Why is it people always tell women they are naturally beautiful, but expect women to shave, do their hair, wear make up and wear clothes that apparently suits them.
My mother is a perfect example of these people. I don't remember a time when she has told me I'm beautiful just the way I am and that I don't have to wear make up. Ever. Instead, she tells me how ugly I am like a million times a day, she always has something to say about my so called lack of beauty if she sees me not wearing one of the following
- false lashes
- other jewellery
- "perfect hair"
She is just a fucking hypocrite. She has never worn foundation in her life, let alone the works. Why? Because everyone tells her how beautiful and young she looks. She is just so ashamed to have a daughter like me because everyone asks me why I'm "this way".
So then she watches TV and talks shit about celebrities that have plastic surgeries etc and tells me they should be happy with what God has given them. Doesn't she realise what the fuck she's doing? I honestly think that while she is on her deathbed and I visit her, her last wish will be, 'Please wear makeup 24/7. Do whatever it takes to please men. It'll be the only way you'll be happy'. Ha. Hahaha. Her last wish is never going to come true. When that moment comes, I'll burn all the make up and other shit that has made me so fake and vulnerable all these years.
Monday, July 6, 2009
Why is it people always tell women they are naturally beautiful, but expect women to shave, do their hair, wear make up and wear clothes that apparently suits them.
Posted by Jo at 2:45 PM
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Biting Beaver is the BEST!!! I love her checklist and agree with all 51 points. Fuck you all taht don't agree with her. You just can't accept the fact you raped a woman or you want to rape a woman and to all the women that disagree, you're just a bunch of fucking man pleasers. I hope you get raped and maybe then you'll understand.
From the comments I've read everywhere regarding BB's checklist, I've decided to add my own answers to these retarded comments. I will not be posting these comments, but will post my answers to what the comments were under each point when necessary.
The Rapist Checklist
Some things to remember…
1. You are a rapist if you get a girl drunk and have sex with her.
It's funny how most people do not consider this rape. Please explain how this is not rape? It is NEVER the female's fault you fuckwits. When will you ever learn to accept that? Most people tend to blame the girl when she is raped when drunk which is pure stupid. Say that you are drunk in your home and someone breaks in and steals something. Will you say, '"Oh, it's alright, I was drunk, it was my fault my home was robbed?". No. So shut the fuck up and stop blaming a drunk victim for rape. She obviously did not consent.
2. You are a rapist if you find a drunk girl and have sex with her.
See point 1
3. You are a rapist if you get yourself drunk and have sex with her. Your drunkeness is no excuse.
She obviously did not consent.
4. If you are BOTH drunk you may still be a rapist.
She obviously did not consent.
5. If she’s alternating between puking her guts out and passing out in the bed then you’re a rapist.
Need I say more?
6. If she’s sleeping and you have sex with her you’re a rapist.
She obviously did not consent.
7. If she’s unconscious and you have sex with her then you’re a rapist.
She obviously did not consent.
8. If she’s taking sleeping pills and doesn’t wake up when you have sex with her then you’re a rapist.
She obviously did not consent.
9. If she is incapacitated in any way and unable to say ‘Yes’ then you’re a rapist.
She obviously did not consent nor is in a state to do so.
10. If you drug her then you’re a rapist.
Fuck you assholes.
11. If you find a drugged girl and have sex with her then you’re a rapist.
12. If you don’t bother to ask her permission and she says neither ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ then you could be a rapist.
There are many reasons why she didn't say no. She could be scared of what will happen to her if she says no. She could not be in a state to say no.
It's sad that most men think that women are just dying to have their cocks in her. Get over yourself.
13. You are a rapist if you ‘nag’ her for sex. Because you manage to ply an eventual ‘yes’ from a weary victim doesn’t mean it’s not rape. You are a rapist.
You have a hand. You have a penis. Why don't you just go masturbate if you want some fucking pleasure. Stop raping women.
14. You are a rapist if you try to circumvent her “No” by talking her into it. She’s not playing hard to get, and, even if she IS it’s not YOUR responsibility to ‘get’ her. You’re still a rapist.
Why is it men don't understand the meaning of no? NO MEANS NO. It doesn't mean
15. You are a rapist if you manipulate her into sex when she doesn’t otherwise want it. If you say, “If you loved me you’d do X” then you’re a rapist. If you say, “All the other kids are doing it!” then you’re a rapist.
