Posted on February 28, 2009
I bet King County Sheriff’s Deputy Paul Schene felt like a big man when he’d finished beating up this 15 year old girl in a holding cell.
I wonder how he felt when he found out the whole thing had been caught on camera……
Hat tip to egalia at Tennessee Guerilla Women
Wow. Talk about the major over-reaction of a teen girl, being a bit lippy, and kicking her shoes off.
Hell knows what they would have done to her if she had actually physically threatened them.
And two large coppers against one slight teen girl?
Is that what passes for fair fight or appropriate level of force?
I should think he probably said ‘oh shit’ or similar Cath. Though he must be dense, presumably CCTV in cells is standard?
Wow, that teenage girl sure looked like a threat to those ‘big men’ with guns /snark
Yeah, he must really be dense not to remember about the cameras in the cells.
Or perhaps he thought his woman-hating buddies would have a laugh and cover it up.
Ffs. Sick, sick misogs. Yeah, a 15 yr old girl is indeed a big threat to two large fit men (sarcasm).
Cath, I find it ironic that you would post something like this. Aren’t the police supposed to be your allies in arresting prostitutes?
You see, this is what happens to women when they are alone with the police, and this is what you are subjecting sex workers to by helping to keep prostitution criminalized.
Ms. Elliot, your vile hatred of sex workers could not be more plain.
No Susan, you are an idiot.
The radfem position is to criminalise the Johns, not the prostituted women. There are a significant number of radfems that were formerly prostitutes, Dworkin is a notable example. And radfems call for exit programmes for prostituted women.
So Susan, take both feet out of your mouth before you choke on your non sequitur.
Susan. Not sure where you got the idea that I support the criminalisation of those working in prostitution, but as I’ve tried to explain on numerous occasions that’s absolutely not the case.
No, my hatred of pimps, johns, and anyone else who profits from, or who otherwise exploits,some of the most desperate women in our society, for their own monetary gain or for their own sexual satisfaction, could not be more plain.
Decriminalise those working in this vile “industry” and clamp down on those who abuse and exploit others: that’s always been my position in this debate.
Based upon what I have read above I would ask that radical feminist activists advocating for survivors and women and girls in prostitution take time to voice your feelings and beliefs that women/girls in prostitution should not be arrested to CATW.
Norma Ramos of CATW is on the record congratulating Sheriff Tom Dart for his actions in Chicago. Congratulating a sheriff who is nothing but an old school thug that brags about his accomplishments including the arrest of a 14 year old girl in prostitution and a soccer mom. There is no excuse for arresting a 14 year old girl in prostitution and using it as documentation of “being fed up with prostitution” as Sheriff Dart states. Nothing is accomplished by arresting the prostitutes. Nothing. When Sheriff Dart and those like him find support from radical feminist organizations such as CATW and are able to persuade radical feminist organizations to be silent or even endorse efforts which largely focus on arresting prostitutes with an ancillary component of fighting trafficking it sends a message to these agencies they have a free hand without accountability. And the greatest suffering remains the women and girls in prostitution.
I believe we can all agree that it is going to be difficult for exit agencies and orgs to gain the trust of women and girls in prostitution while they are closely allied with the very law enforcement agencies that are persecuting them. It is great to build coalitions and find common ground but organizations such as CATW have to define boundaries of actions that are unacceptable to their collaborating partners or the partnership doesn’t work. I know from first hand experience my own captivity in the sex industry so many years ago was extended by virtue of fear of arrest. Fear which was a valid reality and one that a sadistic pimp knew to exploit.
I believe you when you say that most radical feminists do call for the end of arresting the prostitutes. I saw that first hand as a radical feminist activist from 96 to 03. Many however that are placing themselves as the leadership and spokesperson for all things radical feminist, like CATW, are not taking the stances the rest of you are. Yet the are making a great deal of noise that they are the experts, they are the definition of feminist activism and that by virtue of the studies and their academic achievements they know more about what survivors need and feel than the survivors themselves. They don’t and they are misrepresenting your movement and it’s goals. Sheriff Dart is a thug that I met in 2002. One who made no secret of his disdain for prostitution survivors and his belief they are all liars that are drug addicted. He is very wrong. He is not an ally and not someone that should be congratulated as has been the case with CATW regardless of CATW’s agreement with him on the issue of forcing Craigslist to remove adult advertising space. That kind of compromise where a thug brags about arresting women and girls in prostitution, even the most vulnerable ones, for a trade off on a push to shut an advertising venue, it can’t be acceptable.
As radical feminists you have the ability to call on CATW to reconsider it’s support for arresting women and girls in prostitution with the possiblity they will hear you. The letter I sent Norma Ramos is likely to fall on deaf ears over political partisanship. Perhaps she needs to hear this from radical feminists. I would respectfully advocate that you take a moment to hold those that view themselves as leaders of your movement accountable to the principles of the movement and members.
Actually, I am not aware of any genuine radical feminists that support the criminalisation of women and girls in prostitution.
Frankly, I think this is a long-winded blog-by radfem-bash. A hobby that has gained in popularity by those who hang about the F-Word.
I only know of you as someone who has a track record of radfem-bashing.
Jill- reference please.
Laurelin, “Jill’s references” include being a sex-pozzie, whom I think may also hang around with RE.
Why Jill brings up a US situation to a UK blog for solution/policing, one would have to think that she may have already annoyed US radfems enough already.
Susan: Cath has never said sex workers should be arrested. She has quite clearly stated she wants criminal penalties to be removed from sex workers.
Any more than I said that people should be arrested for thinking stuff. Seriously Susan, you need different drugs.
Susan, can you point us to where (in the UK as I’m not a global authority)radical feminists uphold the criminalization of prostitutes?
Coalition Against Trafficking in Women (CATW) on March 5, 2009 5:46 PM
Congratulations to Sheriff Dart for taking on Craigslist and its role in facilitating sex trafficking. It is an enormous mistake to consider sex trafficking and its end result prostitution to be anything but the world’s oldest oppression. The commercial sexual exploitation of girls and women is a too often ignored social injustice.
We must create the cultural, legal and social conditions that are inhospitable to human trafficking. Everyone has a responsibility to do this and we thank Sheriff Dart for giving his attention to this human rights abuse! Norma Ramos, Co – Executive Director of CATW
I’m not a sex pozzie. That is a label that I don’t appreciate, it is one that is inaccurate. You don’t know me, have never made any effort to and have cast judgment that is both unfair and inaccurate without any effort to even substantiate your facts.
I didn’t realize this was a UK blog. Not that it matters to me because my belief is that issues related to prostitution and exploitation within it are global and have to be solved globally.
My post was not a long winded effort to bash radical feminists and radical feminism. I came here with a legitimate concern asking for radical feminists to look into an issue and put aside political dislike for me to address an issue that effects and harms women in prostitution. Can for a moment the feminist debates be put aside to deal with something important. There are activists and orgs in every movement that go astray and it is imperative that activists within movements in which that happens try to at least voice concerns. I do that often within the movement of which I am an activist and I believe there is no reason why radical feminists can’t at least look into concerns about an organization with such regard as CATW and ask CATW do look inward and check themselves.
I don’t know who the UK, US, Canada and other countries feminists are, I don’t care. Nationality doesn’t matter much to me. Thus I haven’t run afoul of too many radical feminists and am thus going to a UK blog. I don’t know who is from where and it doesn’t matter to me. I still work on issues of prostitution with many radical feminists and still am active on issues of abolishing sexual slavery.
This isn’t about that. This is about an organization that is supporting a sheriff that is making a media case out of his pride in arresting 14 year old prostituted girls. Can’t we focus on that and put aside animosity for one issue?
Laurelin, I’m assuming you meant reference for the CATW issue. If you were asking for references for me. My testimony is in To Plead Our Own Cause by Kevin Bales and Zoe Trodd, which Zoe would be a good contact point if you want to speak to a radical feminist who knows both that I am the same person named Jill as in the article and that my work for social change is genuine. You can check the book Enslaved Modern Day Stories of Sexual Slavery, a day by day of my life in prostitution as a sex slave is there.
You can contact Bill Nelson of the Women’s Recovery Center for Prostitution Resources http://www.angelfire.com/mn/fjc/index.html He is the founder of the org and is ED. His org is entirely exit based from a position that prostitution is sexual violence and he and I worked together in founding this project, I was an advisor on the project and we still collaborate when able. The reason we do not collaborate more now is about distance not politics. I left Minnesota in 2003 where he is and moved to Raleigh/Durham, NC. 1259 miles away.
Jill, I appreciate what you’re saying about Dart making a media case out of arresting 14 year old girls, however, there’s nothing in any of the stuff I found online to suggest that those girls are then charged with anything.
His aim seems to be to want to tackle the trade in under-age girls being sold for sex, not to victimise them even further:
Is there another Jill Brenneman who is pro-porn then?
