What’s more, porn has become so standardized both in how it talks about women and in the women it presents that it is actually STUNTING men’s sexuality–it limits their imaginations, and not in a good way.
Not to mention, if these magazines were presenting people of color, say, or Jews, in a similar spirit and saying things of a similar nature about them, those magazines would have been banned from military bases long ago, and who here would object?
Why is it “free speech” when it treats women like garbage, but not quite so much when it’s other political minorities?
Why am I seeing this shit defended in a feminist blog?
P.S. Playgirl sucks. It’s just your typical vapid women’s magazine talking about diet, celebrities and “relationships” with the addition of naked guys. So not only have you got the objectification of guys thing going on, you’ve got the insulting the readers’ intelligence thing going on. The one thing it’s got in its favor is it doesn’t call the guys cum-dribbling sluts. But presenting it as a way to “balance” out, say, Hustler, is fucking lame.
“…history shows the Right doesn’t give a good goddamn about women being exploited by the culture.”
I was going to compliment you on your drastic change in political viewpoint - and then I realized you aren’t Wingnut Dana who regularly haunts Pandagon.
We need to get you guys together and work out a way to distinguish you without need to go to your website URL…
Dana: Right, it’s totally feminist to object to military guys not being allowed to read instruction manuals for rape and disrespect of women when they’ve already been having, um, “issues” with rape and disrespect of women–both Stateside with American women, soldiers or not, and in Iraq with the local womengirls there.
SERIOUS cognitive dissonance, until I checked the link.
Dana, you might want to change your handle to avoid confusion.
justicewalks, wrote:
“Why aren’t you performing in porn movies to be sold for $5 a pop to the nearest gaggle of misogynist school boys or farthest battalion of misogynist soldiers?”
Well I am not a soldier, but I am a serviceman, and I like some porn (the porn that isn’t disrespect to women), and I definitely am not misogynist. Most couples have porn in their bedrooms, and I doubt they would like being referred to as misogynist either.
Also I resent the implication that porn watchers are also costumers of prostitution. I have never in my life paid for sex, and very few of my friends who like porn have paid for sex either.
Porn is simply just adult entertainment, and just because you like adult entertainment doesn’t make you are a pervert, anymore than wearing high heels and tight pants implies that you want to get raped. (Note that I am not in any way justifying child porn. Child porn is illegal, and should stay illegal).
The vast content of porn, on the legal market, does not depict violence against women. Though I will admit that a lot of porn is disrespectful to women, but not all of it. Certainly not the porn I like.
Most porn promotes safe sex, and kindness in love making. What’s more damaging to the human psyche; senseless gratuitous violence that we see on TV on every hour of primetime, or exposure to love making?
Luckynkl wrote:
“But we must feed these poor, poor boys porn and keep their morale alive.”
No one here has said that our best and brightest (our men in uniform who raised their hand and pledged to protect this nation and its constitution) should be forced to read or watch porn. But since most servicemen are adults (and I am against allowing anyone under the age of 18 into the military, even if they have their parents permission), they should be allowed to own legal porn, and possess legal porn if they like, as long as they don’t use it to sexual harass someone else.
Luckynkl, you are starting to sound very anti-military, and I am starting to take offense. The vast majority of us are not disrespectful to women, and without us there would be little standing to protect you from chaos.
fetboy, the only difference between a porn “star” and a prostituted woman is the presence of the visual recording device.
It is disgusting that porn-apology passes for mainstream feminist discourse these days. Good day.
alicepaul wrote:
“Aww, I forgot that it’s the job (patriotic duty?) of women to take off our clothes and get fucked & photographed so that the men in uniform can relax and stay sane!”
I have always suspected that the main reason why porn stars act in porn movies and pose in porn magazines was to pay off their bills, but if any of them chose to get into the porn industry out of a sense of patriotic duty, then I feel honored, and my message to them is; your talents were appreciated by many. To the best of my knowledge no one in the legal porn industry had a gun pointed to their head, though I am certain that some rather awful things (some of them violent) have been done to coerce women into the porn industry, and that a lot of porn stars were lied to about what they would be expected to do. Both are problems that we as a society need to combat, and that is why I have advocated that feminists take over the porn industry, like in the corporate take over sense, and make it more woman safe and friendly. A lot of female porn stars have made a lot of money (a lot more haven’t), and in general the porn industry would be transformed if female porn stars unionized in an effort to improve conditions for aspiring women who want to get into the porn industry. The porn industry could easily be controlled by a women’s organization, if a women’s organization was so inclined to take it over. And such a visible entity as the porn industry would make a great platform to promote women’s issues.
Porn is not the problem, but the way the porn industry is controlled is, but a powerful pro-women’s organization could easily take it over and correct that problem.
justicewalks wrote
“fetboy, the only difference between a porn “star” and a prostituted woman is the presence of the visual recording device.”
I do not deny that in a lot of cases this is true, and a fair amount of porn was made using prostitutes and hidden cameras.