She does NOT want to fuck you. Gees, what does she have to do to get the message across?
16. If you threaten her, or act in a way that SHE thinks you’re threatening her then you’re a rapist. If you puff up and get loud and frustrated while trying to ‘talk’ her into sex then you’re a rapist.
17. You are a rapist if you don’t immediately get your hands off of her when she says ‘no’. You are a rapist if you take your hands off of her and then put them back ON her after 10 minutes and she eventually ‘gives in’ to this tactic.
18. You are a rapist if you won’t let her sleep peacefully without waking her every 15 minutes asking her for sex. Sleep depravation is a form of torture and YOU are a rapist.
19. If you’re necking with her and you’re naked and you’ve already gone down on her and she says ‘No’ to sex with you and you have sex with her anyway then you’re a rapist.
You're probably thinking to yourself, ' But I can't stop half way through'. YES YOU CAN! Parents stop having sex when kids walk in on them, anyone that gets caught having sex stops. So you can stop. It's just that you don't want to.
20. If you’re engaged in intercourse and she says ‘No’ at ANY point and you don’t immediately stop then you’re a rapist.
21. If she said “Yes” to sex with a condom and that condom breaks and you proceed anyway then you’re a rapist.
22. If she picked you up at a bar looking for sex and then decides that she doesn’t WANT sex and you continue then you’re a rapist.
23. If she changes her mind at ANY point for ANY reason and you don’t immediately back off or you try to talk her into it and get sex anyway then you’re a rapist.
24. If you don’t hit her and she says ‘No’ you’re still a rapist.
25. If you don’t have a knife or a gun or a garrote and she says ‘No’ then you’re still a rapist.
26. If you’re a friend of hers you can still be a rapist.
Statistics show that most women are raped by someone they know.
27. If you had sex with her the night before but she doesn’t want morning sex and you pressure her for it anyway then you’re a rapist.
28. If you’re her husband you can still be a rapist.
Now just because she is your wife does not mean it's her duty to fuck you.
29. If it’s your wedding night and she doesn’t WANT to have sex with you and you force or coerce her anyway then you’re a rapist.
30. If she’s had sex with you hundreds of times before but doesn’t want to on the 101st time then you’re a rapist.
31. If you penetrate her anally, orally or digitally against her will then YOU my friend, are ALSO a rapist.
32. Women do not owe you sex.
33. Buying her dinner does not entitle you to sex.
34. Paying her mortgage does not entitle you to sex.
35. Buying her clothing does not entitle you to sex.
36. Buying her lingerie does not entitle you to sex. It also doesn’t mean that she has any obligation to wear that lingerie around you.
37. Spending any amount of money on her does not, ever, entitle you to sex.
38. Seeing her legs or cleavage does not entitle you to sex.
39. If she ‘turns you on’ you’re not entitled to sex.
40. If she has fucked every man in a 10 square mile radius and she doesn’t want to fuck you and you have sex with her anyway, then you’re a rapist.
41. Her clothing is not a reason for you to rape her. Her LACK of clothing is no reason to rape her. If she’s wearing a thong and pasties you STILL have no right to rape her.
A woman doesn't look at a man wearing nothing but shorts and says, 'Oh he's asking for it. I'm going to rape that fucker'.
42. If she’s a prostitute and she says “No” then you’re a rapist.
43. If she’s a stripper and she says “No” then you’re a rapist. Likewise, if she’s a stripper and she’s been rubbing against your dick all night long and you follow her to her car and have sex with her against her will then you are ALSO a rapist.
44. If you watch a woman being raped without calling the authorities then you’re as bad as a rapist and you may also be a rapist yourself.
45. If you don’t fight rape then you accept rape.
46. If you don’t believe a woman when she says she was raped then you’re encouraging rape.
47. If you choose to remain friends with a man who raped a woman you are encouraging rape.
48. If you confess to the authorities that you raped a woman it does not exonerate you. You are not suddenly a model of good behavior.
49. If you ‘only’ raped one woman, you’re STILL a rapist.
50. You cannot tell who is a rapist by the way they look. Rapists are your friends, your brothers, your fathers and you won’t know it.
51. Do not get frustrated with a woman if she doesn’t trust you. SHE already knows that rapists don’t wear signs on their foreheads. Something you think is innocuous SHE may find terrifying.
