jump to navigation

A Continuum of Woman-Hatred. Or, What “Flavor” Is Your Misogyny? December 24, 2010

Posted by FCM in feminisms, health, international, PIV, porn, rape.
Tags: , ,
trackback

this was inspired by 9/2’s most recent and most-excellent takedown of porn.  she mentioned how so-called “feminist porn” is so elusive, and it got me to thinking…WHAT IF…

if PIV (or PIV-as-pleasure for the “what about teh babiez” crowd) itself is woman-hating, and i think there is an excellent argument that it is (because its specifically and particularly dangerous to women and not to men) then PIV-centric sexuality and therefore heterosexuality itself as we currently know it exist on a continuum of woman-hating.  i think we all know what madness lies at the far end of the continuum (rape-murder…and deaths resulting from unwanted pregnancy) but what lies in between just good old-fashioned “vanilla” PIV (what flavor is *your* woman-hate?  mine is strawberry!  well it used to be, currently i am off the sauce) and the intentional and sexualized extermination of girls and women, by men?

welp…all PIV-centric porn would lie on this continuum, for starters.  and this would, in fact, explain a lot.  it would explain why so-called “feminist porn” is so elusive (because it doesnt exist, because nothing feminist exists on a continuum of woman-hate.  duh.)  it would explain why PIV and rape are nearly indistinguishable in so many instances: where does each lie on the continuum?  an inch apart?  half an inch?  two full inches?  color me unimpressed with *that* alleged difference…kinda like the difference between night and…still night.  it would also explain why just run-of-the-mill heterosexual fucking (and porn) has become more and more degrading to women over time, and more and more violent, but is still considered “just sex.”

heterosexual “sex” as a continuum of woman-hate would explain why even the united states supreme court has historically had a difficult time articulating any real difference between “mere” porn and material that is so vile and without redeeming value that it is illegally obscene.  it would explain why marriage and in fact het partnerships in general resemble prostitution, and why the fun-fems and PIV-pozzies framing all of these issues in terms of “consent” and “agency” are chasing their tails, and why their entire discourse absolutely smacks of double and triple-think.  wouldnt it?

in fact…in the interest of time, i propose that we start with the assumption that everything exists on a continuum of woman-hatred, and see if things fall into place.  i mean really.  whats the sense of resisting this at all, when its probably the truth, and its the short-way around, at that?  are we afraid of hurting mens feelings?  please.  IF ONLY any of this were about “feelings” instead of actual, demonstrable harm, it would make me SO.  HAPPY.  but i digress.

with specific regard to “sex” and PIV-as-pleasure, i think the continuum framework is clearly applicable.  it starts with a man sticking his dick into a vagina because it feeeeels good (to him), and ends in the literal (LITERAL!) death of hundreds of thousands of women annually, now, and millions (billions?) of women across time and place.

so.  where does *your* heterosexuality fall on the continuum?  where does your favorite memory of the best “sex” you ever had, fall on the continuum of woman-hate?  this is why i can barely even masturbate anymore.  my own memories of 20-something years of heterosexual fucking, material i used to invoke as a masturbatory aid, are horrifying to me now.  and again, the idea of PIV-centric sexuality existing only on a continuum of woman-hate explains a lot.  it also seems to be demonstrably true, for anyone who thinks this is just a mental exercise, or a faith-based discourse.  its not.

Comments

1. factcheckme - December 24, 2010

obviously, the lesbians here get a free pass…EXCEPT the ones that have had PIV. although i suspect that lesbians who have had PIV with men will be the LEAST resistant to admitting that PIV (and their memories of it) exist on a continuum of woman-hating.

happy holidays y’all!

2. factcheckme - December 24, 2010

Actually, scratch that. Probably any woman who has cast off piv has a damn good reason for doing so, and any radical feminist especially. Lesbians may just more easily or readily replace the memories with new and better ones, quicker? I don’t know. Why don’t you tell me.

factcheckme - December 24, 2010

ok, and i just switched up the graphic a little. i didnt want to actually GRAPH DEATH, and i figured my readers would get it without directly saying it. but why hold back right? and i am getting some traffic from 9/2s place and frankly some of her readers are a little dense. sorry 9/2.

3. Undercover Punk - December 24, 2010

I totally agree with you. PIV “for pleasure” is woman hating. What about PIV for procreation? Or attempted procreation?

