babyhueypnewton posted:saying "my female friend likes rape porn are you gonna take her rights away?" is like saying "my friend makes money off Xbox live are you gonna steal his xbox in a communist revolution as the means of production HUH??"
people as individuals deal with patriarchy and capitalism in all sorts of fucked up and subconscious ways, our job as socialists and feminists is to change the structures that force women to internalize misogyny. not argue with individuals about whether they are bourgeois or not. to the masses, from the masses.
um sexuality is how people constitute their subjectivities its not an xbox live
roseweird posted:cut your balls off
thats ur answer to everything
roseweird posted:deadken posted:ok so how do you navigate this in your own relationships.
i'd like to know how you navigate it in your relationships ken. are you a gentleman
i don't believe all heterosexual relationships under patriarchy have to be unequal. i know some of mine have been but i'm trying to work on it. nobody's perfect but we can try! 
discipline posted:deadken posted:discipline posted:
you are putting a full stop after women enjoy their own oppression ken. I said it was something born out of survivalism, trauma, or other reasons. none of which are important when it comes to rallying and demanding the end to oppression of women.
ok so how do you navigate this in your own relationships.that's really none of your business
yeah ok sorry if im being intrusive
conec posted:i dont get why this thread is 9 pages long
same as every thread, conec: inadequate public investment in mental health resources.
conec posted:nothin wrong w a little latex nd bondage na mean but porn is utter shite i dont get why this thread is 9 pages long
because of patriarchy
roseweird posted:deadken posted:thats ur answer to everything
well at least quit stimulants
i basically have. i don't even drink that much these days. it's not like i'd say no to a nice line but they've not been a major feature of my life for months. for more information please see the swolebriety thread
conec posted:nothin wrong w a little latex nd bondage na mean but porn is utter shite i dont get why this thread is 9 pages long
EDIT.. nbetween consenting adults det is...
I wasted a lot of people's time, conec
discipline, why do you think authors like pat califia, who are willing to interrogate the role of capital (edit: at least somewhat) in everything from sexual legislation on children to prostitution, still find themselves unwilling to write off porn or prostitution entirely? I use weasel words there, but califia revels in it.
but i guess i should reformulate this as:
what do you think accounts for the predominant divide between non-positivist queer theorists, even interdisciplinary ones like halberstam, and non-positivist feminists on the issues of pornography and prostitution?
discipline posted:I can't disagree that women are trained from a young age to accept and enjoy submission to the male sex tho ken? that's an essential part of rape/porn/john culture.
ok but you're approaching submission as something unified and monolithic. representations of submission, pretences of submission, sexual submission, and social/political/economic submission are not the same thing. they feed into each other but they're not identical and do contradict. my approach might be atomised but yours is not very dialectical
deadken posted:swampcloneboy literally said my friend enjoys the kind of sex she does because she was abused as a child
where did i say this?
HenryKrinkle posted:porn isn't consensual because the actresses involved are economically coerced and often psychologically manipulated. plus, as a media form, it motivates sexual violence and other forms of subjugation against woman.
MadMedico posted:HenryKrinkle posted:porn isn't consensual because the actresses involved are economically coerced and often psychologically manipulated. plus, as a media form, it motivates sexual violence and other forms of subjugation against woman.
haha youre a real creep
blinkandwheeze posted:c_man posted:shaming people about viewing pornography is not some sort of radical new idea. im not a historian but didn't the porn industry see pretty good growth under social conditions like the ones being proposed itt?
lol am i really going to have to hold your hand through this. nobody here is saying that the expansion of & the exploitation inherent to the pornographic industry can be mitigated solely by shaming or social stigmatization. i think there is a good case that could be made that direct action in the form of industrial sabotage like discipline suggested that could do this but thats an entirely different argument
what people are saying is that the emancipation of women from the exploitation of the pornographic industry can only be pursued through mass social organization outside of the decisions that can be made in the framework determined by capitalist society. this is entirely because stigmatization of consumers isnt enough to curb the reproduction of this industry in the same way stigmatizing the consumers of sneakers offers no practical antidote to the misery that accompanies the exploitation of the developing world. this would be evident to anyone with a basic reading comprehension but somehow you are still accusing people in this thread of advocating this?
what i am saying is pretty simple. the consumption of pornography normalizes the rape and abuse of women as it is an industry qualitatively characterised by the rape and abuse of women. the mobilization of social forces necessary to end the reproduction of this industry requires broad networks of solidarity between individuals. if the composite members of these networks engage in the consumption of the products of this industry they are active in the normalization of this rape and abuse inside these networks. as such, these networks become hostile to the participation of women and the security of those who do participate. this prevents these social networks from engaging with the concerns of women and their livelihoods, especially those victimized by these patterns of rape and abuse
c_man posted:can analogous pressures be placed on some organizations that will have effects on the production of porn on a similar scale?
no. the problems with the pornographic industry are not quantitative in character, they are qualitative. the production of pornography is necessarily the institutionalization of the rape of women. you cant apply pressure that results in rape or abuse being conducted more ethically, this is categorically not possible
you are our greatest hope for the future, young 'zzoner.