But for the most part the porn stars are considerably less at risk of catching diseases than prostitutes are, get paid better, earn their money legally, and have a better idea of who they will be asked to sleep with weeks in advance. Also most female porn stars are in a working relationships with their male co-stars, where as a prostitute and her John are not working together. Also most porn stars do receive working benefits (such as medical and dental), and are not at risk of getting arrested for illegal activity.
The porn industry has gotten a lot of young women off of the streets, put legal, taxable, money in their bank accounts, and allowed them to step into higher, more respectable, positions in society. Prostitution has not (though I do know a few former call girls that managed to put themselves through college, but at great risk to themselves, and they can’t go public with what they did).
Those who want to focus on the miniscule proportion of visually recorded genital display, intercourse, sodomy, and fellatio that is neither exploitative nor coerced
Are the other women stupid? Are they childish, weak of will? Do women need to be protected from their ill-considered decisions? Do women need guardians? What should the age of maturity for women be set at? 45?
Surely women’s inability to avoid coercion and exploitation strongly suggests they should be kept in the charge of some male at all times.
The day people figure out “sexy” is as socially constructed as “boy” and “girl” and that people acting “sexual” has no more innate appeal than a grocery bag is the day porn will disappear.
Luckynkl wrote:
“In the meanwhile, 80% of the casualties in any war are women and children. The boys don’t target each other, silly.”
I don’t know where you got that statistic from, and I have been looking all over the web for something that would support the figure you provided.
It has always been my understanding that the overwhelming amount of violence in the world was male on male. But I am not saying that rape is not a problem in the battle zones. It is a big problem, it is appalling, and the global community needs to do something about it.
There are plenty of people on this thread who are denouncing the pornography industry, and don’t slow down much when they transition from porn to prostitution.
Why is it that these people are so invested in denying the agency of women to choose to be sex workers?
Admittedly, there are bad situations that many women can be put into. Such abusive situations should be opposed.
However, many workers were being exploited and abused throughout the Gilded Age, and even today in American territories overseas. Did we then outlaw textile workers, or assume that people only work in textile plants because they’ve been strongarmed into the jobs? No, we didn’t.
We need to make a distinction between the “sweatshop” porn and prostitution industry, and the legitimate, unexploitative industry.
Like all things, sex can be abused. Some folk would have us ban all sex because that potential for abuse often becomes realized. We don’t need to go quite that far.
To Dana
“The one thing it’s got in its favor is it doesn’t call the guys cum-dribbling sluts. But presenting it as a way to “balance” out, say, Hustler, is fucking lame.”
Actually Hustler was invented to balance out Playboy and Penthouse, as Playboy and Penthouse were considered to be uptight and snooty. Back in the day it was thought that only rich men should be allowed to be aficionados of porn. Hustler was billed as the blue-collar man’s porn. I’m a blue-collar man, so of course I prefer Hustler. Also Hustler was meant to be satirical, completely comical, and politically challenging, where as Playboy and Penthouse take themselves seriously.
When they started, Playboy featured individual women with notable breasts. Genitalia and even pubic hair were not seen. In contrast, Penthouse showed pubic hair, and had photospreads with more than one woman, as well as with men and women. The relevannt phrase at that time was “maximum tumescence in repose” to meet U.S. mailing requirements.Penthouse also ran letters purporting to describe readers’ sex experiences. “Happy Hooker” Xaviera Hollander would advise readers on letters purporting to describe their sex experiences, this time ending, “Xaviera, is this normal?”
When it started, Hustler went right to giving its readers the gynecologist’s-eye view of things.
“Why is it that these people are so invested in denying the agency of women to choose to be sex workers?”
Okay, that really pisses me off so let’s turn that around for a moment: Why is it that you want to pretend all women in the sex industry have agency?
Don’t you know the average age of a “woman” entering prostitution is 14? How much agency does a 14 year old have, particularly one who is so poor and desperate, she has to turn to prostitution?
Don’t you know there are an estimated 800 thousand people being trafficked globally every year? Did you know 80% of them are women? Do you understand that trafficked women and kids have no agency?
Do you choose your sex partners, Chan? Sex workers don’t, they get chosen. And they don’t choose who or what they do either. The men have all the agency.
Hector B
“When it started, Hustler went right to giving its readers the gynecologist’s-eye view of things”
You creep me out big style. Sayin’ that, just the same as all the other pornsick misfits. No: deffo More.
I haven’t seen Hustler in 20+ years cause it was crap then, is likely crap now.
Gee, me, the woman in a male dominated profession, with a husband who spent more time at home as primary caregiver than I did (we both did some, and did shifts more or less equal more than either being primary) because I know women who happen to have done amature porn and shared it with me can’t possibly be a feminist. Who knew?
And as MAJeff is gay, his porn would exploit men, if anyone. Exhabitionists do exist. No, most porn is not good. Guess what? Reading comprehension is a requirement for adult discourse. I did not say “I like porn.” I said “I like some porn.”
Yeah, anti-porn crusaders Really aren’t absolutist asses. (snark)
Oh, yeah, I almost forgot. Flynt creeps me out big time, but not nearly so much as Heffner.
“I’m 42. I like some porn. Not all of it is anti-women. Those who condemn it all as exploitation are anti-sex.”
