Having stated my fundamental disagreement with Nine Deuce over her basic philosophy and her use of that racist cartoon (and it should be noted that she has now gone ahead and taken it down, though the rest of the GenderBorg Posse, especially Heart(less) and Witchy,  still defend it with pride); I will now proceed to do the fundamentally contrarian thing and actually agree with her on something she posted today at her place

Funny, that…there is actually an issue or two where I as a sex rad progressive can actually agree with a antiporn radicalfeminist. So sue me.

Today, ND posted about her grave issues with the clothing conglomerate American Apparel, which is well known for not only its guarantee of sweatshop-free clothing designed for the young, hip, middle-class market, but even more for the…ummmm…innovative ads they run to sell their gear.  That would be innovative as in “Throw lots and lots and LOTS of SEX, SEX, and more SEX at ‘em; as close to porn as we can get without actual sex happening!!!”

It has gotten them and their CEO, Dov Charney, very rich and very successful…but it has also gotten them in a heap of controversy over the overtly sexual use of youngsters in their ads. Now, it is granted that none of the models in the AA ads actually have sex, so Charney and AA aren’t liable to the kiddie porn laws or even 2257…but still, they do kinda stick out there as going pretty damn far in the T & A department.

And it doesn’t help matters either that Charney has had the reputation of being either  — depending on which side of the fence you stand — a Reniassance Man with a unique and open-minded attitude towards sex in the workplace…or a creepy, skeezy pervert and near pedophile who forces his dick on every woman he sees and employees.  He was well known for the notorious act of openly masturbating in front of a female reporter who once interviewed him for a trade journal (the woman interviewer wasn’t offended and took it all in stride); and he openly boasts of sleeping with his ad models.

And even his company, despite its anti-sweatshop commitment, has come under fire from traditional unions for underpaying his workers; along with the accusations of sexual harassment. A bitter lawsuit was filed at one time by some female employees there, but it was soon thrown out.

Obviously, ND sees him in the latter light as a total pervert and asshole, and the perfect model of the corporate pimp who uses womwn’s bodies for his own pleasure, not to mention his theft of gritty urban fashion for petty gain.

I almost want to blame Dov Charney for hipsterism. His store is a mecca for people who think they’re making the world a better, hipper place by overvaluing ugly cotton clothing, and it’s the place people go when they’re ready to make the belated move from dance music to lame corporate “indie” rock. I definitely blame Dov Charney for the dorkification of some of the more interesting urban areas in this country. I mean, once you see an American Apparel store go up in a neighborhood, you can pretty much assume that any real counter-cultural activity going on in the area is over and that any interesting residents will be moving elsewhere, afterward to be replaced by Radiohead fans with Apple computers and sparrow tattoos who don’t mind paying triple the current rents.

Whether he made hispterism the asshole trend of the decade or not, he’s making sure it spreads and doesn’t go away, so fuck him to the floor for that alone.

[....]

But did I mention that he likes to sexually harass his employees, the women he does business with, and everyone else he comes across who owns a vagina (he’s been sued at least 5 times for it)? Did I mention that his company’s advertisements (which are done in-house and can’t be blamed on anyone else) are basically kitschy 70s porn? Did I forget to say that he coerces the “models” he hires to create that 70s porn into letting him pork them, often by warning them that their jobs depend on it? Oh yeah, he also jacked off on someone and he likes to walk around the office naked, firing anyone who doesn’t like it. He’s a bad guy.

I suppose it isn’t much of a surprising story. Total geek in high school (I mean, fuck, his name is Dov Charney… and did you see him?), hated by everyone, can’t get anyone to touch his wiener, gets rich and powerful, then takes it out on the women he has some authority over and pretends it’s just one big fun sex party.

For the sake of clarity, it should be known that Charney does have his defenders, including some present employees at AA who insist that no sexual harassment occured at all, that everything going on there is totally consensual, and that it is mostly disgruntled former workers with axes to grind who are responsible for his and the company’s bad rep.

Now….there was a part of me back in the day who would actually, in my more utopian moments, actually see the glass-half-full side of this issue; where the antics of American Apparel’s workplace could be actually seen as a model for a more open and progressive viewpoint of handling sexuality in the workplace. I mean, can you imagine a job where there would be no hangups about who’s sleeping with who; and where open sexuality would be treated with respect rather than ridicule??  It may make for wonderful wanking fantasy for erotic fiction and the “Sex at Work” section of the adult movie store; but could it quite work out for real in the workplace of today??

Ahhhhh…errrrrrrr..uhhhh….no.  Not even close.  Not in this lifetime. And not with the prevailing attitudes.

Don’t get me wrong, though…I would wonder whether a woman with the power (both corporate and sexual) of Dov Charney would be able to pull off such a feat; and it would make for an interesting experiment for the future should an openly sexual and intelligent woman ever achieve such power in the corporate world. Within the porn industry, indeed, there are women who are slowly getting that kind of corporate power, such as Lisa Ann, a porn performer who now runs her own talent agency for porn performers (Lisa Ann Talent Management, which manages some of the heaviest hitters in porn like Nina Hartley and up and cummers like Bridgett Lee), and who still does the occasional video and strip club tour.  And there are women like Vicky Vette, who have parlayed their years of experience in the corporate world in middle management into their subsequent careers in the industry (and in Vicky’s case, her highly successful website.

Problem is, though, the prevailing attitudes about sexuality being both private and not fit for public consumption, and the potential for abuse by  leering men (and women) who may take advantage of such an open attitude; not to mention the wandering eye of the vice cops; would probably squash  that experiment flatter than the Catrock in West Texas.

But while Charney’s personal perversions may be an issue only to those who feel offended by his act, his use of young girls for AA’s “sexy” ads is the main issue for me…and why ultimately I’m more than tempted to agree with Nine Deuce for a change. While I am all for much more adult sexual expression, I draw the line explicitly at using young underage girls and boys as hooks for selling sex to pimp clothing….and I’d much rather that I not see 15- and 16-year-old girls  and boys be put out in the ‘ho and slut fashion merely to make more money for Dov’s private sex parties. That’s why we have legal age of consent, fool, and why porn should be made by ADULTS.

