-
BlogHer Ad Network More from BlogHer Advertise here BlogHer Privacy Policy -
"In my heart, I think a woman has two choices: either she's a feminist or a masochist." --Gloria Steinem
-
Mar
4
International Sex Workers Rights Day
Filed Under blogswarm, class and economics, courts gone crazy, discrimination, feminism, human rights, misogyny, objectification, pornography, rape and sexual assault, sex and sexuality, sex work, sexual exploitation and harassment, slut-shaming, violence against women and girls | 26 Comments
As I briefly mentioned earlier, yesterday was International Sex Workers Rights Day. I missed it; I didn’t know that it was going on until I’d already posted for the day, and I just didn’t have the time for a second post. So I planned to write about it today instead. I felt slightly guilty about that, but now that I’m well aware that the issue didn’t get nearly as much coverage as it should have, I feel really guilty. I tell you this not only by way of explanation, but also to say that if you blog, I know it’s easy to miss things and to not blog about something when you should. And it’s not too late to make it right.
That being said, to those who purposely avoided blogging on the topic, I understand why. Talking about sex work causes fighting, and not the feminist vs. troll kind, but the feminist vs. feminist kind. Positioning yourself in that argument isn’t a fun thing to do, particularly if you think that each side has at least a couple of good points, and it’s easy to avoid the question all together (this is of course, what we call “privilege”). But that doesn’t make avoiding it right. I’m fine with everyone voicing their opinions, but I do want to let everyone know up front that I will not allow things to get ugly, personal or insulting. And while I’m not going to insist that everyone post from a pro-decriminalization standpoint, I do insist that comments come from a perspective that promotes rights for sex workers — however you believe that those rights are best obtained. I’ve never had to ban a feminist before, or even ask one to stop posting; please don’t make me start today.
So. Why sex workers’ rights? Well, it’s pretty simple. Even those sex workers who enjoy their jobs get a hell of a raw deal. All around the world, sex workers are: investigated and arrested for making a living, deported even when there is evidence of non-consent, left without any form of job security, gang-raped and abused by their bosses but left without recourse for fear that they themselves will be arrested, and arrested for mere suspicion of prostitution, including carrying condoms (which only discourages safer sex).
Popularity: 27% [?]
Feb
18
Distributing Homemade Porn without Ex’s Consent Could Land Man in Jail
Filed Under Asia, International, assholes, misogyny, objectification, pornography, sex and sexuality, sexual exploitation and harassment, slut-shaming, violence against women and girls | Leave a Comment
This greatly pleases me: a Hong Kong man who posted sex videos of his ex-girlfriend online without her consent could face jail time.
A jilted Hong Kong boyfriend who posted video clips on the internet of his ex-lover having sex with him was warned on Monday that he could face jail.
Lee Wing-fung, 29, uploaded nude photos and video clips in an act of revenge when his former girlfriend refused to get back together with him.
He was sentenced to 240 hours community service in September after admitting criminal intimation and publishing indecent material.
However, the prosecution claims the sentence was too lenient and is now seeking a jail sentence for Lee.
It says the fact that he threatened the woman beforehand and published her name and work address with the video clips deserves a jail sentence of at least 12 months.
In the earlier hearing, the defence claimed Lee resorted to the action because he was devastated when his girlfriend ended their three-year relationship.
A true threat of punishment for such an action isn’t exactly one that you see often, even if the practice itself is becoming more and more common. We’ve long had people who steal and release homemade sex videos by celebrities. Then came the camera phone phenomenon of taking pictures up women’s skirts and posting them online or passing them around to friends. Now, the practice of posting sex videos without one person’s consent has increased, with the success of sites like xTube and YouPorn. For those who don’t know, these sites are the YouTube of porn — anyone can upload videos to the site, so long as they own the copyright to the material. They are designed specifically for amateur porn, and though the sites have a rule that the consent of all participating parties in the video must be obtained to legally publish it, there isn’t exactly any way to enforce such a requirement.
