jump to navigation

On Consumerism (Prophylactic Goods and Sexxxay Services) October 26, 2011

Posted by FCM in health, international, liberal dickwads, PIV, politics, pop culture, porn, prostitution, WTF?.
Tags: , , ,

theres a lot of talk about the economy lately isnt there?  and i once heard someone say something about the environment too!  you know, just in passing.  but what i have never heard (at least not yet) is anyone besides radfems seriously considering the implications of PIV and PIV-centric sexuality on both.  which means they arent really taking any of this seriously.  or more to the point, if it gets in the way of anyones precious PIV, its not an option: if a solution to any problem comes at the price of decreased sexxxay, the cost is simply too high.

heres one example of someone (kinda-sorta) going down that road and stopping abruptly: when discussing so-called “eco-sexuality” or “green sexuality” the best they can come up with is biodegradable lube and green vibrators.  what the fuck?  they hint at a female-centered sexuality and one thats good for the planet, yet they never come out and say that noone should be engaging in PIV because its male-centric and destructive.  they dont seem to care at all that if you have to purchase a product to engage in it, whatever you are doing is consumerist and supports profit-driven economies.  and that these things are not sustainable, and make already rich and powerful men even richer and more powerful-er.  biodegradable lube?  really?  how about the effects of overpopulation on the planet, as the direct result of mandatory PIV and unwanted and ambivalent pregnancies?  they dont say.

heres another example: at nopornnorthhampton they stress the importance of sustainable sex, which sounds really good!  since the average professional longevity of a female porn actor is a few months to a couple of years for example, its very easy to see that a certain kind of “sex” and sexuality is not sustainable for women, and indeed is not compatible with life for women.  while NPNH advocates for the abolition of porn and prostitution, it doesnt seem to care that PIV itself is not sustainable for women, if for no other reason than the vaginal changes that occur at menopause (not to mention all the stress, spending and consumption that comes with it).  heres how they see it:

Green sexuality is sustainable sexuality. It is characterized by long-term, mutually respectful relationships that enhance the lives of the lovers and the wider world. Green relationships look more like erotica and less like porn. Green sexuality is a union between two equals, embracing both heterosexual and homosexual bonds but excluding polygamy, adult-child sexual relations and bestiality.

Green relationships are mindful of the impact of sexual choices on physical and mental health. They value integrity, wholeness and communication and avoid exploitation, abuse, promiscuity, infidelity and prostitution.

Green sexuality is consistent with the principles of the larger green movement, emphasizing long-term thinking, respect for other people, and an awareness of the consequences of personal choices. The green lover avoids mindless excess. By giving up superficial, fleeting, unsatisfying experiences, green relationships cultivate a finer, deeper, richer and more robust way of living.

at least they are willing to exclude certain things, bravely venturing into sex-negative “prude” territory by rejecting bestiality (!) and “avoiding” prostitution and abuse (is that the same as excluding them outright?  if so, why make the distinction here between what they “exclude” versus what they merely avoid?  im just asking).  well im sorry but thats not good enough.  anyone who is considering the long-term health and wellbeing of women and sustainable sexuality for women must address the problems of short-term payoff versus long-term consequences of PIV, and must perform this analysis separately when examining the practice from the perspective and experience of men versus the perspective and experience of women.  this is obvious when so many women report that there really is no short-term payout for them from PIV at all, and that they dont even like it.

but nobodys going there are they?  because going there means having to examine PIV for reals, which quickly and obviously exposes it as a harmful cultural practice that benefits men at womens expense.  and to admit that this is the case, and that so many men continue to do it anyway, casts men in a very unflattering light.  even the allegedly “good ones” who would otherwise not harm a fucking fly.  how very fortunate to be a fly, then.  meanwhile, men and women are advancing and advocating for green movements generally that dont even have womens or the environments best interests at heart, ignoring womens specific and unique concerns (as approximately half the population of the planet, give or take) and failing to consider real solutions if it would mean putting an end to PIV.  this, they cannot have.  even at the obvious cost of successfully achieving the very result they say they are aiming for.  which means they are lying about what they really want, does it not?  i mean really.  the refusal to examine certain practices and solutions out-of-hand is highly suspicious.