4. Valerie's Ex - December 24, 2010

Undercover Punk,

If hetero couples wish to procreate, why doesn’t the man ejaculate outside, and the womon use any suitable method – a turkey baster, or his or her fingers if they prefer, to transfer the semen into her body?

FactCheckMe,

I would have expected “heterosex” to include hetero couples’ alternatives to PIV. Is it only sex if it’s as disgusting as PIV? I understand that men often seem to think so.

factcheckme - December 24, 2010

Total agreement ay? Then this post is probably redundant. Heh. But many feminists are STILL talking about feminist het porn like some elusive holy grail, and EVEN some radicals seem open to the possibility that it exists, even though none has ever been produced that passes the radical smell-test, as it were. I think its time to put this one to bed. And I think the idea (and the graphic!) of a continuum of woman-hating whereupon ALL instances of penis-in-vagina lie, does the job. Does it not? Next!

As for intentional procreation…well even wanted pregnancies can kill you can’t they? And even intentionally-conceived children are abandoned by fathers once the sexual relationship with the mother ends. Even wanted children are a burden on mothers in every way. So…I guess I would consider a reason vs application analysis here. Perhaps intentional procreation isn’t INHERENTLY, PATENTLY UNREASONABLE (although interestingly its still always going to be inequitable or unfair to women, due to the physical risks). It could probably be done in a feminist context. Its just highly unlikely that it ever will be.

factcheckme - December 24, 2010

Valeries ex, havent I banned you like 6 times already?

Look. First of all, there are no alternatives to piv, when you are het. Sorry! Understanding of course that we are discussing the way things ARE, and not the way they SHOULD BE. This is a radfem blog afterall.

Also, I never said that I think piv is disgusting. I said that its DANGEROUS, and it is. I see no reason whatsoever for a disease-free straight couple to use the turkey baster or any “alternative” method for impregnation. Wtf? My problem with piv is not political. It’s that its unreasonably dangerous to women, due to the risk of unwanted pregnancy, and the dangers of birth control.

You are on extremely thin ice. Read more, and post less. Thanks.

5. SheilaG - December 24, 2010

There is no such thing as feminist pornography. This is pure leftist male invention– the usual line of “well women choose it” “women do it too”
begging the question completely about who “consumes” the vast majority of the world’s pornography.

And creating a much more just world for lesbians, that means straight women have to cut their lesbian erasing tendencies, will make it much more possible for lesbians to never waste time with socially coerced PIV. Then you’ll have millions more girls who just are regular lesbians without the heteronormative coersion… or boy crazy take overs of high school and junior high girls groups.
Imagine a world where all little girls realize the valid option of never having sex with men ever!

A radical idea.

6. SheilaG - December 24, 2010

P.S. Hey FCM love getting a lesbian free pass!!!

7. thebewilderness - December 24, 2010

Shulamith Firestone, back in the day when we thought technology might just possibly be used to the advantage of women, postulated an excellent solution. Freaked people right the hell out.

factcheckme - December 24, 2010

i cant stand some of the idiotic comments over at “chez deuce” so i will bring it over here. what do you all think about “vanilla” PIV being so boring to the porndogs now that they just completely disregard it? or anyone thinking that PIV-criticism is “quaint” considering the “extreme” woman-hating thats out there?

my criticism is of course of heterosexuality as an institution being PIV-centric, which it is. almost every single het encounter includes PIV at some point, but het as a “sexuality” ALWAYS includes it. ie., if someone was NEVER going to engage in PIV with you within the context of a het relationship, that relationship would be considered “abstinent” or “unconsummated” by just about everyone. not to mention regarding PORN of course that no matter how “other-orifices” oriented it might be, the end result it has on men is that it makes them want to fuck/abuse women themselves. which almost always includes PIV too (see above).