I associate the name with one who has opposed several US radfems on anti-porn issues, so of course it seems a bit strange to suddenly want radfems’ help and co-operation.
I hope those are his aims Cath. Fortunately I met this man in 2002 and came away deeply concerned about his commitment to helping anyone in prostitution. His main interest by virtue of his own statements was disbelieving survivors of some very difficult experiences in prostitution. And that in his experiences every prostitute was in the industry to score a rock. This was an exact comment and he wasn’t being sarcastic.
My belief is that survivors are to be believed and that under no circumstances is it acceptable to call one much less an entire panel of them liars that were looking for book deals or attention. There was no reason to believe any of them were. He clearly was of the belief that they were self serving liars out of some hidden agenda. They weren’t. I knew three of them, two quite well, the other by virtue of her work in Hawaii helping women exit, and they were brave, compelling, their survival was nearly miraculous in each case and there was no reason to cast dispersions as Tom Dart did.
Even from the most pragmatic sense, excluding the issue of Tom Dart’s actions, it is my belief arrest has to be taken out of the equation entirely. To be roughed up by the police, handcuffed and dragged into a station is a hugely traumatic experience for anyone.
These are Sheriff Dart Quotes from http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/03/sheriffs-lawsuit-says-craiglist-largest-source-of-prostitution.html
“Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart says he has busted enough prostitutes who were pimped out on Craigslist to know the popular online classified site is the biggest whorehouse in America.”
This is part of the article
“Undercover officers posed as customers who made dates with women featured in “erotic services” ads on the site. Once an offer of sex for money was made, the woman was taken into custody, officials said.” http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/03/sheriffs-lawsuit-says-craiglist-largest-source-of-prostitution.html
Assuming Sheriff Dart is trying to do the right thing, he has to understand that arrest itself is traumatic and there is no place for it when he is arresting the victims even if the effort is to catch the criminals harming them. That is akin to arresting rape victims and the rapist. There is far too much harm done to many in prostitution by criminals, abusers and oppressors. The last thing they need is the very people that are supposed to be bringing justice and ending the exploitation, that being the police, to be another layer of harm.
I believe it is imperative that activists make it clear to Sheriff Dart that arrests of the prostitutes is not acceptable strategy in the process of arresting those that are exploiting and harming them. Honestly I don’t believe it is inappropriate to hold him accountable to a higher standard. In terms of CATW, it is understandable they are pleased with his actions against Craigslist. That is a shared goal between Craigslist and the police and it is understandable that there are many viewpoints on how to achieve social justice. However, it is imperative for an organization such as CATW to frame their support within the framework of expecting that he will not add to the trauma suffered by those that he implies he is trying to rescue.
I’ve been both the prosituted woman/girl and the arrestee for a prostitution charge. Even though I was able to plead out to a misdemeanor that wasn’t much of a legal issue, the process of being arrested, being placed in a cage, and all the assorted other indignities suffered upon those arrested, including the reckless arrogance of many cops, those things were only additions to the trauma suffered. I truly believe as activists seeking positive and constructive social change, perhaps via different ideology and method, but nonetheless with the shared goal of trying to make lives better for those in prostitution, that we can agree arresting the prostitute is not acceptable to any of us. And that we can take steps to ensure that message is understood by law enforcement. It is especially understood if organizations that are highly recognized such as CATW make the case. Thus that is the basis of my feelings.
I want and advocate for law enforcement to tackle underage prostitution. No argument from me. I don’t however want to see the prostitute whether underage or adult to suffer in the process.
Cath, thank you for your thoughtful response. I truly appreciate your allowing my posts to remain and for the respectful discussion.
Jill- Yep, I was asking for references for what you were saying about CATW.
susan – You see, while you continue repeating your mantra – radfemshatesexworkers-radfemshatesexworkers you are not addressing the real source of the hatred – which quite frankly is the voice of the Johns, pimps, and all other beneficiaries of prostitution. Believe it or not, this is where the hate lies.
And for some reason the end of my comment got cut off.
Nonetheless, you have your mantra and it seems to serve you well.
Stormy, there is one Jill Brenneman. I am by no means pro porn. I haven’t watched porn in over 2 decades and seldom did prior. There are pictures of me in porn that still float around on the internet and that I have to live with the fear of those being found. Those pictures are of me as an underage prostitute that had zero consent. It is very unfair and hurtful to have someone toss a misleading and very hurtful label at me such as pro porn. I am not pro porn. I have never advocated porn and don’t. This is a hurtful an unsubstantiated label.
What I am is someone that seeks to achieve positive social change by virtue of inclusive activism that is open to eclectic approaches. My belief is that this is a huge issue that requires far more resources than any one perspective of activism on behalf of women in the sex industry can provide. I am diverse in those that I am work with. I don’t believe excluding people from activism whether radical feminist, whether sex worker rights, whether harm reduction, whether faith based or any in between is constructive. Certainly there are activists in any of those genres that I don’t work with because I don’t believe they are ethical and working toward social change but instead toward their own ambitons and gain. This isn’t limited to any particular genre of activism. There are good and bad people in every sector of life. I will work with a radical feminist and/or a porn actress to try to combat sexual violence. Both offer insights to that process. Working with active porn actresses in which we both share goals such as finding ways to keeping underage protected from the sex industry doesn’t make me pro porn anymore than working with a very strongly religious group of people in Chile makes me pro faith based or working with a radical feminist makes me pro radical feminist.
I work with those that can be part of positive social construct. In Chile that means working with religious based organizations. It is the nature of the culture and the dynamic that exists there. And in doing so I found that while differences of opinion exist, there is more commonality and that the goal is constructive. I’m not willing to exclude them because I don’t share their faith based approach. The goal to me is helping the individual in need.
Why did I reach out to radical feminists in this instance? Because CATW considers itself to be a leader in radical feminist activism. CATW is very likely to hear the voices and concerns of radical feminists that it will never hear from me. We can agree that the women in prostitution shouldn’t be arrested. I have written to both Tom Dart and to CATW on this issue. Fact is, neither is likely to care what I have to say. You can write to them and perhaps be heard. And have the message that arresting the prostitute is unacceptable. Getting that message across is the goal to me. I don’t care who is successful in getting the message across. The important thing is trying to find the positive outcome.
I have opposed some anti porn activists. No question about that. But what have I opposed? I opposed the use of pictures of women in bondage scenes of which there is no consent on the part of the website owner and nothing more than a rude scoff at concerns about that. I oppose the idea that one visits a radical feminist blog which is supposed to be safe from triggers and is ambushed by a violent bondage shot. That can be traumatic for me as a survivor and I know it is for others. It doesn’t matter to me whether it is for educational reasons that the site owner is trying to achieve constructive goal. I am as harmed by seeing that on an anti porn site as I am if I open an email and some sleaze has spammed me with it. There is a reason I don’t go looking for porn. Because violent porn remains a trigger to my own past. When I have addressed these concerns I have been blasted as pro porn, had my own experiences in the sex industry mocked and/or called lies by the site owners. I am asking for the same thing that is expected of any site depicting porn images. Place a warning there so that one knows what to expect and make sure you have consent of the woman whose image is being used. Having been ambushed with my own images by a friend who meant well by showing me she had found them, nonetheless it hurt and caused trauma, I am sympathetic to those whose pictures are used without their permission. The person in the picture should have the right to say no, to have them removed, and to retain control over them regardless of whether the intent is commercial or educational. I don’t believe asking for 2257 compliance to protect the viewer and ensure the consent of the actress is wrong. I don’t want children in my life being exposed to porn whether on a porn site or an educational site about the harms of porn. The child is likely to not understand the difference and be harmed either way.
JB, what ticked me off was you initial accusatory tone, and that we have some sort of mysterious influence at CATW, or control over the spokespersons thereof. Radfems are not an organisation.
If I have any more influence with them than you do, it is probably because I have not pissed them off, as per your track record with radfems.
Your stance on 2257 compliance seems rooted in keeping your past from accidentally re-surfacing.
If I recall correctly, you were in bed with RE on the 2257, so likely you visited her site, with lots of softcore and simulated porn? So forgive me not to welcome you with open arms, when radfems would account for 0.0000000000001% of non compliance for educational purposes, whilst the pornographers and pimps are the greater culprits, who additionally make money out of it. Yet your target is radfems.
Stormy I know that radical feminists don’t have mysterious influence over CATW or spokespersons thereof. I was a rad fem activist from 1996 to 2003. I was the co founder of Escape the Prostitution Prevention Project and was heavily involved in the movement in the early part of the 2000’s. To the point that Andrea Dworkin knew me on a first name basis. My point is that I am probably more familiar with radical feminist activism than most of my colleagues in other forms of activism by virtue of experience within that genre of activism. I’m not clueless about radical feminism or radical feminist activism.