Besides, if AA really wants to push the sex angle so much to pimp their gear, why not simply hire out actual and LEGAL women from porn for their ads??  I mean, they would be actually doing a service by giving these girls an alternative source of income, and providing actual benefits like insurance wouldn’t hurt their cause.  They could even team up with HUSTLER and their “Barely Legal” line of videos; it’s not as if they don’t share the same demographic. There is no need to go to the “Buy our clothes so that you can get seriously laid by fresh, hot, young ass” card…unless thinly-veiled pedophilia was part of the hook to begin with.

Sorry, Dov, but you represent open-minded sexuality the way Jim Jones represents Christianity. Very, very, badly.  And you’re still a skezy, slimy perv, too. (I don’t mean that in the sex-positive way, either.) Youz gets no love or support from me…only a grand “FAIL”. I’d shop at Wal-Mart before I ever touch one of your clothing.

Besides…Danni Ashe did it so much more better, and would kick your ass both professionally and sexually. And, she’s one hell of a lot sexier looking when she jills off, too.

(Note: Even Renegade Evolution, who knows a thing or ten about sex and taking charge, gives Dov Charney the big FAIL.)

(Note #2: Amanda Marcotte at Pandagon (nice upgrade!!) gets her forearm shivers into Charney and AA’s backsides, too.)

[Updated: scroll down to the bottom.]

Oh, how nice….I was so busy answering Nine Deuce’s inquiry that I glossed over the rest of her essay….and it’s even more loaded and leading of the question than the questions:

Where are the men who want to argue vociferously for women’s “right” to participate in their own exploitation? Where are the men clambering to convince me that (women) getting naked for money is empowering? Where are all the dudes who want to tell me that feminism is about “choice” and that women who are making the “choice” to suck a bunch of dicks for money are leading the charge toward some future utopia in which women will be safe, free, and human? Not many of these men exist, because most men know that they’d have a hard time keeping a straight face while making such claims. So why are women making the claim for them?

Of course, all this is just a figment of ND’s vivid imagination, since no prominent sex-pozzie male has ever, at least as far as i have seen, ever claimed the universal that sex work is innately “empowering” to all women (other than those women who have testified personally that it was empowering for them….but you know that their voices don’t count in the minds of radicalfemiinists like ND); or that there is anything “utopian” about “making the ‘choice’ to suck a bunch of dicks for money”. And of course, the idea that women can’t speak for themselves (at least, not the women who don’t think like Nine Deuce and Heart(less) and Maggie Hays and Witchy-Woo) but need men to carry their water, tends not to get through the microcode implants in their brains.

But even that does not compare to the greatest weapon that ND brandishes in her assault on pro-pornie men…..namely, this cartoon:

Uh-huh. Nothing says “exploitation” quite like gawking, leering men staring down a scantily-clad woman.

Except, ND…that it isn’t quite exploitation if the woman actually likes it. Or the guys actually respect her. And they are willing to tip her graciously. (Yes, ND, she’s the one getting paid, and they’re doing the paying. So, who’s exploiting who here???)

But, it’s the racial mixture of the gawking men that should really squick everyone here: does Nine Deuce really understand how depicting men of color as mouth-dripping, sex-obsessed adolescents just might feed into charges of racism???

Errrrr…..just sayin’.

Update: Get a load of how Nine Deuce attempts to dismiss criticism of using this cartoon:

“I think the picture is of a bunch of old white dudes that are outside the reach of the spotlight. If the artist intended them to look like men of color, I’m not backing that, but I doubt it. In any case, with regard to the post it’s a tertiary issue at best. Back to the point.”

Oh, really??? Well, bless her heart…..or, to be more accurate, BULLSHIT.

Notice, for example, the guy at the forefront who’s staring directly at the stripper’s ass. Looks Black to me….or else that must be one powerless spotlight.

Or…the two men standing next to the man who’s talking about “Enough exploitiation, let’s have the empowerment!!!” Most definitely Black…especially the bald-headed one.

But, of course, all of that is merely tertiary to the main point of…what?? That sex-positive men only want to get into women’s panties?? That their respect for women who perform sex acts on stage or screen (or even those who simply strip in night clubs) are simply “Freedom to Rape With Impunity” cards to assault women with?? That we all are simply Ted Bundys in training??

How very antiracist of you, Nine Deuce….I see that Jon Justice isn’t the only one needing a trip on the Klew Train.

Update #2: Leave it to Amber Rhea to bring down the bolt of truth onto such haters:

Yes, no surprise, shit like this and this (check the comment from “L”) downright enrages me. And even that word, I think, does not do justice to the pure RAGE I feel when I see people DENYING MY AGENCY AS A HUMAN BEING, denying my very existence, denying that I am an intelligent, capable, self-aware woman who is CONSTANTLY examining and reflecting on my own life and the choices I make. It hurts the most when it comes from other women, in particular other feminists.

[...]

It enrages me, and it makes me feel sick, and sad, and just awful about humanity, actually. Because why is it such a difficult concept to convey, that my life is mine, my choices are mine, and just because they differ from yours that does not mean I’m damaged or stupid? Why is it so hard to see that accepting the same old stereotypes of women who are openly sexual (not to mention women who work in the sex industry!) as stupid or damaged or victims or villains is nothing more than some seriously OLD-SCHOOL PATRIARCHAL BULLSHIT? It HURTS to have that same old double standard inflicted on me by other women, by other FEMINISTS.

This post gets the “hypocrisy” tag because, as I said to Elisa the other night, that’s what it is, plain and simple.

Pole dancing, for example? The smug characterizations of it as “empowerful” or “degrading” and whatever other bullshit so-called feminist bloggers (not to even mention non-feminists, especially anti-feminist men; holy shit, I can’t even go there, I would get damn near suicidal) say about it, talking OUT OF THEIR ASSES, assuming I must be doing it for my boyfriend (!!!!!!) or whatever else… holy fucking shit I cannot take it anymore. But guess what I DO know, assholes? That when I’m pole dancing, I feel joyful and whole, I feel a happiness that I rarely feel at any other time that permeates my entire being, I feel ALIVE - and the last thing on my mind is what “Teh Menz” might be thinking (especially because nine times out of ten, there AREN’T ANY MEN PRESENT anyway).

