PORN AND ANTI GLOBALIZATION
Grammatoncleric | 03.09.2006 20:40 | Globalisation
Hello,
I was looking at www.hustlingtheleft.com and at the top of the site it has a banner with the description ‘ what 56 billion dollar industry is ignored by globalization critics?’
The answer is the pornography industry.
I haven’t found much with a search in Indymedia either.
Most anti-globalization/corporations site similar reason for opposition to commercialization, the reason I‘m concerned with and wish to encourage debate on Indymedia; Commodification of sexuality.
Anti - Globalization protestors usually believe that to commodity aspects of our humanity like; socialization/ relationships/intimacy, like corporations try to do in countless advertisements is wrong. I’m sure most contributors to this movement probably agree with that sentiment.
Does the same apply to pornography? A tricky one for the people of the left I’m guessing.
Not wanting to be seen ’siding’ with the anti-porn ’religious’, maybe people will side with the ’people vs. Larry Flynt movie’?
Not wanting to be seen as being ’anti-sex’, maybe people will be lassiez-faire in regards to porn.
Not believing there is anything wrong with porn, maybe people will say ’each to their own’.
Being porn consumers maybe your going to reply; Heck No!
Does the pornography industry deserve the protests, articles, analytical documentaries, and boycott’s that other ’products’, and corporations currently receive?
Before I go ahead I’ll introduce myself a bit.
I’m a 22 year old, black male. Girlfriend. Interested in life. Former pornography addict (still get the urges).
In this article I’m referring to the heterosexual/lesbian softcore/hardcore pornography found on late night cable television, and on the internet. I will also describe some pornography to give evidence for my argument, and to acquaint people unfamiliar with pornography with what I’m describing.
If you are familiar with anti-pornography articles please forgive me if this seems like I’m plagiarizing, I thought I’d try to re-present the arguments for Indy media - it annoys me when people simply link to websites without articles.
DOES PORNOGRAPHY EXPLOIT WOMEN?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
When I was in the midst of my addiction that was a common question I used to come across in my head.
I used to see the women as using their sexuality in order to get money from men, or see them as willing participants and genuinely enjoying what they did.
I questioned that when I began to watch behind the scene’s porn shows. One shown on channel 4 a few years ago involving a single mum from the UK going to the US and being talked into acts she refused to engage in before she went over there. In a final scene she met Max Hardcore a porn director/actor who literally beats, humiliates, and abuses women, he is notorious for shoving his penis so violently into a women’s mouth that they vomit. In the scene he shoved his penis down the throat of the women (who had heard of his reputation but did it for the money), he then held her in place so she couldn’t breath. She ran off crying and said she didn’t want to do it, she was extremely upset but Max pressured her (she had father issues which Max’s pressuring behaviour mirrored) into agreeing. At which point the documentary makers became so concerned for the lady that they stepped in and refused to allow it to continue. (If anyone is thinking of doing a web search for max hardcore, I warn you, you are going to find images of nothing more than a person who has contempt for female sexuality.)
Was she exploited? The documentary showed me that the actresses may not like what they are doing as much as I thought they did, but I still liked to watch it.
I didn’t realize until looking back that my pornography tastes had slowly (since 13) gone from admiring women’s bodies, to wanting to see them being humiliated. Thankfully I never got as far as viewing Max hardcore films, not because I didn’t want to, but because I knew psychologically I’d ‘go to a bad place’.
Does it exploit? I now have to come to the view yes.
I think it commodifies women’s sexuality and physiology. The description’s of genre’s for myself to choose from on porn site’s include; teen, tits, ass, anal, oral, asian, ebony, interracial, A2M (ass to mouth), gang bang, group, lesbian, and many more. Women, and sexual acts are categorized for the ease of consumption, like in a supermarket. If you’ve ever seen clips of porn expo shows you’ll see women displaying their bodies like products, and
In Gonzo pornography, which is a very popular form of pornography on the internet (see bang bus.com), women are frequently described as… cum-drinking whores, sluts, dirty bitches, cock-suckers, and nasty cunts.
What is the most popular porn? Amongst my friends growing up, our pornography and sexual tastes became increasingly attracted towards ’dominating’ women. We wanted them in a positions, and scenario’s, where they are vessels for our pleasure. We wanted to hear women call themselves, and be called; sluts, bitches, whores, cunts. We wanted to watch women ’owned’ via the ‘degrading’ act of anal sex and then having them perform oral sex to ejaculation (ass to mouth/A2M). We wanted to see a ‘dirty white whore gangbanged by big black dicks’, we wanted to see female face’s ejaculated on, we wanted them to display their bodies on camera for our inspection. Women were no more than meat, and objects of contempt to us. We loved to see them being dominated sexually by the men, they were tits, ass, and a pretty face to us. I don‘t believe we were the exception, judging by the seemingly infinite sites, channels, and movies that catered to our tastes.
Arguments I came across by people who had a pro or lassiez-faire view towards porn was that the women are fooling men into believing they have the power but in reality they are using their sexuality to gain money.
A quick argument to that is to look at how the women are described and probably viewed by millions of people and tell me they think money is an adequate substitute. Or if they believe the women would have that power if they didn’t undergo surgery, or aged? They have power as long as they cater to largely misogynistic fantasies.
What effect does allowing others to call you derogatory names, and doing A2M (after anal sex having the women perform oral sex to ejaculation), Bukkake (having multiple men ejaculate onto you), and gang bangs, in order to attain empowerment have on your psyche.
Do you think that someone who has genuine self-love, and respect for themselves would desire to be treated that way?
In the darker side of porn (that Dr Sharon Mitchell AIM founder admits is becoming more mainstream) being pissed on, beaten, bound and gagged, spat on, simulated rape, and being throat-f@#@ed to gagging and vomitting are trademark features. Does that sound like something psychologically healthy people subject themselves to for money?
What kind of message is being internalized by the assertion of the argument, ’ you have power as long as your are willing to use sell your body and dignity to be used for sexual humiliation, to arouse men?
If you are in doubt that female sexuality is objectified, and comodified by pornography, I would like you do web searches for websites and pay attention to how women are described, and how their bodies are displayed to us.
If you disagree please state your reasons why. May I suggest viewing popular gonzo porn producers bangbros.com. Please view sites for yourself, my aim is to provoke discussion.
