jump to navigation

In Which I Utilize Accordion Techno Illustratively! January 6, 2011

Posted by FCM in books!, entertainment, feminisms, international, PIV, pop culture, porn, prostitution.
Tags: , , ,
trackback

as usual, i am probably the last person on planet earth to have heard this song.  i was like “pretty sure thats an accordion!?” so i googled it. and yes, its an accordion.  there are a surprising number of accordion-techno songs out there actually, but i wouldnt know that being that i live under a counterculture rock with my favorite reruns and my ipod stuffed with the soundtrack of my fading youth.  and sometimes, books.  its the only way to successfully avoid accidental encounters with eminem and charlie sheen…and get off my lawn!

anyway, this song is currently playing on every radio station at all times, and there are at least 2 versions of both the song and the video.  the above version kind of surprised me actually, because it doesnt feature any men in the entire video, at all (except the accordionist).  and…the driver probably.  and…well, all the men she is probably fucking in those high-priced hotels she is being driven to in the middle of the night in a black luxury sedan.  right?  shes a hooker.  a happy, shiny one, at that!  so this is the fun-fem sexxxay empowered version of the song.  you know, or something.  okay, i am with them so far. 

heres another version:

mkay.  this is the “sweetly romantic” version i guess?  where she pines away for her man, or some man, and lucky for her he was stalking her the whole time and they eventually “randomly hook up” just like she always dreamed (and like he had planned from the beginning).  how creepy i mean completely normal!  okay.  2 versions of the same song.  2 takes on (literally) the same narrative.

so…i have been thinking lately that there is exactly one explanation for the existence of fun-fem “sex worker advocacy” i mean pornstitution empowerfulization that makes any fucking sense, at all.  and i think its just the latest rationalization of het partnerships to come down the pike, since the first rationalization of het partnerships came down the same pike in or around 1900 or so.  when some women were no longer as dependant on men as they once were, and were first starting to cut their teeth on a female-centered reality, being openly critical of aggregate male behavior, especially mens dangerous sexual behavior, and making real progress toward eliminating PIV-centric sexuality, and the sexual abuse of women and children, by men. 

and as sheila jeffreys notes, out came the big guns to tear it all down, to literally erase all the good work the feminists had done: the male sexologists, who decided, with science! (despite their obvious bias and conflicts of interest) that women were supposed to enjoy PIV, and engage in it as often as possible.  oh crap!  we better get right on that then.  on, men, or back on them.  see, theres nothing wrong with men, and mens male-privileged perspective, whereby they audaciously proclaim the most dangerous and least-pleasurable sex-act to be “sex” and you bitches better keep doing it, you better start liking it, and you better quit making us feel bad.  just start liking it, and the problem (of women complaining about it) goes away.

so now that we have the mandatory enthusiastic PIV covered (thanks male sexologists!) it becomes even more clear that hooking and het partnerships share quite a lot in common, do they not?  so much so that justifying hooking actually justifies your average het partnership pretty well.  perhaps especially the way the fun-fems do it, with their empowerfulized “happy hooker” narrative, which is actually nothing like the actual experience of your average prostituted woman, anywhere in the world.  and where the most egregious violence that prostituted women encounter consists of words, the words of radical feminists who are (and always have been) critical of aggregate male behavior, and the sexual abuse of girls and women, by men.

and the economic and social coercion to partner with men hasnt gone away, and decades of feminist history and PIV-critical work has been erased, making the possibility of a non-coercive and non-PIV-centric sexuality seem frankly bizarre to almost everyone.  and the resemblance between het partnerships and “sex work” is even more uncanny in fact since women started faking it.  or you know, figuring out how to actually have orgasms “from” PIV, by rubbing their clits WHILE being fucked.  (god that just makes no fucking sense at all does it?)  and keeping that in mind, always…

i think that this pro-pornstitution empowerfulization rhetoric is just more of the same shit, a covert “lesbians and spinsters are gross” meme that primes women for PIV, and quells the screaming inside “modern” women’s heads, because their relationships with men resemble prostitution in a very fundamental way.  isnt it?  all this empowerfulment and agency bullshit is really just to justify their nigels porn habit, and het partnerships generally.