And Amber’s not even a paid sex worker….just a civilian who does pole dancing for the sheer fun. Is she one of the “exploited”, too, ND???

This is getting dangerously close to a “Kiss my ass” moment, so I will stop here.

Update 8-4-08:

Well, now….seems that Nine Deuce has decided to take down the pic from her blog, claiming that she doesn’t want the allegations of racism to distract from the point about the “subjugation” of stripping that she was attempting to make. There’s an extended exchange in the thread between ND and Bint Alshamsa (of My Private Casbah), with the usual drive-by smack from the GenderBorg Peanut Gallery (mostly Gayle), where they hash out the debate on racism.

But never fear…seems like Heart(less) and Witchy-Woo have now taken up ND’s slack in full defense of the pic….and especially get a load of what Witchy did to attempt to counter the racism charge: (this captured and smacked down so well by Caroline over at Uncool):

Yup…..that clears it up real good. No racism at all. Nothing to see here, just move along, losers.

Hey, Witchy…..I really do hate to break this to you, my lady (actually, I don’t), but you do know that brightening up a pic via Photoshop or The Gimp does not eliminate differences in flesh tones, right??? Problem is, even with “the spotlight” turned on as you attempt to do, you can still see the Black faces staring at the dancer…thusly, the pic can still be perceived as promoting the usual racist stereotypes of oversexed, drooling, raging hormonal Black men targeting dimwitted, bubbleheaded slutty White women for abuse and rape.

Oh…and the insulting way you put quotes on the dancer isn’t too bright and progressive, either….just ask some actual dancers on that one.

Never say that I’m not hip to answering a challenge.

Since Nine Deuce asked so politely, and Witchy-Woo laid down the gauntlet so forcefully (now, I can’t speak for Jack Goff or IACB, only for myself), I will do my best to answer all of ND’s questions about how we sex-pozzie men aren’t the ogre rapists and demonizers that she and W-W think we are.

Let’s go by the numbers, shall we??

1)  Do you believe that women would participate in sex work if we did not live in an oppressive, misogynistic culture? If so, what would the sex industry look like in a world in which women were seen as possessing the same humanity men do?

Probably, yes…because I believe that misogyny is not just an element of porn but endemic in the entire culture; thusly, a more democratic and egalitarian culture that distributed wealth and resources more equally would allow women more freedom of choice and thought…and more access to safer and more sane sex work and media. And with better rules and regulations to ensure the safety and consensuality of client and worker alike, and the more corrosive puritan attitudes transformed and vetted, sex work would become itself more sane and safe. It won’t be perfect, since there will always be assholes who will attempt to push themselves and their myopias onto both workers and clients, but at least it will be so much easier to isolate and contain them from the general population.

2)  Do you believe that pornography and prostitution negatively affect some women’s lives (obviously some sex workers suffer abuse, but I am referring to women outside the sex industry here)? If not, why not? If so, does any of the responsibility for that lie with sex workers, or does it lie solely with the producers and pimps? Or somewhere else?

When it is enfused with sex negative and antiegalitarian values?? Sure, porn and prostitution can indeed negatively affect the lives of outsiders.  BUT…so can so many other factors, such as income levels, socioeconomics, race, access to basic human resources.  The difference between we sex-poz radicals (both men and women) and the antiporn “feminists” is in how we would resolve such inequities.  They favor censorship and imposition of a narrowly based sexually conservative vision on everyone; we favor greater access to more choices and developing safer environments for such choices.

3)  Why aren’t there more men out there arguing for women’s “right” to participate in sex work? What do you make of the fact that very few men call sex work a feminist choice? I’d also be happy to discuss the arguments of men who do make such a claim.

Gee, ND, I thought that men were universally FOR women’s “right” to participate in their own subjugation?? Doesn’t that kinda make your argument kinda moot???

And I thought that feminism was a women’s movement that didn’t concern itself with what men thought about them???

But to answer your question more directly: Because a great deal of men have inoculated themselves with the dominant cultural beliefs about sexuality being redeemed only through “intimacy” and procreation through marriage?? Even though they tend to violate these vows with regularity??

4)  Can women like Jenna Jameson can be considered feminists for taking leadership roles in the production of pornography? Why or why not? If the answer is yes, how can we reconcile the negative effects pornography has on women’s lives with referring to a producer of mainstream pornography as a feminist?

Well….I don’t see Jenna calling herself a feminist, any more than Carly Fiona or Whitney Houston or Cindy McCain calling themselves “feminists”. But considering how successful she has been in her profession, whether she calls herself a feminist or not, she is still a woman deserving of respect and admiration for her success and her leadership.

Now…I would consider someone like…say, Nina Hartley, definitely a feminist, and definitely a leader in revolutionizing the production of porn and sexuality. Her legacy of bringing progressive values (not only feminist, but also anti-racist and anti-ageist and pro-pleasure) simply can’t be dismissed as readily….and as to “negative effects on women’s lives”: well, we’ll have to just agree to disagree on that.

5) How can sex work empower individual women when it requires that women submit to being objectified and performing acts for money rather than out of genuine desire to do them?

Well….people are “objectified” every day to do things that they normally wouldn’t do for the paycheck…and they do learn much from the experience that they can use later on in their lives. And who says that the women don’t already enjoy those acts they get paid to do in their private lives for free?? And as Nina has said consistently, sexual objectification isn’t always that bad in itself.

6)  Alternatively, if one genuinely enjoys something and gets paid for it, does it become a feminist act?In other words, does feminism exist to advance the cause of women as a whole or for individual women to use as a justification for their personal choices?