From what I can gather - and upon reflection - the aim of the sex acts was to leave the women looking/feeling exhausted, used, and dominated. I began to reflect on the significance of the almost gonzo trademark of women’s faces being ejaculated onto, why is that the climax (no pun intended) of the film, why not kissing, and caressing her afterwards, and telling her how much you love her?
Is it healthy to disassociate intimacy from being naked infront of another person, penetrating and allowing yourself to be pentrated?
A common question one psychologist asks sex addicted males is, ‘would you want your daughter, or wife to be in porn?’ I think you can guess the reply.
Biting beaver (a blogger) stated that the 10% dominate the porn debate. The 10% are the happy hookers (I deeply question if they are happy), the one’s who say they enjoy their lives, and are happy with themselves. The 90% who undergo severe psychological and emotional trauma are ignored, whilst Hugh Hefner is an ‘Icon’.
DOES PORNOGRAPHY HAVE ANY NEGATIVE EFFECTS ON CONSUMERS?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This following excerpt from a producers description of a porn gonzo movie; something that my porn-loving male social circle would find a definitely find a turn on;
‘Chicks being ass-f+@#*d till their sphincters are pink, puffy and totally blown out. Adult diapers just might be in store for these whores when their work is done.’
I am interested in what emotions/values you believe are mixed into the following, I assure you these description’s are from sites/movies that are very popular;
‘…in search for every girl's inner slut. We have driven all over the country, and over the past year, all over the world. We have returned with footage that your brain will not want to accept, but will have to. It is undeniable. It is debauchery. It is human behaviour brought to frightening lows…’
‘We find a brand new hottie every week, plow her tight ass and shoot a thick creamy load all over her face. Who cares if it hurts, none of our girls get away without getting their backdoor plundered.’
There have been many studies (debated ,as almost all are, but I’m inclined to agree, I know I developed an aggressive, though consenting, sexuality). Negative effects were;
increased the acceptance of rape myths
increased male aggression toward females
decreased sensitivity to the crime of rape
predisposed willingness to rape
increased the acceptance of violence against women
decreased support for women’s rights
alter perceptions of “common” sexual behavior
decreased sexual satisfaction with self and partner
I recall being horrified whilst reading a book about the psychology of rapists when they outlined rape scenarios. I was partly horrified because a lot of them where extremely similar to pornography I had viewed. It wasn’t obscure pornography, it was the online erotic literature I read, the gonzo scenarios, the ’girl reluctant at first but then begs for it’ scenes, all viewed on popular sites, and all freely available and accessible to minors. I will also admit that I found it difficult controlling a part of me that wanted to sexualize some of the scenario’s I read in the book. I wouldn’t have written that but a ‘nice’ leftist friend of mine who I was recently discussing this with, bowed his head and agreed he had the same problem, we have both have lived through porn addiction in our teens.
If you put the mute button on, it would be difficult to separate some porn with rape, there is a site and video series that has extremely aggressive throat-f@#&ing, I have to call it that because it isn‘t oral sex. Women are teary eyed with smeared make up, with the sound off I’m pretty sure that, and other gonzo scenario based porn, would take on more sinister tones. If you‘ve ever been exposed to max hardcore you know what I‘m talking about. DO NOT LET YOUR CHILD HAVE THE NET ALONE IN THEIR ROOM!
In my pre/early porn exposure to softcore my sexual fantasies were caring and appreciative in the beginning. However once exposed to hardcore, I began increasingly to enjoy domineering, and aggressive pornography. I would often fantasize about women begin subjected (the feeling was definitely them being subjected) to whatever sexual act I wanted to do to them, they of course would like being made to feel dominated, and loved being ‘used‘ by me for my sexual pleasure. I would like the sites that appealed to my desire to see women being ‘used’ by men for sexual pleasure like meat.
I had my own insecurities that fuelled my desire to view pornography, common ones like; low self-esteem, feeling sexually inadequate, loneliness, anger, etc. Pornography definitely catered part of me that wanted to feel 'powerful'. Just like fantasies of beating up people who had made me feel 'weak', my pornographic\taste were about dominating women to cover up feelings of weakness.
Talking to my social circle, I am not alone when it comes to the effects porn had on my sexual fantasies.
PORNOGRAPHY AND THE LEFT
-------------------------------------------------
I find the left (feminism aside) pretty quiet on the pornography industry, and it‘s effects on society. In Indymedia uk’s archives it is easy to find articles denouncing corporation’s attempts at shaping culture for profit, and the negative effects of their product’s on society.
Why is pornography not included in the analysis?
Why is the Playboy logo, not viewed in the same way as the Coca-cola?
A question to begin; hopefully a productive discussion;
Is pornography a expression of sexual liberation? Or does it commodify sexuality for profit?
########################################################
http://www.oneangrygirl.net/antiporn.html
www.hustlingtheleft.com
www.bitingbeaver.blogspot.com
http://www.csun.edu/%7Epsy453/porno_y.htm
I was looking at www.hustlingtheleft.com and at the top of the site it has a banner with the description ‘ what 56 billion dollar industry is ignored by globalization critics?’
The answer is the pornography industry.
I haven’t found much with a search in Indymedia either.
Most anti-globalization/corporations site similar reason for opposition to commercialization, the reason I‘m concerned with and wish to encourage debate on Indymedia; Commodification of sexuality.
Anti - Globalization protestors usually believe that to commodity aspects of our humanity like; socialization/ relationships/intimacy, like corporations try to do in countless advertisements is wrong. I’m sure most contributors to this movement probably agree with that sentiment.
Does the same apply to pornography? A tricky one for the people of the left I’m guessing.
Not wanting to be seen ’siding’ with the anti-porn ’religious’, maybe people will side with the ’people vs. Larry Flynt movie’?
Not wanting to be seen as being ’anti-sex’, maybe people will be lassiez-faire in regards to porn.
Not believing there is anything wrong with porn, maybe people will say ’each to their own’.
Being porn consumers maybe your going to reply; Heck No!
Does the pornography industry deserve the protests, articles, analytical documentaries, and boycott’s that other ’products’, and corporations currently receive?
Before I go ahead I’ll introduce myself a bit.
I’m a 22 year old, black male. Girlfriend. Interested in life. Former pornography addict (still get the urges).
