Trigger Warning March 31, 2012
Posted by FCM in books!, feminisms, prostitution, rape.Tags: big porn inc, gang rape, knowledge, male violence, rape
68 comments
i wrote most of this before the great cotton ceiling debacle of 2012 feminist emergency and ive been thinking about it on and off ever since, when i wasnt thinking or writing about trans. tending to feminist emergencies is real work too, but the other stuff doesnt stop just because someones picked up the red phone and had good reason to use it. ive been thinking about “trigger warnings” and going down the rabbit hole of what men are and what men do, and all the obstacles in front of us, preventing us from knowing the real, whole truth. all of it.
allectos post on big porn inc has haunted me ever since i read it. whenever i read stuff like that, stuff thats truly, truly “triggering” it changes me. i dont know where this word “trigger” came from or what people think it means, perhaps especially what its supposed to mean when its used by those who arent being “triggered” (ie. men in feminist spaces mostly, if not exclusively) but i should think that “warning: you are about to be permanently changed by what you are about to know, and you are dangerously close to knowing it but still have the choice to know or not know at this point, its not too late to hold onto your ignorance of this one thing” would seem like a more accurate and honest descriptor, although its long and doesnt exactly roll off the tongue. and…something to do with size. like you think the world is the size it feels to you now, but theres actually much, much more to it than that, do you want the world to get bigger immediately? yes/no? if not, stop now.
and before you continue, there are no graphic depictions of anything in this post. im talking about trigger warnings in a meta way, and discussing horrific sexualized violence in a general way. not giving you an actual trigger warning.
the horrors that men perpetrate on women and children (and non-human animals) are literally beyond any of our (women’s) imagining, i think. some of “us” and those among us have experienced some of this first hand, some of the horrors that really likely are a 10 on that scale, but even they, i dare say, cannot imagine the many, many other things that men do that are also a 10. the horror and the magnitude of the horror registers and the memories are there, and the 10 has been acted out on bodies and minds but still, the details must evade us. mustn’t they? because men are extremely creative, when it comes to thinking up ways to harm, and actually harming women and children. creative torturers and death-dealers. if thats not the most necrophilic thing i have ever heard, then i dont know what is. its also a reversal of the highest order. they are destructive, in every way.
and in my travels, as i am sure has happened in most of yours, i have had cause to know about some extremely horrifying things that men do to girls and women. there are no words to describe the atrocity of these things, not to mention the audacity of the perpetrators, and relaying “just the facts” would provide wanking material to some perv, so i wont do it. but every single time i heard, saw or read about one of the many things men do to girls and women, it changed me. the details were always different, and so each instance changed me in a new way. the only thing that was constant was the horror and the misogyny, and the world getting bigger, and fact that i identified, always, with the victim, because these things were always being done by men, to women and girls. it is the truth, and i accept it as the truth. and i resist and activate when and how i can, and i think my feminist-consciousness and all radical-feminist consciousness is reality-based.
10 was a big year for me. thanks nightly news (rape)! thanks disney version of swiss family robinson (gang rape reference)! thats rated G btw.
but. i also know that there are things i dont know, and that there are devils in the details. and that there are millions, billions of details. there are literally endless ways that men can harm girls and women, whether its planned beforehand, improvised at the time, or repeated or reenacted from somewhere else. i suspect that during the throes of misogynistic violence that a kind of “creative” or reverse-creative energy is unleashed and men are able to come up with some truly unimaginable ideas and acts that a person who was not in the throes of misogynistic violence would literally be unable to imagine. its as if they tap into a collective misogyny or hundreds of thousands of years of history, and coupled with their own sickness and the chemical torrent that accompanies this act and this being, they perpetrate atrocities that are literally beyond imagining. and then they document it, and pass it along as a part of men-only oral and written history. they never have to reinvent the wheel, unless they want to. they can always take it further, and the next guy takes it even further than that. its literally a kind of industry with its own industrial revolutions, and they are taking each other down that road with advancements in technologies and epistemologies and they are having breakthroughs and they have their own thinkers and geniuses and someone invented the equivalent of “gains from specialization” and another one came up with electricity and its entirely possible that things are getting worse. from womens perspective anyway.