because straight women know they are never, and i mean NEVER going to find a partner who *isnt* going to regularly masturbate to graphic images of misogyny.  to images of other women becoming impregnated.  to images that he doesnt know and cant know where they came from, or even what is going on, or who its happening to, and he doesnt care.  damn thats disturbing!  and of course, porn serves to normalize mens absolute obsession with PIV, and the way they want to fuck too.  and all het men, i dont care how “good guy” they are, are ALL demanding PIV-centric sex from their female partners, and under circumstances that look a hell of a lot like a quid-pro-quo, or a barter, if not an outright sale.

just…damn, do “empowerfulized” fantasies regarding sex-workers lives, and the average nonviolent (!!!11!1) nonexploitative (!!!11!!1) empowerfulized het partnership, look almost identical.  and the way these empowerfulized couples are fucking has been made to resemble porn.  yay prostitution, then!!11!!1  yay actual porn!  all of this is ok!  (you know, or none of it is).  yes it is, shut up.  it is, because the fucking fun-fems (and male sexologists!) say it is.

Comments

1. Undercover Punk - January 6, 2011

Can I be the first??? YAY!

Oh HELL yes, compulsory heterosexuality is the NORMALIZATION of prostitution. As you note, the set-ups, the narratives, are almost exactly the same. It’s so obvious, it hurts. I think that’s why women can’t face it: it’s TOO MUCH.

or you know, figuring out how to actually have orgasms “from” PIV, by rubbing their clits WHILE being fucked. (god that just makes no fucking sense at all does it?)

IT MAKES NO FUCKING SENSE. At all. We all know why MEN are obsessed with PIV: because they fetishize submission/harming women. But WHY have women go ALONG with penetration-as-the-primary-sex-act??? FFS, even LESBIANS are obsessed with dildos! (will be blogging about that next, but y’all know where I’m going with that!) For het women, I can SORT OF understand because they are getting other benefits from their het partnerships (economic mobility, social “security”, etc). But for women who are NOT receiving such benefits, WHY dear goddess WHY does the clit ALWAYS ‘cum’ second to penetration???????? It’s so incredibly woman-hating that it makes my fucking brain smoke.

because straight women know they are never, and i mean NEVER going to find a partner who *isnt* going to regularly masturbate to graphic images of misogyny.

Oh, I cry for you, het-I-dentitifed women. I really do. Goddess knows it’s hard to find a non-queer, anti-BDSM lesbian these days, but a MAN?? HA!! FCM is right. It just isn’t happening. I mean, I remember my mother banning my father’s porn use back in the early 90’s (he’d already been banned, I just happened to find his VERY tame stash– old school stuff, romantic by today’s standards, even quaint). No ONE does this now. Banning porn is, like, a major deal breaker for all men in the new millennium. Can you imagine young women holding the line on this?? HA! And BECAUSE of fun-fem rhetoric, no one can understand why it’s such a HUGE FUCKING problem. Masturbating to graphic images of MISOGYNY. That’s it, sister.

Something else FCM once mentioned, that at some point she starting PORN-ING IT UP for her partner’s benefit (or something like this, I hope I haven’t misrepresented your words). Anyways, I remembered this because OH MY GOD YES, I remember my introduction to sex and LEARNING to make noises, pant, pose in certain “provocative” ways, bite, swallow, that kind of PORN shit. It’s hard to talk about because it’s so humiliating. But I think there is MAJOR PRESSURE on ALL WOMEN to behave this way. The younger ones may not even realize there is ANY OTHER way of having sex. Non-pornified sex– hahahahaaaa!! NEVER gonna find a man like that.

FCM - January 6, 2011

Hey up, did you watch the vids? They are mesmerizing, and the song is an earworm. I do like the accordion though.

FCM - January 6, 2011

Also, to clarify, I actually think that normalizing pornstitution serves to normalize het partnerships. I think thats why the fun fems work so hard at it. It’s very back door. Ha!

FCM - January 6, 2011

Wait, I think that’s what you said? Just in another way.

2. Undercover Punk - January 6, 2011

Back door! HA!! You’re funny!

I think it’s a chicken and egg kind of thing. Het relationships are, historically, more socially acceptable than pornstitution (though this may be questionable in the current climate of hyper-sexualization). They are so similar, however, especially from the MALE PERSPECTIVE (which women areNOT supposed to think about!!), that it’s hard to tell the diff. In fact, and forgive me goddess, but I have a biological cousin who LITERALLY uses her youth and beauty to form relationships with men who fund her global travels. I kid you not. She hasn’t worked in years. Everyone in my family hints at the prostitution thing, but they are ENTIRELY BLINDED to the SAME problem in het relationships.