In this article I’m referring to the heterosexual/lesbian softcore/hardcore pornography found on late night cable television, and on the internet. I will also describe some pornography to give evidence for my argument, and to acquaint people unfamiliar with pornography with what I’m describing.
If you are familiar with anti-pornography articles please forgive me if this seems like I’m plagiarizing, I thought I’d try to re-present the arguments for Indy media - it annoys me when people simply link to websites without articles.
DOES PORNOGRAPHY EXPLOIT WOMEN?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
When I was in the midst of my addiction that was a common question I used to come across in my head.
I used to see the women as using their sexuality in order to get money from men, or see them as willing participants and genuinely enjoying what they did.
I questioned that when I began to watch behind the scene’s porn shows. One shown on channel 4 a few years ago involving a single mum from the UK going to the US and being talked into acts she refused to engage in before she went over there. In a final scene she met Max Hardcore a porn director/actor who literally beats, humiliates, and abuses women, he is notorious for shoving his penis so violently into a women’s mouth that they vomit. In the scene he shoved his penis down the throat of the women (who had heard of his reputation but did it for the money), he then held her in place so she couldn’t breath. She ran off crying and said she didn’t want to do it, she was extremely upset but Max pressured her (she had father issues which Max’s pressuring behaviour mirrored) into agreeing. At which point the documentary makers became so concerned for the lady that they stepped in and refused to allow it to continue. (If anyone is thinking of doing a web search for max hardcore, I warn you, you are going to find images of nothing more than a person who has contempt for female sexuality.)
Was she exploited? The documentary showed me that the actresses may not like what they are doing as much as I thought they did, but I still liked to watch it.
I didn’t realize until looking back that my pornography tastes had slowly (since 13) gone from admiring women’s bodies, to wanting to see them being humiliated. Thankfully I never got as far as viewing Max hardcore films, not because I didn’t want to, but because I knew psychologically I’d ‘go to a bad place’.
Does it exploit? I now have to come to the view yes.
I think it commodifies women’s sexuality and physiology. The description’s of genre’s for myself to choose from on porn site’s include; teen, tits, ass, anal, oral, asian, ebony, interracial, A2M (ass to mouth), gang bang, group, lesbian, and many more. Women, and sexual acts are categorized for the ease of consumption, like in a supermarket. If you’ve ever seen clips of porn expo shows you’ll see women displaying their bodies like products, and
In Gonzo pornography, which is a very popular form of pornography on the internet (see bang bus.com), women are frequently described as… cum-drinking whores, sluts, dirty bitches, cock-suckers, and nasty cunts.
What is the most popular porn? Amongst my friends growing up, our pornography and sexual tastes became increasingly attracted towards ’dominating’ women. We wanted them in a positions, and scenario’s, where they are vessels for our pleasure. We wanted to hear women call themselves, and be called; sluts, bitches, whores, cunts. We wanted to watch women ’owned’ via the ‘degrading’ act of anal sex and then having them perform oral sex to ejaculation (ass to mouth/A2M). We wanted to see a ‘dirty white whore gangbanged by big black dicks’, we wanted to see female face’s ejaculated on, we wanted them to display their bodies on camera for our inspection. Women were no more than meat, and objects of contempt to us. We loved to see them being dominated sexually by the men, they were tits, ass, and a pretty face to us. I don‘t believe we were the exception, judging by the seemingly infinite sites, channels, and movies that catered to our tastes.
Arguments I came across by people who had a pro or lassiez-faire view towards porn was that the women are fooling men into believing they have the power but in reality they are using their sexuality to gain money.
A quick argument to that is to look at how the women are described and probably viewed by millions of people and tell me they think money is an adequate substitute. Or if they believe the women would have that power if they didn’t undergo surgery, or aged? They have power as long as they cater to largely misogynistic fantasies.
What effect does allowing others to call you derogatory names, and doing A2M (after anal sex having the women perform oral sex to ejaculation), Bukkake (having multiple men ejaculate onto you), and gang bangs, in order to attain empowerment have on your psyche.
Do you think that someone who has genuine self-love, and respect for themselves would desire to be treated that way?
In the darker side of porn (that Dr Sharon Mitchell AIM founder admits is becoming more mainstream) being pissed on, beaten, bound and gagged, spat on, simulated rape, and being throat-f@#@ed to gagging and vomitting are trademark features. Does that sound like something psychologically healthy people subject themselves to for money?
What kind of message is being internalized by the assertion of the argument, ’ you have power as long as your are willing to use sell your body and dignity to be used for sexual humiliation, to arouse men?
If you are in doubt that female sexuality is objectified, and comodified by pornography, I would like you do web searches for websites and pay attention to how women are described, and how their bodies are displayed to us.
If you disagree please state your reasons why. May I suggest viewing popular gonzo porn producers bangbros.com. Please view sites for yourself, my aim is to provoke discussion.
From what I can gather - and upon reflection - the aim of the sex acts was to leave the women looking/feeling exhausted, used, and dominated. I began to reflect on the significance of the almost gonzo trademark of women’s faces being ejaculated onto, why is that the climax (no pun intended) of the film, why not kissing, and caressing her afterwards, and telling her how much you love her?
Is it healthy to disassociate intimacy from being naked infront of another person, penetrating and allowing yourself to be pentrated?
A common question one psychologist asks sex addicted males is, ‘would you want your daughter, or wife to be in porn?’ I think you can guess the reply.
Biting beaver (a blogger) stated that the 10% dominate the porn debate. The 10% are the happy hookers (I deeply question if they are happy), the one’s who say they enjoy their lives, and are happy with themselves. The 90% who undergo severe psychological and emotional trauma are ignored, whilst Hugh Hefner is an ‘Icon’.
DOES PORNOGRAPHY HAVE ANY NEGATIVE EFFECTS ON CONSUMERS?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This following excerpt from a producers description of a porn gonzo movie; something that my porn-loving male social circle would find a definitely find a turn on;
‘Chicks being ass-f+@#*d till their sphincters are pink, puffy and totally blown out. Adult diapers just might be in store for these whores when their work is done.’
I am interested in what emotions/values you believe are mixed into the following, I assure you these description’s are from sites/movies that are very popular;
‘…in search for every girl's inner slut. We have driven all over the country, and over the past year, all over the world. We have returned with footage that your brain will not want to accept, but will have to. It is undeniable. It is debauchery. It is human behaviour brought to frightening lows…’
‘We find a brand new hottie every week, plow her tight ass and shoot a thick creamy load all over her face. Who cares if it hurts, none of our girls get away without getting their backdoor plundered.’