and women are participating in progressive movements generally alongside men who refuse to give up their precious sexxxay, including PIV and porn, and alongside men who are actually having PIV with actual women on the ground in the middle of the actual protest itself, with people having to step over them, and creating a market for novelty condoms to celebrate (and mitigate the harms of) all of this, without seeing or caring that there is a very serious problem with that for women.  and that its all very consumerist to boot.

theres a big old pot of steaming reality brewing on the radfem blogs, for anyone whos interested in fully waking from this nightmare.  of course, everyone reading here already knows that.  and once again, radfems are putting it all on the line and creating community for women who wake up from all of this alone, and finding themselves very suddenly unsupported by their protesty PIV-entitled bretheren and the women who make excuses for them, with nowhere else to go.  but DAMN its so fucking aggravating.  and its so BORING.  lets go to the ends of our thoughts, people.  its called intellectual honesty, and internal consistency.  and its not too much to ask.

and PS.  porn is a consumer product.  DUH.


1. FCM - October 26, 2011

from msn.com today:

Sometime on Monday, Oct. 31, the world’s population is projected to hit 7 billion. Is that numerical milestone a cause for celebration or concern?

A little bit of both, according to the United Nations Population Fund. The organization, an international development agency that promotes the right of every person to enjoy a life of health and equal opportunity, on Wednesday released a report detailing the achievements and setbacks faced by an ever-crowded world.

How we respond now will determine whether we have a healthy, sustainable and prosperous future or one that is marked by inequalities, environmental decline and economic setbacks, according to “The State of World Population 2011” report.


of the several experts who propose solutions to the problem of overpopulation here, not a single one addresses PIV as an institution, even when they do identify that womens rights and autonomy are the key to stopping this. its contraceptives and abortion all the way, baby. ahem.

unwanted CHILDREN are the problem you see, not unwanted PREGNANCIES. thats womens problem! and pro-natalism is the problem, not PIV-positivism. do they not know where babies come from?

2. SheilaG - October 26, 2011

I was thinking about this 7 billion mark recently FCM, and remember a time when the world population was half that…in my short lifetime.
And then I read Jane Fonda’s autobiography…. and came across a gem as she wrote about the 1930s in Los Angeles, and because the population was so much lower then, the quality of life was a million times better… I know she was sheltered from the horrors of the depression, but the way she wrote about the less populated world really stuck with me.

If women were 100% honest about what we really wanted…. the population would go down to managable levels. So it’s not about abortion or birth control (for women), it’s about an end to the practice that ever can cause a pregnancy unless the woman specifically and consciously wanted a child. It would be 100% up to the woman.

This message will change the face of the earth. Even in my childhood, the world was a more civilized place, precisely because the population was so much lower, and that was the middle of the baby boom of the 50s and 60s.

Sex toys, birth control, etc etc all cost money, as does the BDSM stuff… capitalism at its best.

Great post BTW. My partner and I had wondered what had happened to “the population bomb”… no real discussion of what the actual carrying capacity of the earth really was. Suspect….

3. SheilaG - October 26, 2011

All PIV can resulted in forced pregnancy for women. All of it all the time. What is suspect is the lack of imagination of men, who could easily come up with other het forms of sexual expression that would NEVER endanger or threaten a woman with pregnancy.

The women I know who are struggling the most financially… or are the most stressed out about money, ALL are single Moms. They ALL have one child or more, and this one change made their lives completely different from mine. It’s scary. Even the solidly middle class Moms, the ones who are still married to good guys (or so they think), they haven’t factored in the decline of the middle class. Or the flat income for 30 some years.

So the world “looks” the same, but economically it totally isn’t. And I don’t believe that women really make a choice. Every time I meet a het woman who is 40-something or late 30-something, and they have a college age child and then weirdly a couple of 3-6 year olds, I know the story. They remarried, the new guy just had to have KIDS of “his” own, and guess what? I can’t believe how common this is.

I am quite honest about my dislike of children and my general horror at what they do to women health wise and economically wise, and the women with the “ambivalent” pregnancies never completely get upset with my radfem rants. Because I know that deep down, they didn’t want to have these children, and my speaking radfem uncomfortable words rings true to them. It’s why we all as women can have more courage to spread the radfem message.