No, I didn’t hear the song. I’m sure it’s excellent, but I do NOT watch videos or listen to songs on the internet. I just don’t. Every once in a great while I’ll watch something on my phone or on someone else’s computer, but viruses KILLED my computer and now I have PTSD re: videos on the internet and I avoid them at all costs. My loss, I realize. ;P

3. calliope - January 6, 2011

omg. accordion techno, where have you been all my life?

but this topic reminds me of this awful movie: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1440728/

earlier this year I went with friends who wanted to go see it. at the beginning of the movie, George Clooney, a cold and weathered assassin shoots his girlfriend point blank because she witnessed him kill an enemy. later on, supposedly because he decides to stay detached but no man can go without PIV for more than a week (day? hour?), he goes to see an incredibly beautiful, innocent, naive young high-end prostitute and there’s a really gratuitous and *pain*fully long “sex” scene where he fucks her “so well” that she falls in love with him.. he supposedly falls in love with her too. he tries to retire from his life as an assassin in order to live out his days with her and (the only part that I thought was even remotely noble) free her from the sex trade, but after some thinking I realized, he’s just buying her.. he got jealous, and wanted to buy her, for himself. even though his very presence puts her life in danger. and this is seen as liberating? he hands her an envelope full of cash.. and then, shortly after, he’s killed.

from IMDB, an excellent reviewer wrote: “In the paper, [Clara, his prostitute gf] reads that two prostitutes have been killed by clients. That doesn’t stop her from driving out into the middle of the woods to a place that no one knows about on a second date with this creepy man who won’t tell her anything about his past and barely speaks to her the whole date. Even when she finds a freaking bullet in the water, she still does not question what she is doing there.”

yup

4. calliope - January 6, 2011

I meant to add:
because the whole movie is a male fantasy, and the women are just prostitutes/trophies/disposable toys, no matter how much he may think he loves them.. this is how so many men seem to view women in reality too, no?

FCM - January 6, 2011

this whole fantasy that hookers fall in love with johns and vice versa is extremely tired isnt it? there is simply NO WAY that a man who is using a hooker could or would ever fall in love with HER, if she is acting. he would only ever fall in love with her hooker-persona; which is not that different actually from many dating-personas and femininity-performing personas now is it? and if hookers are falling in love with their johns, how is that different from just good old-fashioned trauma-bonding that is so commonly experienced over time and place that we all know it as essentially “why didnt he call” syndrome? DUH. IF this is even happening, and hookers are falling in love, its so similar to het trauma-bonding (or actual stockholm syndrome, if its traditionally abusive on top of it) that its impossible to tell them apart. it could actually be that they are the same exact fucking thing. which means that its quite literally deliberate mind-control, for men to stick their dicks into any woman, at any time, under any circumstance. they KNOW this is going to happen, that women are KNOWN to get clingy and stuff (ie. “bonded”) and they do it anyway. its just pure fucking evil, is what it is. mind-control is some seriously fucked up shit, and we all know it. hollywood makes “psychological thrillers” about this very thing (mind control) with some regularity.

i have said here before that i stripped in college. i actually did have a client “fall in love” with me, and i actually kind of fell for him too. but it wasnt real. i knew this, consciously, but decided to do it anyway. now, i warned him that i wasnt “really” a stripper, that i was in my last year of college, and i wasnt even a girly-girl, at all. he CLAIMED that he understood this, and that he understood that all strippers were acting, at every moment, while they were at work. well. one of our very first arguments was about me “not taking care of myself” because when i wasnt working i chose not to shower, wear makeup (or pretend to be interested in him when he wasnt being interesting, of course). he said it hurt his feelings that i was giving “the best of me” to my clients, and he got the shoddy leftovers on my days off. i said I TOLD YOU I WASNT LIKE THIS. he said “well yeah, but i thought you’d at least wear a little makeup.” he SAID he understood that it was an act. turns out, he didnt understand a good goddamned thing, at all.

reminds me very much about the “letting yourself go” argument after a woman has been married for awhile actually. (seriously, the parallels dont stop). after a few years, she might decide to hell with some of this exhausting femininity shit, im not doing it anymore! and the next thing you know, her fucking husband is crying in his beer because shes gotten fat. and usually after giving birth to HIS CHILDREN TOO! god. ITS FUCKING ACTING. thats all it is.