I would ask you to consider what you have stated to me. Rad fems are not an organization. Neither is harm reduction and sex worker rights activism. I have no more control over what other activists do than you have over CATW. All I can do as an activist working from those perspectives is voice my opinion when I see things that I feel need to be challenged. Just as radical feminism isn’t one big organization and not all radical feminists are the same. The same goes for me. I’m an activist working on issues of social change from an eclectic perspective. If someone came to a speech that I give, they would not and do not come away with any sense that I am a cheerleader for the sex industry. I still work largely from a survivor perspective. I’m just not married to one particular ideology. There are pieces of all of them that make sense to me and pieces of all of them that don’t. I will work with anyone I feel is doing constructive work regardless of political affiliation. I will also be frank when I feel they are not. Or have lost sight of real reason for activism in the heat of a moment or battle.
I realize that pimps and pornographers are a bigger violators of 2257 than radical feminists. Just because it isn’t always public doesn’t mean that I haven’t been outspokenly critical of their violations. My viewpoint however is that the voice of the woman in the sex industry is the one that needs bandwidth. If the women are being arrested, my goal is fight to end their arrest. If their picture is being used against their will or in a way that minors can view it, I’m not going to support it. I’m not willing to say it’s ok to use the woman’s picture without her consent whether it is for educational purposes or for commerical. It doesn’t matter to me who are how it is being used. If it is without consent it is wrong and needs to be opposed.
In terms of coming here and expecting open arms. I didn’t come here and expect that at all. That wasn’t even an issue that crossed my mind. I didn’t come here to be liked. I came here asking if someone with perhaps more influence than I could have could take a step that would perhaps lead to something constructive. It isn’t a personal issue. I would rather it not be. Since we can all agree that arresting women and girls in prostitution shouldn’t be arrested, that should be enough for the occasional put aside of political differences of opinion for something constructive which in this case would be to oppose the arrest of women and girls in prostitution.
Is this is a straw I see before me?
I have known of a ‘violent bondage shot’ once on a radfem site. ONCE. And you were not ‘ambushed’ by it because there was a warning and you had to click on the image to see it. Which I certainly didn’t because the type of image concerned is now illegal in the UK.
Yet what – 2 years – later you and your ilk are going on about it Jill. Ignoring the fact that I can walk into high street newsagent WH Smith and see displayed at a height of about 80cm (or a one year old child’s height) a bondage magazine. And Nuts. And Zoo.
And if this image of this woman is all over the web do you not think it’s been used ‘without her consent’ anyway? Talk sense.
How are rad fems meant to contact the woman to get her consent anyway? Again – talk sense.
Susan. We’re waiting for you to quote one example of a rad fem saying sex workers should be criminalised.
Whereas by contrast of course Jill I HAVE seen pornographic images on ‘sex positive sites. I assume the owners of those sites have consent forms signed in triplicate by the people depicted???
So in summary Jill, you are an activist who will align herself with any group – as long as it suits the Jill Brenneman agenda – and any working against radfems in the past should be put aside – because Jill says so. Are there any future guarantees you will not again work against radfems? Probably not.
Sounds a lot like the ‘deals’ of men’s groups; “hey feminists, work with us to achieve these common goals, then we will sort out the little sexism problem”. Then once they have achieved what they want to achieve, bad luck feminists.
Except your deal doesn’t seem to even promise any of that. Just that we should be honoured to work with you.
“Cath, I find it ironic that you would post something like this. Aren’t the police supposed to be your allies in arresting prostitutes?”
KCJ dudes, they’re more into forced pornography, KCJ was my beat at one point,
I famously also solved the brassiere blocked toilet mystery at Snohomish jail.
So there you go
“You see, this is what happens to women when they are alone with the police”
UN Minimum Rules s53, go support me
53. (1) In an institution for both men and women, the part of the institution set aside for women shall be under the authority of a responsible woman officer who shall have the custody of the keys of all that part of the institution.
That’s the solution
I haven’t ever asked or implied anyone should be honored to work with me. Nor would I want anyone to. I asked if radical feminist activists would consider advocating to CATW that they discuss the need for decriminalizing prostitutes with Sheriff Dart prior to offering him broad support.
I agree I will make many compromises and work with a diverse group of activists for social change. The goal is much more important to me than the politics. My opinion was the only people that would likely have sway with a major radical feminist organization like CATW was radical feminists. This is no different to me than referring someone to Minnesota’s Women’s Recovery Center which is an awesome St. Paul based exit program. We may differ politically but nonetheless it is a stellar resource for someone in need of that resource.
If asking CATW to advocate decriminalization of women and girls in prostitution and use their influence toward that end isn’t something you feel comfortable with. Then don’t. To me it makes sense and it makes sense to reach out to activists that may best be able to facilitate that process. I”m not asking anyone to buy into my politics. I’m asking that the women and girls suffering as a result of Tom Dart be advocated for. How anyone feels about me isn’t relevant. If we can agree the women and girls in prostitution are the priority than we should be able to agree to step aside from our own politics for a moment. If you don’t choose to. Then you don’t. We all have to sleep at night and we all are doing what we believe is right. That picture is different for all of us.
Cath has graciously allowed me to post on her blog unmoderated. I am truly appreciative of the opportunity to discuss thoughts and hope that there were some constructive opportunities that arose. I prefer to keep the focus on the important issue of the women and girls in prostitution that need advocacy and not on a political debate. I’m not much a fan of debates anyway. They are great if there are people seeking to learn more than one side of an issue and make their own choices. They are exhausting for all when they are just for the sake of arguing politics. Thus, I respectfully decline to go further into political debates or engage in debating whose form of activism is best. The fact that we all care and are passionate and working toward social change toward the best possible outcome we can is awesome and that picture will always be different and should be. I respect diversity and respect the commitment shown toward advancing the rights of the oppressed.
In concluding my final post in this blog, my appreciation for the opportunity to express myself and my best wishes.
Just because Jill agrees with me on 2257 does not mean she agrees with me on everything. That is not the case at all. Completely dismissing everything she says because she has been known to be in my mere presence makes no sense at all. This cop in Chicago? Likely it is he is a real asshole. Hating my guts and taking it out on Jill will not fix much of anything now, will it?
And Polly, at least on my blog, yes, any naked people have consented to be there. I am a stickler for legal documentation. And why yes, I have taken other non-radical bloggers to task for image useage as well.
And stormy, you must be out of the loop, I have actual occassional bits of hard core porn up too. Shocking, I know! Then again, no one is forced to look either.
And this has what, to do again, with helping people who want out of prostitution out?
I agree with this.
Also, I’m not sure if you’ve seen the stuff on the UK government’s survey into public attitudes around violence against women, but what they’ve shown, (apart from the fact that we seem to be going backwards, with more people than ever seeming to think that women who “nag,” dress provocatively and so on are responsible for being raped, hit, beaten etc)is appalling attitudes towards those working in prostitution. Something close to 50% of respondents for example believe that women who work as prostitutes are responsible if they get raped.
I’d like to think this is another area where no matter what our political/ideological differences are with regard to the sex industry, we can all agree that these levels of victim blaming/downright misogyny are both shocking and totally unacceptable, and we can(maybe)work together on trying to help change those attitudes.
Although how the fuck we do that is beyond me at the moment.
But it’s worth thinking about.
Thank you for the response. I too despise the absolute misogyny that fuels blaming rape victims. Somehow the message that consent has to be active or it is rape gets lost in society. Or conveniently forgotten by rapists who use excuses, what she was wearing, she was at a bar, she was drunk, she is/was a prostitute, stripper, whatever. There is no excuse for turning anything but an absolute yes into consent.
It has been a striking commentary about society how many times I have heard the argument that a prostitute can’t be raped. WTF?? Yeah, she can be raped. If she didn’t say yes to a sexual act the act still took place it sure as shit is rape.
What can we do? Changing societies views is never easy but it’s possible. Even if we change one person’s view and one less rape occurs that is one less victim of rape and ultimately is an important success. To me any life saved, any rape prevented is an important success to be celebrated.
Ideas of the top of my head. Create banners that blogs and websites that are interested can place within their websites/blogs. There certainly are plenty of blogs. Perhaps a website or blog of sorts addressing the issue that prostitutes can and are raped, what rape is, and why prostitutes can be raped. Both as a statement and as an explanation for someone who perhaps just hasn’t considered the concept but isn’t hostile to it. Just uninformed. Perhaps part of the site could be to express that the site is for the purpose of creating awareness that rape is rape, prostitutes can and are raped and that it is a site for all supporters where politics are left behind briefly for the sake of focusing on an issue that we all agree on. My hope and belief is that there is potential to come together on the issue of opposing rape and violence and conscious raising and that our differences can be left aside for somethign we agree on.
Anyway that’s my response. I”m certainly interested in taking a project like this farther if you or others are interested. Contact me on or offblog.
Perhaps thoughts that could become concepts to use as a model. The greatest two public service announcements opposing child sexual tourism were what was playing on the hotel cable English station in a hotel in Chile while on a layover.