so anyway, about the details. every single time i hear of another variation on this theme, it changes me. the world gets bigger. and in a very traumatic way. if i were to force myself to know every detail, for one thing, i couldnt: there would always be something that was unknowable, and advances happening in mens horrific industry of misogyny and sexualized violence all the time so that some of the details would always be out of my reach. but. imagine that i dedicated my life to knowing the truth, the whole truth about men and what they do to girls and women, and that the whole truth included the details. because it does.
i would be changed a hundred times a day, or once for every detail i learned. every single one, every single time. the world would get bigger every time, where one second i literally hadnt realized that the world i inhabit is the same world in which that happens, and now i know. those worlds are the same. this expanding world would expand infinitely, there would be no end of it. because of the details. and where that kind of change would be happening to any of us daily, if we made the commitment to know about it, about the details, everything else would be required to remain the same. same job. same dick-pleasing job requirements. same schedule. same clothes. most of our patriarchally-defined worlds are not compatible with this much, or this kind of change. this is deliberate.
this world could keep expanding forever. do you want it to? why/why not?
you cant stay up all night crying, or your eyes will be all puffy the next day and you really need your sleep because you cant be late; you cant stop eating (or start to eat too much) even temporarily out of the sheer horror of what youve seen, because then your clothes wont fit; you cant call in sick no matter how sick you feel, and how sick you are from the knowing. you cant. nothing else would change, but you. nothing would get bigger except your world. which is everything, from your perspective; but thats just you.
so, i guess i would suggest that we might start thinking about that, if we havent already; and perhaps even zeroing in on the details of how to create a world for ourselves and other women that is compatible with this kind of constant change, and consistent with knowing the truth, the whole, entire truth about what men do to women and girls. because what we have right now isnt. and men benefit from women not knowing. they probably even depend on it.
Enthusiastic Dissent February 6, 2012
Posted by FCM in health, PIV, rape.Tags: divorce, PIV, rape
comments closed
i recently had a woman in my life ask me for advice. she said that even though she told her husband she no longer wishes to have PIV, that he keeps bothering her about it, and even though her main reason for removing PIV from the table is menopause-related, in that PIV now causes her extreme pain and recurrent infections, he is getting increasingly and explicitly coercive. she specifically asked for a list of arguments she might be able to use when he comes after her again, and she plans to stockpile them, essentially, like ammo. if that doesnt give just the perfect mental picture, then i dont know what does.
so, heres what i said. keeping in mind that i know some of the details of her situation, and that this is a custom-tailored list, heres what i came up with:
you could tell him that you arent a blowup doll and suggest that he get one. or tell him you give him permission to get a girlfriend, and that you are sure there are plenty of young women that would love to have intercourse with him. NOT. or that no PIV is NOT a grounds for divorce in your state, so whats his point? he is not asserting a real right here, just an imagined one. [link to divorce law site]
as for his assertion that its your “right” as a woman to enthusiastically engage in PIV until you are 90, [HAHA!! HE ACTUALLY SAID THAT TO HER] tell him ok fine, its your RIGHT and you are choosing not to assert your right in this instance. ask him if “women” (women generally, including you) also have the right to refuse PIV, whether they are old or young? if so, why? if not, why not? do his daughters have this right? does his mother?
as for his being unable to get his head around “never having PIV again” tell him you dont control that, only he controls that. all you are saying is that hes never going to have PIV with YOU again, and thats bc you arent ever going to have PIV again with anyone and that part of your life is over, and you are ok with that.
insist that YOU have the right to anally penetrate him with a dildo of whatever size YOU choose, and you dont care if it hurts him bc its your (MADE UP) right to do so and you are asserting it. or, tell him that its your right to be married to a rich man and you are asserting that right, so he better start looking for a second job right away. tell him you are a gold digger and you are tired of GOING WITHOUT.
tell him that intercourse is a scam that only very young women buy into because they dont know any better, and you arent young anymore and neither is your vagina. tell him that yes, there are documented physical changes that occur with menopause.