5. nudeasthenews - January 7, 2011

Sar here, aka nudeasthenews. (Sorry for any confusion, but I do not understand wordpress and how it memorizes certain usernames and not others, and tries to force you to use certain ones sometimes and not others.)

The fun fem piv-deology is the same, isn’t it? The porn star says “i love sex, thats why I’m a porn star”. The Fun Fem says “I LOVE PIV, thats why I choose to ALWAYS provide it”. Ofcourse, how can you know if something is a choice if you’ve never chosen NOT to do it, Funfems?! Just try!

Most prostitutes enter prostitution under the age of fourteen, that means that their WHOLE sex life has been prostitution. Funfems too have been having PIV sex their WHOLE sex life. They have never chosen to try to have a full sex life that doesn’t include PIV. Some young women abstain from having relationships at all because they are fearful of pressure and PIV and rightly so. ALL women are groomed to be prostitutes/sex slaves in this way because they are NEVER allowed to imagine or experience a sexuality without PIV. Pornified culture just delivers the message even sooner. Its insanely sad.

Also, it speaks to a very closed mindset, where the assumption is that everyones experience is, at base, like yours. Understanding privilege (ahem, richwhitefunfems), understanding difference, is called empathy and most people do not have it. I’m sure the hyper PC liberal fun fems would weep to realize they don’t possess empathy, but they dont. They cannot allow it. because the male-reality cannot allow it. Every bit of information they receive is interpreted to protect their own ego and fragile mind ie. men’s minds. That too may be a symptom of severe trauma.

FCM - January 7, 2011

ALL women are groomed to be prostitutes/sex slaves in this way because they are NEVER allowed to imagine or experience a sexuality without PIV.

YES! excellent. i have said here before (and EW it just gives me the shivers talking about it) that my dad tried to give me “the talk” when i was in 5th grade or so, and i told him i already had the talk with someone else, that i knew all about “it” and that i didnt think i was ever going to want to do it. HE LITERALLY LAUGHED AT ME, and said “yes you will.” imagine if he would have said something else, like “its your body and you get to decide.” i really think that the relationship between fathers and daughters is pretty inherently fucked up, because most fathers wouldnt have CHILDREN at all (or as many or as soon) if not for the mandatory PIV they inflicted on their wives and gfs in the first fucking place. they obviously see women as fuckholes, or they wouldnt be sticking their dicks into women, in the first place. then they end up with girls. ugh it makes my fucking skin crawl.

also, as an aside, articles drawing “paralleles” are actually very hard to write, because you are telling basically 3 stories for every 2 things you are paralleling. the story of A, the story of B, then C which is the story of how these things relate. and here i was kind of paralleling 3 things, porn, prostitution, and het partnerships. its not impossible to do it, but its difficult in a short blog post format, i am not completely satisfied with the way it turned out, but whatever. i am just saying. thats where the comments come in handy, and where the conversation often gets good.

anyway, this is the part that inspired the whole post, it was a comment i left over at miskas:

i think that this is just more of the same shit, a covert “lesbians and spinsters are gross” meme that primes women for PIV, and quells the screaming inside “modern” women’s heads, because their relationships with men resemble prostitution in a very fundamental way. isnt it? all this empowerfulment and agency bullshit is really just to justify their nigels porn habit, and het partnerships generally.

heres the link to her takedown of the idiotic “radical feminists are killing hookers with words” post over at feministe.

http://scumorama.wordpress.com/2011/01/02/the-mudflap-girl-she-has-something-to-say/

6. FAB Libber - January 7, 2011

so now that we have the mandatory enthusiastic PIV covered (thanks male sexologists!) it becomes even more clear that hooking and het partnerships share quite a lot in common, do they not? so much so that justifying hooking actually justifies your average het partnership pretty well. perhaps especially the way the fun-fems do it, with their empowerfulized ”happy hooker” narrative, which is actually nothing like the actual experience of your average prostituted woman, anywhere in the world.

Yes! I think you have uncovered the funfem motivation very well, the only motivation that really makes any sense. After all, funfems, if they were actually feminists, would not be routinely ignoring/discrediting the prostituted woman who don’t want to do it, don’t feel ’empowered’ by pornstitution. The funfems insist this group are just a minority, and the majority are happy hookers. The reality is that 80-90% of prostituted women want out. The funfems cannot even get a handle on the percentage of ‘job satisfaction’ FFS. I think you are right on this, the funfem motivation for supporting pornstitution is to justify their het relationships and more recently, to justify their Nigel’s porn habits. It’s either that, or they are completely stupid. The lesbian fun-fems are all into the dominance/submission paradigm (bdsm) which has the stench of patriarchy all over it.