There have been many studies (debated ,as almost all are, but I’m inclined to agree, I know I developed an aggressive, though consenting, sexuality). Negative effects were;
increased the acceptance of rape myths
increased male aggression toward females
decreased sensitivity to the crime of rape
predisposed willingness to rape
increased the acceptance of violence against women
decreased support for women’s rights
alter perceptions of “common” sexual behavior
decreased sexual satisfaction with self and partner
I recall being horrified whilst reading a book about the psychology of rapists when they outlined rape scenarios. I was partly horrified because a lot of them where extremely similar to pornography I had viewed. It wasn’t obscure pornography, it was the online erotic literature I read, the gonzo scenarios, the ’girl reluctant at first but then begs for it’ scenes, all viewed on popular sites, and all freely available and accessible to minors. I will also admit that I found it difficult controlling a part of me that wanted to sexualize some of the scenario’s I read in the book. I wouldn’t have written that but a ‘nice’ leftist friend of mine who I was recently discussing this with, bowed his head and agreed he had the same problem, we have both have lived through porn addiction in our teens.
If you put the mute button on, it would be difficult to separate some porn with rape, there is a site and video series that has extremely aggressive throat-f@#&ing, I have to call it that because it isn‘t oral sex. Women are teary eyed with smeared make up, with the sound off I’m pretty sure that, and other gonzo scenario based porn, would take on more sinister tones. If you‘ve ever been exposed to max hardcore you know what I‘m talking about. DO NOT LET YOUR CHILD HAVE THE NET ALONE IN THEIR ROOM!
In my pre/early porn exposure to softcore my sexual fantasies were caring and appreciative in the beginning. However once exposed to hardcore, I began increasingly to enjoy domineering, and aggressive pornography. I would often fantasize about women begin subjected (the feeling was definitely them being subjected) to whatever sexual act I wanted to do to them, they of course would like being made to feel dominated, and loved being ‘used‘ by me for my sexual pleasure. I would like the sites that appealed to my desire to see women being ‘used’ by men for sexual pleasure like meat.
I had my own insecurities that fuelled my desire to view pornography, common ones like; low self-esteem, feeling sexually inadequate, loneliness, anger, etc. Pornography definitely catered part of me that wanted to feel 'powerful'. Just like fantasies of beating up people who had made me feel 'weak', my pornographic\taste were about dominating women to cover up feelings of weakness.
Talking to my social circle, I am not alone when it comes to the effects porn had on my sexual fantasies.
PORNOGRAPHY AND THE LEFT
-------------------------------------------------
I find the left (feminism aside) pretty quiet on the pornography industry, and it‘s effects on society. In Indymedia uk’s archives it is easy to find articles denouncing corporation’s attempts at shaping culture for profit, and the negative effects of their product’s on society.
Why is pornography not included in the analysis?
Why is the Playboy logo, not viewed in the same way as the Coca-cola?
A question to begin; hopefully a productive discussion;
Is pornography a expression of sexual liberation? Or does it commodify sexuality for profit?
########################################################
http://www.oneangrygirl.net/antiporn.html www.hustlingtheleft.com
www.bitingbeaver.blogspot.com
http://www.csun.edu/%7Epsy453/porno_y.htm
Grammatoncleric
Homepage:
http://www.amnesty.org.uk/content.asp?CategoryID=771
Comments
Hide the following 10 comments
YOU WERE WARNED- here comes Blair's war on BDSM
03.09.2006 23:29
Hitler, as we all know, persecuted homosexuals. Except, of course, nothing could be further from the truth. Many of Hitler's inner circle were gay, and this fact didn't bother Hitler in the slightest (why should he have cared what flavour his psychopath thugs came in?). Hitler's use of sexual persecution was not based on any ideology held by the monster himself, but purely a mean's to an end.
Hitler's thugs sent some homosexuals to the deathcamps just as Blair's scumbag monster 'Grammatoncleric' would happily do to those with a consensual BDSM sexual preference. Blair needs this act to help continue to spread FEAR and GUILT, as well as to give state thugs an excuse to 'take-out' enemies of the state, or destroy their lives, and search their computers.
The nazis said "if you are gay, we are coming for you" and Blair and his New Reich supporters say "if you are BDSM flavoured, we are coming for you". Different sexuality, same motivation.
This state-created, dull-witted article, and others like it, will be repeated more and more across the coming days and months in an attempt to prevent or reduce the likelyhood of those that know that they SHOULD oppose Blair's new laws from standing up and voicing their objections.
At no time in British history has it been a criminal offence for an adult to simply possess an image of other consenting adults carrying out acts of sexuality of interest to that particular group. 'Grammatoncleric' knows that many lines must be crossed if Blair is to get his death camps in the UK, just as Hitler knew that he had to cross many lines on the way to HIS death camps.
'1984' told of a society where what you believed and what you thought was the possession of the state. 'Grammatoncleric' (whose ironic name is carefully chosen as an act of psychological warfare) tells you all that you should welcome the evils of '1984' into your lives, and the lives of all that live around you.
You may find it odd that if 'Grammatoncleric' cared about Humans at all (like nazi scum ever care about anyone other than themselves), this psuedo individual would be all over the Lebanon Holocaust. But then again, you may take it as read that ANYONE suggesting loudly in a public forum that you should NOT looks at the crimes of the mass murdering monster Blair, is an agent of Blair.
One interesting fact- when the monster Blair was a school-boy, he was subject to sado-masochistic rape. This is interesting, since sado-masochistic rape (sometime called school corporal punishment) had been made illegal in most of Europe during the early 20th century BECAUSE researchers into Human sexuality had discovered that adult Human interest in BDSM was commonplace, and criminal adult Humans, therefore, frequently took advantage of punishment regimes at schools to rape (which is the correct way to describe the beating given to children for the sexual gratification of the teacher) the children. With this knowledge, our far smarter European neighbours banned school CP many many decades before our government (against its will) was forced to.
Anyway, Blair doesn't, in person, give a damn about BDSM. Many of his inner circle (like I need to remind you) are deeply into this form of sexuality. However, as a stick to beat us all, Blair will make as many aspects of BDSM as possible illegal, and then use the powers given to his uniformed thugs to selectively apply the new laws in a way identical to those used by the nazis over homosexuality.
