In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

I Can Never Tell

This guest post is by Thomas MacAulay Millar, feminist, kinkster, litigator and essayist. He blogs regularly at The Yes Means Yes Blog and is a frequent contributor to Feministe.

I don’t buy porn from any of the big companies that make BDSM porn. It’s not that I have a problem with consenting adults making depictions of sexually explicit conduct for the purpose of arousing viewers. In concept, I’m a fan of some writers who also make porn, and I’m friends with a few people who make or have made porn. And when it’s my friends, I’ll watch as much of it as I can get, because I have some certainty about what kind of experience they had.

But when the producer is some big company far away and I don’t know any of the people involved, how would I know if the bottom’s limits were negotiated and respected? If the bottom had a good experience? I recently posted about the Bagley abuse case in Missouri, where a woman was kidnapped for years and raped and abused, in a relationship that had all the underlying dynamics of a near-terminal domestic battering case. She ended up on the cover of a mainstream porn magazine with a BDSM theme. Let’s just say for the sake of argument that that’s a fluke. How common are those flukes? I have no way of knowing.

It has become common in BDSM-themed porn to give post-scene interviews of the bottom, or of the top and bottom together, and the bottoms always seem to say they had a great time and would do it again. They never had a tough time. They never felt the experience was mixed. They never say that and even if they are glad they did it, they probably won’t do it again. They never felt stressed and at sea. I’m not even talking about having been forced beyond their boundaries; that’s rape. I’m talking about normal emotional processing that sometimes goes with a hard scene. I’ve been in the “that was tough, and I’m glad I did it but I may not want to do it again” place with certain activities. And a month later I’ve been in the “I remember how hard that was, but I want to do it again” place. What we do pushes our physical and emotional boundaries, and that’s part of the point. But the interviews I’ve seen are just about all sunshine.

Clarisse Thorn interviewed Tim Woodman, who works in that industry niche. Here’s what he says about the interviews:

I know too many models who have been paid “hush money” to keep quiet about their injuries at the larger fetish porn companies. I know too many who have had their paychecks withheld until they do a positive interview. They are forced to lie on camera, telling how they enjoyed it and would do it again, when in fact the opposite was true. I know too many girls who have worked for these larger companies, and when they refused or even objected to activities that were beyond their limits, they were told that they were a “problem girl” and that they would not get much work with an attitude like that.

This kind of business practice is reprehensible. In the BDSM community, if you play like that, word quickly gets around that you are an asshole and are not to be trusted. But in the adult movie business, you can threaten and cajole women by withholding their pay. You can intimidate them by warning that nobody will hire them if they have self-respect, and are unwilling to bend or break their personal limits. That is rape. That is illegal.

[Emphasis in original.]

I’d love to cosign what he says about the BDSM community, but I’ve written before that it doesn’t always work that way. People make excuses for their friends and avoid washing their dirty laundry in public, and the effect is that too often people — and in my experience, too often women — who have been sexually assaulted in scenes are silenced.

Read More…Read More…

Posted in Sex

Fundamentalists Ruin Everything.

Basil, a restaurant in Crown Heights, Brooklyn, is a kosher joint that seeks to bridge the gap between the neighborhood’s very divided Jewish and black populations. And it sounds pretty great!

Danny Branover, Basil’s principal owner, was struck by that when in 2001 he moved from Jerusalem to Crown Heights, which he chose because he, his wife and their children — he has seven now — belong to the Lubavitch movement. He remembers thinking that its Jewish and black residents were more estranged than the Jews and Arabs in Israel, who, he notes, have profound political differences and much more reason to distrust one another. That confounded him.

“I talk to anybody,” Branover says. His father, a Russian physicist, joined the Lubavitch movement as an adult, while his mother, along with many other relatives, never embraced religion with quite the same fervor. “I like interacting with people. It was very annoying.”

Besides which, part of the distinctive philosophy and theology of the Lubavitch movement is to reach out to, educate and inspire others: only when the world is a more virtuous place, the thinking goes, will the messiah come. So why, Branover always wondered, did so many Lubavitchers in Crown Heights keep so steadfastly to themselves?

Branover started Basil to bring the diverse communities in Crown Heights together. He hired a Catholic Latina manager, who in turn hired a culturally diverse staff. There were some bumps in the road — waitresses singing “happy birthday” without realizing that Hasidic men aren’t allowed to listen to women sing — but generally things were going pretty well. Until:

Read More…Read More…

Layla is a lucky girl

You may have heard that Jessica Valenti and her husband Andrew Golis recently had a baby girl, Layla Sorella. You might not have heard about the circumstances of her birth — how sick Jessica was, how early Layla was, and how both of them have pulled through. You can read Jessica’s story here. Layla is still tiny, but she’s a fighter, just like her mom. And I’m sure as she grows up, the story of her birth will reflect the fact that she’s been strong from the moment she came into this world, even under perilous circumstances. She’s a lucky little girl to be born to such amazing parents. I’m lucky to count Jessica as a friend, and I’m inspired by how courageously, openly and incisively she writes about even the toughest times in her life.

In honor of Layla, Jessica and Andrew, and per Jessica’s suggestion, I made a donation to Women Deliver. I hope you will too.

Thanks, Jessica, for everything you do. And welcome Layla! Your mama has worked really hard to make the world a better place for you, and I know she’s still going strong. I’m looking forward to seeing how you follow in her footsteps, and what paths you create for yourself.