PIV criticism is quaint! omg. has everyone gone completely insane?

factcheckme - December 25, 2010

from 9/2s place:

I didn’t mean to insinuate that your beliefs were ridiculous or far reaching. I just didn’t really understand. It may be true that PIV is on the continuum of woman-hating, especially if you acknowledge that it is uniquely harmful to only women. I’m just so used to PIV-bashing among pornified men that it’s become hard for me to even see it that way. It’s like some of us are relishing the scraps we’re thrown under the table. When I look at mainstream pornography, it’s hard to believe that anyone could find PIV so objectionable. I’m just so used to the extreme misogyny in porn, that PIV seems…harmless.:/ But it’s not. I get that. I’m just desensitized.

for starters, i didnt say that “PIV is on the continuum of woman-hating.” my point in diagramming it like i did, is that theres a continuum of penis-in-vagina that starts with “vanilla” and ends with rape-murder and death from pregnancy-related complications. and that this continum represents the whole of het sexuality, and that its all on this continuum somewhere, and that EVEN what we call “vanilla” and everything “more extreme” too (which everything is, duh. vanilla…then strawberry then chocolate right?) appears to be a direct line to the ultimate destruction of woman. and this is a problem.

8. veganprimate - December 25, 2010

“Lesbians may just more easily or readily replace the memories with new and better ones, quicker? I don’t know. Why don’t you tell me.”

I’m confused by this. What are you implying? Do you think that b/c former het lesbians have sex with women, that they must not remember how icky sex with men was? If they did they’d just be spinsters instead of lesbians?

factcheckme - December 25, 2010

Yeah, that was a little confusing. I meant that lesbians must figure out a way to have a non-piv centric sexuality, or at least be able to imagine one. Wouldn’t they? And if they are able to do either one of these, then they would theoretically be able to use the “remembering” method of visual stimulation/masturbatory aid too. I currently cannot. That’s all.

BTW, I rarely “imply” anything. But you probably already knew that.

9. factcheckme - December 25, 2010

Do you think that b/c former het lesbians have sex with women, that they must not remember how icky sex with men was? If they did they’d just be spinsters instead of lesbians?

also, i have absolutely NO IDEA where you got this one, or how anything i have said here would lead you to this? why would icky het memories PREVENT anyone from being a lesbian, and make them choose spinsterhood instead? actually, what are YOU implying here? that you know for a fact that this ISNT true, based on personal experience? do tell.

10. FAB Libber - December 25, 2010

I agree with your graphic. The concept is mirrored in the porn continuum of misogyny. You could easily put markers below that line, having vanilla PIV porn on the left and snuff porn on the right.

The concept of both porn & PIV being on the same continuum of misogyny is not far fetched at all. In both cases the “more : better” always gravitates towards greater harm to women.

I took a quick look at the thread at 9-2’s and saw the old “menz are more visual” crapola. One reason I think that women generally do not get into porn (apart from the violence and misogyny) is that, on some level, I think they ‘know’ or ‘remember’ that “sex” is not without risk to a woman, and that it is the risk factor that is the turn-off. For men, the risk factor (or harm) is very much the major turn-on with porn (and PIV).

It is somewhat surprising that anti-porn feminists have a harder time denouncing porn today vs 40 years ago. The harms, violence, and overall ickiness is much more obvious than it was back then in mainstream vanilla porn. Today’s vanilla porn is the equivalent of the extreme stuff back then.

Harm and degradation ARE the main turn-ons for porn (for men), so looking back at the root of where that began, vanilla-PIV porn, then it is not unreasonable to conclude that for men, the main turn-on for PIV is the harm. I know, I have just recapped your PIV series!!

Perhaps we can conclude that porn is actually a form of documentary – showing the progression of harm? And it all began with vanilla PIV.

factcheckme - December 25, 2010

yes, all the “studies” make me fucking sick. just more male sexologists rationalizing dangerous male sexuality, and normalizing mens demands for PIV and completely disregarding women in all of it. i mean really. using misogynist PIV-oriented porn as their “visual stimulus” and then concluding that women arent visual because it doesnt make them want to have PIV? there are about 6 things wrong with this just on its face.