Dare To Win Issue 2, April 2014
Pornography and prostitution are routine subjects of critique within the nominal left. Indeed, the part these industries play in the cultivation of anti-womyn attitudes, along with the anti-womyn violence sex workers are frequently subjected to, are well-documented things. The very fact that sex workers are primarily womyn and it is by-and-large womyn’s sexuality that is on offer, while men are overwhelmingly the consumers, is an obvious example of patriarchy. Yet, what is conspicuously missing from the mainstream narrative on sex work even within the nominal left is the perspective of sex workers themselves. Occasionally, individual sex workers are tokenized or quote-mined to support this or that position, but rarely is a serious attempt made to understand the material realities that sex workers face and what this means for revolutionary organizing. As Maoists, we need to do better.
In the U.S. and Canada, sex workers are overwhelmingly womyn, and a majority are of oppressed nationality. Trans womyn, who suffer homelessness and unemployment at double the average rates, also have high representation in sex work. The vast majority of sex workers have unstable living situations, few having homes of their own or even the ability to rent. Moving between homes of friends, hostels, or places much worse; it is common for sex workers to be deprived access to the safety most people in North America enjoy. Sex workers frequently face harassment and violence from customers, their bosses, and from the police. Many are survivors of sexual abuse. When sex workers are subjected to violence, it usually goes unnoticed from the broader community.
In short, sex workers are generally part of an underclass in the U.S. and Canada who have been pushed out of the classes which have historically benefited from capitalist-imperialism. Though there are many reasons womyn enter the sex trade, not least among them is a lack of employment opportunities elsewhere.
Keeping all of this in mind, it becomes clear that campaigns critiquing pornography and prostitution which focus only on reducing consumption, as opposed to building a program that works toward uniting sex workers in revolutionary struggle, risk jeopardizing sex workers’ already precarious livelihoods. Many critiques also include sentiments which perpetuate already widespread hatred against sex workers, obviously a reactionary endeavor. Moreover, attempts to abolish or reduce the prevalence of sex work within the context of capitalism invariably harm sex
workers. In places where many forms of sex work are illegal, sex workers are in a position of high risk, and have very few real protections. But “alternative” models fare no better. The so-called “Swedish model,” which puts more emphasis on “reducing demand” for paid sex by punishing consumers and those who “promote” sex work, while ostensibly focusing less on punishing sex workers themselves, has in reality been a disaster for sex workers. Violence against sex workers has increased as a result of this “model,” and reduced income has made it even harder for sex workers to attain stable housing and/or has pushed them into other avenues like the drug market. The policy has also effectively dismantled any leverage sex workers may have had by criminalizing sex worker collectives. Simply put, the “Swedish model”— and indeed any attempt to eliminate sex work within the context of capitalism—is frankly an attack on the stratum of womyn who are already among the most downtrodden. This is because these efforts do not in any way address the contradictions that give rise to the sex trade and which push womyn into sex work.
On the other side of the coin, there are reformist efforts to decriminalize sex work and to incorporate sex workers into labor-aristocratic trade unions. At best, these efforts may succeed in giving some sex workers upward mobility, but this will be at the expense of the lower strata, just as the mainstream LGBTQ movement has largely been converted into a watchdog of capital through the expulsion of the most oppressed elements. At worst though, reformist efforts on this front will simply fail outright, because integration of sex workers into the empire is not something the bourgeoisie in the United States or Canada seem ready to bring about.
Reformist efforts ultimately fail because they do not address the fundamental contradiction between imperialism and the oppressed and exploited of the world. We want to smash patriarchy and all of its manifestations. But to do that, we ultimately need to smash capitalism.
So here is where RAIM stands:
1. Sex work is real labor!
There is a tendency for people to treat sex work in a metaphysical way, as something that is somehow categorically different from all other labor. In reality, although sex work is non-productive, it is labor just as much as any other service work. In fact, many sex workers are in a position where they consume the product of less labor than they expend. Effectively, a large number of sex workers have their time stolen by capital, and to a much greater extent than many productive workers in the U.S. and Canada. Thus, sex workers are a source of revolutionary potential here.