Posted in Uncategorized

Anatomy of an Adoption Crisis

This article by EJ Graff is a fascinating look into international adoption practices. It pulls the cover back on the myth that there are thousands upon thousands of adoptable babies in the world, just waiting to be saved from poverty and abandonment. In fact, international adoption operates very much on the gray market, with babies being procured like products through coercion, bribery and sometimes out-right stealing. As certain countries are positioned as adoption “hot-spots” — trendy or easy places from which to adopt a child — and unethical practices flourish, the reaction from the U.S. government is often too little too late.

According to these internal documents, the State Department was confident it had discovered systemic nationwide corruption in Vietnam — a network of adoption agency representatives, village officials, orphanage directors, nurses, hospital administrators, police officers, and government officials who were profiting by paying for, defrauding, coercing, or even simply stealing Vietnamese children from their families to sell them to unsuspecting Americans. And yet, as these documents reveal, U.S. officials in Hanoi did not have the right tools to shut down the infant peddlers while allowing the truly needed adoptions to continue. Understanding how little the State Department and USCIS could do, despite how hard they tried, helps reveal what these U.S. government agencies need to respond more effectively in the current adoption hot spots, Nepal and Ethiopia — and in whatever country might be struck by adoption profiteering next.

This summary of 10 adoption cases in Vietnam illustrates the situation — and it’s disturbing. Adoption can be a great thing, and there are certainly many children in need. But when there’s a demand by wealthier nations for children from poorer ones, the poorer ones are under a lot of pressure to meet that supply. The practice of simply cutting off adoptions doesn’t get the root of the problem.

Performing my democratic duty…

In August, I voted in a federal election for the very first time.

I was very excited and wanted to make sure I did it just right, so I researched every single candidate. That may not sound like much to you, so let me tell you how it works in Australia. There are two ballots, one for the House of Representatives and one for the Senate. There were three people running for the House of Representatives in my electorate, so sorting that part out was fairly easy. (Especially as I had Some Issues with two of the candidates. Ahem.) But there were eighty-four people running for the senate in my state of New South Wales. Now, for the Senate ballot you can vote above the line or below the line. When you vote above the line, you pick your party and your preferences fall in line with theirs. You can easy look up the preference deals that every party has lodged. Independents and such don’t get a say above the line. Alternatively, you can vote below the line and number every single individual. It’s a bit more complicated than that, but that’s the jist of it. Of course, because I was ridiculously excited, I had to vote below the line. So let’s just say that planning out the order of my preferences took me quite a while.

I went in to vote and was met by how-to-vote volunteers for the three major parties, the Liberal Party, (who are the major conservative party, just to confuse you) the Australian Labor Party (who – spoiler! – won the election, and are to the left of the Liberals) and the Australian Greens (who are exactly what you’d gather from the name). It was actually really beautiful to see them all work together so well and be so pleasant to each other, rivals though they were. They really cared about what they were doing, and that this young person have a great first voting experience. It was heartwarming to see how happy they all were for me and it made the day really special.

I went in there, and I got a sore neck from filling in those eighty-four boxes, and checked it all over painstakingly to make sure I had it right. The best bit was putting the candidates for the One Nation party, that bastion of mindblowing racism, at numbers 83 and 84 respectively.

I’m grinning hugely just thinking back to the moment I took a breath and put my ballot papers through their slots. That was my vote making my little contribution to the nation I live in. I’ve rarely been so proud. I walked out of there with the six ‘I voted!’ stickers I was given – yeah, they were really happy for me – which was kind of fabulous.

Got any moments of voting pride you wish to share?

Hugging is for girly-men

George Bush chest-bumping a young man

Saying “This is one of the most ridiculous, embarrassing things I have ever seen, even on an Andrew Breitbart website” sounds a little… overblown. But then there’s this.

Am I the only one who saw weakness when President Obama and his departing chief of staff Rahm Emanuel gave each other big, fat, full-bore hug following their speeches at the resignation event in the White House’s East Room on Friday?

Remember, this is on global television. And it has to do with the very top of the United States government. Our friends and enemies were all watching.

I think the hug lacked dignity. It did not send a message of American power and forcefulness. So I fret about the reaction around the world to this kind of fraternity-like emotionalism in full public view.

Why not just a dignified, stand-up, serious handshake? That’s what Reagan would have done. A strong handshake shows friendship, respect, and even affection. But a big fat hug seems to go over the line.

Yeah, I’ve got nothin’.

I’m Sorry

Study Shocker: Women apologize more than men.

If you think you hear women saying “I’m sorry” more than men, you’re right. Women apologize more often than men do, according to a new study.

But it’s not that men are reluctant to admit wrongdoing, the study shows. It’s just that they have a higher threshold for what they think warrants reparation. When the researchers looked at the number of apologies relative to the number of offenses the participants perceived they had committed, the researchers saw no differences between the genders.

“Men aren’t actively resisting apologizing because they think it will make them appear weak or because they don’t want to take responsibility for their actions,” said study researcher Karina Schumann, a doctoral student in social psychology at the University of Waterloo in Ontario, Canada. “It seems to be that when they think they’ve done something wrong they do apologize just as frequently as when women think they’ve done something wrong. It’s just that they think they’ve done fewer things wrong.”

So it’s not just that women have a knee-jerk “I’m Sorry” reflex — it’s that men really don’t think they have anything to be sorry for.