heres a link: http://www.medicinenet.com/vaginal_dryness_and_vaginal_atrophy/article.htm
that article says that the PIV-related symptoms can be minor or severe. for minor symptoms, IF A WOMAN WANTS TO (which you dont) she can use a lube. but if they are severe, the only treatment is hormone replacement therapy that has side effects and potential complications, up to and including death. tell him that yours is severe, and you arent willing to take the risk OF DEATH in order to engage in PIV with him. if he is willing to die from it, suggest that he take his blowup doll onto the freeway and take his chances.
then after thinking about it for another hour, i sent this one, because her partner prides himself in being a terrific family man who loves his children more than anything in the entire world, allegedly including his daughters:
next time he brings this up, stop the conversation immediately, and tell him to call his daughters RIGHT NOW and tell them that they do not have the right to refuse intercourse with men. tell him to call his daughters RIGHT NOW and tell them that if a man does something to them that hurts, that they dont have the right to stop him, and tell them that if a man hurts them that they just need to let him keep hurting them. tell them they will probably get used to it over time. [THATS WHAT HE SAID TO HER, THAT THE REASON IT 'HURTS' HER IS BC THEY DONT DO IT ENOUGH, THEREFORE TO ALLEVIATE THE PAIN THEY SHOULD DO IT MORE].
if he says that its different bc you are married, then tell him that you are going to call his daughters and tell them that they should never get married and tell them why. then, tell him that the “right” to intercourse wasnt in your marriage vows. just like you having the “right” to be married to a millionaire wasnt in your vows, and perhaps you shouldve both considered that before you got married.
some of these are nuclear, all are eminently reasonable. thing is that i know none of them are going to work, if by “work” you mean they are actually going to convince a man, and get him to really, really feel it, that he doesnt deserve unfettered sexual access to a woman, and that its not, in fact, his god-given right as a man to have PIV on demand. dood actually told her that HE DESERVES BETTER. when the truth of the matter is that if he got what he deserved, he would have less than nothing, because thats what he deserves. and he sure as hell doesnt deserve her, and everything shes done for him over the years, and all the ways his life is better for being with her, because she takes excellent care of him and excellent care of everything.
if only men got what they deserved. if only. the world as we know it would be unrecognizable. and facing that beautiful new world, i think i’d turn cartwheels down the street until my hands bled, and then i’d wash the gravel out, and then….well, i think i would take a pillow and a blanket to the beach and sleep there for a week and think about what i would do with my life, because my work would be done. and i would be so happy about that. oh. my. god. the happy.
Workplace Sexual Harassment: Framing the Issues July 25, 2011
Posted by FCM in feminisms, gender roles, PIV, rape, trans.Tags: PIV, rape, sexual discrimination, sexual harassment, trans
comments closed
i wrote about issue-framing here and i wanted to write about it again. yes, its that important that feminists get this and understand it at a deep level: men get it and understand it and use it against us all the time. and its time for us to start doing it too, en masse. we need to frame the issues to benefit *us* for a change, because issue-framing is at least half the battle, if not more. if youve never thought about it or cant tell who benefits from the way issues are currently framed, chances are whomever it benefits, its not you.
so. on the issue of workplace sexual harassment and sex-discrimination: how is this issue currently being framed? well, undercover punk has cited this paper about a million times and i just had the extreme displeasure of reading the article in its entirety: apparently, if you frame the issue of workplace sexual harassment and discrimination just right, you get to include protections for transgender and transsexual persons “right” to gender-nonconform in the workplace. thats right! men are constantly, CONSTANTLY bemoaning the fact that there are any social controls on them at all, and this includes having to wear “appropriate” clothes to work. and…shaving. solution: call yourself transgender, and you get to redefine workplace-appropriate, to suit yourself.