Recently Stephen Fry (British comedian, openly gay) got into meeja hotwater for his comments about (het) women and sex:

“If women liked sex as much as men, there would be straight cruising areas in the way there are gay cruising areas. Women would go and hang around in churchyards thinking: ‘God, I’ve got to get my fucking rocks off’, or they’d go to Hampstead Heath and meet strangers to shag behind a bush. It doesn’t happen. Why? Because the only women you can have sex with like that wish to be paid for it.”

“I feel sorry for straight men. The only reason women will have sex with them is that sex is the price they are willing to pay for a relationship with a man, which is what they want,” he said. “Of course, a lot of women will deny this and say, ‘Oh no, but I love sex, I love it!’ But do they go around having it the way that gay men do?”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/oct/31/stephen-fry-sex-women-relationships-attitude

On one level, Fry is correct, but what he actually misses in his comments is that women are left few viable alternatives to het partnering, or they get conned or trapped into it (and usually cannot leave because they later have dependent children, so the financial survival aspect becomes even worse than it was before).

Generally it is an open secret that most women really do not love teh PIV, a realisation that happens as women get older (or really bored with their pornified Nigels!). All this funfem stuff is geared towards younger single women – this is the time when they are most vulnerable to be taken in by all this shit, and more often than not, either their casual relationships or het partnerings will end up with them having children then trapped within the cycle of dependence on men.

Financial independence (from men) really is the key to totally free choices for women. Why else are women still only getting 80-85% of the male wage, 30 years after second wave feminism’s fight for equal pay?

Domestic prostitution (ie het marriages) is something females are brainwashed into from birth (Prince Nigel fairytales, motherhood, prettiness as greatest achievement). Most get trapped into the het partnerships before they are fully independant adults (between 15-25). And hence you have a lot of later-lesbians as well.

There are more similarities than differences between het partnerships and prostitution, but most women are blinded into not seeing them, and further conned into believing that prostituted women are different from themselves.

7. FAB Libber - January 7, 2011

Miska’s graphics were brilliant!
In her comments she also summed up some of what I said above:
Young women are recruited and groomed for sexual service to men–it’s why older men are always on the hunt for younger impressionable women to manipulate, control and sexually colonize…

And the funfems ARE the HOPs doing the work for men. They really are the anti-feminist trolls.

8. FAB Libber - January 7, 2011

My apologies, it was from Sheila’s comment!

9. Sargassosea - January 7, 2011

“All this funfem stuff is geared towards younger single women – “

Yes, this is the latest incarnation of culture-wide grooming. Hell, when I was a teenager the ERA had just gasped its last and the way I remember it was that it was all good because now girls could grow up to have fulfilling careers AND sexually/domestically service some wiener. What that’s led to (in the US anyway) is an economy wherein 2 incomes is the norm, yet folks are struggling to keep up; and who’s getting screwed THE MOST in this scenario?

So yeah, FABlibber, I agree that it’s an open *secret* that older women have come to realize they hate the piv especially when it is required at the end of/before a long day of working in and out of the house.

FCM – this is a great post! “The simplest things are the hardest to see, let alone explain.” is something that I say all the time because it’s so true. That’s your gift, I think, to be able to take these complex* simplicities (oxymoron/dichotomy alert!) and present them in a clear and, sometimes, accordion accompanied Blog-Thesis.

*complex only because we are dealing with up-is-down, black-is-white logic-free assertions of what ‘reality’ is. Makes for teh crayzies.

10. FAB Libber - January 7, 2011

An example of culture-wide grooming is in Pamela Stephenson Connolly’s latest “advice” (via Cath Elliott) http://toomuchtosayformyself.com/2011/01/07/theres-a-name-for-that/

Not only are young women expected to supply PIV to their partners, but if Nigel happens to be a wannabe rapist or potential necrophiliac, then that’s ok too! PSC is so full of shit.

I agree with the two-income screw-over Sargassosea.