This blog has helped me communicate much more effectively with straight women, who I never really understood at all before.

4. FCM - October 26, 2011

If women were 100% honest about what we really wanted…. the population would go down to managable levels. So it’s not about abortion or birth control (for women), it’s about an end to the practice that ever can cause a pregnancy unless the woman specifically and consciously wanted a child. It would be 100% up to the woman.

are you quoting jane fonda here, or is this you? either way, i dont see what women being “honest” has to do with anything: women have reported for a long long time that they dont like PIV, its not pleasurable for them OR its not worth it, considering how dangerous and stressful it is. women tell the truth about this. men and male-identified western sex-positive women arent listening. if women could only be HONEST about their NEEDS blah blah blah. this isnt womens fault, and we arent lying or hiding the ball. nobody fucking cares about women, thats the problem. nobodys listening, and when they are its only as much as is necessary to tweak their propaganda towards higher effectiveness. dont like getting knocked up all the time? great, heres a pill/product/device/procedure. its not pleasurable for you? rub your clit while he fucks you. etc etc. you know how it is.

5. cherryblossomlife - October 27, 2011

brilliant! They’re talking about over-population in the Guardian this week… no mention of patriarchies forcing women to reproduce… no mention of PIV, or rape etc…. It’s all smokes and mirrors. Men don’t give a shit about the environment, or the population, as you say..

Oh and LOL at this
“bravely venturing into sex-negative “prude” territory by rejecting bestiality (!) ”


6. maggie - October 27, 2011

The world population would be hitting the 8 billion mark by now if abortion was unavailable. I know abortion is harmful to women – the lesser of two evils – is the usual clarion call from the fun fems, however you are spot on when you say:

“unwanted CHILDREN are the problem you see, not unwanted PREGNANCIES. thats womens problem! and pro-natalism is the problem, not PIV-positivism. do they not know where babies come from?”

FCM - October 27, 2011

actually i have never seen the fun-fems refer to abortion as an evil at all. most of them downplay it whenever they do discuss it, and use male-centric analogies that make it sound like its “no worse than having a tooth pulled.” as if having a fucking tooth pulled is a walk in the park! and AS IF PIV puts MEN in harms way at all, even in danger of needing a tooth pulled. its all so stupid. they dont seem to care how the hormones and bodily changes of ALL pregnancies affect womens bodies and minds, or that no contraceptive is 100% reliable, or how all of this is really terrifying and gets in the way of womens sexual enjoyment, and trauma-bonds them to the men they are fucking. add in a little outpatient surgery to boot, what could it possibly hurt?

at any rate, the “lesser of two evils” seems to acknowledge that unwanted pregnancy is an evil (which it is although thats an imperfect word) but they arent willing to examine why it continues to be an issue for women worldwide. if anyone has put it in those terms, its not the fun-fems. maybe old-school democrats (hilary clinton?) who are playing politics with old white men who refuse to discuss it on anyones terms but their own? “evil” evokes religiosity afterall, and concedes that unwanted pregnancy is inevitable when its not. talk about male-centric discourses right?

plus its a frog-in-boiling-water scenario. women go through absolute HELL to comply with and conform to PIV-centric sex, abortion really is just one more thing. and it *does* reduce the harm, for some women some of the time, where carrying a fetus to term is unacceptable. but the problem of UNWANTED PREGNANCIES and then PIV that causes them is still there. it doesnt have to be this way of course. thats what none of them are willing to discuss.

7. Sargasso Sea - October 27, 2011

Think about just the mondo profitable legal porn/stripping business in the US alone and the poisonous infrastructure that is required to run it. Now think globally. Now add in all the (more expensive and more difficult to get to) illegal versions. Now add in prostitution.

And all of THAT is on top of all the fuckability accoutrement crap that ALL women are expected to lovingly embrace!

I swear at least half (51%?) of the global economy IS the business of (and infrastructure required for) male-identified, male-centric, male-demanded sexual degradation of females.

And then start thinking about how all of this *spare change* that men are spending on their *entertainment* is subsidized by women’s laboring for them, doing most of their work at “work” and at home and what we end up with is an entire fucking global economic system that is built entirely on the backs, orifices and uteri of females and which will sooner rather than later destroy OUR planet.