It depends on how you describe “feminism” to be, ND. If feminism is defined as to maximize the humanity of women to equal that assumed of men and enlarge the choices and resources that women should have, then I guess that doing something that you love and getting paid well for it would count as being the ultimate goal of “feminism”. But then again, I’m a man, and I don’t feel myself suited to define what a movement of women should be like; that should be up to women themselves. I tend to judge political movements by their actions, not by their labels or gender…or their private sexual practices.

7) If sex work is a valid, feminist choice, what are we to make of women who say that their participation in sex work resulted from dire poverty, drug addiction, etc.?

I have a novel idea: ATTACK THE POVERTY AND THE DRUG ADDICTION AND THE CONDITIONS THAT CAUSED SUCH, NOT THE OCCUPATION. Why should sex work have to be the scapegoat for problems that are so much more universal??

8)  I see sex work as a reductionist commodification of human sexuality. Do you think that the reduction of sex to a commodity has a negative effect on our ability to explore and express the potential of human sexuality? If not, why not?

Well….since I don’t quite see sexuality as you do, ND, I’ll just have to pass on that loaded question.  And EVERYTHING in capitalism is commodified; that’s capitalism’s nature. Of course, if you believe that “the potential of human sexuality” can be best realized by neutering, slut-shaming, and badgering women into submitting into your particular narrow view of sexuality, then be my guest.

9)  If you’re a sex-positive dude, tell me why. Why are you in such a huff to help women out? And why does it manifest as sex positivism? Why is your desire to help women out limited to arguing for their “right” to serve you sexually?

Ahh, yes…the most loaded question of all for last: the old “You evol ’sex pozzie men’ just wanna get into our freakin’ panties!!!” meme.

Now, ND….if I was in fact capable of meeting Renegade Evolution or Nina Hartley or Vicky Vette or Bridgett Lee or whomever sexy and intelligent woman I currently admire and respect, do you really think that I wouldn’t be in the least interested in jumping their bones??  But there is a distinct reason why I wouldn’t do such: BECAUSE I RESPECT THEM AS FULL HUMAN BEINGS.  First off, they are already taken. Secondly, they have the right of first refusal…remember that old meme “NO means NO!!!”  (Now, if they came to me and specifically wanted me to get it on with them, then that’s a different question altogether…but my stated principle is that unless they say yes, just assume NO. Not “Not now,” not “Maybe later”…but “NO.”

Trust me on this, ND…..sex isn’t much fun or pleasurable to me if the person on the other end isn’t enjoying herself as much.  That’s the fundamental difference between a genuinely sex-positive male and a boorish, MRA-ish lout who really doesn’t give a Hoover Damn how the woman feels. It’s not about a woman’s “‘right’ to serve me sexually”; it’s about her right to serve HERSELF sexually…and if she prefers to serve herself with one man or the entire roster of the New York Giants team; or one woman, or the entire Los Angeles Sparks women’s pro basketball team, or just by herself with her favorite toy…then that’s all right by me.

The only means in which such a woman “serves” me is that she is an active participant in her own pursuit of safe and consensual pleasure…and that she is open and honest and willing to share that pleasure with others.  That, in the end, is what turns me on, gets me off, and earns my respect.

And no, ND…I don’t have to want to have sex with a woman to respect her for her humanity.  I was brought to this earth by a woman; was raised by a woman, have bosses and supervisors who happen to be women, and look up to and admire several women whom I have no intentions of ever having sex with. There are more than enough willing sexual subjects who celebrate my sexual desire for them willingly to satisfy me. (Even if only in fantasy.)

Hopefully, that fulfills my end of the challenge…probably not enough to change ND’s opinion of us sex-poz men (and definitely not enough for Witchy to lay off the claws….but then again, I don’t blog to please them in the first place.

Update 7-28-08: ManEegee over at Latino Politico has a full list of blog reaction and protest on Jon Justice here.

Update #2: Ahhh, lookee here….seems that Jon Just-an-ASS isn’t quite as good at taking shit as he is as giving it out…and he’s getting plenty of it….hot, fresh, and consistent. From the Feathered Bastard blog at the Phoenix New Times site today:

In fact, in a recent blog post, Justice sounds like a whiny little bitch served with his own medicine.

“Welcome to the hypocrisy as Isabels Garcias [sic] group DERECHOS HUMANOS has launched a campaign against me!” he kvetches. “Do I work for the government? Does the taxpayer pay my salary? What what [sic] about my 1st Amendment rights? No one ever said that Isabel and Derechos never had the “right” to protest. It was and is still about a lawyer and public servant acting inappropriate per the AZ State Bar Rules and Pima County Policy.”

What a pant-load! Garcia didn’t threaten Arpaio with violence, which is what Just-An-Ass is referring to when he mentions Pima County policy. All she did was pick up a frickin’ pinata head. Even the piñata-beating itself is protected, symbolic speech. You may not like it, but that’s what the First Amendment’s there for, to protect the speech you don’t like.

I don’t really think Justice should be driven off the air, any more than Garcia should be fired from her position. But Justice drew first blood, and Derechos Humanos is counterattacking in defense of their gal Garcia. Justice brought this on himself. And if he can’t cowboy-up and take it, he should consider a new career as an Avon Lady.

Just like a right-wingnut bully, ehhh?? Attempt to shift the blame to the victim. I’m surprised that Just-an-ASS didn’t go to the “She’s a hot mamacita slut who got what she deserved” card.

So now, he’s trying to get Mrs. Garcia fired from her Public Defender’s job for “inappropriate behavior” (i.e., leading the protest against Sheriff Joe)?? Gee..and Arapio’s running around at taxpayer expense (unlike Just-an-ASS, last time I recall, Arapio is still Sheriff of Maricopa County and thusly a PUBLIC official) is appropriate??

As appropriate, even, as faking a drowning of a dog on air?? Which, BTW, was the stunt that got Just-an-ASS booted from his old radio gig in Michigan. I guess that the brain cells weren’t clicking then, either.

What a man. Really. May he burn in 500 pits of Hell.

Update #3: Oh, good Goddess Almighthy……just when you think it couldn’t get any better; I just caught the second video that Jon Just-an-ASS made regarding Isabel Garcia. WOW…this dewd is sicker and more racist than I ever imagined. Just try and get through this shit without either laughing yourself silly…or throwing up.