1. Shows a little Chilean girl. They show her laughing, playing, hugging her parents, with words, she laughs, she plays, she hugs, she loves, She is not a tourist attraction. With a number to report child sex crimes.
2. They show an english speaking man saying he loves the sights and sounds of Chile and that it is a great country. It is made obvious that he is talking about exploiting chilean children. Something to the effect of your vacation will last a lifetime if you participate in child sexual explotation in Chile. The show him going into a jail cell and the bars slamming behind him with the jailer throwing away the key with a fade to black of Our children are not tourist attractions and the number to report it.
Simple message and a simple line of our children aren’t tourist attractions. With truly striking impact. Maybe there is a way to take that concept and recreate it on some scale regarding prostitutes and rape.
anyway a thought,
“Both as a statement and as an explanation for someone who perhaps just hasn’t considered the concept but isn’t hostile to it.”
What would be the point of educating people who themselves will not rape prostitutes? There is no usefulness to mere awareness of the problem among non-rapists unless the goal is to work towards asking those people to do something substantive about the actual problem, about the actual abusers of prostituted women and children.
I’m not a fan of trickle-down rape prevention tactics because I haven’t seen any proof that the general population’s abhorrence of rape has any effect on reducing prostitute-using men’s lopsided proclivity to rape. A website banner for fence-sitters is a nice idea. Criminalizing men who seek to exploit anyone sexually and making men’s predatory behaviors have real consequences for the man has proven to be a more immediately effective solution because it doesn’t rely on bystanders but cuts right to the core problem that is men with entitlement-to-sex issues.
Sam, I guess my question would be what would this hurt? If people wish to build a small website and do the project. Whatever constructive results that are achieved are constructive results. Something positive, however small has been done. If one life is saved from rape, the project has done something wonderful. Even if it is only one. To the one person that isn’t raped. That is a huge thing to them. It’s pretty much free. Blogs are free. It is really not much more than some time in front of a computer to do something that really isn’t being done.
Perhaps someday funds will exist to do targeted PSA’s like the Children are not tourist attractions in chile campaign. Until that option comes we work with what we have. I don’t see a downside to it.
Here’s what I would suggest. If people want to do the project. We do it. Those who don’t want to, don’t agree with the idea, etc, Then don’t work on it. No foul. If for whatever reason you don’t want to. That’s fine. Anyone who does. That’s fine too.
Build a website to put out the message that rape is bad?
Let’s see, yeah, radfems do this, only to be heckled by the sex pozzies at every opportunity. Not to mention the odd death-wish from the pozzies.
I agree Sam, the trickle down approach does little. Society in general is already aware that “rape is bad”, yet every day thousands of children, prostitutes, and women get raped. If the penalties for rape were implemented more, that would reduce rape. It is the legal system that does not adequately protect females from male sexual violence.
If you feel it’s a bad idea to do a website on the concept of the rape of prostitutes being bad, a website that is outside the political divides. Then you are certainly welcome to express your displeasure by not doing it or criticizing it. I If you are interested. You know how to find me.
Stormy has been saying the rape of prostitutes is bad online since the year dot. As have I. As have all radical feminist bloggers and commentators. Just do some reading.
My point was, radfems have blogged about this very thing – rape is bad – rape of prostituted women is bad – rape of children is bad. However, all we get is attacked by sex pozzies with “prostitution, SOME women chose it, you are denying them their agency, fall under a truck and die choking on your own blood”.
*somehow* that does NOT lead to a harmonious working relationship.
stormy- you mentioning threats and attacks is priceless really…you might want to quit on that one while your ahead, as it were.
and the “sex pozzies” guess what? PLENTY of “rape is bad” on their sites too. And plenty of attacks aimed their way as well.
Jill is suggesting another way to draw attention to the issue of the rape of prostitutes. This is a noble idea. You want to give her hell and ‘poo-poo’ her for it? Fine. Does not change the fact that she is looking for another way to draw attention to the problem, just like MANY radical feminists AND sex positive feminists and women in general have done. Which, you know, is not a bad thing.
Shouldn’t the woman/girl in prostitution that is being raped or arrested trump all other concerns? We all advocate decriminalization. We all want rape of prostitutes to end. We can argue ideologies of how that process should happen until the cows come home but that woman being arrested is still who we are advocating for. Isn’t it? It is for me.
I work a crisis line in my full time job. There is no qualification for getting help. I help anyone who calls. It is my job and my ethics. If someone calls 911 does it matter what my politics are or what theirs are when they are in crisis? Prostitutes being raped, or for that matter anyone being raped is in crisis and any step to create awareness, to advocate for them is a good thing. What difference does it truly make to someone that was just raped what the political affiliations are?
The prostitute that just got arrested. We can all agree she should be decriminalized and not be arrested. There is no contention on that point. Radical feminists agree with this so do harm reduction, so do sex worker rights. While those are broad political spectrums on many issues, on the issue of decrim it isn’t broad it is consensus. Therefore it is easy to do something constructive and contact sheriff dart, or put up a banner on a website. Have many other radical feminists said for years that rape of prostitutes is bad. Of course. So haven’t others from every spectrum. But so what. To the woman just arrested, to the woman just convicted, to the woman who tries to get a straight job and is turned down over an arrest record, none of our politics matter. We can argue ideologies of activism all we want to but any step forward is a step forward. So there are a dozens of websites from everyone about rape of prostitutes being terrible. There should be! Because it is terrible. But the world is a better place with more of them because not everyone will ever find every site but the more sites that have them the more coverage of the message. A message we all agree on. There isn’t anyone on this blog that I agree with entirely. There isn’t anyone on this blog that agrees with me entirely. But so what. On decrim we agree. On prostitutes being raped we agree. This is equivalent to putting up a crisis number to call. Isn’t the best reason to put up the number anyplace we can so that the most people see it?
I don’t care whose website or whose movement gets the credit for the link. The point is someone saw the link and someone is perhaps able to get help. We can argue forever but meanwhile less letters have been sent to Tom Dart, less people have seen a message that raping prostitutes is bad because someone missed all of our websites. And the ultimate loser in that equation is not any of us it is the the person suffering that could have perhaps been helped by a momentary alliance.
Who threatened whom first?
I would not have done what I did, if you were not such a nasty piece of work. And you still threatened me after that.
You and your stalker buddies can just fuck off and leave the radfems alone. You lot have nothing to blog about but for attacking radfems. I analysed your blog content for a period of one month, it was 55% radfem bashing, about 5% feminism, the rest about the mighty RE. Fuck all concern about any other female on the planet. And that was when you claimed to be a feminist.
It all ends right here. You stay on your side of the internet, we stay on ours.
This is the last time I address you directly, because frankly, you are beneath contempt. I have an adversion to compulsive liars who make violent anti-woman porn, and make out that it is a good thing for feminism and the liberation of womankind.
The first time I remember talking to you about women in prostitution being raped Renegade Evolution – Lara Roxx and Linda Lovelace (as porn is just filmed prostitution) – I remember you saying that what happened to them said something about them as performers. You didn’t have a word to say about the rapists. I don’t think you were too supportive of the Duke rape victim either although I may be misremembering.
I think people are saying that this is more about posturing and manipulation rather than anything sincere. Given the history between the groups I don’t see why that should be a surprise.
But Jill should go right ahead and build Jill’s website. If it isn’t a pro-sex industry site but is genuinely anti rapist johns and anti rapist pimps, I’m sure rad fems will support it.
Oops, that should be me, Delphyne posting there.
Sanctimony isn’t a solution, and here it is being used to divert energies and attention away from the most effective solution. That is Jill’s goal now as it was when she wrote “Ten Reasons to Decriminalize Prostitution.”
I didn’t write this. Retraction please.
Jill I think it’s odd that you’d expect radical feminists to work with you given that at least some of your time is spent actively working against us (and in support of the male supremacist sex industry):
Radical feminists spend our time challenging institutions that men have created to harm women. You spend at least some of your time trying to get in the way of that work.
It’s a good idea. I will go ahead and create the blog. If you support it consider yourself welcome. If you don’t, I dunno. Do whatever you feel is right and what you have to do. I made a request for support. I’m assuming most here are saying no. Nonetheless, anyone who wants to is certainly welcome.
I remain open to civil discussion about the issues addressed above. I’m not open to responding to character assassinations here. I’m not going to go into that on Cath’s blog. If a response to questions about my integrity is desired contact me off board. I’m open to fair questions. I’m not open to public excoriation based upon assumptions.
I didn’t say I expected anyone to work with me. I asked and have said repeatedly that if you wish to you are welcome if not no harm no foul.
I”m not going to debate feminism here. I have zero interest in arguing the validity of various interpretations of social change. If you feel that I am a supporter of male supremacy than you do. Shrug…… It is interpretive. I disagree but feel it is counter productive to argue the point.