FCM - January 8, 2011

also, i would add that “for health reasons!” was the reason women were supposed to engage in regular PIV, according to the male sexologists in the early 1900s. YES! although its actually the opposite of what we know to be true, the male sexologists were (and are!) telling women that engaging in regular PIV has numerous health benefits. they completely ignore of course that many if not most of womens health PROBLEMS are directly attributable to PIV, especially for young women who dont have many other causes of morbidity, due to the fact of their youth. that is, as a group, they are healthy EXCEPT for oh say STDs, birth-control complications, vaginal infections, unwanted pregnancies, pregnancy and delivery-related complications, and DOMESTIC VIOLENCE. yes lets not forget that shall we? since most penises come attached to an actual man afterall. and we all know that womens biggest danger are MEN, particularly MEN THEY KNOW. intimately.

of course, the alleged “health benefits” of PIV are STRESS REDUCTION (orgasm) and EMOTIONAL BONDING. both of which can be done WITHOUT PIV…and neither of which necessarily accompany PIV at all. and if you are a woman, PIV is actually extemely fucking stressful due to the threat of rape, higher sucseptibility to STDs, and OH YEAH pregnancy scares. and putting womens “emotional bonding” (trauma-bonding) from PIV in the healthy category is extremely problematic, to say the least.

so, even if we accept that orgasm and emotional bonding are generally healthy, its pretty clear that PIV is really only “healthy” for MEN. which is an extremely shitty reason for anyone to tell WOMEN that we need to be engaging in it.

FCM - January 8, 2011

oh, and back in the day, the alleged “health benefits” to women of PIV were things like…IF YOU DONT DO IT, YOUR PUSSY WILL SHRIVEL UP, AND YOU WILL GO INSANE. both of which have been summarily debunked by the way, in case anyone wasnt sure.

11. SheilaG - January 8, 2011

Just had to add this note FCM– I watched “Eat, Pray, Love’ recently… yeah I know malestream yadda yadda but I do like international travel and Julia Roberts… anyway, the Julia character has divorced her husband runs away to find herself, but meets a man, has sex with him… next scene she’s at an Indonesia woman healer who tells her she has a urinary tract infection…giggle giggle about the implied reason for it — lots of PIV with this new guy. Wow, that would have gone over my head in the past, but thanks to FCM and her explanation of PIV as a danger to women…. I caught the nuance in the movie!!

12. SheilaG - January 8, 2011

Indonesian — typo correction…

13. thebewilderness - January 8, 2011

You forgot zits. PIV was promoted as the cure for a girls pimples in the late seventies or early eighties or somewhere back around then.

FCM - January 8, 2011

yeah, and if you LITERALLY coat yourself inside and out with semen it will supposedly keep you young. even though stress, disease and childrearing are all known to prematurely age you.

funny that. trying to gain anything from PIV if you are a woman, is a fucking moving target.

FCM - January 8, 2011

and YAY, sheilas back!!

14. SheilaG - January 8, 2011

Good to be back– had to have something of value to say…🙂

15. FCM - January 8, 2011

Always glad to lend a hand to a lifelong lesbian who doesn’t get pop culture references to piv. But seriously, the fact that they were giggling about a woman’s urinary tract infection really fucking sucks! But yes, in fact, tee-heeing about them actually happens, because we all know how you usually get them, and yes, its almost always from fucking. It even has a name: honeymoon cystitis.

And I am sorry, but getting one while traveling is many women’s worst nightmare, and rightly so, because you are away from your doctors and dependant on a healthcare system you don’t even know, spending your entire vacation (or honeymoon) and probably your budget trying to get it treated. Tee-hee I’ve been a bad girl!!!111!1 and now I’m really sick, but at least a man wants to stick his dick in me, so its worth it, and funny too, tee-hee some more. God, its fucking revolting.

And fab libber, I read cath Elliotts article about the boyfriend who “initiates sex” while his partner is asleep. Kinda like saying that a murderer “induces a peaceful slumber” in his victims isn’t it? Ps. Your boyfriends a rapist.

FCM - January 8, 2011

also, i know that the second video makes you click through to youtube. i couldnt find one that didnt make you click through, although i tried. its worth the click.

16. FAB Libber - January 8, 2011

I did watch both videos.
The first is a fairly typical softcore porn, with the woman writhing around and looking sexxay-hawt. Most music videos today with female artists are similar.

The second, is remarkably “G” rated except for the crotch/abdomen shot in the middle somewhere (wtf?). This is fairly atypical of today’s music videos.