And they have the nerve to appropriate Ecology (thanks Mr. Vice President I-Lobbied-for-the-Internet-with-Porn-Money Gore!) as one of their talking points…

FCM - October 27, 2011

exactly s4. the entire thing is built on womens labor and from our sexual victimization for mens entertainment. the only reason many men have disposable income and leisure time in the first fucking place is bc men are overvalued and overpaid in the workplace, and women are washing their shorts for free at home (and performing free childcare for wanted, unwanted and ambivalent children alike, DUH) and dedicating their entire lives to making these asshats successful and increasing their earning potential by doing all the humiliating but necessary grunt work so they dont have to. then the men take their time and money and use both to economically exploit other women through porn, stripping and prostitution…if all of this were to end, everything would be different. absolutely everything, absolutely different. they are lying when they say they want real change.

8. SheilaG - October 27, 2011

By “honest” I mean women being honest with themselves, and this is hard to achieve. In order to be honest with ones self, you have to have the time to do it. It doesn’t matter what you tell men, they are never ever listening anyway. So it is a waste of time trying to educate men. What we need to be doing as much as we are able is educating each other.

As many women as possible have to be reached with these messages, since the most women supporting and women positive advice out there is in the radfem realm. You will get absolutely no points, no statues in your honor, no social approval for being a radical feminist. So what we say counts, because these is no advantage socially or even economically to this philosophy.

It’s hard for women to even hear the voices inside their own heads, because patriarchy is the heavy metal radical station playing 24/7. Ever try to think with that music blaring?

As I’ve said many times, men are stealing women’s energy, time, talent and money. It’s grand theft even having them in the room.
I’ve noticed how women cater to males walking into rooms, which is why I hate to be in mixed groups. I can’t bear to watch the het simpering and male pleasing…. it’s horrifying to watch this behavior, but again, most women don’t live male free lives even in their own homes, so there is not enough think time. And time to think is what women so desparately need worldwide.

The Jane Fonda paraphrase was just how the lower population of 1930s Los Angeles felt on a day to day level BTW.

9. The Masked Lily - October 28, 2011

The overpopulation is at least partially the legacy of Abrahamic religion.. every woman being forcibly bound to a man and told to “go forth and multiply.”

On the left, though, religious patriarchs are replaced by doodbros .. who are little better..

I think the psychology behind PIV needs to be unraveled, and men need to understand how depraved it is objectively. Men with scruples would be horrified, I think, and yet, they aren’t.

Why do men get off on humiliating/penetrating/denigrating women? Is it a power trip..? I can’t see it as loving in any way that’s for sure

10. The Masked Lily - October 28, 2011

And putting women’s lives at risk every time.. every instance of PIV ..

11. cherryblossomlife - October 28, 2011

“an entire fucking global economic system that is built entirely on the backs, orifices and uteri of females and which will sooner rather than later destroy OUR planet.”


*Everything* else: religions, political movements, environmental concern, war etc… are just smokescreens.

Yes, men *need* women to remain oppressed.. or the world would change beyond recognition. And they actively work to this end, every single day. I would say that men’s daily work consists of oppressing women… anything else they achieve is just an add-on extra.

Look at Cordelia Fine’s analysis of the “sciences”. Men have had all the resources and support in the world to carry out proper research.. and what have they been doing? COncentrating on “studies” that prove women have inferior brains. Meanwhile, these “scientists “had wives at home washing their underpants and picking up their socks.

They’re just time-wasters at best, and when they’re not time-wasting they’re creating evil, freaky ways to oppress women. I still shudder when I think of what male ob/gyns are doing to birthing women in hospital, even today in 2011.