Make that 1,000 pits of fire in Hell for you, you racist dumbass.

Update #4:Oh, now he’s really gone and done it….he even got Blackamazon to come out of retirement to whack his sorry ass……way to go, bastard. Betwen the Latin@ Posse and BA’s machete, I’d strongly consider taking a permanant vacation…in Chile.

Oh…and even freakin’ Trinity over at The Strangest Alrhemy is bashing Just-an-ASS…with a transcript (pdf file, requires Adobe Reader to view) of Video #2 above. You not very bright, Jonny boy.

——————————————————————

Original Post:

I’m sure that you’ve seen this video going around the blogosphere:

The man featured in this video is a right-wing radio shock jock wannabe named “Jon Justice”, working out a station in Tuscon, Arizona.

The woman that he is slandering in pinata effigy is a Latin@ activist and public defender named Isabel Garcia, whose main offense in “Justice”’s mind is that she dares to see her people as a bit more than just human pinatas for tighty Whitey Righties like “Justice” to use and throw away as “illegal aliens”.

And what prompted this little lovefest?? Well, Mrs. Garcia led a protest against a book signing by Maricopa County (where the greater Pheonix metro area is centered) Sheriff Joe Arapio, the famed “Tough Justice” advocate known for his slightly unorthodox means of humiliating those unlucky enough to violate his laws. Arapio was pushing his latest book attempting to slander “illegal aliens” (read that to mean, Latin@s not “smart” enough to know their place and stay there, or rich enough to vote for Republicans like Arapio and glorify him on FOX News Channel) for creating all sorts of evil and sin on decent, law-abiding (White) America. The protest happened to include a pinata party featuring a likeness of Arapio (including the trademark pink undies that he regularly imposes on his inmates).

Of course, you can say that having young kids beat down a pinata image of an authority figure like Arapio is a bit suggestive. On the other hand, creating a similar pinata image of an older woman of color with all the usual “Mexican” stereotypes; making all sorts of snark about wanting to “take her home with me”, and then using the image to mock the real person’s heritage, language, and gender….I would guess that that would be considered to be a bit beyond suggestive. ‘ya think??

Uh-huh. Try excessively stupid. Fundamentally racist. Physically threatening. And without a freakin’ clue, either.

Dewd…you do know that those people are THE MAJORITY over there, right?? And that if you persist in pissing them off enough, they can unify themselves and wipe your sorry ass off the face of the earth?? And reclaim the land that YOUR ancestors actually STOLE from them?? (Yes, Mr. Justice, that land you assume to be your own was actually stolen from them, not the other way around.)

But then again, given the state of political education in the age of Limbaugh, Boortz, the Savage Weiner, and Tancredo, it hardly surprises me about how privileged right-wingnuts like “Justice” get free airplay.

This fool needs a serious neurological workup….and a swift ass-kicking to boot.

My fellow and sister Headbussas Nezua and Brownfemipower have so much more on this developing story; see also Belledame. Info on the good deeds of Mrs. Garcia can be found here; she deserves the support of all decent progressive people.

here are people who just don’t know when to let go of their myopias.

And then….there are FeministAnonymist and Ginmar, who don’t even know how to begin to admit their myopias to begin with.

Both of them call themselves \”radical feminists\”….even though their core vision of sexuality is probably closer to the radical RIGHT than to any feminist I know.

Both of them are obsessed with the appearance and personal, private sexual habits of other women…..in the name of \\\”protecting\\\” women from the threat of \”the patriarchy\”. Even if that means denying the agency and humanity of those other women who don’t agree 110% with their beliefs.

And both of them, in not only my opinion, but proven by events and facts, are purified assholes.

Ginmar, of course, you already probably know about….the former Army soldier who served in Iraq, then formed her own LiveJournal blog to rant about her experiences, then converted to the school of \”radicalfeminist\” thought as expressed by the prophecy of Catherine McKinnon, Gail Dines, and Sam Berg, then proceded to use her soapbox as a ramrod against every woman who disagreed with her. (And quite a few men as well.)

FeministAnonymist, on the other hand, is a relatively new addition to the radfem crank crew; she apparently cut her teeth fighting the good fight agaiinst Islam (not just the terrorists, mind you, but the religion as a whole) before, like Ginny, turning her fire on the evil \”fun feminists\” and \\\”sex pozzies\\\” who are so polluting her precious air space and perverting a perfectly good feminist movement.

But both also share a common goal: they dislike independently sexual women with a passion.

And they especially despise women who talk back at them.

Which explains their continuing obsession with…..yeah, you got it…..bashing Renegade Evolution to shreds.

Ginny’s personal stalking of Ren Ev is more than documented (from \”She’s an college-educated SLUT who kneels at the Patriarchy’s COCK!!\” to \”Ms. Plastic Tits\”), and I’ll just refer you to Ren’s blog for the background…..but in a recent comment thread over at I Blame the Patriarchy, Ginny decided to reup the war by attacking Ren for the 456th time for \”trashing feminists\” and lying about her true condition in defense of her profession as a sex worker/porn performer. This time, it wasn’t Ren Ev’s rack that became the object of derision for Gooney Ginny, but her nose:

ginmar Jul 21st, 2008 at 7:55 am
Oh, christ, she’s got a picture of her ass on her blog? And she’s got Ren Ev commenting? Yeah, that’s empowerfulizing. RE’s had her nose broken four times in this emperfullizing career of hers as a stripper, but it’s the feminazis that are mean and awful to her. Jeezus.

The \”picture of her ass\” reference, BTW, is to Sarah over at Season of the Bitch, who did a nice nuclear vent on Ginmar and the rest of the GenderBorg Collective’s bashing of women for their appearance…tapped off by a \”Kiss my HUSTLER panty-clad ass\” moment at the end. (I guess that if the label had been Playboy or Victoria’s Secret or Trashy Lingerie, it wouldn’t have mattered, anyway. And…how ironic for HUSTLER….granny drawers?!?!? Isn’t that a bit…well….modest for the flagship mag of Larry Flynt??)