Posted by Jo at 7:29 PM
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Hold the front page! Images of bikini-clad women make men more sexist. Steve Connor reports on a new study by Princeton scientists, while Jeremy Laurance recalls the other academic work that told us what we already know
Scientists have demonstrated something that many women suspect and most men would admit only to themselves: pictures of scantily-clad females turn women into sexual objects in the minds of men. Feminists would no doubt see the discovery as the science of the bloody obvious, but the researchers claim the results demonstrate just how pictures of bikini-clad women affect the inner workings of the male brain.
The study found that the part of the brain that keeps in check a man's sexual hostility towards women is deactivated when he is shown images of women in bikinis. The findings also support the idea that pornographic images turn women into commodified objects in the minds of men, the researchers said.
"It is as if they are reacting to these women as if they are not fully human," said Susan Fiske, professor of psychology at Princeton University, who made the study on 21 male undergraduates using a medical scanner to analyse their brain activity. She told the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Chicago: "I wouldn't argue for censorship, but I would argue that it is important to know about the impact of the images you are showing."
More Science News
The study focused on a region of the brain called the medial pre-frontal cortex, just above the eyes, which, when activated seems to damp a man's tendency to express hostile sexist thoughts about women, Professor Fiske said. Men who express the strongest sexist tendencies tend to have a less active medial cortex. It becomes decactivated in men who are the most hostile to women, but only for women in bikinis, she said.
"So basically they are particularly likely to treat these women as objects, at least that is the interpretation of the data we have so far. It is a preliminary study but it is consistent with the idea that they are responding to these photographs as if they were responding to objects rather than people."
It was "shocking" to find that the pictures of scantily clad women deactivates the medial pre-frontal cortex, Professor Fiske went on. "The only other time we've observed the deactivation of this region is when people look at pictures of homeless people and drug addicts who they really don't want to think about what's in their minds because they are put off by them."
The panel of 21 heterosexual male students were first rated in terms of their sexist attitudes to women, using answers to interview questions. Then they were placed in a brain scanner while viewing a set of images of women in bikinis, women in clothes and men in clothes. The scientists also used "sexualised" images, where the head of each semi-naked photograph was cut off so that only the torso was visible. The men were then given memory tests on what they had remembered about each image, with and without the heads.
"Heterosexual men had the best memory for the sexualised bodies of women – this is cutting-off the heads – even though they had seen the bodies for only 200 milliseconds," Professor Fiske said. The findings have wider implications for society because they show how sexualised images in the media and in advertising can dehumanise women by encouraging men to think of them in terms of objects to be acted upon, she said. "There is an avoidance-related dehumanisation or dementalising kind of response. This one is an approach-orientated response. These women are attractive, they are seen as sexually inviting.
"When you have sexualised pictures of women in the workplace, it's hard not to think of female colleague in those terms. It has a spill-over effect in how you perceive plausible women in the workplace and not treating them as agents but as independent people, and not seeing them as a means to an end."
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
A little-known fact: some studios recently decided to no longer make female-lead movies.
Lately, I've been in meetings regarding a new script idea I have. A studio executive asked me to change the female lead to a male, because... "women don't go to movies."
When I pointed out the box office successes of Sex and The City, Mamma Mia, and Obsessed, he called them "flukes." He said "don't quote me on this." So, I'm telling everybody.
I'm in a new movie, My Life In Ruins, out in theaters now. It's a small indie, that was picked up for distribution by a studio (thank you Fox Searchlight.) We're in one-third, maybe less, about one-quarter of the amount of screens of the big movies...yet we made it into the Top Ten.
I'm not too cool to admit this -- on the weekend, I snuck into the back of the theaters to hear people laughing. It's a very good-mood-inspiring sound, better than the sound of potatoes being dipped into a fryer. (Almost.)
The theaters were full of people laughing. Women were there. Sure, men were there, we are a date movie too, but the fact is women were there, some in big girls night groups.
Our movie isn't "playing everywhere," yet these audience members found it. We had an advertising budget of about 6 bucks, Canadian. We don't have billboards, or giant newspaper ads, or skywriting. So I've been Twittering (NiaVardalos), loading homemade videos onto YouTube : "My Life In Ruins, Really!" and blabbing to anyone who makes eye contact with me.
It's called show business for a reason. The theater owners want to make money, and understandably so. My Life In Ruins is the highest testing movie in Fox Searchlight history so we've been given a chance. And, the theater owners said they'll keep the movie in their theaters if people go.
So, women: can we speak up with our wallets?