FCM - October 28, 2011

yes, time wasters! the entire “workday” and workweek structure are built around and facilitate men wasting time, so they can be away from home for as long as possible every day to avoid gross and degrading domestic chores and have “cover” under which to have affairs. all working women know that “face time” is a sham and that we could get an entire days worth of work done in about 2 hours. any woman working to her full potential under this regime will either be getting paid for 2 hours of work per day and thus starve to death, or will be doing the work of 5 people and getting the pay of one, or less than one.

in reality, men have been over-valued and overpaid in the workplace this entire time, and this was not sustainable. they are whinging and crying now that the gravy train is over, they want things back to the way they were. big surprise right? men were never worth what they have been being paid this entire time. if they had been being paid what they were worth, the nuclear family wouldnt exist and we would all be living communally or without men at all because they are so worthless their incomes would never support a family. they must know this. how many men just sit at work and shuffle papers from one side of the desk to the other, harass the women or look at porn? and they have always done this and gotten paid very well to do it. they have been entitled to it this entire time and their entitlement is being challenged here big time. it might never go back to the way it was before, and there must be a way for us to take advantage of this now while they are dazed and confused from this giant slap in the face? mustnt there?

12. Global Population to Reach 7-Billion | Radfem Hub - October 28, 2011

[…] and in every other way, whenever they want to do it.  dont mind me, i surpassed mere cynicism 3 days ago.  every once in awhile we exploit “irony” and go right to living in a […]

13. cherryblossomlife - October 29, 2011

“men were never worth what they have been being paid this entire time”

Yep. Men have priced themselves out of the market.

It happened in the seventies in the UK. When Thatcher closed the pits, the unions collapsed and up and down the country men were out of work.
The women, however, still had jobs. As assembly line work in factories that “couldn’t afford” to hire men. During that time, my grandmother supported her husband and their seven children through factory work. This gave working class women a modicum of power in the home. ANd it is said that you could tell which families had female breadwinner because they would be better-dressed, better-fed, better-read and better-travelled than families where the man was the main breadwinner.

If socialist or anarchist men ever cared about economic exploitation they would have made the pink ghetto a priority.

I once went to the European parliament for a week’s work experience with an MEP. A Very Important Man. He was paid a lot, and we partied the entire week on expenses. I was taken aback to find that it was his personal assistant, a woman, who was doing all the work for him as he just pissed about in restaurants and bars. She had to call him to remind him to go to his appointments and meetings. He honestly didn’t have a clue.

As Loup said at the HUB, they’re just angry they’re being treated like girls.

Due to being over-valued for far too long, apart from the powerful few that reap the benefits of patriarcho-capitalism, the system can no longer sustain men and they are becoming redundant in the marketplace

Yes, we have to take advantage of this. It is going to work out well for women, I think.

14. SheilaG - October 29, 2011

I’ve always found it odd that men take forever to get their work done.
If you are working more than 30 hours a week, you are doing the wrong job. It is not the hours that matter, it’s the pay per hour that is the key calculation, but again, men just want to be away from home as much as possible. The guy across the isle watches his son’s filmed football games at his desk. When I show up to work, he flips the screen to “work stuff” but I find it amusing.

I’m on the phone all the time with clients, following up on stuff… my boss often reports in exasperation that the guys don’t meet the deadlines, don’t take action, and then get mad when they haven’t followed up and get dinged in charge backs etc.

15. Feuerwerferin - October 29, 2011

SheilaG, I have read about I man who only employs women. He says that his business is more successful because of female-only employees. Even Marx wrote that only women and children were employed in several industries because they worked better than the men. It has been know all along even to men and still women are discriminated against in employment.
Like always an interesting post, FCM. Thanks.

FCM - October 29, 2011

my first “real” job also only or primarily hired women becasue it was known that women worked harder. IMO this was unfair because there were unreasonably high expectations placed on the women to produce yet we were still forced to do it within the existing structure, ie 40-hour work week, face time etc when this is antithetical to really being productive on womens terms. and bc of course, there were men there too, and nothing much was expected of them.

16. demonista - October 30, 2011

Fcm and others, SO MUCH YES. To all of this. I’d only refine the men’s lack of work to white men being the laziest (men of various races, depending on context like country and time period, have had to work hard… for white men).

On that green sexuality quote, why is having more than one partner placed in the same categorization as sexually exploiting/abusing children and animals? Why is it excluded? Yes, why is abuse and exploitation (presumably of adults) just to be avoided? And why is bisexuality not mentioned at all? as well as what you’ve already said.