Ahh..anyways, back on topic….Ren got word of Ginny’s smack and answered back, both through IBTP and her own blog:

RenEv Jul 21st, 2008 at 8:18 am
Ginmar-
Let’s not do this again. Yes, my nose has been broken 4 times: Once in a car accident, once in a sports accident, and yep, by an abusive partner, who happened to be female. Never as part of my job, never due to stripping, or anything like that. My ex partner wasn’t a dancer or a patron of strippers, she was just a violent person. Also, once again dragging out my personal life to prove an argument, and distorting the actual facts of what happened, well, yes, I’m sick of it. My broken noses did not occur in the course of my job, and anyone saying so is not only lying, but very, very unethical.

Now, my broken noses? Talked about in my old LJ, which was “gathered” as part as the infamous Stormy file. But you know, I know I never mentioned getting a broken nose as part of my stripping experiences, because you know what? That’s not what happened. Two of them happened before I even started dancing. Not sure who decided to destort the truth on that one, but hey, what can I expect, right? It’s not like the truth of the situation matters, right?

Now, you would think that that would end that issue, right?? Wrong.

Apparently, the word of a sex worker can’t be accepted as fact amongst certain \\\”feminists\\\”…especially those with long-standing vendettas. This is Ginmar’s reaction to Ren Ev’s revelation about her broken nose:

ginmar Jul 21st, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Drakyn, why are you here? I can easily show those here how you treat feminists.
And frankly I wouldn’t trust anything RE said at all. She appears to have a miserable time as a stripper and porn actress, but she gets really infuriated at feminists who point that out. And she just plain makes shit up about radfems.

Oh, I get it….Renegade Evolution is incapable — in spite of her college education — to speak for herself and defend her life as a sex worker, but Ginmar, merely for being a radical feminist and a opponent of Ren’s existence as a human being, gets not only to define Ren’s experiences, but also her basic emotions about her experiences. Oh…and only she lies about \”radfems\”…not like Ginny’s friends and allies who threatened to out her personal life in front of her family; who have attacked her for her looks, her implants, her skin tone, her heritage, her private sexual preferences…well, simply for being her and not being one of Ginny’s allies, and who have never even deviated one bit from the libel of Ren Ev being the mastermind of the grand plot to destroy radfems now and forever.

This is feminism the way Phyllis Schafly would love to go up against.

But, at least Ginmar has a method to her madness.

FeministAnonymist, on the other hand, is simply like a monkey flailing his own shit at anything that moves…..she just locks and loads.

FemAnon was first discovered when she attempted an ambush on Natalia Antonova (Ukranian native who definitely ROCKS, BTW) because she dared to defend the human rights of Ukranian Arab Muslims. Then, at a blog hosted by an Pakistani emegre who hated Islam as much as she did, FemAnon continued the assault on Natalia, so much so that she got banished from the blog.

On Tuesday, though, FemAnon decided to rent out blog space to defend herself….and while most of her firepower was drawn at Natalia again, she did manage to fire a foul Scud Ren’s way:

The nudity and showing off brings me to the subject of Renegade Evolution. I see that she has quoted me on her infamous blog. I am beginning to think she finds my comments amusing.

I’m not afraid to say that I hate Renegade Evolution. First she pisses people off when she waves her tits in their face but then she is surprised that others get angry with her and dehumanize her. HONEY YOU DID IT TO YOURSELF. You dehumanized YOURSELF. No one in the feminist community owes you anything after what you chose to do.

Yes I believe in older women having authority to use in teaching the younger women a thing or two. I’m not much older than Renegade Evolution but I have more experience and have obviously read more books. I was willing to educate myself a long time ago and have been educating myself for years. I’m not an anti-inellectual like Renegade Evolution. If you come to a bad end, Ren Ev, remember that the real feminists saw it coming. No it’s not a threat. It’s a simple reality check. You let men use you, so don’t be surprised if and when it goes too far.

Once again I DO NOT LIE though. People have suggested that Ren Ev made death threats. She didn’t. She’s too smart for that and her smarts are what make her dangerous to the feminist movement in its whole. But her readership is disgusting and I am afraid of them as any woman with any intuition would be afraid of a mob.

Oh…so nice of you to give Ren that benefit of the doubt, all your other smack aside, FemAnon….and why in the hell would you be so afraid of one blogger??? Because she is a stripper who happens to like sex on her terms?? Because she doesn’t run to the nearest GenderBorg Political Correctness Center to attack every single man with an erection merely because one or two happen to act like assholes??

But that’s not even the most hilarious part of FemAnon’s rant….witness this blast towards someone named \\”Apostate\\” merely for the crime of flashing a bit too much skin for FemAnon’s ideological taste:

I liked The Apostate’s blog but I became angry and upset when I clearly saw she had also posted a suggestive picture of herself. Apostatepakistani doing it is understandable as she is an unwell woman, but a woman of sound mind and with a job doing it is awful and sad.

She’s says she’s doing it because she wants to appear un-Islamic. It might seem like a good idea to those that do not dig deeper, but she is playing into the patriarchy’s hands all over again. Just from a different angle. The “i’m a perky-titted young thing and I’m rebellious” line is as antifeminist as is Islam. You’re no better than a Suicide Girl if you do it.

Put some clothes on, Apostate.

If you care about women at all.

We must have the same standard for everyone. No one is special. Either feminists are equal or they are not. Got it, Apostate?

How nice….so I guess now that opposing the sexual restrictiveness towards women that Islam supposedly represents for \\”radicalfeminists\\” by merely showing \\”a suggestive picture\\” of yourself is as much \\”antifeminist\\” (read that to mean MORE antifeminist) than even the supposed \\”antifeminism\\” of Islam. And it certainly makes \\”feminist\\” like FemAnon look really bad. So, for the good of womankind, Apostate must COVER UP!! Stop showing that nipple!! Hide that midriff!! No skirts above the knee…that would inflame men to rape and pillarage even more than \\”Islamofascist\\” rants from Osama bin Laden!!!