My reading comprehension is just fine, Helen. You wrote the above. You got slammed for it and rightfully so. Deal with it.
PS: I was in male dominated professions for years. What the hell does that have to do with pron? Oh, yeah, nothing.
It has equating anyone who isn’t automatically anti-porn is not a feminist.
Yeah, really need to work on that reading comprehension.
“It has” (??)
Apparently, you really do need to work on that reading (and writing) comprehension.
You wrote what you wrote. “If you’re against pron, you’re anti-sex. ” That’s essentially what you wrote. Now, you’re attempting to backtrack.
You want to take that back? If so, we can have a conversation.
AnnaR: When Hustler came out, its chief distinction compared to Playboy, etc. was not that it was comical, satirical, or blue-collar. Its chief distinction was its focus on female genitalia. By making that observation I didn’t expect or intend to creep anyone out.
To Hector
The print of Hustler was and is satirical, completely comic, and blue-collar. The Photography in Hustler was and is extremely explicit.
Actually what is in Hustler, and most of what Flynt does creeps me out to, but I love reading larryflynt.com, and I can’t and won’t deny that I love looking at naked a woman (especially my wife), and any straight man that says he doesn’t, is lying.
Can porn and the porn industry be respectful to women? I believe some of it is (though I will admit that Hustler is not very respectful to women, if at all, but still I think it is better than Playboy or Penthouse).
One thing I hope you all note; I acknowledge that the porn industry has some serious problems that need to be fixed, but I would hate to see it go away completely. Personally I would like to see feminists take it over.
To Gayle
You’re right, you can be pro-sex, and anti-porn, but I think porn makes sex more interesting (also porn relaxes me, where as action movies make me hate life), and, as I said, not all porn is disrespectful to women.
Porn that isn’t disrespectful to women? And who decided it wasn’t disrepectful to women? You? Who decided you weren’t
misogynist? You? Not too full of entitlement and self appointed authority, are you? Now stop deciding and dictating to
women what is or isn’t disrespectful to women. I don’t remember electing you to speak for me, boy.
In the meanwhile, understand that when a woman reads porn, it feels a little like a Jew reading a Nazi manual.
How would you know what’s in most couple’s bedrooms? What are you doing in most couple’s bedrooms? Do most couples
invite you into their bedrooms? Why? Well, I’ve been in plenty of bedrooms and I don’t recall seeing any porn there. And I can
definitely assure there’s no porn in mine or my partner’s bedroom.
As to what misogynist like or don’t like, who cares?
Of course you pay for sex. You buy porn, don’t you?
Who’s entertainment and at who’s expense?
So I can assume you write to your mother and grandmother and church congregation about this? Well, golly gee whiz, why
not?
….anymore than wearing high heels and tight pants implies that you want to get raped.
Well, that’s sure not what you boys say in the courtroom.
Well, that’s mighty white of you.
Of course, not. Not the porn you like. But you’re not a pervert either. Peeping Toms that look at the naked bodies of women
they don’t even know, are not perverts, dammit.
Since when did fucking become love making? That’s the trouble with porn. Under its influence, you boys can no longer
distingush between rape, sex, lovemaking and violence.
“Pornography” literally means the writing of harlots or depictions of acts of prostitutes. “Porne” in Greek, literally means
whore. But somehow in your twisted little boy mind, this is kind and respectful towards women and not misogynist?
Porn is the war room where the soldiers are trained. Porn’s little soldiers then go out and commit those acts they have learned
and been trained in on women. Porn is the instruction. Rape, battering and prostitution is the practice. But oh, no, no, no,
this isn’t gratuitous violence. This is love making!
Well, try spreading that love around. Go ahead and try it on another guy. See how kind and respectful he finds it.
I don’t support death, destruction, trained assassins, hired killers or the imperialistic invasion and colonization of other people
by those with slave/master mentaities. You act like that’s a bad thing.
So what do you consider not disrespectful? Letting us live?
Now spare me your protection racket. I mean, just who is it I need protection from? Isn’t that a little like having the fox guard the henhouse?
I don’t need you to protect me, boy. I need protection *from* you. Besides, it gets old having to pull you boys out from under
the bed and hear y’all screaming for your mommies every time you hear a loud noise. As usual, you boys have everything all upside down and half-assed backwards. It’s women that protect you boys, not the other way around. It’s women that sacrifice their lives for you boys, not the other way around.
Now stop acting like you’re doing women a favor. If you really want to do women a favor, stay away from us. Date men.
Gayle,
One more time:
“I’m 42. I like some porn. Not all of it is anti-women. Those who condemn it all as exploitation are anti-sex.”
What about “some”, Not all”, and that last sentance are beyond you?
“My reading comprehension is just fine, Helen. You wrote the above. You got slammed for it and rightfully so. Deal with it.”
If you think “pornhound” is a slam, rather than the amusing knee-jerk reaction of an absolutist moron, you really are naive.
And a typo is all you’ve got? Why would I want to discuss something you clearly have no understanding of beyod I have decided all porn is bad and exploits women, while ignoring MAJeff’s note that gay men’s porn has no women?
You know where this leads?