I'm so mad!!!
Posted by Jo at 4:30 PM
"I claim that rape exists any time sexual intercourse occurs when it has not been initiated by the woman, out of her own genuine affection and desire." -- Robin Morgan, in 1974
"Heterosexual intercourse is the pure, formalized expression of contempt for women's bodies." -- Andrea Dworkin
"And if the professional rapist is to be separated from the average dominant heterosexual [male], it may be mainly a quantitative difference."
-- Susan Griffin "Rape: The All-American Crime"
"[Rape] is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear" -- Susan Brownmiller (Against Our Will p. 6)
"Politically, I call it rape whenever a woman has sex and feels violated. You might think that's too broad. I'm not talking about sending all of you men to jail for that." -- Catherine MacKinnon "A Rally Against Rape" Feminism Unmodified
Posted by Jo at 1:48 PM
Chelsea woke up to the sound of her phone beeping. It was a txt from Brandon. She had met Brandon online a few weeks ago and chatted to him everyday. She was surprised to receive a txt from him. It was his first txt. “I didn’t go to work today. I’m feeling quite down. Can we please meet up? I need someone”, the txt read. Chelsea’s parents were due to arrive from overseas in a day so she refused. “Fine. I don’t ant to bother anyone with my problems. I should have known better” was the reply. Chelsea being the good hearted person she is felt bad and accepted his invitation.
Brandon picked her up later that day and took her to his apartment. They chatted about all their mutual online friends and were laughing the whole way to his place “My brother will be home too”, said Brandon when they reached his apartment. Chelsea found it odd for two brothers to take the same day off but said and thought nothing of it at the time.
Brandon went straight to his pantry and got out a bottle of tequila. He poured two shot glasses whilst Chelsea spoke of Sam, another mutual friend. Brandon introduced her to Brett, his brother. Brett was extremely anti-social. He just shrugged and went to his room. Chelsea showed Brandon her tongue ring and a few pictures on her phone. Brandon was just laughing and telling Chelsea her found her really funny. It was the last thing she remembered.
There was a dark room and a bed. Chelsea was on the bed naked. Brandon was on top of her covering her mouth and pushing her down. She tried to scream but he was too strong. She must have passed out. She woke up later and tried sitting up but Brandon pushed her down again. She was too weak and was passing in and out of conscious. She woke up soon after and vomited all over Brandon. He was sitting on her face. Chelsea cried and cried. She could see someone standing by the bed. He was naked. His erection shone in the darkness.
“Which one is your house?’? Chelsea woke up and found herself in a car. Brett was driving and Brandon was next to him. They were on Chelsea’s street. She could see her house from a distance and muttered a few words to Brett. They stopped the car outside her gate. Brandon opened her door and dragged her out. She got back in the car and they drove off. Chelsea could barely stand, let alone walk to the door. She fell and slowly crawled to her front door. Everything around her was spinning and she could feel she was half naked. She got inside the house and passed out on her bed again.
Chelsea woke up a few hours later. She felt like vomiting. Her body and bed were really sticky and smelt of vomit. Her body as aching. It felt as thought someone had run a tanker over her. She stood up to see legs, clothes and bed covered in blood.
2 weeks later
Chelsea was still bleeding. The doctor told her she had cuts, tears and bruises in her vagina. Brandon didn’t speak to her much after that. If he did, it was only to tell her that everything was her fault, he felt nothing for her and he couldn’t care less about her.
A few months later
Chelsea had been having nightmares every night. Someone always tried harming her. She would run and run but HE would always get her. ALWAYS.
Chelsea started seeing a counsellor. She joined many support groups and met many victims of sexual assault. She soon learned that Brandon and Brett had planned the whole thing. Most survivors of rape were raped by someone they knew.
What happened to Brandon and Brett?
They’re still out there. They had their way of manipulating Chelsea to make sure she doesn’t go to the cops. They know what they did, they know what they are doing but they won’t stop. Their happiness comes from raping women that are weak and vulnerable. They study their victims and carry out their plans accordingly.
She will never forget what happened till the day she dies. She did eventually go to the cops. The cops told her the chances of him being convicted were low because there is no physical evidence. She eventually dropped charges.