Though I’m sure that this kind of thing has happened to men as well, with straight men being the primary consumers of porn, women are mostly the ones getting screwed over. No matter how much a woman is comfortable and unashamed of her sexuality, as a general rule, she still wouldn’t want images of herself engaging in a sexual act available for anyone to see — particularly without her consent. Beyond simple modesty concerns, this is a highly rational worry, seeing as how one’s entire career can be unfairly jeopardized for even the most benign photographs (of course, it’s also a huge violation of personal and sexual rights).
Popularity: 28% [?]
Jan
5
They’re Coming for Your Uterus
Filed Under 2008 election, abortion, anti-choice extremism, human rights, legislation, misogyny, paternalism, patriarchy, politics, pornography, reproductive justice, women’s health | 4 Comments
I have already reported on how Missouri is seemingly working its ass off for the title of Most Anti-Choice State. Last August, the state legislature passed an initiative that would require abortion clinics to undergo extremely expensive and unnecessary renovations. When challenged by Planned Parenthood, the state contracted an anti-choice group to act as its defense. In September, we found out about a lawsuit challenging the two year old state law effectively outlawing abortion for female inmates. In October, Governor Matt Blunt put together an anti-choice “abortion task force” supposedly to find out what “impact” abortion has on women, though the conclusion was clearly reached before any “investigation” was completed. And then, as a direct result of said “task force,” a Missouri ballot initiative outlawing abortion was proposed in December.
Now, I’m not saying that they’ve won the title yet. Off the top of my head, I can say that Mississippi, Kansas and South Dakota are all strong competitors. But Missouri — well, they get an A for effort.
A couple of days ago, the Baltimore Sun ran a more comprehensive story about the ballot initiative. It’s mostly about how the initiative could potentially impact the 2008 Missouri elections, but what caught my eye was the new anti-choice argument. Before, they argued (falsely) that abortions regularly cause severe physical and emotional trauma to women. Now, in a variation on a theme, they’re using the newly-popular argument that women don’t have abortions of their own free will. Baby-loving, pregnancy celebrating, innocent and simple people that women are, they have to be coerced into having abortions.
Though the ballot proposal is just beginning to attract attention, its implications are significant in Missouri and the nation.
Anti-abortion groups say the proposal would make Missouri a model for the country. They contend that it seeks to prevent what they allege accounts for more than half of U.S. abortions: women being coerced into having unwanted abortions.
Supporters say the regulations would force abortion providers to inform women of all of the potential consequences of abortion, such as “higher rates of suicide, psychiatric hospitalization, substance abuse, depression.” [. . .]
Supporters of the initiative, formally titled “The Prevention of Coerced and Unsafe Abortions Act,” are attempting to frame the debate around their contention that 64 percent of women who have abortions have them without really wanting to. They say women are pushed into them by partners, family, poverty or lack of information regarding their options.
“It is my belief that the vast majority of Missouri citizens, even those who believe that abortions should be readily available to women, would agree … that no abortion should ever be the result of coercion,” Reardon said.
One supporter of the proposal is Paula Talley, a divorced mother of two from St. Louis who says she was forced into having an abortion nearly two decades ago by economic hardship and fear of what her family would think.
“I’m hoping that my story will really speak to people as they consider how to vote on this,” Talley said.
Popularity: 14% [?]
Sep
25
Why Generalizing About Porn Doesn’t Help
Filed Under homophobia and transphobia, misogyny, objectification, patriarchy, pornography, sex and sexuality, sex work, sexism, violence against women and girls | 13 Comments
Perhaps in response to the Don Hazen review of Robert Jensen’s book Getting Off, AlterNet today has another article on the topic. This time it’s by Riane Eisler, and she argues that pornography and war are intricately linked.
I want to start off by saying that Eisler’s writing is not particularly academic. She also repeatedly and gratingly uses the word “porno” (seriously, when was the last time you heard someone say “porno” in a non-facetious context? Unless you’re in 4th grade or living ten years ago, it’s either “porn” or “pornography.”). But I’m going to work past all of that and ask you to do the same, because I think that what she has to say is interesting– even though I disagree with her.
I find her initial link between war and pornography to be compelling:
Liberals often defend images of men chaining, whipping, torturing, and even killing women in the name of sexual pleasure as harmless exercises of free speech. At the same time, they strenuously object to war propaganda.