Talk about beating the Right…by outflanking it even further to the Right.

And how nice for FemAnon to speak about feminists being \\”equal\\”…but I guess that some \\”feminists\\” are a bit more equal than others, since those who don’t cover themselves up and spout the \\”not-so-fun\\” radicalfeminist line about not encouraging those EVOL penises aren’t quite allowed to control their destiny like those more \\”educated\\” and \\”informed\\” in the real \\”feminist\\” ideology.

And in case you don’t get the point, FemAnon makes it pretty damn explicit later on, when she decides to whack yet another supposed \\”fun feminist\\”, namely Jill at Feministe (who has a special place on FemAnon’s (s)hit list for not only allowing the dreaded \\”sex pozzies\\” room to speak freely, but even allowing Ren Ev to guest blog without the usually required derision and censure)::

Jill Fillipovic is the original Fake Pretty Feminist. It’s all based on looks it’s all vapid it has nothing to do with women’s liberation. UNTIL WOMEN ARE NO LONGER SEXED UP THEY WON’T BE SEEN AS HUMAN BEINGS BY MEN. Actually these are the women who will never see THEMSELVES as human beings. They’ll be too busy buffing their nails and deodorizing their vaginas, ha!.

Because, of course, only TWUE RADICAL FEMINISTS like Feminist Anonymist are capable of telling such non-women whether or not they deserve to be fully human. Forget about equal pay or domestic violence or economic parity….it’s only about flashing panty and bare midriff and cleavage.

Yeah, right.

Being one such man who happens to LIKE women who show cleavage and thigh (and a whole lot more), and still manages to respect them when they show off the other aspects of their humanity, such as their brains, their intestinal fortitude, and their compassion for other human beings and living carbon life forms, I can attest to the fact that compared to them, the likes of Gooney Gunny Ginmar and Feminist Anonymist just don’t add up. There is more humanity in the left nipples of Caroline, Ren, Apostate, Natalia, and any other of the women FemAnon and Ginny slandered, then there is in the collective human bodies of the GenderBorg and their allies….perhaps that explains why there is such an obsession with constantly ridiculing and libeling them as sluts, whores, trollops, and \\”traitors\\”.

Or, to put it another way: The \\”scoreboard\\” always sucks worst to those on the wrong side of the ass kicking…..and right about now, the \\”sex pozzies\\”, as I see it, are intellectually wielding the boot.

Try not to hate too much, fools.

Oh, but this is sooo sweet….it seems that Adam and the folks at NoPornNorthhampton.com are having a bit of a snit….because we of The Great Pro-Porn Posse is undercutting and “censoring” them again.

Apparently, they got word of Renegade Evolution’s latest campaign to bust their favorite antiporn activist Gail Dines and her Stop Porn Culture slideshow by using the very same 2257 federal regulations that require record keeping for explicit sexual imagery. Ren is basically saying that if folks like John Stagliano has to go to jail because his videos might be accessible to “minors”; then why the hell is SPC allowed to go off scot-free and present their slideshows in open daylight to public audiences using the very same sexual content??? In venues much, much more accessible to minors, even???

Anyways…Adam and the NPNH gang let off their steam with a biting rebuttal at their site, where they attempted the same old tired smack about how the big, baaaad, evil pro-pornies are out to “suppress” their speech….and they start out by quoting an eariler “example”:

Porn defenders are usually staunch advocates of the First Amendment, but when the issue is speech they don’t like, many can’t resist groping around in the legal code to find a way to shut down analysis and criticism. We encountered this last summer, when the owner of the website Cruising for Sex wrongly claimed that copyright law prohibited us from reproducing a small portion of The Gloryhole FAQ.

The “Gloryhole FAQ”, in case you are intersted, is NPNH’s slightly biased and totally whacked and cracked attempt to explain away the practice of “gloryholes”; which are basically private areas where people (mostly gay men, but increasingly straight hetero folk, too; can engage in semi-public sex through holes punched through the walls. (Yes, Adam and NPNH is as obsessed with demonizing gay sex just as much as they are with porn…especially when it comes to playing the “anal sex causes HIV/STDs” card. They just so happened to randomly quote from the explicit (and free) Cruising for Sex website to prove how dirty and evil “gloryholes” and those who would participate in them are….copyright violations be damned.

Funny, but all the CfS webmaster did was to say that NPNH violated his copyright by using his images and words without his permission; it’s not as if he’s trying to put them out of business….no, wait…isn’t that exactly what Adam and his crew are attempting to do to adult bookstores and to porn itself??? Can you say, “Pot/kettle hypocrisy,” Clones??

They then get to the issue of “certain pro-porn activists” (Uhhhh, please, Adam, try to give Ren Ev and Ernest Greene their deserved props for their idea!!) attempting to “stifle” StopPornCulture…though they, unlike Ren Ev, manage not to even link to the SPC website or their slideshow (which has now been removed from the SPC site, interestingly enough).

Unfortunately, Adam shoots himself in the foot with the first attempted shot:

According to Wikipedia, the 2257 Regulations “require producers of sexually explicit material to obtain proof of age for every model they shoot, and retain those records”. The primary goal of the regulations is to prevent the employment of underage performers, such as Traci Lords.

First off: Wikipedia?!?!?! Damn, Adam….you could have just quoted the regulation directly from the Department of Justice; why the need for Wiki??

Secondly…you do know that it was Traci herself who fabricated her age in order to get into porn before she was legal, right???

And finally….if the goal is really to prevent underage performers, then why not use existing laws against kiddie porn and not require 35 year old performers to provide such intimate and private information to the Feds?? Or, do you think that Nina Hartley is really a 17 year old trapped inside a 46 year old body???

Oh, but it gets so much better….here’s how NPNH explains why antiporn activists like them should get free passes from having 2257’s documenting regs apply to them:

To apply 2257 to the StopPornCulture slideshow is clearly unconstitutional. Under the First Amendment, restrictions on explicit expression that is not “obscene” must be as narrowly tailored as possible to achieve the government’s objective. Not only would application of 2257 to political critiques of the adult industry be overbroad, it would undermine the purpose of the statute–prevention of child porn–because the effect would be to severely impede criticism of the primary producers of pornographic material.