It is somewhat surprising that anti-porn feminists have a harder time denouncing porn today vs 40 years ago. The harms, violence, and overall ickiness is much more obvious than it was back then in mainstream vanilla porn. Today’s vanilla porn is the equivalent of the extreme stuff back then.

loretta first got me to understand this when she talked about “gonzo” and how disturbing and increasingly violent porn was becoming. i was like “huh?” because all i ever knew as porn WAS what people call “gonzo” and i had never seen any porn that WASNT gonzo, or that predated gonzo. or at least, nothing that i would even recognize as porn. i didnt even know it was getting worse. the older feminists of course were aware this was happening. somehow i think this is exactly where the “third wave” and sex pozzies come in. there had to be someone saying all of this was actually FEMINIST and creating at least “plausible denyability” and “debate” as to whether the new porn is harmful to women. because its just so clearly the case that it IS. listening to the porn-saturated commenters over at 9/2s place, it ALSO sounds like all of this has worked pretty effectively to completely erase the harms of good old-fashioned vanilla PIV. which of course has ALWAYS been the point and the effect of “sexology” and this is the third fucking time they have done exactly that, as sheila jeffreys documents in “spinster”.

factcheckme - December 25, 2010

an atheist xmas carol…lyrics are below

“The Atheist Christmas Carol”

It’s the season of grace coming out of the void
Where a man is saved by a voice in the distance
It’s the season of possible miracle cures
Where hope is currency and death is not the last unknown
Where time begins to fade
And age is welcome home

It’s the season of eyes meeting over the noise
And holding fast with sharp realization
It’s the season of cold making warmth a divine intervention
You are safe here you know now

Don’t forget
Don’t forget I love
I love
I love you

It’s the season of scars and of wounds in the heart
Of feeling the full weight of our burdens
It’s the season of bowing our heads in the wind
And knowing we are not alone in fear
Not alone in the dark

11. FAB Libber - December 25, 2010

i didnt even know it was getting worse. the older feminists of course were aware this was happening. somehow i think this is exactly where the “third wave” and sex pozzies come in. there had to be someone saying all of this was actually FEMINIST and creating at least “plausible denyability” and “debate” as to whether the new porn is harmful to women. because its just so clearly the case that it IS.

This right here is an illustration of that old saying “those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it”.

The pozzies/3rd wavers do not have a personal frame of reference to work from, they came into age when porn was obvious in its misogyny. They did not bother to check history, nor look for earlier baselines. They completely wrote off feminist visionaries from the 2nd wave as being “prudish about ‘sex'”.

I am on the tail-end of the 2nd wave. In the early days of being exposed to porn, even being unread in feminist literature, I could not quite put my finger on ‘what was wrong with porn’. I know now of course, and can articulate it. The inherent danger or risk (to women) in PIV is really the root of it. This is where one can now look back on that vanilla porn of the 70s and go “aha”. Nothing to do with being ‘menz being more visual’ or any other red herring.

It kinda sucks being an older feminist. The young of every generation always think they invented ‘sex’ and that previous generations were prudish and uptight, yet there have been cycles after cycles of conservatism and hedonism. We sit in the sidelines silently screaming “get there faster!” when it comes to realising the cycles, and also how PIV is used against women. This is why we seem sometimes to come across a bit on the grumpy side. *sorry*

12. kurukurushoujo - December 25, 2010

those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it

Right on. In the 14th century women decided to “empower” themselves by painting their nipples, even piercing and hanging gold chains from them, letting their breasts hang out or pushing them up to an extreme degree in the wake of relaxed control of sexual interaction through the church. This was an “empowerment” strictly pre-determined by men’s norms. It didn’t make women more powerful. And today women wax poetically about how “empowering” it is to have some guy jerk off on their face. It doesn’t and won’t makes us more powerful either.

I can also remember reading an old paper from the 2nd wave about how women search for the power they do not have in public life in their sexual interactions with men. Because bringing a man to sexual extasy is felt as having control over him, something most likely to not occur in the workplace or at school. Then I read about a recent sexology study which found that the reason a majority of girls like fellating their boyfriends is that they experience themselves as powerful this way. This was not questioned at all- here I was thinking that sexuality should be an expression of mutual attraction and not a playing field where girls and women have an opportunity to gain a false sense of power.

The more things change the more they stay the same. *sigh* I wish we would spend more time reading and learning and less time trying to assimilate.

factcheckme - December 25, 2010

yes. saying women have “female sexual power” is problematic in the same way as saying we have “female gender privilege.” its an impossibility, and in fact an oxymoron. up is down, black is white, etc. god they must think we are complete idiots!

13. Sargassosea - December 25, 2010

I’m glad you changed the graph because it makes the point abundantly clear, immediately. Too bad some women “weird out” about your take on PIV, huh?