I have known a few women who defend PIV and say they do it for themselves, and have read others. It seems they fall into one or more of these: they have experienced little or no sex that didn’t centre around PIV, they think the alternative to no PIV is fellatio or even PIA (because their male partner and/or the whole freaking malestream culture told them it is), they follow foreplay-penetration-orgasm pattern and don’t know about orgasms not brought about by penile entry (these women sometimes fall into a “questionable orgasm” group, mistake arousal for orgasm, and sometimes later discover it wasn’t orgasm they were feeling but “sensuously warm oatmeal” as one woman put it), do orgasm from enveloping but think it needs to be a penis, and/or are attached to PIV as the main or only means of giving and receiving pleasure simultaneously, at least in a hetero context. Usually there is overlap. Like if they start having PIV with older males, they are probably having little if any clitorocentric sex, and will be kept in the dark about it, by those men/older boys and malestream culture. And if they start to orgasm during this, they get told that is the only or best way for them to orgasm, so why bother with “other stuff”? And so many of us either never have or get told it is immature, just foreplay, etc things like tribadism and frottage. Which can be done separately or simultaneously (various combinations of penis or vulva with the other, thigh, stomach, etc). Most men are sexual dolts, and are profoundly unsexual, like you’ve said. Most women I talk about this with are surprised. Naming as both separate acts and sex is powerful. I also usually feel like a lone nut because I’m a 24 year old who has been having sex with males since 16, but has never had PIV (or pia) and when I “out” myself as such.

And why is vasectomy almost never brought up? They’d probably get *more* PIV out of it (if we didn’t have to worry about pregnancy happening virtually at all), but could it be that the appeal comes from *females* *needing* to worry and protect themselves against his manly sperm? Men generally envision their sperm as male, and fertilized eggs as made male. And so many also claim its not reversible, but 95% of men who do get a surgical reversal get their sperm back in their ejaculate. They are lying, to have their female partners worry and take it upon themselves for decades. And to have their own *biological* children, that they made with their sperm, regardless of whether she wanted the pregnancy, from PIV. If semen marks her as his (see all the men pontificating about marking their territory with semen), physically for a couple days if inside her, then sperm impregnating her marks her physically for the length of her pregnancy, and almost always afterwards to. It isn’t just metaphorical, and something she can just wipe off, or even something *she* can place on *him* (gasp! Horror! Men can’t have their own ejaculate on them, it’s emasculating!), it is a lasting literal proof of ownership. At the very least, it is a refusal to do what they expect women to do (take responsibility for preventing pregnancy).

17. mechantechatonne - November 1, 2011

Just for the hell of it, I decided to suggest on a funfem site forgoing PIV to avoid pregnancy and having other, more orgasmic, forms of sex in the comments on (yet another) article on how hormonal birth control kills sex drive. You would have thought I had suggested that they boil their nigels in oil.

The responses were truly hilarious. One person said to me “why are you so obsessed with orgasms,” someone was like “you are fear-mongering, women don’t die because of PIV if they’re healthy and in committed relationships,” someone linked the scene in Mean Girls where the coach says “have sex and you’ll get chlamydia and die,” someone suggested I get therapy, someone called me frigid, “there’s nothing that makes me feel as close to my partner as letting him into me so intimately (oh look, we’re trauma bonding)” and that went on.

And I literally laughed out loud when someone said “just because I don’t have orgasms during PIV doesn’t mean that I don’t really enjoy having PIV with my partner. After he finishes he makes sure to stimulate me and then I have an orgasm.” Oh you showed me how much fun PIV is right there. That falls right in the “you can just rub your clit when he fucks you” only just a scotch less pleasant since at least with the rubbing during PIV you don’t have to wait until he’s done to get something out of it.

I literally got about forty responses, all of them some variation of “you are a spoil sport and this talk of PIV-related harm is LIES told by old people that hate sex. I LOVE PIV and even when I don’t I don’t think I could live without it anyway, at least I know nigel couldn’t. So there, go get some therapy for that frigidity of yours!”

FCM - November 1, 2011

LOL gross! thanks for sharing. those responses never get old. actually YES THEY DO!