I’m not going to argue with you here. I didn’t come here for that. I came here with very simple requests about a common goal of opposing someone who is making a career out of arresting women and girls. And is doing so as we speak. They remain the focus to me.
I”m not going to fight a feminist battle here. OK. Can this boundary please, be respected?
Erm, I’m not expecting a debate about feminism. I’m pointing out the unreaonableness of your request given your past behaviour with regards to radical feminist work. If you don’t respect or understand the feelings of rad fems I guess that’s your prerogative but that won’t make them go away.
You came here with a challenge about CATW expecting action from rad fems, when you could equally write to them yourself. They are pro-women. If they are doing something anti-women I’m pretty sure they’d be happy to have it pointed out so they could rectify it. You don’t need to turn anybody else into a conduit to them. They can be approached.
Your simple request is manipulative because it requires rad fems to ignore all the anti radical feminist work you’ve done in the past and ignore all the difficulties it has caused for some of us. Most of us don’t chase you around the blogosphere objecting to your work or protest you in real life. What you do at SWOP goes pretty much unchalleged, as do the conferences you all organise, although we would argue they are pro sex industry and thus anti-woman. Why don’t you show our work the same respect?
I said what happened to Lara Roxx was unfortunate but as she was an experienced performer I somewhat rather wondered why she agreed to do a scene she did not want to do. I also said that if she was raped, those who made the film should be prosecuted.
WRT to Duke, I said If I Was on a Jury in a US Court of Law, based SOLELY on the Evidence Presented, it would be hard to level a guilty verdict. That has nothing to do with how I feel about the woman involved, and all to do with how law, juries and courts work.
Prove otherwise, or drop it.
Stormy: You, my dear, are full of it. And I have one thing you seem to lack when it comes to 90% of this crap…proof. Now, I have really endeavored to avoid you because I think you are not too bright, a liar, and power-tripping, which is never a good combo, however, you cannot seem to leave me out of much of anything. You want me to act as if you do not exist, I am more than happy to, but that is a two way street. Stop obsessing over me and dropping my initials everywhere. Your behavior does not constitute “leaving alone”. You can allude to whatever the hell you want, but I assure you, I remember your actual, pointed, and why yes, first made threat, and should you choose to go forward with that, I am all too prepared to show you the error of your ways. You are not the only one who can dig, you know. Nasty piece of work, well, maybe I am, but Stormy, look in the mirror to see another one.
Jill, I think your idea is a fine one, and if you need assistance, I am happy to help you. I am pretty good with logos and graphics and such.
Cath- I apologize but I find it completely asinine when someone like Jill shows up with good intentions and tries to engage in an exchange of ideas and gets blasted for merely knowing me when that has nothing to do with the problem at hand. Lot’s of people from all sides find the rape of people in prostitution a huge problem, and that is an issue. Jill supporting me on 2257 should not overshadow that, and it seemingly has. Which makes no sense at all.
“I somewhat rather wondered why she agreed to do a scene she did not want to do.”
Yes dear, that’s why it’s called rape. Her choice was taken away by the men doing it. Do you not understand the concept? She was 18, what the fuck does “experienced performer” mean for a girl that age? You really show yourself up you know.
As for the Duke rape victim. Do you think she was raped – yes or no? Because if you are saying yes here you’d be able to do exactly the same thing in a jury room and not a person could stop you. Why would you want to let rapists walk free?
Lara Roxx’s rape for anybody who is wondering what on earth we are talking about:
“Roxx’s interview with AVN itself shows the fluidity of “consent” in these matters. “I told [my manager] I wasn’t interested in anal at all, and I was a little freaky about the no-condom thing too,” she said. On arriving at the film shoot, she was pressured into performing the “double anal” scene by the director, Marc Anthony. She says: “So I get there and Marc Anthony tells me it’s a DA, which stands for double anal. And I’m like, ‘What? I’ve never done a double anal’. And he was like, ‘Well, that’s what we need. It’s either that or nothing’. And that’s how they do it… I think that sucks, because he knew double anal was dangerous.” Later, she says, she was in pain and could not sit down.”
She got AIDS from it. But hey, she was an eighteen year old “experienced performer” so it has to be down to her really.
What happened to Lara Roxx was horrible. I’ve said that repeatedly. I think the director of said film should be held responsible in some way, as should her agent.
As for the Duke victim- I think she was assaulted, I think she was subjected to racial harassment, I think she was absolutely physically mistreated and verbally abused. I think the prosecutor in her case was a headline seeking idiot. Do I think she was raped, I do not know because I was not in the room. And part of the deal with being on a Jury in the US is being able to put away what you feel and what you think might have happened and weigh the presented evidence and return a verdict. An inability to do so gets one excused from jury duty.
There were plenty of radical feminists in opposition to Proposition K in San Francisco. Prop K would have effectively stopped the arresting of prostitutes in San Francisco, yet radfems like Norma Hotaling and Melissa Farley were against it. Radical feminists always SAY they are against prostitution arrests, but when it comes to supporting this type of legislation, they immediately speak out against it.
And no, I’m not on drugs.
And furthermore, I’ve seen nothing but bitchy attacks directed towards Jill Brennemen. Jill is a survivor of the very sex slavery you claim to care about. How about some compassion?
You see, it’s easy enough to say on a blog that you want to stop prostitution arrests, but then that position has to translate into public support for that very cause. While I’m against the Swedish Model because it drives prostitution underground and therefore make it more dangerous, it would at least stop the arrests of prostitutes.
I’ve given a lot of thought to your post. You asked me straight out so here are answers.
Polly writes “And if this image of this woman is all over the web do you not think it’s been used ‘without her consent’ anyway? Talk sense.”
Well you are likely to be correct on that regard. I have little doubt it has been used over and over without her consent. And my feeling is that the scum who used it without her consent should be prosecuted, the fact that she can’t have it taken down and retain ownership of it to keep it up or remove it is abhorrent,,,, I certainly advocate criminal proceedings for any pornographer using images without consent. If you know of images that have been determined by the actress to be used in violation of her legal rights, I am happy to support you in demanding justice. As an advocate counselor I have strongly made the point to direct services clients talking about going into porn that they consider that the images are likely to be stolen without their consent and that removing them is a major legal fight that often is fruitless. And that they consider there may or even is likely to be a time for many to most in their lives that they will wish the images were not out there and to consider this very strongly before making the decision. I have referred many direct service clients to feminist legal counsel to demand their rights and have strongly advocated against porngraphers violating them. Or worse.
I have zero sympathy for this issue. I wish 2257 or similar legislation was stronger, have advocated that it be stronger to protect the porn actresses rights.
Making porn against the consent, without the consent some combination of the two is in my belief filmed rape. You either have active consent that is totally free from coercion or it is not consent. If it isnt’ consent, it’s rape on tape.
However, I would ask you to consider that the porn actress has already been violated over and over by both our description. Are you stating that because her images have been blatantly stolen and she has been horribly violated that it becomes acceptable via virtue of this kind of usage for use in educational material to demonstrate how horrible it is?
I would advocate that rather than taking an image of this sort of which consent can’t be determined, that a willing actress be found, one who does consent both to the image and it’s usage for any reason including educational. I am assuming that we can agree on that?
Polly writes “How are rad fems meant to contact the woman to get her consent anyway? Again – talk sense.”
I don’t know Polly. I have no answer to how they would get her consent. To me it is yes they have it or no they don’t. Same as consent for sex. Yes is yes, anything but free consensual yes is no. Therefore I believe talking sense is what I would advise anyone asking me, if she didn’t consent than the answer is unequivocally no. I don’t believe in granting any exception to this as the precedent has to be very high or it will easily become a loophole in the law by exploited by every scumbag that is caught. This, to me, is the same as rape for educational purposes. It can’t happen. Certainly rape can be depicted and used in educational settings and those designed to create awareness of the horror of rape as long as it is a depiction. BSG actress Grace Park did a tremendous job trying to hammer that message home and it is tragic that the network cut most of the footage as unnecessary. Grace put herself through a series of very difficult scenes to demonstrate for awareness purposes of the horrors or rape and the network should have aired it. Thus, it is imperative that radical feminists locate an actress who actively consents to the depiction. No active consent, then the answer has to be no. No exceptions.
Criminalizing men who seek to exploit anyone sexually and making men’s predatory behaviors have real consequences for the man has proven to be a more immediately effective solution because it doesn’t rely on bystanders but cuts right to the core problem that is men with entitlement-to-sex issues.
Rape is already illegal; it’s the enforcement of it that’s the problem. However, paid sex between consenting adults is NOT rape, and never will be, and should never, ever be criminalized. An adult is an ADULT, Sam.
And BTW, how did we get on the subject of porn? To me, the issue is NOT ARRESTING PROSTITUTES.