you also get to work within the current frame of sexual harassment and discrimination, which is intended to and does benefit men (and not women) and to further frame (and reframe) the issue to benefit men, MOAR. those special snowflake men who dont feel the way they imagine men should feel (ie. the opposite of what they currently feel, when they imagine they feel like women feel. got that? good). and transmen get a bit of a coattail-ride here, so they arent saying anything, but they absolutely should be. heres why…
when the question is asked (in the offending–and offensive–article above) “what is the harm of sexual harassment and sexual discrimination” the author answers her own question, as authors are wont to do. heres what she said to herself:
self? the problem with it is 1) the unfair consideration of biological differences between males and females; 2) the resort to archaic notions about the skills, abilities, or desires of men and women; 3) the perpetuation of stereotypical notions of masculinity and femininity; and 4) the unwelcome instigation of sexual behavior in inappropriate settings.
lets hope she came to this conclusion after she did her research and not before…but theres probably not much chance that that happened is there? oh well. if teh menz can routinely start with a conclusion and work their way backwards, (ie. how can we make it so we win, no matter what?) instead of actually being honest and examining the issues objectively, so can she. im just saying.
so anyway, shes framed the issues thusly (the “problems” in her estimation are sexual harassment versus sexual discrimination) and narrowed it down to 4–apparently shared–harms. but i think it can actually be narrowed down to 2, and she didnt include either one of them. first, i think the “harm” of workplace sexual harassment is that references to unwanted PIV are a rape-threat. okay? everyone, and i mean everyone considers PIV “sexual behavior” (instead of calling it what it is: penis-in-vagina, and female-specific harm) and “unwanted PIV” is fucking rape. thats what it is. of course, men have framed this issue to benefit themselves: they dont know their PIV-references are unwanted until they try it, and are rebuffed! but guess what dickwads? from my perspective, its unwanted the first time, and you shouldnt get a second chance to rape-threat me (ie. referencing unwanted PIV) at fucking work. but they do. and they get second, third and fourth chances too, being that the standard of illegality of this rape-threatening behavior is apparently “its so egregious that it would tend to repulse a dirty old male attorney.” DUBIOUS. STANDARD. at best.
and the harm of “sexual discrimination” is probably two-fold: one, if women cant work for a living, or be truly upwardly mobile (aka. gainfully employed) we are going to be financially insecure and threatened with looming homeless, both of which lead to our vulnerability to mens PIV-centric sexuality and being threatened with male violence and rape. and two, if you force women to behave “femininely” in the workplace, and forbid them to act “masculinely” you are reserving true success (as defined by men in the male-dominated workplace) for men, and leaving women at the bottom being sweet to everyone and making the coffee. and…see #1 for why thats a problem. and, see “sexual harassment” for more context too (see, even differentiating harassment from discrimination is questionable when viewed from womens perspective isnt it?)
these are the harms of all of this, to us. to women. its not that we think “sex” and the workplace dont mix, who has time to worry about that? jesus fucking christ. i cant even open up my email or buy my lunch without being bombarded with a hundred demeaning and sexually charged images every day, at work. no, thats not the problem at all (well it is, but we arent talking about the complete eradication of pornified images from the entire world, or im not in this post).
and i dont give a fuck, as it were, whether i am allowed or forbidden to “express” my real, true heartfelt gender at work: whether i even have a “heartfelt gender” is highly questionable. again, who has the time for such namby pamby idiotic bitching about trite bullshit that doesnt even matter? what i do care about is that pretty much however i *behave* at work, whether its stereotypically feminine or not, i am at extreme risk of failure, or failure to thrive, because i was born female and for no other reason but that. women-born-women literally cannot do anything right, where feminine behaviors are not correlative with male-defined success, and masculine behaviors are reserved for men. thats the harm of enforcing stereotypical behaviors at work, for women. its not oh boo-hoo, you arent honoring the trueness of my preferred favorite gender. its not oh poor me, everyone gets to act out their gender except me. okay?
and this is how the transactivists are framing the issues of workplace sexual harassment and sex-discrimination–issues that women and feminists have been working very hard on to gain any ground at all mind you. we gained an inch or two, and they took the wheel and laid on the gas and are off into poor-teh-menz territory quicker than shit. what about teh menz! which is ironic, considering that the way it was before demonstrably and intentionally benefited men too. they win, no matter what. this is what happens, when they are allowed to frame the issues, including the alleged harms and the “solutions” too.
we cannot let them do this. or at least, it behooves all of us to see what they have done, and what they are doing and to name it. quite alot depends on it. women-centered reality is the only one thats going to save any of us from mens tyranny: we have seen the world through mens eyes, including our own destruction, and its all very…sexy, actually. which is fucking hideous, and a huge red flag that something is very, very wrong.