The style is supposed to be semi-narrative, but the narrative execution is fairly poor. I would disagree that he is supposed to be stalking her, mainly because of the lack of similar locations he is filmed in. I think it is meant to be some sort of love story of either they have had a fight and get back together, or, they live in the same place and get together (again, narrative poor). The creepy bit was at the end when he comes up behind her and embraces her. Had he tried that on me he would have been writhing around on the ground in pain about a second later. But, I gather it is “romantic”.

I think romantic and creepy are probably on a continuum as well. Some ‘romantic’ stuff is well creepy.

17. SheilaG - January 8, 2011

Straight women tee hee all the time about male abuse, or their husbands or whatever. I just never get this, because I love my partner deeply, don’t tee hee about her, and we don’t give each other infections because of sex.

It must be male brainwashing, nothing else could explain this behavior.

18. thebewilderness - January 8, 2011

People tend to laugh or giggle when they are uncomfortable. You see this a lot in children. Women learn that it is the only safe response to uncomfortable thoughts.
That is one of those things that once you notice it you notice it a lot. They ain’t laughing cuz its funny. KWIM?

FCM - January 8, 2011

i had to google KWIM.

19. thebewilderness - January 9, 2011

My apologies. I won’t do it again.
“I am aware of all internet traditions” but that doesn’t make it ok to foist it on others.

20. FCM - January 9, 2011

actually i recall the giggling over UTIs was kind of a bonding ritual with other empowerfulized women. same thing with the pregnancy scares. i regarded it all as a badge of honor i guess, that i was fucking so much and had the proof (in case anyone wondered). this is actually encouraged. i dont remember it being an a-ha moment at all, and therefore nothing to feel uncomfortable about. i shit you not, it never occured to me that this was all extremely fucked up.

relatedly, i have heard second-handedly of women deliberately cultivating yeast infections, or at least not treating them or delaying treatment when they occured, because having PIV with an itchy raw vag/vulva was more intensely pleasurable than just boring old regular PIV. even at the time, when i was an empowerfulized fun-fem and a human petri dish myself for all the UTIs and vaginal infections (UGH) i thought that was extremely fucked up, and declared “i dont care how good you might think it feels, thats fucked up.” plus, i knew what they were talking about when they said it was more “intense” due to the insane itching and scratching sensations involved, but i never thought it felt good at all to have PIV with a yeast infection. WTF?

FCM - January 9, 2011

to clarify, when i said it was revolting, it was more of a painful memory than a judgement.

21. nudeasthenews - January 9, 2011

I think you are right, that self destruction is often a bonding ritual, a right of passage. For men violent rituals end, though. Women do not pass through the right of passage- it is a life sentence. In context, thinking of women giggling and bonding as they pop pills for their PIV related illnesses just seems so outrageous and senseless. But also an appropriately insane response to insane social conditions.

Self injury is a symptom of overpopulation (modern life). It has been demonstrated in laboratory animals that even if basic needs are met like food and shelter, for social animals overpopulation causes mental anguish which causes self mutilation. Self mutilation (piv)Overpopulation. Appropriate social relations/lack of social hierarchy/lack of PIV based sexuality IS a basic human need.

Can the self mutilation of women in groups be considered trauma bonding?

22. nudeasthenews - January 9, 2011

edit: self mutilation (PIV) equals Overpopulation, Overpopulation equals self mutilation (PIV).

FCM - January 9, 2011

thats an interesting point about overpopulation! vegan primate writes about primitivism and how our modern life is against our “natures” and can be quite harmful and anxiety-producing. her latest example is of having strangers caretake our loved ones, and how this never used to be the case.

and about PIV equalling self harm, do you only mean womens self harm? it would also be self preservation of course, to “choose” the exact method of “self-harm” that men would inflict on us and do, even if we said NO.

FCM - January 10, 2011

heres a link to vegan primates post.

http://veganprimate.wordpress.com/2010/12/18/nurturing/

23. FAB Libber - January 10, 2011

I agree with Vegan Primate’s two posts about unnatural (modern) living conditions, more evident in cities than in small rural towns.

Many feminists have already asserted that het coupling up is an unnatural arrangement, so yes, I am sure there are a lot of stress behaviours that women do either in response or to cope. Even if it is ‘natural’ for a short period of time to cohabit with a male, modern society has it rigged that women, for the most part, stay in these relationships long after they have gone bad due to lack of other viable options. Being a prisoner is stressful, and women probably have more in common with prisoners of war (vs prison inmates).

I am saying that women are held in captivity by modern (patriarchical) society. Being ‘let out’ to go to the supermarket really does not cut it in the freedom stakes either.