But if war propaganda is effective in dehumanizing members of “enemy” nations to make it possible for men to hurt, kill, and degrade other human beings — as it clearly is — why would images of women as merely body parts for male sexual use and abuse not have similar effects? Why, like other propaganda, would stories and images that dehumanize women not blind people to the reality of women’s suffering? If linking sex with violence had no effect on behavior, why would savvy media professionals link sex with whatever they are trying to sell — from cars to Coca-Cola — to influence peoples’ behavior?
. . . Many studies show that images linking sexual arousal with cruelty and violence desensitize men to rape and other gender violence. Even beyond this, porno dehumanizes women and perpetuates the notion that half our species is put on earth to be used, and abused, by the other half.
I find this to be a valid argument, and I mostly agree with Eisler here. But then she starts taking it a little too far:
Now what we’re talking about here is pornography, not erotica. Erotica is about giving and receiving sexual pleasure. Pornography is about linking sexual arousal with the infliction or suffering of pain — be it psychological or physical. Erotica (from Eros, the Greek god of love) is about sexual love. Pornography is about male control over women — and even beyond this, about domination and violence as normal and fun.
Images that link sexual arousal with causing physical or psychological pain perpetuate repression and injustice across the board. They condition people to accept, and even want, relations of domination and submission enforced by violence.
Popularity: 15% [?]
Sep
24
On Degradation, Violence and Porn
Filed Under books, feminism, misogyny, objectification, pornography, sex and sexuality, sex work, sexual exploitation and harassment, violence against women and girls | 9 Comments
Here is a book that I can’t wait to read: Getting Off (Pornography and the End of Masculinity) by Robert Jensen. It’s a a book by a feminist male against pornography. What the hell is not to like?
But from Don Hazen’s AlterNet review, I can tell that it’s going to be a tough read. From a book excerpt, here’s Jensen:
First, imagine what we could call the cruelty line — the measure of the level of overt cruelty toward, and degradation of, women in contemporary mass-marketed pornography. That line is heading up, sharply.
Second, imagine the normalization line — the measure of the acceptance of pornography in the mainstream of contemporary culture. That line also is on the way up, equally sharply.
If pornography is increasingly cruel and degrading, why is it increasingly commonplace instead of more marginalized? In a society that purports to be civilized, wouldn’t we expect most people to reject sexual material that becomes evermore dismissive of the humanity of women? How do we explain the simultaneous appearance of more, and increasingly more intense, ways to humiliate women sexually and the rising popularity of the films that present those activities?
As is often the case, this paradox can be resolved by recognizing that one of the assumptions is wrong. Here, it’s the assumption that U.S. society routinely rejects cruelty and degradation. In fact, the United States is a nation that has no serious objection to cruelty and degradation. Think of the way we accept the use of brutal weapons in war that kill civilians, or the way we accept the death penalty, or the way we accept crushing economic inequality. There is no paradox in the steady mainstreaming of an intensely cruel pornography. This is a culture with a well-developed legal regime that generally protects individuals’ rights and freedoms, and yet it also is a strikingly cruel culture in the way it accepts brutality and inequality.
Popularity: 24% [?]
Jun
14
On porn, in theory and in practice
Filed Under blogging, feminism, marketing, media, misogyny, patriarchy, pornography, products, race and racism, rape and sexual assault, religious fanaticism, sex and sexuality, sexism, sexual exploitation and harassment, violence against women and girls | 14 Comments
Roy, one of the coolest male-feminists and bloggers around, has a particularly thought-provoking post up at Feministe, where he’s guest-blogging for the week. It’s about porn, and how the stances that we feminists sometimes take on it have the potential to cause more harm to women who actually work in the sex-industry.
Personally, this is an issue that I am torn on, and therefore don’t generally blog about. I consider myself to be sex-positive. I like sex. I think that sex is a healthy, natural, fun, beautiful thing in all its consenting, mutually-pleasurable forms. I’m supportive of sex toys, kinks and fetishes as long as the participants consent and no serious physical harm is being done.
Popularity: 6% [?]
-
"No woman can call herself free who does not own and control her own body." --Margaret Sanger
-
"Men, their rights, and nothing more; women, their rights, and nothing less." -- Susan B. Anthony