In Blair's future world YOU will not consent. Instead, a sick twisted racist uniformed thug, with the blood of his latest muslim victim still fresh on his knuckles, will tell you exactly what you are allowed to think or do in your own 'bedroom'.
It is interesting that Blair's thug 'Grammatoncleric' suggests that you look at the propaganda from Blair's front, Amnesty International. Amnesty Internation was directly responsible for the deaths of more than a million innocent Humans in Iraq when it co-published ads promoting the carefully constructed lie about Iraq forces in Kuwait throwing babies out of incubators.
Of course, Blair, the US and Israel have frequently attacked hospitals, ambulances, and medical staff and patients in acts of the most despicable and depraved violence, without Amnesty International once taking out an ad to condemn these REAL acts of utter evil. AI exists for one reason alone- namely to put out propaganda saying that the victim is as much to blame as the attacker, when the attacker is Israel, the US or Blair.
Indeed, Blair's BLACK PROPAGANDA post by 'Grammatoncleric' does you all a favour, for anything pushed by the article, or linked by the article, defines exactly the tactics to be used by Blair in the immediate future.
REMEMBER, Blair's WW3 is nearly here, beginning with the coming genocide of Iran. Blair needs to shape the minds of a nation destined to be at the centre of his web of world wide devastation. While issues of adult human sexuality many seem insignificant as part of this game, do yourself a favour and remind yourself that the history of the nazis prove that the very opposite is true.
GUILT, FEAR, AND THE TOOL OF ARBITARY SEARCH, SEIZURE AND ARREST USING THE NEW POWERS GIVEN TO BLAIR'S UNIFORMED THUGS, USING THE EXCUSE OF BDSM FETISH BETWEEN CONSENTING ADULTS.
twilight
An interesting article
04.09.2006 06:04
Caz
liberation repackaged and resold for profit
04.09.2006 11:07
Both are true which explains your confusion.
The problem with the porn business is the business. Take the businesss out of it and the porn itself is at worst a bit sad and perhaps even life-enhancing. The truth of any argument is tested at the extremes, so for instance few people would condemn a married person for privately possessing a picture of their spouse in a state of undress, while few in the porn business would defend 'snuff movies'. The trouble is in context of a violent society - like ours - physical and economic violence is used to coerce vunerable people to acts they themselves disapprove of. There are job-ads for lapdancers in JobCentres now - apply for it or lose your benefits, which makes Blair a pimp in my opinion, though it's not his worst fault (he is the ultimate British child-murderer). In the context of the 'massacre of the sexes' - the wholesale slaughter and exploitation of females by males - then feminist rejection of porn becomes understandable. Male addiction to porn is simply Pavlovian behaviour - the actual addiction is to masturbation and the porn itself is simply the bell associated with orgasm. Most men could equally be trained to lust after even inanimate objects. The proof of this is found on any nudist beach as men there don't reflexively jerk off constantly. In an uptight society - like ours - where exposure of bodies are outlawed in most situations, and where people can't get the sexual contact that they desire any other way, porn actually has some beneficial aspects and it is arguable that porn may bring as many benefits as costs to humanity. I'd rather someone jerked off to a magazine rather than stalking the streets looking for someone to rape. 'Follow the money' though and you'll find damn few female 'porn-magnates', and that is the 'root of all evil' in any business - behind every successful woman you'll find men taking 90% of the profits.
Similarly the major problem with prostitution is the violence directed to prostitutes from pimps and johns, and to criminalise the prostitues themselves is to criminalise the victims rather than the perpetrators of that violence, it is to legalise the silly myth that men are victims of female sexuality.
don't ask me why i'm crying
i'm not going to tell you what's wrong
i'm just gonna sit on your lap
for five dollars a song
i want you to pay me for my beauty
i think it's only right
'cause i have been paying for it
all of my life
i'm gonna take the money i make
and i'm gonna go away...
we barely have time to react in this world
let alone rehearse
and i don't think i'm better than you
but i don't think that i'm worse
women learn to be women
and men learn to be men
and i don't blame it all on you
but i don't want to be your friend
i'm gonna take the money i make
and i'm gonna go away...
i was eleven years old
he was as old as my dad
and he took something from me
i didn't even know that i had
so don't tell me about decency
don't tell me about pride
just give me something for my trouble
'cause this time, it's not a free ride
Danny
Porno no no....
04.09.2006 11:44
So here's what we need-
1. The state and society need to take more seriously issues of sexual exploitation of women and how it will be prevented by the law and justice (just as they are now taking seriously that of children, and no, I dont mean vigilantes). We've got the international treaties (CEDAW), we just need to honor them. INTERPOL are getting organised about UK paedophiles abusing children abroad, the UK police are raiding those who put their credit card details on child porn sites, now what about more attention and more sensitivity to the trafficking of women? What about busting sites who claim to show rape or snuff? It will be a VERY LARGE task, and often with unclear boundaries, but since it involves human rights and often sexual violence it has got to be worth the effort.
Its the same issues which stopped the police responding to domestic violence for so long- the fear of intruding into the 'private realm'. But they managed it there, and they are managing it with forced marriage, so they can manage it with violent porno and foreced sex work too.
2. A cultural debate. At the moment, the police and social tolerance of violent porn sends a message to everyone that these matters are out of the political realm, and that women and men have to navigate issues of desire, power, dignity alone. A debate would surely be more healthy. Its not only men who have desires that are hard to manage.
How do we feel about having foreign sex workers, who are quite possibly trafficked, in our cities? Do we find it acceptable to visit brothels? What about when on holiday, does it count then? Do we give a sh*t or not who were f*cking or watching being f*cked?
What about having an inbox full of offers of rape porn when you turn on your computer?
In any case, what with all the backstepping of popular feminism in case men think we're gay and won't go out with us, a lot of issues are being allowed to slide, and what with the continuing explosion of capitalism, and the internet, pornography is definately getting,out of control.
It hard with all the constant media bombardment just to step back and say NO WAY, THIS IS RIDICULOUS! but it is definately getting to that stage.
PS What about more fair trade porn? Fine, it wont stop the rest of the porn, but it'll give those of us who dont actually enjoy other peoples' pain something good to look at!