>>You came here with a challenge about CATW expecting action from rad fems, when you could equally write to them yourself.>>
Well, Delphyne, you are using Jill as an excuse not to put your money where your mouth is. You say you’re against arresting prostitutes. Well why don’t you tell CATW that, since it seems that they are willing to get into bed with Sheriff Dart, a man who has arrested UNDERAGED prostitutes. But, oh, you’re not gonna do it because of Jill Brennemen. How convenient. Too bad for the 14 year old girl the good Sheriff had arrested and put into a gaol-cage that you are not gonna stick up for her.
Gee, Delphyne, you felt sorry for the 15 year-old girl in the video posted up at the top, yet you can’t muster the energy to defend a 14 year-old against a hypocritical CATW who gets into political bed with her arrestor.
Susan and Delphyne
I did write to CATW. But I was concerned that perhaps because of political considerations that it would not be taken as strongly as perhaps it would coming from radical feminists. Since we all agree that Sheriff Dart should stop criminalizing prostitutes. I truly though we could put politics aside. I am certainly willing to. Susan you want to do the project with me?
Anyway, here is my letter to CATW
Dear Ms. Ramos,
My name is Jill Leighton-Brenneman. I am a survivor of sexual slavery and human trafficking in prostitution from 1981 to 1984 in the United States. My testimony is published in books written by Gloria Steinem, Enslaved Modern Day Stories of Sexual Slavery, Kevin Bale and Zoe Trodd’s To Plead Our Own Cause and Donna Hughes Making the Harm Visible. I have been an activist on issues involving sexual slavery, violence and oppression against prostitutes, and in creating awareness on human trafficking since 1996. I read your recent post about Sheriff Dart’s actions in Chicago and was truly dismayed to see that CATW is supportive of Sheriff Dart’s actions. I’ve met Sheriff Dart. He is deeply condescending of the suffering of prostitution survivors including those trafficked. I am deeply disturbed and saddened to see the positions that CATW continues to take. Sheriff Dart is arresting prostitutes in bulk in a disingenuous operation to stop human trafficking. Arresting women that I believe both you and I can agree are often victims of sexual, physical and emotional violence in the sex industry. Why would you endorse his actions? His focus on arresting prostitutes completely overwhelms any minimal assistance he is giving to the token few that he can cite as examples for press conferences. His efforts against Craigslist are based on financial motive. He is working to get the money back that he spent on behalf of his department in initiatives that largely targeted the very women that CATW, you, I and many others are trying to advocate for.
Ms. Ramos, I was held captive by a sadist pimp from 1981 to 1984. He did some truly horrific things to me forcing me to be a submissive in prostitution for him. One of the greatest weapons he and his tricks had was the fact that the police were as much a potential oppressor as he was. I was as afraid of spending years in jail and having no ability to have a life beyond it as I was of him. Many of the most violent tricks were cops. More than one of which made no secret of being a cop, or were in fact on duty, and made no secret that they could and would arrest me and make it their mission to make my imprisonment as terrible as they could. My pimp Bruce made over $100,000 off of me in the three years, years I was aged 14 to 17. There was no Craigslist, was no internet yet the tricks found Bruce the pimp and therefore me by the 1000’s in 3 years. Yet by Sheriff Dart’s admission in interviews, he would have arrested me. He brags about arresting a 14 year old prostitute. When the end of my captivity came it was because the police were picking up Bruce the pimp on an unrelated warrant involving extradition. They found me locked in his closet. They were absolutely unsupportive. Bruce told them I was his girlfriend and that I liked rough sex. I was told by the police officers if I wanted to speak to a female officer as I had requested, that I would be arrested and would go downtown with them and that they felt it was in my best interest to keep my mouth shut and not make any more work for them. They didn’t even both to ask my age and were combative about allowing me to put some clothes on. The police aren’t allies so long as there is criminalization of the prostitute. Arrest certainly isn’t a rehabilitating experience. I know that first hand also. And it hovers in the background for the rest of someone’s life as they try to get decent jobs unrelated to the sex industry. Ms. Ramos, I respectfully ask that you reconsider who and what you are supporting. I remember the days that CATW was strongly supportive of the decriminalization of women and girls in prostitution advocating the Swedish Model. Where CATW is now and who and what they are supporting is both saddening and very disturbing. CATW seems to have lost focus on the very victim/survivors and instead is pursuing some macro level battle that allies with some truly horrible anti women, reactionary neo conservatives that are disingenuously taking on trafficking not for social justice but to give another reason for a press conference and photo opp.
I truly ask you and CATW to reconsider your alliances and actions. As both a survivor and an activist I have both seen the harm caused by disingenuous politicians with power such as Dart and on a bigger level, Bush and Cheney, I have seen the harm done outside the US and the women that are suffering because of truly horrific policies originating in the United States and suffered a great deal in prostitution because of the dynamics that men like Dart create. I would truly ask that you ponder the course CATW are on because from where I have stood and where I stand it is truly harmful to women and girls that have suffered a great deal and continue to do so and as the result of arrests through the actions of Sheriff Dart will fight having a criminal record and further struggle to have a life outside the sex industry as a result.
Thank you in advance for considering my thoughts and feeling,
Jill, not sure what I can do to help, because SWOP-Chicago has already made their public statement in regards to this matter.
I hardly think CATW is going to listen to a sex worker advocate who emails them, or take it seriously. But they might take it seriously coming from another radical feminist that it’s not okay to arrest prostitutes.
Let me know how I can help in this.
“What happened to Lara Roxx was horrible. I’ve said that repeatedly. I think the director of said film should be held responsible in some way, as should her agent.”
Really where did you say that? You didn’t say it here when I first asked you. You didn’t say it at Biting Beavers. What you did do was blame the victim for what happened to her. This is the first time I’ve even heard you come out with the world horrible although I see you still can’t bring yourself to call it rape. I think it’s a fucking joke that you’re pretending you care about other women being raped in prostitution when that is your response to a real life case.
You’re mighty good at this self-justification malarkey though. Pity you can’t spend the same number of words condemning male violence against women.
“As for the Duke victim- I think she was assaulted, I think she was subjected to racial harassment, I think she was absolutely physically mistreated and verbally abused. I think the prosecutor in her case was a headline seeking idiot. Do I think she was raped, I do not know because I was not in the room. And part of the deal with being on a Jury in the US is being able to put away what you feel and what you think might have happened and weigh the presented evidence and return a verdict. An inability to do so gets one excused from jury duty.”
You very carefully don’t say that you think she was raped even though she’s says that’s exactly what happened to her. Why don’t you believe a woman when she says she was raped? And if you don’t, why the fuck can’t you just come straight out with it and say “No I don’t think she was raped”? Oh, I forgot that would be bad PR wouldn’t it? As long as you skirt around the issue nobody is going to hold you accountable for your bullshit. What a joke. I think Jill should be writing you a letter of complaint for supporting rapists of women in the sex industry, not the victims.
“My testimony is published in books written by Gloria Steinem, Enslaved Modern Day Stories of Sexual Slavery, Kevin Bale and Zoe Trodd’s To Plead Our Own Cause and Donna Hughes Making the Harm Visible.”
Hang on you know Donna Hughes and she’s published your testimony Jill, but you’re coming to some random British rad fem blog to get support for a piece of activism back in the States. Why don’t you just contact Donna directly? She’d take your call wouldn’t she?
Talk about indirect.
Yes. While I have contacted Donna, there has been no response and is likely not to be one. You don’t know the circumstances as to why there are issues between her and I, really behind her and a significant group of survivor activists, Kelly Holospple, Minerva K, Chris Stark, Angel Cassidy, we all had a huge break with Donna over something.
So yes, while I have contacted her it is likely to fall on deaf ears. Perhaps you may have more luck
With all due respect. The amount of time and times that people have written questioning me in this blog could have had a letter sent to CATW and/or Sheriff Dart, a letter that would be advocating for the women in prostitutin rather than expending it on me. I continue to ask that I not be the priority and the women in prostitution be.
I am not the proirity. I shouldn’t matter at all as any obstruction to taking important steps to benefit women and girls in prostitution. They matter. Our politics can be another day.
Well the amount of time you have spent trying to manipulate rad fems and posture here with people whose work you have been actively hostile to in the past could have been better spent rounding up allies who do want to work with you on the sex industry and aren’t pissed off with your previous behaviour. It cuts both ways Jill. You came here to try and get us to condemn Norma Ramos for a COMMENT made in the comments section of a newspaper 5000 miles away from where the owner of this blog writes. How totally pathetic is that? Norma Ramos is responsible for her own words. You responded to her there – that should be the end of it, but instead you tried to manipulate a bunch of other people to go after her too.
You’re all about causing divisions. I see over on RE’s blog Cath is getting lauded for being the “good” rad fem for listening to you whilst the rest of us who have genuine grievances at your behaviour are getting written off. Here’s a clue – if you want to create allies, don’t actively attack their work. There are plenty of other people you could work with on this yet you choose to pick on the people who you have actively worked against in the past and attacked, then complain when we aren’t having any of it.