The memories of what Brandon and Brett did to her will haunt her everyday. Forever. Every man she looks at disgusts her. He could be a rapist in disguise for all she knows. The thought of it all makes her sick. So sick she feels like throwing up. Chelsea knows that the rapists got from her exactly what they wanted and she’s feeling the way they wanted her to feel. Weak. Powerless. Alone. Frightened. Lost. Empty.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
The Anti-Pornography Feminist Movement “I don’t need statistics to tell me that there is a relationship between pornography and real violence. My body remembers.”
This chilling testimony from a female rape victim to a grand jury in 1983 represents the evils that pornography represents in the United States. There are strong correlations between sex crimes and pornography that have divided feminists over whether free speech is worth the sheer magnitude of sex-crime victims. Free speech is protected by the First Amendment and most people have differing views on its meaning. One thing that cannot be ignored is the fact that 90% of sexual offenders have used pornography “frequently.”
I believe that the anti-pornography movement is not only just, but essential. I would like to explore various aspects of the anti-pornography movement including the history, players, rhetoric and the impact. I believe that shedding light on the ways that pornography effects human beings, we will feel differently about the “freedom of speech.” In the 1960’s and 1970’s, debates over pornography mirrored the counter-culture’s battle with conservative values.
The 1969 case Stanley v. Georgia, “community standards” were challenged and the court upheld the civil rights for consumers to possess pornography in their homes. However, the 1970’s brought about the VCR and feminists began to redefine pornography to explore the impact of the porn industry on women and their place in society. Though many feminists were frightened by the prospect that they may be working hand in hand with conservatives to regulate this practice, many women jumped to action when new surveys and statistics were revealed about pornography and women. To most of these women, the immorality was not the sexual content, but its violation of a woman’s dignity, a lie about who women are and what they want. Out of these theories, writers like Andrea Dworkin, Catherine MacKinnon and Dr. Diana Russell founded and encouraged many anti-porn groups around the country.
Though movements against pornography had existed prior to feminist anti-pornography groups, they were previously conservative or moral majority inspired. Then came groups such as the Anti-Porn Feminists (APFEM) and the Women Against Violence in Pornography in the Media (WAVPM). These groups had limited following because of the feminist ideology of freedom of speech and expression. Due to this lack of agreement on terms and standards, the supporters have never been centralized. Supporters may be varied and polarized but most believe that there is a real problem and there must be suitable action.
The reason that this movement exists are due to findings of surveys and studies as well as testimony of women who have suffered from pornography at one time or another. The studies are varied and numerous. To provide examples of these surveys I would like to illustrate the findings of several of them. The first finding comes from a 1983 study by Edward Donnerstein. He polled male high-school and college students on 37 states and came to the following conclusion. 25% to 30% of male students who admit that there is some likelihood that they would rape a woman if the could be assured of getting away with it, increases to 57% after exposure to sexually violent images depicting women enjoying rape. This means that as a result of one brief exposure to pornography, the number of males who are willing to consider rape as a plausible act for them actually doubles. On such brief exposure to pornography also increases male subjects’ acceptance of rape myths and interpersonal violence against women. This essentially means that porn viewers have lower inhibitions than exist in the absence of pornography. They are more likely to act out violent desires and fantasies including submissive and domination sex.
This evidence is overwhelmingly supported by a follow-up study from an independent source. Larry Baron and Murray Straus undertook a 50-state correlation analysis in1984 about the rates of rape as they relate to pornographic magazines. The eight pornographic magazines with the highest circulation are Playboy, Penthouse, Chic, Forum, Gallery, Genesis, Oui and Hustler. A highly significant correlation was found between the reported rape rates and the readership of pornographic materials.
According to the findings, a ratio of +64% was found in men who read pornographic material that those who had little or no exposure. However, out of this survey came more shocking results. The levels of rape were higher in regions that had few or no laws governing the sales and distribution of pornographic material. This is evidence that legal intervention may be directly related to rape in an area or city. Since 64% more men who read or watch pornographic material would entertain rape then making pornography hard to come by would certainly reduce the rate of rape.
In another study, Michelle Goldstein and Harold Kant found that incarcerated rapists had been exposed to extremely hard-core pornography at an earlier age than males presumed to be non-rapists. Nearly 30% of convicted sex offenders experienced hard-core pornography before adolescence (11 years-old), while only 2% of non-rapists were exposed to porn at such an early age. Another 34% of convicted sex offenders were exposed to pornography before the age of 15, while non-rapists showed only 7% had been exposed that early age.