2. Build dual power!
Rather than working “within the system,” we want revolutionary organizing which challenges and undermines the system. We want militant institutions run by and for sex workers and supported by the broader communist movement, which provide for the material needs of sex workers, defend and protect sex workers from violence and abuse, and shift power away from imperialism and patriarchy toward sex workers and the oppressed and exploited in general.
3. Unite sex workers against imperialism!
Revolution will come to the U.S. and Canada through the global defeat of U.S.-led imperialism. Sex workers can and should be united into the broader revolutionary struggle against imperialism from within the belly of the beast.
deadken posted:swampman posted:deadken posted:ok here's an example. one of my closest friends and confidantes is an extremely vocal and outspoken feminist and communist, active in campaigns against the exploitation of womens bodies both in pornified mass-media and third-world labour practices. she is also extremely into bdsm, particularly playing a submissive role with a male partner, and extreme pornography (including choke porn). naturally this provokes an ethical dilemma, as her political engagements and sexual desires appear to be oppositely articulated - but does this mean that her enjoyment is invalidated, that it's somehow false or conditioned by patriarchy, and that she should give it up? i don't know the answers to this but it's an important question
an article posted here in the last few months talked about how rape victims will often go on to have rape fantasies, and many will never have sex again without remembering the rape, in this way the rape is more significant than a mere physical assault as the woman really is forced to "enjoy" rape as it is forever bound with her sexuality. by which i mean, your friend is probably returning to the familiar with bdsm, and it probably comes from some early event in her sexual history, like, i don't know, being exposed to hardcore bdsm pornography at a young age
lol this is some terrible psedofreudianism
even freud accepted early in his career the obvious widespread effects of abuse in children tho he stupidly rejected it afterwards http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Assault_on_Truth
Masson makes available previously unpublished letters from Freud's closest friend, Wilhelm Fliess, which reveal that Freud had grave doubts about abandoning the "seduction theory." Masson discovered that not only had Freud read the contemporary literature documenting the high incidence of sexual abuse of children, he had in all likelihood witnessed autopsies of children who had been raped and murdered. That Freud abandoned his seduction theory, Masson argues, was a failure of courage rather than a clinical or theoretical insight.
As a result, most psychiatrists and psychoanalysts have in effect been reluctant to trust the memories of their patients, women in particular, about the traumas they experienced in childhood. Like Freud, they see such traumas as fantasy rather than reality.
palafox posted:yo discipline/others, i asked this a few pages ago but it got lost in the shuffle of deadken's private life, and i'm really curious
discipline, why do you think authors like pat califia, who are willing to interrogate the role of capital (edit: at least somewhat) in everything from sexual legislation on children to prostitution, still find themselves unwilling to write off porn or prostitution entirely? I use weasel words there, but califia revels in it.
but i guess i should reformulate this as:
what do you think accounts for the predominant divide between non-positivist queer theorists, even interdisciplinary ones like halberstam, and non-positivist feminists on the issues of pornography and prostitution?
This is a real good question and I am interested in learning from whatever discussion it generates (although that appears to be none right now).
In passing I'll say that the portrait of pro-pornography feminists that's being developed here doesn't really match up with the pro-porn feminists I've encountered in my own life. The ones I know aren't posers, in that they actively work on women's issues, and their arguments have fuck all to do with declaring porn okay so that men will become leftists.
I do think they'd concede that they believe the djinn is out of the bottle and that it's impossible to get rid of fucked up porn in a way that isn't worse than the porn itself and that they believe through a critical feminist inquiry into pornography it's possible to develop legitimately feminist strategies to counteract the male supremacist assumptions that dictate the production and consumption of mainstream porn. Most porn that bills itself as "feminist" or "women-centered" just plain isn't, but that doesn't mean that it's impossible unless you think it's impossible to create any kind of feminist media.
worthless posted:they believe the djinn is out of the bottle and that it's impossible to get rid of fucked up porn in a way that isn't worse than the porn itself and that they believe through a critical feminist inquiry into pornography it's possible to develop legitimately feminist strategies to counteract the male supremacist assumptions that dictate the production and consumption of mainstream porn. Most porn that bills itself as "feminist" or "women-centered" just plain isn't, but that doesn't mean that it's impossible unless you think it's impossible to create any kind of feminist media.
relate to some of the stuff BnW or discipline was saying about consent, labor and so on? is this a sort of "this is possible in the abstract by not in practice" kind of thing? or what?
Crow posted:MadMedico posted:HenryKrinkle posted:porn isn't consensual because the actresses involved are economically coerced and often psychologically manipulated. plus, as a media form, it motivates sexual violence and other forms of subjugation against woman.
haha youre a real creep
madmedico literally cant stop himself from posting in all the threads about porn or sex work but then he doesnt want to openly take a stand in favor of those things so he just flits around the edges making posts like this