Psychotherapy. It’s Porn-Tastic! On MacKinnon’s “Sex, Lies and Psychotherapy” October 31, 2010
Posted by FCM in books!, health, porn, rape.Tags: freud, mackinnon, psychotherapy, rape, sexual abuse, womens lives mens laws
comments closed
this essay from catharine mackinnon’s ”womens lives, mens laws” addresses how pornified medicine and psychotherapy/psychiatry really are, and how female patients with histories of sexual trauma are treated by male doctors. namely, womens stories of having been sexually abused, molested, and raped give male doctors boners, and anything that gives men boners is both good, and not real, at the same time. sound familiar? male doctors are also known to go out of their way to mansplain to everyone around them how sex, violence and rape are completely different. and how nothing thats violent can be sexual too, and nothing men percieve as sexual can possibly be violent, even where male violence directly targets womens breasts and genitals. now thats good mansplaining!
in another essay, mackinnon (a lawyer and law professor) mentions how the legal standard for what is “obscene” and therefore illegal sexually-themed material must both appeal to the “prurient interest” (aka. it induces boners) and be “patently offensive” at the same time. otherwise its just, you know, perfectly legal porn. and theres nothing wrong with porn, right? right?
well…only the very obvious problem that if any “questionable” material thought to be obscene is ever taken in front of a court of law to determine whether it is or isnt, and the material gives men boners, in order to make the material illegally obscene, they must also acknowledge that whats making them hard is also patently offending them, at the same time. and they never will. because if it gives them boners, its generally good. and if it is just obviously patently offensive, at the same time, so much so that they might actually be embarrassed to be sporting wood at such a disgusting display, a strategically-placed notebook (or a lie) can easily hide the evidence that its also very much appealing to their prurient interest, too. thus, we have all kinds of boner-inducing, patently-offensive material widely available to just about anyone, at any time, and noone is willing to name it. material thats so vile, violent, and offensive, and without any redeeming value at all, that it should be illegal, and would be, except that men are fucking liars and literally cannot tell the truth about obscenity, and what it is, and how it affects them. this is what we know as porn.
oh, and its extremely likely that doctors and psychiatrists use porn, as described above, and they always have. enjoy!
On Footbinding. Or, If I’m Not Raping You, It’s Because I’m Chivalrous! September 18, 2010
Posted by FCM in books!, feminisms, gender roles, health, international, PIV, pop culture, rape.Tags: chivalry, dworkin, footbinding, high heels, PIV, rape, woman hating
comments closed
this is an image of an elderly chinese woman, who was footbound as a child. in “woman hating,” dworkin characterized chinese footbinding and witch burning as the two most obvious, widespread and devastating gynocidal atrocities ever perpetuated against women, in the history of the world. in china for 1000 years, women were permanently hobbled as children, by having tight bindings wrapped across and around their feet, bringing the small toes under and across the bottom of the foot, and bringing the heel and the ball of the foot closer and closer together, until there was a cleft between them. its cleavage, but for your feet! heres what it looks like on the inside, along with what a human foot is supposed to look like, in case anyone isnt sure (the normal foot is the one on the bottom):
now, i am not the first to notice a connection between chinese footbinding and modern high-heels, the fashion accessory thats more likely to permanently cripple you than any other, and in fact even on a good day limits your mobility and spontaneity, alters your gait, and depletes your very spirit as you writhe in excruciating pain, even if you dont show it. i even have an xray film of a model wearing heels in my collection of multimedia snark:
podiatry snuff film
ouch! and the point has been made elsewhere that whats so everloving sexxay about targeting womens feet for patriarchal abuse is that it does hobble them, and makes it harder for women to get away from violent men who would rape them. metaphorically, it symbolizes womens subordinate status, and in actuality, it solidifies that status, in a real, tangible way, by literally handicapping and hobbling us. sure, absolutely. i think thats true.