The most startling fact is that 90% of convicted sexual assaulters, encompassing rape, forced sodomy, sexual attacks and other felonious sexual acts, were frequent users of hard-core pornography. Unfortunately, another 4% had used it sometimes and the remaining percentage refused to classify their usage. The rate of non-rapist porn use was 12% used sometimes and 6% used pornography often.
Due to this study, we can draw the conclusion that a male exposed to pornography early and frequently is much more likely to commit a sexual offense than a person seldom exposed to pornography. (Please refer to above information for statistical logistics.) I would also like to cite a few testimonies of men and women who both participated in pornography and were negatively affected by pornography.
In one case, a man who had participated in over 100 pornographic movies testified at the Commission hearings in Los Angeles as follows: “I, myself, have been on a couple of sets where the young ladies have been forced to do even anal sex scenes with a guy which is rather large and I have seen them crying in pain.” This is a forgotten angle of the anti-pornography movement. Not only do women suffer sex crimes resulting from pornographic ideas, the actual porn subjects are often raped without anyone knowing.
There are many women who are abused, manipulated and drugged for the sake of pornography. Though many people would feel that this is freedom of expression, it is many times not done of free will. According to the anti-pornography Commission hearing in Los Angeles, many films have no script and the female actress is unaware that she is to be intimate by more than one man at a time or sodomized. Anonymous testimony from the same hearing indicated that the surprise factor is actually what makes these scenes more exciting for men because of an insinuation of rape.
One of the most mind-blowing testimonies cane from researcher Edward Donnerstein after his 1983 study. “The relationship between particularly violent sexual images in media and subsequent aggression...is much stronger statistically than the relationship between smoking and lung cancer.” In spite of these studies and testimonies, the movement has only gained momentum in the past ten years as the “date-rape epidemic” has spread through our country.
Though many people believe that the frequency of rape may be relatively constant and that the epidemic is actually the number of women coming forward and pursuing legal action. Many arguments of our desensitized culture have been blamed for the rape epidemic and so it should. Not only hard-core pornography is detrimental. The way that women are perceived in the media is equally disturbing.
The anti-pornography movement has gained strength by aligning themselves with other groups. Though the feminists want to keep clear of the religious right and other conservative movements, they have used their power and abilities to make some gains in their quest. For these reasons, the anti-porn feminist position aligns itself with the move to censor pornography by making its unwanted presence an actionable offense. In its extreme formulation, the anti-porn feminist position would ban its production and prohibit its dissemination. For these reasons, the anti-porn feminist group would be considered co-opted and in the system. Since they have taken some allies on to further their cause, they have certainly shared goals to achieve their end. They have also started to support legislation to reduce pornography in many fashions.
The main area that I would like to focus on is the rhetorical strategies of the movement. The anti-pornography movement uses petition of the establishment, promulgation and polarization. I would now like to provide some examples of how the movement uses these strategies and other ways that they use rhetoric to accomplish their goals. The anti-pornography petitions the state by supporting and supplying the framework for legislation across the country. Though their solidification is shaky due to the plethora of ways to deal with disrupting the pornography trade in America, they still have many different ways to solve problems.
The main way that they approach these changes to legislation is through local government. It is far easier for these various groups to alter the world community at a time than try to destroy the entire enchilada at one time. The anti-porn movement has legislation that has passed in many cities and counties that they use as framework. San Diego, New York and other large cities have place extensive limitations on the production and marketing of pornographic materials. The easiest way to explain these changes is by taking the First Amendment out of the formula.
Considering that the main disagreement over the allowance of pornography is that it may set limitations on First Amendment Right, the anti-porn feminists have decided that they would attack the uses instead of the theory. After all, this is a fight to save dignity, safety and even lives for women in this country so any achievement is considerable. They simply try to abolish pornography in areas where the people do not want pornography in their yards. This is easy when it comes to a small vote by a council or board. Most Americans are assumably in favor of First Amendment rights but that doesn’t mean that they want pornography in their neighborhoods. This could be considered grass-roots activity but I feel that it is far more significant than simply stated.
Another way that the anti-porn movement petitions the state is by employing people such as Dr. Diana Russell. Though Dr. Russell does many important things for the movement, she does one thing that has had a wide impact on the ideas of the state. She is the nations top expert witness in court cases involving rape, sexual harassment and rights of victims of rape and incest to have abortions.