Alexi
e-mail:
anotheraccount@hotmail.com
Fair-trade porn
04.09.2006 13:37
Just hang around hippies more and you'll soon be begging them to keep their clothes on.
Sorry to joke about such a serious subject but to discuss pornography you really have to define what it is first.
Bill Hicks:
That's the problem with this country, one of the many, but this whole issue of sexuality and pornography, which I don't understand what pornography is, I really don't. To me, pornography is, you know, spending all your money and not educating the people in America, and spending it instead on weapons, that's pornographic to me, that's totally filthy, and etc, etc, down the line, you all in your fucking hearts know the goddam arguments, okay, great. But no one knows what pornography is. Supreme Court says pornography is anything without artistic merit that causes sexual thought, that's their definition, essentially. No artistic merit, causes sexual thought. Hmm. Sounds like... every commercial on television, doesn't it? You know, when I see those two twins on that Doublemint commercial - I'm not thinking of gum. I am thinking of chewing, maybe that's the connection they're trying to make. What? You've all seen that Busch beer commercial, where the girl in the short hot-pants opens the beer bottle on her belt buckle, leaves it there, and it foams over her hand and over the bottle and the voice over goes, "Get yourself a BUSCH." Hmm. You know what that looks like, nah, no way. I'll tell you the commercial they'd like to do, if they could, and I guarantee you, if they could, they'd do this, right here. Here's the woman's face, beautiful. Camera pulls back, naked breasts. Camera pulls back, she's totally naked. Legs apart. Two fingers, right here, and it just says, "Drink Coke." Now I don't know the connection here, but goddamn if Coke isn't on my shopping list that week. "Dr. Pepper." "Snickers, satisfying." Damned if I'm not buying these products! My teeth are rotting out of my head, I'm glued to the television, I'm as big as a fucking couch. "More Snickers, more Coke!" That's what I find ironic, too, is that people who are against these things that cause sexual thought are generally fundamentalist Christians, who also believe you should be fruitful and multiply. Boy, they walk a tight rope every day, don't they? "How do we be fruitful and multiply and not think about it?" "We could sing hymns during it." (sings) "One stroke at a time, sweet Jesus. One stroke at a time, sweet Lord." I did that joke in Alabama in Fife and these three rednecks met me after the show. "Hey buddy, come here, Mr Funnyman, come here. Hey buddy, we're Christians we don't like what you said". "So then forgive me". Later as I was hanging from the tree...
ChomskyWithDickJokes
reply to twilight, and others.
04.09.2006 18:00
As for calling me a Nazis, it is argument tactic called psychologizing and scaring away anyone who may oppose pornography, please people do not allow them (people like twilight) to scare you from your own analysis.
Bitingbeaver.blogspot.com had the same ordeal when presenting her arguments which were far better presented than mine. She warned others that when you challenge the ethics of the pornography industry that coutless men enjoy watching for pleasure you are going to upset people who have a vested interest in being 'good' people.
Is pornography damaging from personal experience, looking at information provided by people like Stan Goff and Robert Jensen, and reading the transcript of one of my favourite pornstars who broke down crying (belladonna).
My sign on name is a result of loving the movie Equilibrium, and the main character who frees people from oppression. I always like the name and use it whenever I can. I cannot
prove i'm not working for the government (does everyone who disagrees with 'work for blair?', by indymedias nature it is anonymous, unless you live near cheltenham?
Please read the links and make an informed decision, and why is the pornography industry given free reign without crticism from anti-globalization commentators like other international industries are? (as presented on www.hustlingtheleft.com)
To the men, please put your sexual pleasure aside, and think about the psyche of the women who is called a 'whore', 'slut' and has 3 men ejaculate onto her face for money. Doesn't it deserve the same codemnation that other industries received for commodifying social interaction's that Gap advertisments, and Beer commercials receive?
I didn't expect this kind of reaction, Stan Goff recieved the same though when he began to be a leftist against the porn industry. Why?
Dear Caz,
Stan Goff has had lengthy arguments with pro-porn activist Nina Hartley on that issue both sides present good points. Try to track it down if you can.
Dear Danny,
Studies have shown porn causes an increased aggression in sexuality/sexual fantasies. It also is almost archetypal that a serial killer is heavily into porn (I'm not making this up check yourself). Porn addiction is a relatively new phenomenon, apparently divorce lawyers are seeing that as a new powerful cause of reasons for divorce. Oprah recently had a few shows about the porn addiction.
Dear Alexi,
Thanks for your contribution I agree with you, a much bigger debate needs to take place. Check out oneangrygirl.net I really like her collection in anti-porn articles and viewpoints, one night reading the site thoroughly helped me to have a deep shift in viewing pornography.
Dear Chomsky with dick jokes,
Good point, I can identify it ostensively (bangbros) but not with an adequate written definition, sorry. I also do get pissed off when singers try to get me sexually aroused so I'll watch their video's and by their records, or models who have orgasms in showers to sell us shampoo.
I don't see how it shouldn't envoke the same outrage in the left, than creating a female 'ideal' and selling make up, boob jobs, botox to them in cosmoplitan and the like. Their seems to be (I think) a anything to do with sexuality is out of bounds for critique, because so much repression has taken place. Is selling/marketing sexuality for profit desrve silence in regards to condemnation by anti-globalization activists?
How quick are we to condemn the corporation's who's products/existence have result in aiding social harm, when the porn industry is notorious for abuse and drug taking. Please don't take my word for it look for interviews by Dr Sharon Mitchell former pornstar and provides healthcare to pornstars, and prostitutes she is very honest in the experiences of women in the porn industry, yet she isn't anti-porn herself.