24. nudeasthenews - January 11, 2011

“and about PIV equalling self harm, do you only mean womens self harm? it would also be self preservation of course, to “choose” the exact method of “self-harm” that men would inflict on us and do, even if we said NO.”

Yes, you’re right, it is just self preservation. But, I guess I was thinking of the revelling in it. Many people/most people do take a certain pleasure in self-destruction, mutilation, BDSM(!) etc. Its not that funfems and the token sex workers who love it dont know PIV is unequal and oppressive, is it? They just like to revel in it.

FCM - January 11, 2011

well, rebecca mott writes about “the penis” in her archives, and how it (literally) puts the fear of death in prostituted women. you know, the ones who ARENT the happy-hooker empowerfulized types. THEY seem to get that its oppressive, but the fucking fun-fems dont seem to get much at all do they? and yes, they do seem to revel in it, ESPECIALLY the pregnancy scares and infections. i know i always did. i have written about this before. when i first started having PIV and sex was no longer fun and pleasureable and (relatively, except for the fear of rape) stress-free like it had been before, i felt really mature. like “i am a woman now” which was in fact the case wasnt it? this kind of defines woman. het woman and het “female sexuality” anyway, as dictated by the male sexologists.

i really dont know whether the fun fems get any of this, even at the most basic level. do you? i never got the “masochistic” part of it honestly until i read and digested dworkins “intercourse.” it didnt make any sense. this is the level of brainwashing we are dealing with, around PIV. its so obvious, except that its not.

25. FAB Libber - January 11, 2011

Regarding PIV as a self-harm, check out this article:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/8251259/Women-in-crisis-as-depression-fuels-binge-drinking-and-sex-research.html

Depression can be highly damaging, leading women to engage in “self-destructive” behaviour such as drinking, sexual promiscuity and building up debt
[…]
The trigger for many women suffering depression was losing their jobs, the breakdown of a relationship, getting into debt or becoming pregnant.
[…]
while other destructive behaviour including sleeping with several different partners in a short period of time was also reported.

Interesting to see PIV (or “sexual promiscuity”) being listed among self-harming behaviours.

FCM - January 12, 2011

i love how they say that “promiscuity” is damaging (to women), but noone ever makes the connection that PIV itself is harmful (to women). how much is too much, is the question that comes to mind when they say “promiscuous.” and its a question thats never answered.

26. FCM - January 14, 2011

this is from sar, it went into the spam folder for some reason:

I’m not sure whether the funfems truly get it or not. As you have pointed out, there is a willful, and self preserving, limiting of thought around these issues. Simultaneously there is an extreme arrogance. “I dont even have to THINK about what would happen if the things men give me (the pill, abortions, antibiotics) were taken away.” Maybe one of the first things that funfems need to see is their own arrogance, before they can see their victimhood. Resisting thinking about PIV without western medicine, is resisting basic fact that would reveal that arrogance. Enter individualistic arguments made by men. It IS men who are feeding women these lines/’thoughts’.

reviewed in HTML editor for purity. not sure why it was spammed. sar, if you want to repost, i will remove this one. thanks.

27. Nelle - January 19, 2011

“I’m sure the hyper PC liberal fun fems would weep to realize they don’t possess empathy, but they dont. They cannot allow it. because the male-reality cannot allow it. ”

I think it would allow too much prying into what goes on in funfem’s own bedrooms when it comes to het sexuality/PIV/prostitution/pornography. And we just can’t have that. It’d open open up a big can of reality,and constant struggle after coming to this realization,a struggle to break free of what they once thought was ‘normal’ in het relationships.

@FCM

Some weeks ago, I came across rmott’s blog. Very insightful.

On the subject of funfem’s fantasy and real prostituted womens’ reality-that’s quite interesting. It’s kind of like those anti-prohibition rich suburbanite White males wanting to preserve crack cocaine . Sure they smoke a little pot, snort some cocaine on occasion -but they have a whole lot to fall back on if they slip up-rich parents,therapy,rehab.Poor people aren’t afforded those things ,have no access to such,which is why it is told in most poor families that doing drugs will get you fucking nowhere-DON’T DO IT. Funfems have a lot to fall back on as a class (and often,race *i.e. White) if SexPos doesn’t work out. Sex Pos in itself is a practice of privilege in my opinion.

Much of what they defend is fantasy, not reality.


Sorry comments are closed for this entry