And I hope the following isn’t too far off topic but I just have to say it:
My mom named me after one of the young women featured in the early 60s Playboy pictorial, “Girls of Africa”, because she thought she was so beautiful. I was raised with the magazines in a rack in front of the toilet in the one bathroom I shared with my mom, dad and older brother. I worked a tech gig with the Playboy Channel in the early 90s and until recently, had as part of our business been buying/selling vintage issues; I even found a copy with my namesake – she looked a lot like my mom, actually.
I was RAISED by a politically active, bi-sexual, second wave, rhetorically-militant feminist who believed that it was cool that she named her daughter after a sexually exploited woman (who wanted to be an architect, according to the copy), who thought it was progressive to have the porn available in the bathroom for everyone to enjoy, who also though warned me not to get involved with stripping/pornography ‘because of the drugs’ but thought it was just soooooper that I worked in porn, but BEHIND the camera.

I guess you know you’re getting old when you’ve had TWO rounds of FunFem SexPos spin within your relatively short (I’m 44 as we speak) living memory! Kris Kringle on a krutch!

14. veganprimate - December 25, 2010

“actually, what are YOU implying here?”

Nothing. I was actually just confused. But you clarified what you meant. The written word sometimes just doesn’t work well.

If I’m in the mood to pick a fight, you’ll know it. This isn’t one of those times.

factcheckme - December 25, 2010

since you mentioned playboy, i wanted to make sure everyone knows about the centerfold montages that include pics of the model when she was underage. yes? not nude obvs (actually, not so sure that should be assumed, so NOT obvs) but family pics taken of the model before she was a model. school pics, cheerleading etc., and starting very young like maybe 8? so we have men looking at pics of naked adult women, in some state of arousal of course, or at the very least looking at it with some sort of “eye” and then looking at pics of very young girls, at the same time. this is not only perfectly acceptable of course, but playboy is barely even *porn* its so, well, vanilla. look at whats becoming invisible and vanilla now! PIV and looking at baby pictures with a sexual eye.

as for having such a “progressive” childhood…where your father and brother were looking at pics of naked adult women and young girls YOUR AGE (assuming they had those montages back then?) while they were taking a shit, and all of this was seen to benefit YOU? its so obvious that we are all being groomed for a lifetime of PIV-centric sexuality. and you cant even STOP doing it once you start, because the memories prevent YOU from ever really being alone with YOU, ever again. except that you say youve done it ssea? how?

factcheckme - December 25, 2010

veganprimate, the place your mind goes when you are “confused” always says more about you than anything else. just an observation in case anyone didnt already know that, and wants to avoid revealing anything about their own thought process in the future, accidentally. but i would really like to know what YOU were getting at? you must have the memories too, right? what have you done with them?

factcheckme - December 25, 2010

and LOL @ the bit at the end. “i’ll know it” ay? do you send it western union or what? i will make sure to look for the overt signs in the future, lest i be caught unawares.

15. Sargassosea - December 26, 2010

“(assuming they had those montages back then?)”

The best we can date the inclusion of the montages (without actually researching further than our excellent! memories) was the very early 80s, so yes, my brother and father would have been using them while I was still at home. But I know that my brother was very much into porn from the time he was 12 or 13 and Playboy was certainly lame-0 vanilla wank material to his eye even then.

How have I done my self-imposed deprogramming? All I can say is that it’s been a process that I wasn’t completely aware I was in; I guess we could say that I’m “live-reporting” myself. I would suggest though that you make an effort to FEEL physical sensations (like the wind, or sounds) for what they are to YOU as a personal sensate experience and build on that. It’s more like a 13 year old girl’s way of being, I think.

16. SheilaG - December 26, 2010

One wonders how women age after age can never quite get the history of woman hatred by men figured out. Playboy, flappers, gonzo…all a continuum of the objectification and brutal dehumanization of women. I think most women out in the world just refuse to face reality. Gonzo porn, and all of it is created by a rabidly hate filled species that thinks women are animals and objects. That straight women refuse to see this age after age proves to me, that in youth, we are talking about a truly clueless part of humanity.