#############################
Dear everyone,
please don't take my crappy article as the your only viewing of anti-porn literature/sites.
grammatoncleric
Homepage:
http://www.antiwar.com
Porn, exploitation, violence and sexuality
04.09.2006 22:09
1. Pornography is - as Danny has already alluded to - both a business as well as a series of graphic triggers, and before any serious discussion about porn can commence, I'd strongly recommend that we separate porn as a business from sexuality, arousal, and fantasy. Porn is the parallel market to Hollywood and romance novels: it is the marketing of fantasy. What is different about porn of course is that the fantasy being marketed here is solely concentrated on sexuality. This makes it an automatic target for controversy, largely because our western culture is replete with mixed messages about sexuality (our own and what we take as normative parameters). This is one of the reasons why advertisers have exploited this anxiety for so many decades with varying degrees of explicitness, and why it still works despite the significant contributions of feminsism and post-structuralism in deconstructing the pornographic image/discourse. To use a hackneyed example: while men know that it is a really low class dumbing down advertising trick to use a bikini-clad woman on a car's bonnet to sell a car, it is still used because it still works! What is triggered is something that some might call biological, or natural (whatever that is), but irrespective of what one calls it, the fact still remains is that the eye (male and female!) will be drawn to the bikini-clad model. Studies using the plethysmograph and retinal tracking on males will illustrate that both homo and heterosexual men will "scope" the female model, but the plethysmographic measures will differ as will the duration of attention given. Females (obviously, no plethysmograph!) will spend the same amount of time looking at the model, but usually for different reasons. The heterosexual male will however usually respond in terms of plethysmograph readings (unless his conditioning has pushed his arousal patterns in different directions). It is easy to slip into using language about biological or procreative conditioning here (for the male) or "mate competition" for the female, and I'll leave that to the scientists to fight over.
The point here though is that arousal to sexual stimuli is a trigger point that advertisers take advantage as do pornographers which is advertising (in the bikini mode sense) where what is "advertised" (and sold) is the "advert" itself! Adverts are stimuli triggers that are typically imagery and fantastical. Porn is exactly this as well. So we have two issues here then: the selling of stimulation (which is the "addiction" part) and the issue of arousal. The business side of things is the triggering of arousal, and what ends up happening gets quite messy because these two themes become quickly enmeshed.
2. Because the multi-billion dollar/euro/pound/yen business of pornography is a business designed completely around triggering arousal, everything is geared toward this: this includes a number of mythologies (e.g. women are sluts, easy, wanting it just as badly as you do, etc.) that are used in exactly the same reality constructing ways as the friendly and normalising attitudes of casino staff and even bar staff. If the reality constructing discourse were dropped, the "reality" configuration would be beset upon by other discourses that are also very powerful - e.g. the gambler's guilt, the porn consumer's shame, the boozer's promises to reform. However, many of these mythologies are woven into a sufficient layer of truth to make them increasingly believable - women are sexual beings, and who knows how the description, expression and experience of their own libidos might have been had men not acted like a bull in a china shop and enacted his dominance and controlling frenzy, limiting women to approved modes of expression? The feminist movement was great in being able to help women off-load centuries of oppression, and this led to many rejecting men and well as dominant (dominating) forms of masculinity. Many women reported feeling "liberated" - politically, libidinally, creatively, etc - as a result, even to the point where women began to explore their own eroticism (i.e. soft porn!). However, by and large, these dominating mythologies still persist and in persisting create a world - a parallel universe - where women are wanton sluts who can't get enough of YOUR (whatever one's particular "niche" is). The business is of course, that the pornographer can supply you with a seemingly unending diet of this mythology, with images for consumption.
3. By separating the business from the arousal, identifying the mythologies that support the business by appealing to the arousal, it helps to undo some of the messiness that porn debates get caught up in: arousal is fine, but the marketing of the arousal requires that somewhere along the line someone is getting taken advantage of for the entrepeneur to make a profit: no profit, no business! This is then, in theory at least, no different than the kids engaged in sweatshop work for Nike and other logo-branded consumerables; it is no different than the pig grown fat for the slaughter, or the produce grown and flown in from far away (different thematics of exploitation). In the case of porn (and this includes the sex industry generally) someone has to produce that which is sold - models are required to be photographed. The woman (in the typical case of porn) is the product: it is almost inevitable that she is going to be commodified - she has been converted into a commodity. Trouble is, it is not her as such, but rather the image she portrays ... the mythology she feeds into. She as a person is emptied of her personhood: her body doesn't count after a while because it is not her body per se either, but the "saucy bits" that becomes the prize. But, because this is an image, rather than a full genuine encounter with the other that is about negotiating relationships, the exploitation is built in from the start: just as a fan has a pornographic relationship (arousal fantasy) with a celebrity (image), so the consumer of porn has a pornographic relationship with the porn model's body parts (image). The arousal is to the image, NOT the person pictured, who will remain unknown to the consumer. Often, when any kind of bio is offered about the model it is usually twisted to reflect some or other sexualised re-telling. Most porn media won't even bother with bios or even plot lines: it is not about relationship, but it is the fantasy rapture of body parts.
4. This is where it starts getting tricky. The image is now open and available - there is a sense in which the model has come into the consumer's possession: her legs are opened for him, and her body is displayed for his eyes to consume, for him to become aroused to and to reach satiation (the Pavlovian associative reflex, as previously noted by another poster). The consumption of pornography is however, generally very unsatisfying: there is no relationship, just a picture/film/magazine and a used kleenex. For some men, masturbating to porn is done on the sly and is permeated with various degrees of anxiety (arousal) which, when combined with release, produces an extended associated pairing. Couple this with feelings of guilt, and one has a very powerful hormonal narcotic! Like a junkie, the come down feels worse than the pre-aroused state, arousal feels great and so the cycle is repeated until the association becomes such that it has been habituated. It is not too surprising then that for some men this association becomes so compelling that the fantasy is preferred to the reality, and some men will forego actually human sexual relations (with a wife or girlfriend) in favour of a fantasy encounter with a porno model. The porno model however gets extinguished rapidly, which drives the consumer to seek out newer images in order to recreate that arousal (a parallel issue happens with junkies: their tolerance increases, necessitating them to have larger doses to reach the same level of high as before). Wives and girlfriends become boring because the porn consumer is so familiar with their bodies and then of course there is all that stuff about human beings who don't strike the poses found in magazines, and don't do the things "she" does in the mag/film, etc. Again, a vicious circle of self-perpetuating reinforcement.
5. Finally, pornography does not cause sexual violence: what sex offenders (and serial killers, who often have sexualised violence to its logical end and no longer respond to the normal range of sexual stimuli) tend to do is to find - and latch onto - that porn that reflects the fantasies they have already been entertaining. Interestingly enough, it is not at all uncommon for this material to hardly rank as porn at all, but this is not true in all cases - some will find out and out violent stuff an immense turn on while others will find it too threatening and prefer the hyper-idealism portrayed in Playboy. But, what is critical, is that the causal direction is less from porn to rape (despite what Robin Morgan claimed!), but rather from rape (as sexualised violence and control) to those forms of images that will help keep those fantasies active in an on-going trigger/release of self-stimulation. The majority of the sex offenders I work with will almost have the equivalent to a radar in their heads, always on, looking for the slightest sign of something that can be worked into a fantasy. Rape is the practice of the rape fantasy. Pornography merely adds fuel to the fire, but cannot be said to cause it. What porn - especially the so-called "gonzo" porn of Max Hardcore and company - does do however is make one bored with standard imagery. Because the person is evacuated, it is only the model's body - her physicality, which gets reduced to its barest principles and orifices - that is responded to. But this is empty, flat and hollow (because there is no human there with whom to relate), and so one tires of it easily. This can be frustrating and the sensation becomes degraded, requiring higher and higher jolts to get a buzz going. In short, the porn consumer gets jaded. The pornographer will push new markets into existence, and it will become the new thrill. When I was a teen consumer, Penthouse was about as risque as it got, then came the Color Climax and Euro mags, and now there's double anal, scat, BDSM, pseudo-snuff and faux rape ... all outlyers of a fairly mainstreamed market for those who have become jaded and want something else for a kick, a buzz. This is really where porn gets dangerous, because the same old model of entrepeneurship has not changed - there is someone who has be photographed doing these things, and this is really where women are prone to be degraded radically and obviously. When this is combined with the use of actual narcotics to hook women into engaging in these activities, or they are showered with money (many performers come from poor and troubled backgrounds) for abusing themselves, much of their own internalised abuse kicks in, and they are ripe for the abuse in exchange for money (and/or drugs), which is seen by many as at least getting something back for a change, rather than just taking the abuse and getting nothing out of it. It is a volatile and destructive relationship on all sides: for the female (and gay-for-pay) performers it is more immediate and obvious, for the male performers it is risky (health wise) and leads into a severely distorted relationship with women (because of performer conditioning). This latter applies to the producers/directors too, for the same reasons: the reduction of humans to body parts. It also tends to lead to an arc of escalation - the pattern of abuse will escalate in extremism: the degradation will intensify, the humiliation will be more thorough and complete. This is also paralleled in serial sex offenders (and in serial killing): the offences become more damaging, the victim less likely to survive the assault, physical force and violence to her body will become more significant. This is usually one way for investigators and therapists to identify the dynamics and history of an offender by locating him on the arc of intensification. Again, there is a simple process going on: tolerance. However, this tolerance is complicated by the "hollowing out" of the performer, in the case of porn, as a person and her body becoming the object of frustration because it no longer provides satiation, the "thing" that satisfies is always and finally out of reach, no matter how many women are fucked in however different and extreme ways. In the end, the consumer (the abuser) is found facing his own emptiness - the search for the sacred (the frisson of encounter that is initially sparked as arousal) has finally eluded him, and he is empty. This is the land of despair: many addicts, offenders, and porn consumers are wracked with despair. Some may attempt suicide. Some "graduate" to try to find that spark that continues to elude him.
I apologise for the compressed way of writing: this is a vast and complex topic and I could not do it justice under these conditions. However, there is no simple answer to whether or not porn exploits, for the reasons outlined above. What exploits is the business, which is predicated on triggering arousal and selling an image for consumption that only leaves one hungry. The exploitation is not just of women, but also of the consumer ... albeit in different ways.
I could go on, but will stop for the sake of any reader who has managed to get this far ;-)
dr jeckyl does not hyde
thanks dr jeckyl does not hyde
05.09.2006 18:07
Thank you, dr jeckyl does not hyde. Thanks for your insights. You should have wrote the article instead of me. I do not know if you are anti-porn but you outline the harms brilliantly (not in legisation but in terms of it's effects on society).
Anyone from the pro-porn camp with a response?
grammatoncleric
Homepage:
http://www.antiwar.com
R-complex
06.09.2006 11:59
It is basic and carnal like a reptillian animal an excample in some way without the speccial effects is the pheonix charictor in X-men 3.
1
INDONESIA: Women outraged by Jakarta's anti-porn bill
01.06.2007 02:33
To celebrate International Women's Day, women in Jakarta march to protest anti-pornography bill
Straits Times
Thursday, March 9, 2006
By Devi Asmarani
Jakarta --- Women here marked International Women's Day yesterday with a march to pressure Parliament to drop an anti-pornography Bill.
It seems an unlikely protest for a day focused on women's rights. But the demonstrators fear the Bill could lead to penalties of up to 12 years in prison and fines of up to 2 billion rupiah (S$350,500) for such simple acts as kissing in public and baring of legs or shoulders.
"The anti-pornography Bill does not respect a woman's right to her own sexuality," said Ms Vivi Widyawati of the Mahardhika Women's Working Group as the crowd of 150 rallied at the heart of Jakarta.
Their protest followed days of mounting opposition to the Bill -- which also seeks to ban "erotic artwork" and has strong support among lawmakers -- from intellectuals, artists and some ethnic groups.
But a special parliamentary team says it will press ahead and finalise the draft this week, and submit it for approval in June.
Mr Balkan Kaplale, who heads the team, told The Straits Times recently: "This Bill is crucial to prevent further moral degradation.
"But I agree that parts of it have to be revised -- as it is, only angels can abide by the law."
Some contentious clauses, such as the public kissing ban, may be toned down. But even a softer Bill will not be acceptable to its critics, who say it is too wide-ranging and ill-defined, that the penalties are too harsh, and that existing laws against pornography are sufficient.
There is no clear definition of the "sensual body parts" which must not be exposed in public, or what an erotic artwork is. And women's rights advocates say that instead of protecting them, it demonises them and gives the state a blank cheque to regulate people's behaviour.
Regional opposition to the Bill has come from Bali, Batam and Papua. Both Bali and Batam are worried that the Bill would hurt tourism.
In Bali, where about 1,000 people rallied against the Bill last week, residents have warned that the resort island would secede from Indonesia if the Bill is passed.
"Balinese arts and religious beliefs have never considered sensuality and sexuality as impure," rally organiser Cok Sawitri said.
And in Papua, where many men wear only penis sheaths and women are bare-breasted, there are fears about the Bill's impact on the traditional way of life. But Mr Balkan said these provinces need not worry as their respective local administrations would be exempted.
Date Posted: 3/9/2006
bianrky