A subset of society decides all nudity is porn. Another overlapping subset decides all porn is evil. Public officials hang cloth over classic styled nude statues in public buildings.
You do know who did that, right?
“In the meanwhile, understand that when a woman reads porn, it feels a little like a Jew reading a Nazi manual.”
Not necessarily all porn. More absolutist crap.
You want to say most? You want to say all you’ve seen? I’d give you that as most of what the general populous considers porn is crap. Most of it is exploitive. Who is to say all? You?
Once again, someone completely ignoring MAJeff’s point about gay porn. He sensibly seems to have left you frothers to yourselves. I think I will follow.
So, what are you saying, here? That not all Nazi manuals were anti-Jew? Or that not all Jews would have understood them to be anti-Jew?
As for gay male porn:
Jeez, Helen H. You really are dense. I’ve highlighted the relevant portion of my statement for you.
It is pretty well-accepted that gay men, especially bottoms, are discriminated against on the basis of their approximation of femaleness. They are associated with women. They are woman-proxies. Homophobia is an extention of misogyny. I don’t think I have to tell you, then, that the treatment of gay men, especially feminine gay male bottoms is a reflection of this society’s hatred of women. Therefore, the depiction of gay male bottoms in porn is also reflective of misogyny, ie anti-woman.
When MAJeff comes back with a gay male porno that does not feature any bottoms, I’ll buy the notion that some porn isn’t anti-woman.
That you seem to think anti-porn and -prostitution advocates give a shit about statues is an indication of how poorly read you are on the subject. So long as the statues don’t require or depict the prostitution of women for their creation, there’s no issue. If, on the other hand, you want to pretend as if many of the models used in the creation of nude statues/paintings WEREN’T being prostituted (they were), then you’ve got the blinders pulled down further over your eyes than I thought.
That at least comes close to being a slam. And even has thought and some points.
Your 1st point: no, a woman reading porn does not necessarily feel like a jew reading nazi propoganda (depending again on the specific definition of porn and who do you suggest make this judgement for ALL women, especially that specific one reading the porn).
The absolutist crap refers to insisting that there are no possible shade, qualifiers, or opinions differing from the person making the statement. Generally this is referred to as fundamentalism.
So, the model for David was prostituted? You know this how? I was referring to several specific instances, and male statues. Here’s one for you cite for you. There were others, under Reagan, that I recall but don’t have time to look for.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002/01/29/statues.htm
Not too bright. The point being made about the Nazi manuals is that, Nazi’s being anti-Jew, ALL of their manuals were anti-Jew. Every single one of them. If there are Jews who don’t see the anti-Semitism, it’s because they have blinders on. Not unlike women who refuse to see the misogyny in ALL porn.
I’m going to help you out with some bolding again to highlight the part that seems to have escaped your grasp. Admittedly, the bolded portion here could have been more coherently written, but the gist is clear. If there was no prostitution involved, anti-porn/-prostitution advocates have no problem with the statue.
*If* the model used for the statue of David was not a prostituted man, there’s no problem with the statue of David. I’m sure the people who decided to cover the statue of David did not have anti-prositution concerns in mind.
“You know where this leads?
A subset of society decides all nudity is porn. Another overlapping subset decides all porn is evil.”
I think this misses the point. Reverse this relationship: why must nudity ever be porn? Why must we give two sh*ts about getting off on the image of another?
Certainly, as feminists, we understand basics of gender fluidity, roles, sexual capacities—the extent to which we have been lied to about sexuality. And certainly sexuality runs a wider gamut than we are typically taught: a fine mile from lifelong celibacy to lifelong bestiality. So, I really don’t understand why discourse on porn and its contribution to human life never gets into the nitty gritty of entitlement, invasion and violation. How does attraction and arousal develop? What constructs are needed to find something “visually stimulating” and do those constructs involve feelings of entitlement, invasion and violation of another?
I agree the vast majority of porn is anti-woman. But I am so radical and crazy as to believe all porn is anti-people.
justicewalks & luckynl, you sure are giving this thread a lift!
Still not killing off my hubby & sons for you, though.
I’ve never understood why soldiers need photographs or films in order to masturbate.
I’ve never understood why it’s so necessary that it makes it valid to exploit women by taking pictures of them naked (or being ‘done to’ by men they wouldn’t ordinarily choose to have sex with).
Being anti-porn (yes, ALL PORN) is not being anti-sex. It’s being anti-commodification of sex. It’s being anti-exploitation of other REAL human beings.
If there’s ever true equality between the sexes in this culture we can have the “porn’s okay IF” discussion.
Until then it’s just a bunch of wanking about how “my porn is okay because (I like it) it’s not bad…” and how advanced and sophisticated sexuality is in Sweden. *rolleyes*
BTW, this is strictly MY opinion, I don’t hope to convince anyone to change theirs.
I’ve never understood why soldiers need photographs or films in order to masturbate
Masturbation alone is not effective; men have to have the illusion of participation. The problem there is that men lack imagination, but visual stimuli is effective. Alternatively, some sex stories are well written enough to be useful.
The problem there is that men lack imagination
we’re all doomed, then. no more inventions, no more cures for illness……no more flying machines……where has men’s imaginations gone?
i don’t believe this for one minute!! men willfully brainwash themselves to believe all of this tripe. easier to justify when it’s a ‘fact’, ain’t it?
Whoops! Sorry about the Perpet-U-Quote above. I was responding to Gayle @ #70 above, who thought that because I was saying “Some women like to pose for Playboy because it makes them feel sexy, and if they win PMOY they might get a car, and who are we to tell them they can’t,” it meant I support child prostitution the world over.
The problem there is that men lack imagination
we’re all doomed, then. no more inventions, no more cures for illness……no more flying machines……where has men’s imaginations gone?
i don’t believe this for one minute!! men willfully brainwash themselves to believe all of this tripe. easier to justify when it’s a ‘fact’, ain’t it?
To Luckynkl
Let just put this on record. You hate all porn, and you hate the military.
Well you are definitely not the feminist I want to be associated with.
Yes there is porn (or explicit erotic if your prefer) that is not disrespectful to women. Try looking at “9 Songs”, “The Dreamers”, “Lies”, “Henry and June”, most of Tinto Brass’s stuff, and etc. Your puritanically, naive view of the world is not the one I want to be a part of. And if you don’t believe that the US’s best and brightest, who have sworn to protect this nation and its constitution, are not protecting you from chaos, then I say take a better look at your environment. Last time I saw the national guard took part in the recovery operations of every natural disaster that has befallen this country.
Further more to Luckynkl
Also I don’t believe Tara Patrick, Asia Carrera, Kobe Tai, Jenna Jameson, and all the other female porn stars are going to like that you implied that they are all prostitutes.
i don’t believe this for one minute!! men willfully brainwash themselves to believe all of this tripe. easier to justify when it’s a ‘fact’, ain’t it?
I lied — During the writers strike we are all imagining our own dramas and comedies, much better than the tripe the networks serve up.
Whether they like it or not doesn’t have any bearing on whether it’s true!
“Well you are definitely not the feminist I want to be associated with.”
Oh no! Because misogynist boys decide who is a likable feminist or not and we should be offended! Holy Christ, if that’s not a steaming attitude of male privilege, I don’t know what is! This is so unintentionally funny. I hear they lowered the IQ restrictions for military recruits, and I see it at work right here. But you want a no-questions-asked universal moral medal merely because you are in the military, which an admired position. Your logic is so riddled with fallacies it’s demeaning to me to even engage with you to point them out.
judging by the thin storylines of porn, yes, men lack imagination.
Typical male sexual fantasy: (To the tune of The Bear Goes Over the Mountain)
The penis goes in the vagina
The penis goes in the vagina
The penis goes in the vagina
To coat its walls with ghee.
To K.A.
I didn’t say I disliked Luckynkl, I said I don’t want to be associated with her and her ilk. Which I guess includes you, because you also disrespect the military, and you hate all porn.
So I guess you are of the camp that believes all military personal are stupid. Gee, you really know how to show your lack of appreciation for the service men and women that love this great nation of ours, and are putting their lives on the line for you.
You are right, the Bush administration has lowered the recruiting standards a little, but those drops are only temporary, and when I enlisted in i996 all recruits had to have a high school diploma or equivalent, had to have a clean record, could not be part of a hate organization such as the KKK, and had to pass drug screenings. In short your nation’s best and brightest, most patriotic, and most ready to sacrifice on your behalf have to be a decent, crime free, drug free, non-racist, high school grad (and if you wanted to be an officer you had to have a college degree). I am appalled that you feel those brave men and women are not worthy of your respect.
Hector B it was your reference to “gynaecology” that creeped me out. I worked two years as a gynae nurse; women don’t need your flippant reference to female medicine. We are all well aware of the “gynaecology” genre of pornography that men masturbate do. Women’s health has been sexualised - by men.
Yes - creepy.
To cara, you wrote
“I’ve never understood why soldiers need photographs or films in order to masturbate.”
Did you ever stop to think that aficionados of porn might like porn for reasons other than wanting to masturbate to it?
I like porn, or explicit erotica to be more percise, because it relaxes me, and I genuinely enjoy watching people make love. There are a lot of porn couples these days, you know? Maybe shows like “Queer as Folk”, “L Word”, “Sex and the City” (all of which I am a fan of) aren’t porn exactly, but they are erotic, and the content within those shows is less tame than what Playboy of Penthouse provides.
Yes, I enjoy porn/erotica, and I am not afraid to admit it. And I am not afraid to say that I collect porn and erotica because I find some of it entertaining, especially the porn I considered to be not disrespectful to women.
Anna R, now I understand and I apologize. I was not aware of that particular male fetish.
hm. which viewpoint to consider more hateful towards humanity as a whole: that which says that pornography made under consensual circumstances isn’t necessarily exploitative, or that which says all males should be killed at birth for the good of the earth as a whole, because men are uniformly vicious, repression-obsessed barbarians who can’t get their rocks off until every woman everywhere has been chucked into the gaping maw of The Pornocaust?
Aw shucks. Does this mean we won’t be having dinner and a movie?
fetboy, you say porn/erotica ‘relaxes’ you. i have to say, physically it does not ‘relax’ you if you participate. in fact, it makes certain muscles contract and swell and is quite painful (or so i hear) if participation is not allowed to finish. (i don’t need to use nasty words to get my point across, do i??) i’m wondering if you could deconstruct your fascination with porn a bit further than the same ol’ lie about how it ‘relaxes’ men. it’s impossible to say it ‘relaxes’ you until you come to the end result. otherwise, porn viewing can agitate a man more than anything else, if not allowed to get to end result. what the end result releases in a man’s body is dopamine. THAT IS WHAT RELAXES YOU. NOT porn. any man can re-sensitize himself to his body and can get end result without viewing porn and get all relaxation benefits. no woman demeaned and no man agitated.
To Avril
It depends on how you watch porn. some men watch it with appreciation, and some men watch it with expectation. Since I prefer erotica (porn with a point), I always watch the porn, that I like, all the way through (usually I watch it with my wife). Male gay porn is actually quite humorous.
To Luckynkl
Would you want to come my party if I invited you? I am sure you and I have a lot in common. Just not in regards to porn or the military!
I have nothing against you personally, just I was offended by your remarks about my coworkers and I, and I think you are too harsh on porn, and porn stars.
No, because frankly that’s a laughable concept. Nice try, though. Right up there with “I read Playboy for the articles.”
Sigh. Unless you’re a woman, it’s completely irrelevant what YOU “consider” is not disrespectful to women. Otherwise, it’s all “blah blah I like porn quit ruining it for me I’m a Nice Guy blah”.
To Cara
You couldn’t ruin porn for me, even if you wanted to.
I like some porn, and you’re not going to change that.
Yes I do read Hustler for the articles, and yes, I do like like erotic movies and TV shows all the way through. Yes I do watch porn with my wife (what she likes, and what I like).
Cara, I got an idea. Why don’t you move to a country where all porn is illegal, like Saudi Arabia, Iran, or North Korea, and I’ll stay here and enjoy porn.
Baning porn. finally an area where the Religious Fundies and some feminists have common ground.
No commenter said anything about banning it, dumbass.
Objection to something for one’s own self on strictly personal ethical grounds does NOT equal banning.
Dumbass.
Such language Cara!
To Cara
Than what exactly do you want to do about porn?
I hope I have made myself clear on this one. As a consumer I want to be able to buy, read, look at, and enjoy legal porn. And as a feminist I would like to see Femenists, or just a powerful women’s organization, work with porn stars (particularly the female ones), and porn studios to make the legal porn industry safe for aspiring women (over the age of 18) that want to get into the porn industry.
The heterosexual/lesbian side of the porn industry is the one industry that is completely dependent upon women’s cooperations, and most of the famous female porn stars would consider themselves either feminists, or at the very least supportive of the feminist movement.
I have never understood why main stream feminist have issue with female porn stars, when in fact it seems like they both have a lot of common ground, and could work together to advance a pro-woman movement at the expensive of middle to upper class male slobs that spend a fortunate on porn.
You’re not a feminist, fetboy. You’re no better than the rest of the “best and the brightest” who want their pornstitution no matter what the vast, vast majority of the pornstituted women want:
The women do not want to be there. Women and children do not aspire to be pornstituted when there are other options.
What never changes, though, and you’re right about this, is the fact that men want it, despite women’s and children’s objections. And that is something men (and man-proxies) who get off on pornstituted women ought to be ashamed of, not proud of.
You know, and that’s what kills me about the whole “feminists should make porn better” argument. Women and children don’t want to do it, period. When given a choice between “bad” porn and “better” porn, sure, they’ll choose the “better” one. But if they had other options - if they didn’t have to suck a strange dick, whether on camera or in an alley, in order to eat, the vast, vast majority of them wouldn’t do it at all.
That alone is reason enough for feminists to oppose pornstitution. That the institution also reinforces misogyny is reason to oppose it wholesale.
Feminists have no problem with women whose options have been narrowed so drastically by the patriarchy that they’re victimized by the porn industry. Dumbass.
My problem is with idiots who refuse to simply admit that they’re exploiting people because THEY LIKE THE PRODUCT too much to NOT exploit people, and instead cite a bunch of entitled adolescent arguments about how empowerful it is to be a porn star, how fabulous the lifestyle is, and how sophisticated and advanced their reasons are for liking the stuff (denying how damaging it is to feminism in general and porn victims in particular in the process).
You, however, have promptly admitted you’re an entitled pig. The only bullshittery you’re indulging in is suggesting that anyone wants to take your precious pictures of exploited people away. Your defensiveness, when all I personally said was that it was all a crock, says it all. YOU KNOW you’re an entitled pig and that the whole porn industry is indefensible. It’s just too upsetting not to get points for being a Nice Guy so you drag your girlfriend into it hoping to justify your porn usage.
Nobody cares if you use porn or not. Nobody’s out to ruin your wanking. I’m saying under this system it’s exploitative and nothing will change that except the end of patriarchy.
Dumbass.
Have fun guys. I’m out of here.
Oh, not to mention the fact that when women and kids are no longer objects to be used by men but are full human beings, there won’t be a MARKET for porn.
Porn, as it stands in this society now, is institutionalized hatred of women. It doesn’t cause the hatred, it REFLECTS IT.
Dumbass.
“Have fun guys. I’m out of here.” = so much wanking so little time.
(or “relaxing”) pffffffff
So, Hector B, what you mean to tell us, then, is that you sexualized women’s health care off the top of your very own perverted head.
I’m afraid your excuse doesn’t exactly excuse you of misogyny.
Yeah, Anna R, creepy indeed.
Just for the record, I don’t think the soldiers should have their care packages vetted for sanitary freshness. If their moms want to send them dirty magazines, it’s not my business.
But if I can make one stupid little basement dweller a little less comfortable with the idea that women exist solely for men’s use, and WE LIKE IT THAT WAY, then my work here is done.
I’ve never understood why it’s so necessary that it makes it valid to exploit women by taking pictures of them naked (or being ‘done to’ by men they wouldn’t ordinarily choose to have sex with).
Being anti-porn (yes, ALL PORN) is not being anti-sex. It’s being anti-commodification of sex. It’s being anti-exploitation of other REAL human beings.
So… you don’t have a problem with guys jerking off to hentai?
So, you’re tired of trying to be funny on rape threads–you’re branching out? Good for you.
I was not aware of that particular male fetish.
So, Hector B, what you mean to tell us, then, is that you sexualized women’s health care off the top of your very own perverted head.
No, what I meant to tell you was that Hustler de-eroticized the naked human body by depicting it clinically.
So, you’re tired of trying to be funny on rape threads–you’re branching out? Good for you.
Didn’t think you’d answer the question.
I’ll answer it, rape apologist, with a question of my own. Does hentai reinforce misogyny? Why, yes, yes it does. There were more than one reason given for feminist opposition to pornography. That you cherry-picked just one is further evidence that you’re another one of the slavering male masses looking to see how much they can get away with, rather than trying to do what’s ethically right.
If Hustler was going for de-eroticization, Hector B, men wouldn’t be wanking off to it. They eroticized medicine.
And so did you, with your totally uninfluenced-by-porn comparison.
I don’t even know what “hentai” is. I don’t care, personally, what floats your boat.
I see no reason to answer questions from you, PiaToR, simply because they’re dull attempts to be funny. I’d be more charitable about them if you hadn’t already admitted your “jokes” are attempts to “poke the easily angered”. (Funny how you seem to decide that women annoyed about being treated like sex objects, rape or otherwise, are “easily angered”.
I wasn’t angry about this topic, but I feel no need to treat your any of your questions as serious. They’re pretty clearly meant to be irritants.
In other words, fuck off, troll.
God, I hate careless mistakes.
I don’t even know what “hentai” is. I don’t care, personally, what floats your boat.
I see no reason to answer questions from you, PiaToR, simply because they’re dull attempts to be funny. I’d be more charitable about them if you hadn’t already admitted your “jokes” are attempts to “poke the easily angered”. (Funny how you seem to decide that women annoyed about being treated like sex objects, rape or otherwise, are “easily angered”).
I wasn’t angry about this topic, but I feel no need to treat your any of your questions as serious. They’re pretty clearly meant to be irritants.
In other words, fuck off, troll.
There. Fixed.
Dammit. No, it wasn’t. Strike the first “your” in that one sentence.
Oh, and fuck off, troll.
I’ll answer it, rape apologist, with a question of my own. Does hentai reinforce misogyny? Why, yes, yes it does.
The Little Sisters of Perpetual Outrage have a problem, then.
I agree there’s more than one valid concern about pornography.
However, if your objection is that porn exploits the women involved in creating it, then you cannot use this against hentai.
And if you use the objection that hentai is misogynist, which a hell of a lot IS, then you cannot use this against the subset which is not misogynist. The majority of the output of Milo Manara springs to mind.
So it really looks like your real objection is to men masturbating to images of women, regardless of any actual exploitation of real women, or of the existence or non-existence of any actual misogynistic element in the pornography. The objections you’ve used are valid - women should not be exploited, nor is a sexual response to misogyny a good thing - but you’re using them to obscure your real concern.
Your problem is with male sexuality.
So why don’t you come out and just admit it?
Or, to turn the question around, under what conceivable circumstances would you find a male sexual response to anything other than an actual woman acceptable?
Yup, just trying to see what you can get away with. Just like I thought.
Phoenician in Apologia to odfashioned Rape, like Cara said, if you want to masturbate to pictures of women/girls or likenesses of women/girls being violated, by all means carry on. Just don’t try to make it out like it’s some sort of feminist feat.
Let me also draw your attention to something I wrote several days ago, since you seem to think I’ve been inconsistent or disingenuous:
There is no such thing as pornography that does not have “any actual misogynistic element.” When there is no misogyny, there will be no porn.
Funny, none of the men I’ve slept with have ever thought that I “have a problem with Male Sexuality”. (I even capitalized it to give it the Reverence It Deserves. Really. It’s That Important).