This may seem small in comparison to the task that this movement deals with but it certainly is not. She has been so effective in persuading juries and judges for years that many judges use what is referred to the “Russell Doctrine.” This document is a woman’s bill of rights when it pertains to any of the aforementioned issues. She has changed the way that certain jurisdictions view cases involving women as sexual victims. The second way that the anti-pornography movement uses rhetoric to achieve their goals is by promulgation. This is essentially the spreading of ideas.
The main way that they spread ideas is through their surveys and studies. Their findings have spread not only ideas but terror to the decent people of this country. The fact that they state that there is a more prevalent link between porn and rape than there is between smoking and lung cancer has many people thinking more about this subject. Since the country has been going through the “date-rape epidemic,” people have been wondering why these things are starting to happen more and more.
The anti-porn movement has meet those questions with answers. Since their counter movements have clung to the First Amendment defense, it has been rather easy for the anti-porn movement’s ideas to be accepted. This means that there are few or no studies or statistics to counter those that the anti-porn movement has found. The anti-pornography movement has also found a loop-hole that they believe that they can use nationally. The linkage between pornography and sex crimes, if it could become universally established, would fulfill J. S. Mills harm principle. This would make the First Amendment argument null because the First Amendment does not allow expression that directly relates to the harm of others. Though referred to as fighting words, the J. S. Mills principle limits the protection that pornography would be granted under the First Amendment.
Another way that the anti-pornography movement uses promulgation is by using a statement entitled “Facts and Myths Concerning Pornography.” The first myth is that obscenity and pornography are protected in many countries as “free speech.” The fact is that hard-core pornography is and has never been protected by free statutes in the United States. The Supreme Court has continually upheld the fact that legal protection does not apply to pornography.
The second myth is that pornography is a victimless crime. The fact that 683,000 forcible rapes occur to woman over 18 in the United states and estimates reveal that more than twice that number are casual and date rapes. Not only do
The third myth is that if it is in a local store, it must be legal. The fact is that even illegal materials are readily available when laws against them are not readily enforced. If the citizens demand legal action, local officials will enforce them.
The final myth is that there is nothing that the public can do about it. The fact is that many cities have eradicated hard-core pornography outlets from their communities by passing effective anti-pornography laws. Dramatic drops in sex-crime levels has resulted. The best part is that these efforts have been started by only a few individuals. The third way that the anti-pornography movement uses rhetoric is by polarization. They have split from the main stream feminist groups for the reasons that I have discussed in the previous paragraph.
The anti-pornography groups feel that their rivals are perpetuating the most dramatic abuse of women. The anti-porn movement feels strongly that their adversaries within feminism are attacking “small rights and gains” when the most basic human rights of safety and dignity are being withheld. One opposite viewpoint is patroned by Betty Friedan who argues that what one woman may view as sensual another may view as pornography. While Friedan does express concern over some content of porn, she expresses greater concern over the anti-porn feminist movement. She believes that to further censorship in the United States to suppress pornography is extremely dangerous to women. She believes that the danger is due to the fact that this movement aligns the liberal woman’s movement with the right wing of the conservative agenda. Friedan believes that only the conservatives have anything to gain from such an alliance.
By examining the counterpoints on this issue, it is very easy to see why polarization is widely used. I would now like to focus on the movement ideology. I would like to take a closer look at the ideology itself, the barriers faced and the prevalent ideology which is to be overcome. The ideology supported by the anti-pornography movement is complicated. While they are a feminist group and would not want censorship to prevail, there is undeniable evidence that pornography hurts women. The anti-porn movement focuses on the way in which women are portrayed in this medium. They also focus on the way that sex crimes are caused or promoted by the use of pornography. This makes for a varied support system for the movement.
While a great majority of this country does not use pornography and would not suffer in its absence, it is still an issue of freedom which must be addressed. This is that women are being hurt by the use of pornography. While they do express concern over the actresses involved in the making of the films, they express more concern that this sex and violence against women perpetuates itself to everyday lives and effects innocent women.
The main ideology that the anti-porn movement seeks to advance is to seriously limit the production and consumption of pornography. They feel that this is not an issue of censorship and must be dealt with by legislation. The J. S. Mills principle is one theory that legislators have used in their attempts to ban suggestive material in the past. The anti-porn movement believes that this principle directly relates to their task because it limits the First Amendment rights in the event that people are being abused as a result. The greatest barriers that the anti-porn movement faces are those of their fellow liberals. Main stream feminists and other liberal movements and groups feel that this is putting a stumbling stone in the way of the freedoms that they have collectively fought for. There has been much conversation between the groups but neither side is wavering on their beliefs.