18. The Masked Lily - November 1, 2011

If more women were more independent (ie, given equal pay, not living with men.. I bet there’d be way less resistance to the idea of abandoning PIV. most women don’t even enjoy it. am I wrong in assuming it’s the real reason women aren’t given equal pay? independence from men and coerced heterosexuality would be revolutionary. but men would lose their servants/handmaidens/etc..

and mecha mentioned on her blog, “lie back and think of England” sex is rape too.. it makes my skin crawl to think that it’s a normal part of many women’s lives.. that men have some idiotic right to use a woman’s body like an object, because he has neeeeds. ugh

19. mechantechatonne - November 2, 2011

I definitely think you’re right about the reason women don’t have equal pay. Why the hell would a woman spend so much of her time being disrespected by nigel and making nigel babies when she makes just as much money as he does? If she doesn’t have any kids, she would have no particular reason to have him or his money around. They wouldn’t have to pay the fuckability tax either, because they make enough that they don’t have to spend their money getting tarted up for nigel appreciation stimulus funds. Taking that into account, if men and women made equal money women would actually have more money and better stuff.

Not to mention guys have quite a tendency to waste income anyway. I’ve yet to go to a house populated solely with males and find sufficient grocery. They just eat out because they don’t have the life skills necessary to cook. I’ve even known guys that buy new clothing sometimes in lieu of doing laundry. And of course the money that men spend on sports, beer and video games has to factor as well.

20. developing - November 2, 2011


Sorry this is slightly off topic but just wanted to make sure you’d seen this that appeared today on a mainstream Australian online opinion website (I think run by News Ltd?):


FCM - November 2, 2011

thanks developing. LOL heres her “attempt to contact us through the site”:

Tory Shepherd shepherdt@thepunch.com.au via wordpress.com to me

show details Nov 1 (2 days ago)

Name: Tory Shepherd
Email: shepherdt@thepunch.com.au
Message: Hi there – I want to have a chat with someone about the site and the issues, please!


0421 697 303

Time: Tuesday November 1, 2011 at 7:23 am

handmaiden of the patriarchy. look it up.

FCM - November 2, 2011

my favorite part was where she references “the issues.” what issues? LOL i dont have any issues, sorry. what she obviously meant (although she was too lazy to tap it out) was that someone, somewhere has an issue WITH ME. how is that my concern, again? and what does she want to discuss? what a joke. but thanks for the free publicity? i guess?

21. The Masked Lily - November 2, 2011

oh god. the comments on that ~*article*~ are outright disturbing, and only ONE commenter seemed to even TRY to understand why we oppose mandatory PIV.

so let’s see; according to the article & comments we’re
-need to have PIV/sex with men, to be “fixed”
-postmodern navel-gazers (LOL, us? really?)
-an elaborate hoax
-baby killers
-pathological victims


wow, handmaiden of the patriarchy indeed! congratulations, miss pivster, you’ll get your pat on the head from the men. stay blind to the suffering of women and children.

and funny how even the name Dworkin gets everyone worked up in a froth. “oh no, she didn’t like porn! we’ve never read anything by her, but why would we take a ~*frigid*~ woman seriously?”

FCM - November 2, 2011

LOL thanks for taking that down lily. thats a lot of nasty adjectives right there! how mean are they?

22. The Masked Lily - November 3, 2011

No problem, it really bothers me that she would single you out like this, too. Well, there’s no such thing as bad press, right?Maybe some women will have a moment of epiphany where they make the connection between mandatory heterosexuality, PIV, and danger. Maybe the radfem hub will gain a follower or two in the process. The misogynist men posting on that article already hated us, anyway. Sending good vibes your way. :))


23. cherryblossomlife - November 3, 2011

Oh, that is *so* not the done thing.
Whatever you think of a woman’s point of view, you don’t try and get in with her through the back door, with a faux-friendly mail, smarmying up to her to get information, with the premeditated intent of stabbing her in the back.
That’s why some days I’m glad I don’t have any of these Important Handmaiden of the Patriarchy Jobs that teh menz create for us.

FCM - November 5, 2011

thanks. 🙂

24. Yisheng Qingwa - December 13, 2011

‘Yes, we have to take advantage of this. It is going to work out well for women, I think.’

YES, cherryblossomlife, this. I think you’re right. I want to discuss that more- a lot more.

Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: