Sunday, 30 November 2008

For Rage Against The Man-chine

Post: BDSM (the sexual equivalent of being into Renaissance faires) Part 2: The Problem with Kink

Commenter: Snowdrop Explodes
The question that springs to my mind is, "what did these adverts say?" (that's both the male submissive and the female submissive ones that you mentioned).

Secondly, why did you not explore the responses to an advert as a female dominant?

Thirdly, as someone who would presumably fall into category 1 above, I must tell you that I do not in any way shape or form suggest that it is a "natural feminine desire", and to be honest, I've seen quite a few male dominants who take great exception to being tarred with that brush. I do admit that there are some who definitely do go down that route, but kindly afford them a separate category.

The other thing that seems quite rare is to describe sexual fantasies in a first contact message.

Furthermore, you appear to be unaware that these different types of responses are frequently discussed on BDSM community websites such as and so you've not really "discovered" anything we didn't already know. The proportion of tosspots responding to BDSM personal ads is likely to be similar to the proportion of tosspots who respond to vanilla personal ads, so again, you've proved nothing. Except, of course, in the BDSM community there tends to be more vociferous condemnation by *all* genders of the tosspots, than in vanilla life.

Your analysis is meaningless without knowing what your advert said, and being able to know what exactly you invited by it.

For Rage Against the Man-chine

Post: BDSM (the sexual equivalent of being into Renaissance faires) Part 2: The Problem with Kink

Commenter: Snowdrop Explodes
In your last post, you write "I’ll ask that you keep in mind the fact that you can’t refute an argument that is true in most cases with a single counterexample, even if it is your own personal experience."

However, here you appear to be taking your own personal experience and treating it as universal.

You write, "It might be a result of my being unlikely to respond positively to orders, but I really can’t imagine doing aught but snickering at someone handing out orders to me with the expectation that I’d get all excited by it. I realize that role-playing gets some people all hot and bothered, but that shit is lost on me."

But the expectation comes from the fact that prior to giving the orders, the person receiving the orders has communicated clearly that zie responds in that way. This is why I have heard so many stories of sexually submissive women "corrupting the vanillas" as their first BDSM experiences - that is, asking (nay, demanding!) that their vanilla boyfriend should take on a BDSM dominant role.

You have yourself done precisely what you were warning others against doing.

Tuesday, 25 November 2008

For Women's Space

Commenter: Rachel Setzer
Just because it's more rare for men to be abused by women doesn't mean that it's okay to marginalize those men who are abused by women. It DOES happen and is JUST AS wrong (not more wrong, not less wrong, JUST AS wrong) when a woman abuses her male intimate partner. Nevermind that all of this debate about whose more abused men by women or women by men completely ignores those people who are gay and abused by their intimate partners.

In my opinion, intimate partner abuse and violence needs to be addressed as a whole, focusing on heterosexual as well as homosexual men and women. It may be that most survivors of domestic abuse are heterosexual women, but that doesn't mean that the heterosexual men and homosexual men and women should be ignored while we deal with the so-called "real problem". Perhaps we should focus more on preventing abuse and violence on the end of the abuser rather than who gets shamed by whom on the victim end of things.

Tuesday, 18 November 2008

For Women's Space

Post: An Open Letter from Me, Cheryl Lindsey Seelhoff, to Pro-Porn, Pro-Prostitution, Misogynist, Male-Centered, Anti-Feminist Persons

Commenter: Debi
Heart, I really don't think anybody is trying to silence you. And I don't think anyone honestly expects that you will stop "vocally and outspokenly oppose pornography, prostitution, sex trafficking, the enslavement of women, male dominance, white male heterosupremacy, and all brutality towards women throughout the world." I for one wouldn't want you to stop doing that.

But the problem arises when, for example, you speak about another blogger, or cite something they have said, without giving the context by way of a link, or just an explanation of where the person is coming from (or even who the person is). This misrepresents people, and naturally, gets their backs up. If you want to call out Renegade Evolution, to take your latest example, then you are free to do so, but in the interests of transparency and honesty, it would be best to link to what she said specifically that you are calling her out on, so that people can go there and read it, and form their own opinions.

Of course, it's your blog and you can do what you like with it, but I'm just saying that it seems to me whenever a thread here becomes a "trainwreck" it is not because of "trolls" coming along and attempting to derail it or whatever, but because of your disrespect to (certain) other women in the first place. Coming from a feminist, the dimissal of any woman's voice, or lived reality, is very hard to take. You consistently allow comments from Satsuma, for example, who will not listen to other women, but insists that they have been raped when they say they have not, or that they were abused as children when they say they were not. Satsuma doing that is dismissing completely other women's voices - yet she is allowed to do that in this "Women's Space". However, if one of those women Satsuma says has been raped comes here to say that she is wrong, she is not allowed to do so.

As I said, it's your blog and your choice, but the problem arises from this "Women's Space" listening avidly to some women, whilst others are silenced. And, of course they can go back to their own blog and say what they have to say there, but I think many would much prefer and open discussion at the site of the original "calling out", as that is surely the best way to have a discussion.

For Women's Space

Commenter: Caroline
Good Lord no, you mustn't be silenced God forbid anyone else gets a word in edgeways, huh? Better for them to shut up so we can hear you in all your glory.

Christ woman, your lack of self-awareness is absolutely bizarre, never seen the like in a grown woman.

Monday, 17 November 2008

For Women's Space

Post: Julie Bindel on Sheila Jeffreys’ New Book on the Sex Trade, “The Industrial Vagina”

Commenter: Renegade Evolution
Not that it will matter, but hey, I am that bored/amused/having nothing better to do at the moment.

First, ah, the time honored favorite of “you must be a man!” from Sis. That one never seems to get old! Also, I do believe Hexy answered you regarding money, but oddly enough, her comment never made it through moderation…it happens frequently round these parts. For the record, we are both women, btw.

And then, why yes, Sam! I do not own nor film the scenes on “WhoreAbuse” (no new content for said site has been shot in years, and none of it was ever shot by me). I’ve never actually filmed another woman in any pornography that I, personally, have made, and in anything I’ve ever done, there is no question that it is made willingly and there is nothing “rape like” about it. Rough and rape are not synonymous. Have I listed the names of sites I’ve been on or things I’ve made? No. Why, well, as Sis has contended in the past, I wouldn’t want anyone thinking I was a marketing front or only blogging so people would buy my pornographic products, and further more, it’s not necessary.

And lastly, Satsuma:

A woman has a right to define and name her own experiences for herself. You seem to think you have a right to do it for everyone. Now, unless you can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the women you are discussing (be they sex workers or merely women who watch porn) have been raped, sexually abused, or molested, you really should stop making such accusations towards her, for her, and over her. Further more, you should stop assuming that even if such things have happened, it renders her incapable of making decisions for herself. After all, I would be willing to be a lot of women who are not privilged lesbians, as you say, like you, every day women to oh, a great many radical feminists, have been raped, sexually abused, or molested…and if you are going to go on about how such things eliminate agency…well then, we’re looking at possibly ¼ of the women on the face of the earth who don’t have any. You really want to go there?

Sunday, 16 November 2008

For Women's Space

Post: Julie Bindel on Sheila Jeffreys’ New Book on the Sex Trade, “The Industrial Vagina”

Commenter: Renegade Evolution
Well, Cheryl, call me a stickler for details. When I quote someone or allude to what they’ve said, I consider it good form and ethical to link to their own words, so people can actually see what’s really there, and not someone else’s take on it. It is, in countless ways, considered proper procedure and form.

And since we’re playing this game, let me lay this out real simple for you: Yeah, I have degrees- that being in the sex industry paid for. Do I have some privileges? Absolutely. Do I lack others? Absolutely. Am I middle class? Now, yeah, barely…like a whole hell of a lot of other people out there, yourself included. But I can assure you, I came from far less than middle class- far less- and yeah, you can bet money I am not going back if there is anything I can do about it. And I can, so I do. What has me where I am now? Sex work.

And for a moment, think about this take on it: logically- in any capitalist industry, those who do the employing are far more likely to employ those who will work for free than those who want any sort of payment at all. It’s simply a logical business theory, and porn is a business. So if I do gonzo or whatever else for free or for less, well, I am doing it and perhaps one less woman who doesn’t want to is.

As for the internet, well, I have just as much right to be here talking about what I think as you do, and why yes, I know you are not saying I don’t, but if you think I’m the only person out there who is into “sexual brutality”, even the only female one…well, hate to disappoint, but there are a whole lot of us out here. And in a world where any sort of “sexual deviancy” from homosexuality to BDSM can be written off by many as a mental illness or countless other things, sure enough, I am all for talking about it and seeing non-criminal and consenting acts of such thing normalized.

Millions of humans suffer so we can drive cars, use computers, wear clothes, eat food, and have countless other things. It sucks, and it’s harsh, but it’s true. I think you also know, agree with my methods or not, I do what I can to help people in the sex industry who do not want to be there. And frankly, if you think I am some cold-blooded sellout, well, I don’t care. Everyone needs their demons, right? Hell, I even respect some of the work you do, I’ve said before and I’m sure I’ll say again your site is an excellent source of information on world news regarding women, but I think you have a very one sided and ill-informed view of the whole of the sex industry, the people in it, and what needs to be done. I also know from interacting with you that you do not care to hear from people, even victims, who do not share your view. You’ve made that plainly evident. And yeah, you can quote me on that too.