The strange part is that for the first time in my recollection, the anti-porn movement, a part of the feminist movement, has aligned itself with a conservative viewpoint. The main barriers are internal in my opinion. I feel that the average person in this country would not really care about the lack of pornography. If people knew the ills surrounding the pornography industry most people would surely support legislation to limit its use and abuse.
However, liberal followers are not willing to cooperate with other groups that usually have opposing view points. This reminds me of a story about two feuding farmers that both die in a flood along with their families because they refused to join forces and bank the rising river. Because even many members of the anti-porn movement are hesitant about crossing the bridge to join the conservative right on this issue, women are being harmed.
I apologize for the injected idea in this section but I feel that when viewed from afar, every situation becomes more reasonable and at the same time irrational. The questions on page 75 in the text book Contemporary Movements and Ideologies by Roberta Garner bring up some very good points about the anti-pornography movement. First, I believe that the anti-porn movement would define the good society as one where there are equal rights for women in all situations. More importantly, I believe that the movement would state that safety and dignity for all people would be a very cement norm in the good society. The current existing societies, after all, are neither safe nor fair for women. The new set of beliefs and practices would be much more complicated. The anti-porn movement is a feminist movement and would thus contain many of these beliefs.
The difference would be that laws would exist that would maintain the dignity of all people through better portrayal of women and homosexuals in a variety of media. The result would be less sex crimes and rape within the good society. The way that we can change our society to make it correspond to our vision of the good society is to limit the production and consumption of pornography which furthers the abuses that the movement is against. The ideological critique of the state is not yet clear cut. This issue blurs the traditional way in which we like to divide our politics; the right against the left.
However, the economic sphere would be impacted by the passage of anti-porn legislation. There would be protest because, after all, this is a business to many. There would be no hunger or famine associated with the passage of such legislation so it is arguable that, in the grand scheme of things, there would be little impact. Politically, things are vastly different. I stated before that there are altering ideas that are both holding back and advancing the movement. While some of the movement is hesitant about aligning themselves with the conservative right, some of the movement adores the idea. They like the idea because of the conservative rights ability and numbers. I feel that if they split the left on this issue then the legislation would pass easily. Culturally, the anti-pornography movement would further us as a people. Since some of our largest set backs in the area of equality are in seeing others as objects, this movement would greatly limit that impulse.
Social reproduction would be very hard to estimate what impact this movement would have on the sphere of social reproduction. In some manners, it may limit the sex lives of some people who use pornography to enrich their sex lives. In another way, it may help to make sex more sexual instead of an act. Hopefully, there would be a new appreciation for life both existent and future. In my opinion this movement is very easy to support. The evidence is overwhelming that pornography harms people. Altering perceptions about women is horribly but, to have your perceptions altered unconsciously is almost as bad. Men who are unaware that what they do hurts people are dangerous. There is nothing innocent about pornography.
There is nothing free about pornography. Pornography hurts people. The freedom of a certain few to perform these acts has placed many people in a position of suffering. Though I have never really used pornography, I have had brushes with it back in my fraternity days. I had friends that relished in the gruesome art that always turned my stomach. I feel very bad for those friends that I had who honestly believed that pornography was okay. I wish that I hadn’t written this paper. I stayed up late at night and read the articles and then thought until the wee hours of the morning.
There I found something that I hadn’t seen before. I found a country that can turn a blind eye and not intervene in spite of the statistics. I found people who were completely unable to see the disgusting residue that pornography leaves all over this country every day. I found anger. Anger towards the users of pornography because they just don’t know any better. Anger directed at the feminists who will fight to the grave for equal pay while their sisters are robbed of their dignity, safety and lives. How do we expect to have anything equal if we can’t even recognize these simple things? A person places their hand on a hot stove and gets burned; this we understand. An angry loaner is convinced that women just want to be bent over and screwed then when he rapes some woman on her way through a parking lot we act surprised.
I feel that this movement is going to gain rapid support as soon as some of these findings are more main stream. I also would believe that as more of these findings are discovered and researched this country would increase efforts to help its own citizens. I can’t forget the quote by researcher Edward Donnerstein after his 1983 study. “The relationship between particularly violent sexual images in media and subsequent aggression...is much stronger statistically than the relationship between smoking and lung cancer.”
Posted by Jo at 5:29 PM