Application of 2257 would also be viewpoint discrimination because the record-keeping requirements would be so burdensome to nonprofit secondary producers as to shut down all multimedia presentations from that perspective. By contrast, the adult industry can far more easily absorb this inconvenience, both because of their wealth and because they are closer to the original production.

In other words, it is totally OK for the government to target (and for groups like NoPornNorthhampton) to target and censor sexually explicit media and imagery and slander its participants as either paid rapists and molestors (or mere mindless sluts and disease carriers, and even prosecute them or regulate them to financial ruin. But, if anyone dares to call out such efforts for the censorship it is….well, they are practicing “viewpoint discrimination” against “the little guys/girls” fighting the good fight against the defiling and degradation of women and children; not to mention defending “sexual capitalism” (Sam Berg’s favorite phrase) and the profits of the evil “sex slavery” trade.

Yeah, right.

Let me see now….OK, so Ernest Greene is a producer of porn, as well as an employee (so to speak) of Larry Flynt’s HUSTLER empire (in his stead as chief editor of TABOO magazine), and he happens to be Nina’s husband and occasional producer of her videos. And Ren Ev is a part-time performer of porn by her own right. That leaves moi (who has produced exactly…well, two or three pieces or written erotica that I got exactly NOTHING for); Peter (aka Iamcuriousblue); Trinity, and Amber Rhea….none of whom, as far as I know, have earned one red cent for our opinions on porn and such.

On the other hand, you have StopPornCulture, who exists as a non-profit organization which directly solicits funds for their projects, whose speakers (Gail Dines, Bob Jensen, Rebecca Wheishaut, et. al.) demand and receive royalties and honoraria for speaking at colleges and universities; and who directly receive money from “faith-based” groups backed by the Bush Administration.

But….it’s the “pro-porners” who are attempting to “stiffle” NPHN and SPC’s speech, right???? Ahhhhhhh…yeah.

Oh, yeah…and for folks who are always complaining about personal assaults on them, they are pretty quick to go personal on their critics, are they?? Here’s how they reset their justification of smacking down Ren:

Many things make no sense in Pornoland. The latest example is the position of Renegade Evolution, a porn advocate, “a bit pathological about the rights of free speech,” who objects to our linking to her public statements without permission (even though she linked to NoPornNorthampton on July 8 with no prior notice) and our referencing her material in a critical context. A key element of what free speech is about–truth emerging from open debate–seems to have escaped her…

Ren Ev carries on her arguments here, but the bottom line is she perceives referencing her speech to criticize it to be an inappropriate use that amounts to “exploitation”. I suppose you could characterize any critical examination of anyone’s speech in this way, although I doubt this encourages the kind of open debate the founders of our country prized. Free speech is not just isolated individuals spouting off without reference to each other.

Examining pornography and pro-porn arguments is critical to understanding how porn works, why it’s harmful, its addictive qualities, and the toxic, narrow version of sexuality it sells. We appreciate that porn advocates may be upset or embarrassed by having their materials used in this way, but their interests must be balanced against the harms the sex industry imposes on third parties and its own participants. We will not cease to use the industry’s copious amounts of self-damaging evidence against it. This includes cases of commercial exploitation of other people’s likenesses without their consent, a far less defensible act than referencing material to make a political argument.

Maybe Adam forgot when writing that first paragraph about the Founding Fathers that their concept of “open debate” tended to ignore certain groups of people…such as men who didn’t have lots of property or people of color….or WOMEN.

And of course, no one is denying Adam or anyone else (even freakin’ Witchy Woo or Stormcloud, for that matter) the right to be critical or Ren Ev in their own venues….she’s a big girl and can defend herself quite adequately. But, if you are going to fire nukes at other folks, you just gotta be able to accept that they will fire back in kind…and if you hit any innocent people with your fire, then you can’t blame the other fellow for your mistakes.

But just for Adam’s amusement, allow me to requote his last paragraph, albeit adjusted a bit to reflect the actual truth of the debate:

Examining erotophobia and extremist anti-porn “feminist” arguments is critical to understanding how sex-hate and sex fascism works, why it’s harmful, its addictive qualities, and the toxic, narrow, and restrictive version of sexuality it promotes. We appreciate that anti-porn advocates may be upset or embarrassed by having their materials used in this way, but their interests must be balanced against the harms that attempting to wipe out consensual adult sexual speech and sexual expression and sexual media imposes on third parties and its own participants. We will not cease to use the antiporn “feminist” groups’ copious amounts of self-damaging evidence against them. This includes cases of commercial exploitation of other people’s likenesses without their consent, a far less defensible act than referencing material to make a political argument.

And unlike NoPornNorthhampton, we don’t charge a fat fee for our activism….and our doors will remain open, as long as you are respectful.

Well…I’m behind the crunch again….had to go offline a bit due to the same old issues.

I’m doing my best to get back online ASAP..so bear with me.

In the meantime, I couldn’t help but comment on the Cat 5 blogstorm currently ongoing in the feminist blogosphere over the legend of Kyle Payne: self-identified male feminist, hardcore antiporn activist…..and convicted sex predator.

Renegade Evolution, as usual, has been the point woman for exposing Mr. Payne’s dual life and hypocrisy (starting here and moving on to here, here, here, and here; although Belledame should get first credit for initially discovering this slimeball).

It seems, though, that Payne has managed to do what two years of Porn Sex Wars couldn’t do: unite antiporn radfems and sex poxxies together in shared mutual outrage. (See Ren’s blogroll of posts on the matter.)

All I will say for now is this: if the GenderBorg is so willing to accept this sleazoid so easily into their midst due to his “activism”, while slandering people like moi who use porn and still manage to treat women with respect and humanity, then they are so much worse and closer to the Radical Right than I ever, ever feared.

I’ll probably have more to say on this when I’m able to get back online regularly.

Oh….and show some love to the God Emperor, too, when you visit there: getting burnt really does suck. Seriously. Ouch.