Do tell about you and Donna Hughes though. I can’t imagine what *you* could possibly have done to piss her off.
I have e-mailed the Cook County Sheriff’s Department though, and congratulated them on their action against Craiglist. I have urged them to go after pimps and johns but to treat prostituted people themselves as victims in the transaction and to offer them support if they want to escape the life. How much notice they take of some random person writing from the UK remains to be seen, but I do agree with you Jill that they shouldn’t be arresting prostituted people.
You’ve just gone about getting people on-side in completely the wrong way. You need to do your own work, not try to dictate what other people do in such a manipulative fashion or to keep attacking the work of others. Then maybe you’ll find a more positive response. Certainly trying to get rad fems to police one another is a completely outrageous request and you should desist from that kind of thing immediately, unless you want me to start requesting that you go after RE for her non-response to actual rapes within the industry.
I’ve said it every freaking time you mention her name since the discussion at BB’s. And I think it’s amusing that you presume to know just how much I may or may not care about or do things for other women in prostitution. You can think what ever you want, but hey, in this case, my creds do speak for themselves. As for Lara Roxx, what have YOU done wrt to her lately? Did you know she set up a Foundation? Did you know she works on AIDS awareness? Have you, oh, cut a check maybe to her for either of those things? Agreed with some of the actions that she had proposed for the porn industry and maybe tried to see them implemented yourself? Anything like that? You ever even think about or mention her except for when it suits you? Hum?
And get off my case about Duke. I wrote a HUGE entry on the whole thing, saying why YES, when a woman says she has been raped, I do want to believe her-but this case was such a freaking mess from the get go that it was truly hard to know the truth. The truth is I don’t know who I believe in that particular case. I don’t. I want to believe her, but I just don’t know if I do. And you know, I am under NO obligation to believe every word that ever comes out of any womans mouth just because she is a woman…and I am not going to lie and say “Oh, I believe her” when I am not sure that I do. Christ.
As for your bad PR bullshit, you know, I have most certainly written on Rape, bad PR or not. Theft of Services, anyone? I sure as hell blogged on that more than some folk from your side of the Internet, as did many other folk. Megan Williams? Yeah, her too. So save the song and dance for someone who does not know better.
As for Jill’s letter of complaint to me? Jesus Delphyne, you really are an imperious ass, aren’t you? You know how to talk big and sound enraged, but gee…I actually DO something about the situation…and that can be proved. So unless you can prove otherwise, stop being such a lying ass.
And calling Cath reasonable over at my place? Well gee, maybe that’s because she is!
‘I somewhat wondered why she had agreed to do a scene she didn’t want to do’
I somewhat wonder why a rape survivor should have to provide a reason why she was manipulated and pressurized into performing acts she did not wish to perform. Silly me, there I was thinking that victims of sexual violence shouldn’t have to provide reasons why we should take their rape seriously! But what do I know, eh?
If I’ve mentioned her it’s been once since then that’s it RE so bollocks to me supposedly bringing it up all the time. Your words do speak for themselves though. You don’t see it as rape despite the fact that the men who made her do it knew she’d said no, not once but twice. They could have offered her an alternative instead they pressured her into sex that she didn’t want which is rape. That’s what we’re talking about here – rape of women in prostitution even though you’re trying to change the subject. Good for Lara for setting up a foundation for AIDS. I’ll send her some money, thanks for telling me about it. Have you sent her anything?
You also completely ignored the mention of Linda Lovelace, I’m guessing you don’t think she was raped either. You certainly didn’t agree the last time around. Again it was the bullshit about how it said something about her as a performer.
And how the fuck can you read what happened in the Duke case and have the gall to go “Oh I don’t know what happened”. Oh you’re right you don’t know – but the victim did and she said she was raped. You’re just adding to the pile of bullshit against her when you discount her account. How could anyone trust you to support rape victims when you’re faced with real life accounts you try to weasel a way out for the rapists?
Jill’s letter of complaint about you was a joke. Sorry that one flew right by you. The thing is you’re completely ignoring what an imperious ass Jill is being expecting us to police the words of someone I’m pretty sure none of us even know. On the other hand you’re right beside her saying bullshit about rape victims in the sex industry and like you with jokes, it passes Jill right by.
So why don’t you say it straight – you don’t believe the Duke victim was raped, you don’t think Lara Roxx was raped and you don’t think Linda Lovelace was raped. I don’t think it’s possible for you ever to be that direct though.
We type the initials because we specifically don’t want some people, obsessed with googling themselves, to turn up.
However, when the stalkers track comments, the unwanted guests show up anyway. They outed themselves as stalkers.
The truck/die/choking person is NOT to address me by name either.
>>>I have urged them to go after pimps and johns but to treat prostituted people themselves as victims in the transaction and to offer them support if they want to escape the life.>>>
Thank you for writing a letter expressing your concern. It’s important to offer prostitutes a way out if that’s what they want, especially those that are underaged. However, supporting them does not mean arresting them, no matter how much people like to frame that kind of action as “tough love”. It is NOT “tough love” to give a woman (or man or transgendered person) a criminal record that will stay with her the rest of her life. Underaged prostitutes and runaways especially should have voluntary drop-in centers, not gaol-cages.
In regards to CATW, if they say they’re against arresting prostitutes, and then turn around and support a sheriff who does just that, then that is rank hypocrisy and callous disregard for the well-being of sex workers, or “prostituted women” as they like to say it. Sex workers are real human beings who should not be victimized by every opportunistic politician and radical feminist group that will turn around and flush them down the toilet when it suits them.
Sex workers are real human beings who should not be victimized by every opportunistic politician and radical feminist group that will turn around and flush them down the toilet when it suits them.
Susan, please do some reading around – radical feminists do not “flush women down the toilet” even metaphorically. That will be the porn – you are getting confused.
NB: you do know that a significant number of radical feminists are ex: prostitutes or sex establishment workers – yes?
Well I hope you’ll write a similar letter urging them to arrest pimps and johns Susan whilst leaving prostituted people alone. Then I’ll be sure to graciously thank you too. Whilst you’re at it you could write a letter suggesting similar things to our prime minister given that we are now doing transnational political lobbying.
I don’t think any of you sex pozzie bunch can start accusing people of hypocrisy. It seems to be the fuel your politics run on.
[…]we are now doing transnational political lobbying.
Yup, what are we – a distant European state of the USA or something? For gawds sake I can hardly keep up with our (UK) politics without being bombarded with US state of affairs too.
Stormy- I’ll address you by name if I choose to do so. The second you stop bringing me up all the damn time, I’ll consider changing my mine. And once again, you calling anyone else a stalker is priceless. And I did not google myself. Must have been one of my minions or something…or gee, maybe I read Cath’s blog? She and Caroline seem to be the two people blogging the most on Smith and prostitution in the UK, which oddly enough, is something I have an interest in. Now, as I have said several times before, I am perfectly happy to pretend you do not exist, but that is a two way street.
Delphyne: Linda Lovelace also said she felt utterly used and abused by the anti porn movement, lest people forget that. I also do not recall ever saying she was not raped. I think Traynor treated her like shit for certain. And yeah, wrt to Roxx’s foundation, I have. And ffs, I am legendary for being direct. I think Lovelace was raped, at least by her husband. I think Roxx was unduly pressured and mistreated. As far as the Duke victim goes- I honestly do not know. I think she was assaulted and abused, but I do not know if I think she was raped. I’d like to take her at her word, but I just don’t know. But I note you ignore the fact that, whoops, you were wrong with your accusations about how I never talk about male violence or women who have been raped. Lovely. Oh, and you’re “joke”…not funny. I love how some people can get away with saying really vile shit, but heaven for fend anyone who is not in the blessed Rad Fem circle says something shitty and it’s a big fucking deal. Nice double standards y’all have going there.
Quick! Call the fire brigade!
Somebody’s pants are on fire!
‘I think Roxx was unduly pressured and mistreated’
Being ‘unduly pressured’ into a sexual act is rape. Why not just say it?
And what exactly do Lovelace’s feelings towards radfems have to do with whether she was raped and tortured or not? Nothing, that’s what.
You seem to be so obsessed with proving your ‘creds’ (whatever that means) and disproving everyone else’s, yet unable to answer a simple question.
She was forced to make the movie: that is rape. Why is it so hard to say these porn performers were raped in their jobs? I truly do not understand.
“I also do not recall ever saying she was not raped.”
You are really good at these politicians answers aren’t you? I’m not asking you whether you “recall” (we’re not in court FFS). I’m asking you to say straight out what you clearly believe. If I’m wrong tell me but I think you don’t think that Linda Lovelace was raped on the set of Deep Throat. You keep saying so in so many words, either by just ignoring it completely, or saying it said something about her as a performer, or like this:
“I think Traynor treated her like shit for certain.”