It’s the same story again and again, sexual excess in high school and college, floundering around in early adulthood, later complete regret over a life ruined by PIV. I just don’t get any of it and never will.

factcheckme - December 26, 2010

again, i believe this is a case of willful ignorance, and that it has everything to do with womens complete and utter dependance on men. on one individual man, once you are partnered with one and dependant on his income particularly, or on “him” for any reason. but also dependance on “men” as a sexual class, which ALL WOMEN ARE if they are absolutely certain they want marriage and children. they HAVE to believe that theres “one good one” out there, and that men as a sexual class dont victimize women.

and obviously, if you are financially dependant on ONE man, you literally cannot afford to see the truth about him, or to acknowledge that his behaviors and attitudes are harmful to you or to anyone for that matter, at all. THINK ABOUT WOMEN MARRIED TO SERIAL KILLERS, or when the man was sexually abusing their shared children for years. nobody believes that the wives didnt know what was going on; its literally “unbelievable”. thats probably because its not true.

but this goes to even more “mundane” issues (HA!) too, like PIV. if she decides she doesnt want to do it anymore, he will leave for a woman who is more willing to shut the fuck up about it. at that point, honesty and truly SEEING him for what he is and admitting it to yourself or calling him on it, becomes a cost/benefit analysis that most women decide just isnt worth it. its simply WORTH MORE, to survive, or to keep your standard of living, whatever that may be. its better than being on the street, or having to depend on the “devil you DONT know” rather than the devil you do. i dont know whats so confusing about this actually. frustrating and infuriating perhaps. but its not CONFUSING is it? not really? it makes perfect sense.

factcheckme - December 26, 2010

this is why its so important to keep women economically dependant on men! and to keep women dreaming about motherhood and children. hello. imagine what we would be willing to “see” about men, if neither of these applied. i know men know this on some level. this is why they are so unbelievably compromised, and why even so-called pro-feminist men (even the good ones!) cannot and should not be trusted to see the truth of any of this, at all. the only evidence i would ever accept that pro-feminist men get any of this, and are truly committed to ending male supremecy and divesting themselves of male privilege would be them not sticking their dicks into women anymore, to stop the trauma-bonding, to stop the unwanted pregnancies, and the very things that keep us dependant on them, and unable to see the truth or to call them on it. but they never will. this is all i need to know.

17. SheilaG - December 26, 2010

Those explanations are quite good FCM.

18. Nelle - December 27, 2010

It’s kind of sad, how there are females actually buying into the idea that there’s “pro-woman” / “feminist” porn floating around.

“THIS sexism is positive,ok!!11?Totes pro woman!!Grow the fuck up you prudes and shave yer hairy toes or something!elevendy111”

As I said on N2’s recent entry-there is no such think as feminist porn because the porn industry’s foundation was based on misogyny. The foundation. The funfems would have to have the gonads to break the foundation down ,and create a different “brand” of porn in order to even TRY to make such a claim. But oh no, going for the Heifners and all the other ballrags (aka successful Porn Emporers) would be too scary, so instead, attack any “pr00dish” radfem that dares to say “Hey, some of this shit is kinda sick and wrong-can we try to critque this for a sec?’.Not like many of them would want to do that anyway-so many of them make money off of porn-people are benefiting from porn way too much to want to change any aspect of it-and that’s why funfems twiddle their damn thumbs everytime a radfem says something about it,and they suddenly get all deflective and shit if you delve any further into the discussion.

And that “men r more vishual” argument is pure crap. Men are more visual about things they want to care about,and one of those things happen to be porn.

Bleghgh. I’m around the age where PIV is supposed to be a big thing,and if you haven’t had it yet,you haven’t lived, you hate men (..well,kinda true),or you’re “playing for the other team”. I swear, it doesn’t really matter to me. It’s like everyone’s racing to have PIV and I’m just smoking a blunt eating some Cinnamon Toast Crunch while watching them trip over themselves to get some.

19. FAB Libber - December 29, 2010

FCM, your last two comments on the dependance/PIV/motherhood cycle are spot on.

It also explains, why 40 years after the 2nd wave’s quest for equal pay, the closest we have come is about 80%. I would say it only rose that far to support consumerism of the two-income family.

20. Val - February 16, 2011

“…material i used to invoke as a masturbatory aid, are horrifying to me now.”

that quote leapt out at me like a slap in the face; I am trying so hard to deprogram myself, but it’s difficult after 30 yrs of internalized misogyny…

FCM - February 16, 2011

Thanks val. Some people here have managed to be successful with this. This gives me hope.


Sorry comments are closed for this entry