now, lets take it a bit further, shall we? consider what must be going through mens heads, seeing all these pathetic, crippled women teetering about on mile-high heels? completely ineffectual humans who cant even walk, and most certainly could never run, or run very far, or very well?
heres what they must be thinking: “wow, i could totally rape that woman if i wanted to, and arent i such a great guy for letting her pass?” arent i chivalrous! now, someone give me a cookie.
and in fact, its true isnt it? men are being chivalrous for not-raping women, who could do very little about it, if a man were to decide to do it. in mens own minds, men who arent rapists, not-raping women is the good-guy thing to do. they sure as hell arent not-raping women because they are afraid the women would kick their fucking asses if they tried, thats for sure.
now, lets talk about the fun-fems ”enthusiastic consent!!!11!!!1″ bullshit. from the fun-fem or male feminist perspective, calling PIV ”enveloping” instead of “penetration” solves all of PIVs problems for women, because the only thing wrong with PIV is that women just take it wrong. and being “enthusiastic” about your “consent” makes it easier for everyone to distinguish between a wanted act and an unwanted one. you know, according to them, in their own words. i am not making this up. now, my question is: why do PIV and rape look so much the same, that you literally need special language thats outside most peoples understanding, to tell PIV and rape apart? or to separate a creepy act of sexual aggression from a loving act of, well, love?
what i am thinking at the moment is that theres a reason (DUH) for all this very calculated mental-gymnastics, that the sex-positive crowd and everyone in fact obsess over, where they try SO HARD to separate PIV from rape. and its to solve (well, obfuscate anyway) the very obvious problem that penis-in-vagina pretty much describes, if not defines, most acts of rape. doesnt it? and penis-in-vagina also both describes AND defines the act of heterosexual “sex” and het sexuality too. and thats kinda a big problem. really, problems dont get much bigger than that.
regarding chivalry too, i think its clear that mere everyday PIV, the PIV everyone wants to have, the PIV that we think about when we think about it at all, is PIV with “chivalry.” whereas ”rape” is PIV without it. isnt it? chivalry being something that makes women “feel” better about the encounter, and something arbitrary (rather than substantive) that separates the rapists from the good guys, when they are all placing women in harms way by sticking their dicks into women, with only varying degrees of coersion, aggression, and violence?
so if the only thing (or a very important one) that separates PIV from rape is chivalry (and only very recently, fun-fems ”funny language”, but even thats not mainstream yet) then the more opportunities for men to appear chivalrous, the better. because good-guys dont, and in fact, cant rape, if chivalry makes rape impossible. indeed, most men are “good guys” within this paradigm. how convenient! for them, of course. not for us.
see, in order to create opportunities for male chivalry, men must also create instances of women needing to be rescued. and its nonstop. indeed, women as a sexual class need to be rescued; so men as a sexual class are seen as chivalrous. (and viola! the problem of rape is solved. for men, of course. not for women.) binding the feet. women starving themselves to be too thin and lightheaded to function, or taking diet pills that make you nuts. hobbling women financially, emotionally, physically and socially with medical events and childrearing duties. keeping us tired and broke through expensive and otherwise oppressive feminine rituals. in this pathetic state, women do need help. because men have literally turned us into the pathetic, ineffectual humans that they need us to be. so they can be the heroes. so they can be chivalrous. even when they do nothing. ie. not-raping women who couldnt do a damn thing about it, if they tried.
and in the end, the reason for all of this female pain is to convince whomever is worth convincing that PIV and rape are so different, and that PIV is inherently valuable and benign too, and that its very easy to tell them apart. so that rapists dont go to jail for rape, and no one sees PIV as inherently harmful to women, so that we can all keep having PIV, and being harmed by PIV.
not quite worth it, if you are a woman. totally and completely worth it, if you are a man.