Is “male sexuality” code for “I get to use a woman’s image whenever I want, so there!”? Sure sounds like it sometimes.
Well, Justicewalks, he IS right, after all. Who the hell are we to dislike being treated like things by the whole of society, and to dislike being told we’re just being mean to the poor menz if we say so?
If women are ever people, pictures of nekkid peeples having sex may or may not exist, but there will be a whole new dynamic and it won’t be exploitative. Or whatever.
But all the dick-clutching and whimpering about how awful it is to have to hear teh Mean Mommies’ disapproval is pretty hilarious, overall.
There is no such thing as pornography that does not have “any actual misogynistic element.” When there is no misogyny, there will be no porn.
Very good. Would you like to make a statement applying that to my question “Under what conceivable circumstances would you find a male sexual response to anything other than an actual woman acceptable?” so we have an explicit stance from you and can thus draw a close to the discussion?
No, I would not “like to make a statement applying that to [your] question.” Thanks for asking.
If you actually bother to read the thread, you’ll find that someone, if not more than one someone, has already addressed the issue of the circumstances under which pornography would cease to be exploitative of women.
Yes, it does sound like that, Cara. Would the rape apologist like to make a definitive statement to that effect, so that all the hopeful women out there can hear straight from the horse’s mouth how useless it is to waste time trying to reform men? After all, it’s just natural male sexuality to objectify women, right?
No, I would not “like to make a statement applying that to [your] question.”
Didn’t think so.
But at least we’ve established that your stance is thatt porn is bad, regardless of whether it expolits women, and regardless of whether it contains misogynistic elements.
You appear to be stating that any porn - presumably any picture of the naked body, male or female, used by gays, straights or bis for salacious purposes - is ontologically misogynist.
I wish the Little Sisters could have sorted that right out from the start rather than throwing red herrings about valid objections based on exploitation or, you know, misogyny in porn. It would have saved so much time.
Phoenician in Apologia to odfashioned Rape, like Cara said, if you want to masturbate to pictures of women/girls or likenesses of women/girls being violated, by all means carry on. Just don’t try to make it out like it’s some sort of feminist feat.
Fascinating. I haven’t made any comment about my own sexual activity above, and yet assumptions about this are what you choose to target in personal attacks.
Very telling.
Sigh. You’re not very bright. The misogyny is in our culture, rape apologist. When our culture is no longer misogynist, porn will be OK. Those are the conditions.
It’s just that, when those conditions are met, you won’t even want your precious porn.
Oh, and “Little Sisters”? Misogynist.
Also, exploitation doesn’t just apply to transactions/interactions between individuals. Porn, as an industry, is exploitative of women’s low status in society. And it perpetuates it. Porn, as a transaction, is exploitative of individual women.
So, you know, when I say all porn is exploitative, I don’t have to have a particular porn “star” in mind, oh, rape apologist of stunted reading comprehension.
HA!
That you chose to interpret what was a generic ‘you’ as something specific to yourself is even more telling.
The sentence was directed at you, yes, but the ‘you’ contained within the sentence was generic.
Hardly.
There was no “personal attack”; porn is all okay, right?
You’re bent out of shape because some women expressed their own opinions on the subject. Why? It’s all okay, right?
You’re working overtime trying to catch some discrepancy in what’s been said. Your lack of reading comprehension is not our problem. Your oblique “gotcha” remarks are pretty funny, since they don’t say anything and you haven’t tripped anyone up.
Kind of difficult to win an argument when nobody’s arguing, but go ahead and keep trying, if you want to.
You’re eager to have something specific said to “draw the discussion to a close.” Why? You can bail out any time.
Porn’s all good. Right? It’s all okay, and those of us with other opinions are just mean or manhating. 
So what’s the problem?
Also: once again, YOU don’t get to decide which concerns about porn are “valid” and which ones aren’t. YOU are not exactly the best judge about what’s misogynistic and what’s not, especially because you’re NOT a woman.
(I know, I know–you can be more “objective” about it, right?
So unfair that you don’t get to define all women’s experience, since you can see our lives so much more clearly than we can).
Oh, and “Little Sisters”? Misogynist.
No, just Catholic. You’re identifying yourselves quite well.
I do love the convulsions currently being displayed. Carry on.
No kidding, Cara. How could the assumption that a man needs porn in order to stoke the Power of his Male Sexuality*, if such an assumption had even been made, be construed as a “personal attack” if there’s nothing wrong with porn?
*I love the reverent capitalization, by the way. Pure genius.
Rape apologist, plausible deniability will get you nowhere. As if Catholics aren’t misogynist.
You’re right, we’re laughing at you (”convulsing”). You can take it. (That’s why you keep coming back to it, right)?
I’d really appreciate it if you could speak to your remark about Male Sexuality, since you ARE the one who brought it up. Like I said initially, I’m confused. Lay it out for me. You’re the expert. (I really don’t get why only one guy tried to answer it, and the rest went all apeshit and tried to be cute).
WHY is an image necessary for a man to masturbate? A corollary to that question is why is he entitled to use a real woman’s image, but one thing at a time.