Linda Lovelace says she was raped on the set of Deep Throat. She knows what happened to her better than you do, yet you are clearly avoiding saying she was raped.
“And yeah, wrt to Roxx’s foundation, I have.”
Good for you.
“And ffs, I am legendary for being direct.”
No you’re not. Sex pozzie propaganda doesn’t count. There were three rapes of women whilst they were working in the sex industry and you are saying in every manner of indirect way that you don’t think they were raped. Because, as I said it would be bad PR. If you are so direct then come straight out with it.
“I think Lovelace was raped, at least by her husband.”
Nope, not good enough. Lovelace said “Every time someone watches that film [Deep Throat] they are watching me being raped”. We are talking about rapes in the industry. Rapes that someone, normally men, made a profit from. Rapes that Jill brought up because Jill is starting a campaign against them.
“I think Roxx was unduly pressured and mistreated.”
Being pressured into a sex act you don’t want is rape. Try and say it.
“As far as the Duke victim goes- I honestly do not know. I think she was assaulted and abused, but I do not know if I think she was raped.”
You don’t know what you think? Is that a first? Of course you know what the answer is to that dilemma – ask yourself. Ask “Do I think she was raped – yes or no?”
“I’d like to take her at her word, but I just don’t know.”
You don’t have to know. You just have to stop thinking you have superior knowledge or judgement about a woman’s own experience. You weren’t there. She was.
“But I note you ignore the fact that, whoops, you were wrong with your accusations about how I never talk about male violence or women who have been raped.”
I never made that accusation. I know you’ve made posts about rape in the industry – I think I once even defended you at Ginmar’s when people were saying the sex pozzies hadn’t said anything about the “Theft of Services” judgement and I pointed out you’d blogged about. What I said here was how could we possibly trust you about caring about women who had been raped because when confronted with these real life examples you find weasel excuses for rapists or just minimize or ignore the event completely. Just because you don’t do it every single time doesn’t excuse the times you do. You do know that by refusing to acknowledge these women’s rapes you are basically letting the men who raped them off the hook for their crimes?
“Lovely. Oh, and you’re “joke”…not funny.”
I disagree. It was quite funny. I expect Jill is beavering away now trying to come up with ten inches of whine about your awfulness. Well probably not – Jill only seems to notice rad fem missteps. And no I don’t hold Jill accountable for your behaviour – so no need for Jill to write you a letter. I’ll talk to you directly instead. I don’t need to engineer other people to go after people I’m disagreeing with.
Anyhow I was right. I said you wouldn’t be able to be direct and say “No I don’t think Lara Roxx was raped. No I don’t think Linda Lovelace was raped on the set of Deep Throat. No I don’t believe the Duke rape victim”. Legendary directness – tee hee.
I have yet to see any evidence — and I’ve searched for it — that Linda Lovelace stated publicly she felt exploited or abused by radical feminists, ever. She may well have felt disappointed that radical feminists did not, in the end, support her financially given the anti-pornography work she did, and I can understand that, but that’s something entirely different. So far as I have been able to determine, the “Linda Lovelace felt exploited by radical feminists” meme is a nasty piece of fiction promulgated by idiots like Sheldon Ranz/Phil Goldmarx, a long time AVN reviewer and pornhound, all over the feminist internet, since 2000 or thereabouts. Lovelace posing for a porn magazine late in her life does not equal Lovelace feeling exploited by radical feminists and now she’s gone back to porn and all her porn buddies. From what I can determine, it equalled desperately broke. What we know for sure is, Linda Lovelace felt exploited by the pornography industry and WAS exploited by the pornography industry and is still being exploited by the pornography industry today, even though she’s been dead for years.
I would take your calls for action seriously, Jill Brennemann, if I had not observed over years now how hell bent you are to discredit committed radical feminists who have been in the trenches, doing the anti-rape, anti-prostitution, anti-pornography, anti-femicide work for decades now, for a half century actually. You’ve got a big fat ‘ol axe to grind, seems to me, because you made some really bad, bad and self-serving decisions some years back around your own activism that swung back around and kicked you in the rear when the radfems you were dealing with were not going to play that and told you so straight up, in no uncertain terms. All of this name dropping you are always doing? You should stop doing that. So what if you know whomever you know or knew on whatever basis, or did? Your lists of names and accusations prove nothing.
Some of us are well up to date on what is going on in the world so far as rape and femicide. We’re on that 24/7 like white on rice. We don’t need direction from people like you or anyone else remotely connected with the pornography industry or the sex trade so far as what activism we ought to engage in today.
If you wonder at my vehemence, it might have to do with the fact that I’ve just gone back and read thousands and thousands of words you attempted to post to my blog (unsuccessfully) in, again, the effort to publicly defame and discredit radical feminist women. You’re all over the internet with that and it’s disgusting.
Cath, nice to meet you, I appreciate your work very much.
” “Between Andrea Dworkin and Kitty MacKinnon, they’ve written so many books, and they mention my name and all that, but financially they’ve never helped me out. […] They made a few bucks off me, just like everybody else.”- Linda Lovelace
Who, now having actually read everything she has to say about her life…Yes, I beleive her when she says she was raped.
I never said I did not believe her, by the way.
Laurelin: I think there is a difference between people being talked into things they do not want to do and being forced to have sex. I realize others disagree with me on such matters. They are perfectly allowed to do so. I think Roxx was talked into doing things she did not want to do. She has said she was pressured into doing something she did not want to do…so that is what I say happened to her. Has she ever said,flat out, in her own words, that she was raped? If so, I might change my mind. Naming ones own experiences and all.
Delphyne: You can browbeat me about Duke all you want. That will not change the fact that my answer remains “I do not know”. Like I said, I want to believe her, but when one of the people she accused was not even at the location at all when the incident happened, when her story changed so many times, when the other dancer who was there with her said “no, that’s not what happened”, when one looks at all the things she herself said…well, I don’t know. You do not have to like that answer, but it remains my answer.
Now, you can question my ability to care about women who have been raped if you want. I cannot stop you. But the fact is, why yes, I do work with organizations that want to stop the rape of prostitutes and want to see serious legal action taken against those who do rape them…which would be a funny way of saying I don’t give a shit. Do I think Lovelace deserved more justice than she got? Yes. Do I think Roxx and the Duke victim deserve more justice than they got? Yes. I do.
you know, some of y’all also might want to eyeball your own behavior towards Jill, who was forced into prostitution, held captive, raped and tortured, who has spoken, first hand and all, about how she was treated by a variety of people, from her pimp to Nikki Craft, yet I have yet to see an acceptance of her story as thruth or anything even remotely close to empathy shown to her.
If you can’t work out that rape can take place without overt violence then I think we really have problems.
In any other industry ‘do this sex act or you don’t get paid’ would be viewed – correctly- as sexual harrassment at the very least. But not in pornland apparently.
And yet I thought porn and prostitution were just like any other jobs? /snark
Admitting that these were rapes within the porn industry would burst the little warm & fuzzie free choice defence.
Or perhaps admitting these rapes happened brings back a few memories of coersion on the set.
Laurelin- I have said repeatedly that porn ect. were not a job for everyone by any stretch of the imagination, and well yes, when sex IS your job, if you want to get paid, you have sex. Yes, rape can take place without overt violence, but I am curious to know how Roxx defines HER OWN experience.
Stormy- I haven’t been coerced on a set, so, no. And why are you still talking to/at me?
I haven’t said that Jill is lying. If Jill says Jill was raped and tortured in prostitution by a pimp and by johns then why would anybody dispute that? That’s a truly horrendous experience and I wish it was one that Jill hadn’t had.
I don’t have to accept Jill’s attacks on Nikki Craft as truth though. Nikki Craft has her own version of events that don’t tally with Jill’s and Jill has form for going after anti-prostitution and anti-porn feminists and attacking or co-opting their work. But that’s the kind of manipulative thing you do – equating the horrific rape and torture of a person with a disagreement amongst feminists. How can you do that? Do you really not see how egregious it is to put the two in the same category and demand that both receive the same response?
I’m glad you’ve finally acknowledged that Linda Lovelace was raped on the set of Deep Throat to make the film. That is what you said there isn’t it because you still didn’t say it outright even after we had to narrow it down to the Deep Throat set because you were willing to believe she was raped…… by Chuck Traynor even though you knew it wasn’t what we were talking about. It’s only taken three years to get there and it’s a big change from the callousness you displayed when I first mentioned it to you. Maybe you could blog about Linda though and her experience of being raped to make porn because I know a lot of porn users call her a liar and discount the rapes she experienced so they could enjoy what was done to her on film. As this thread is all about suggesting what work other people should do.
As for the Duke rape victim, no you’re still making me sick. You know those scumbag rapists were lying don’t you? They set up a whole lot of tricks at the time to confuse her and to make sure they got away with it. Just because lying bastards covered their tracks and got other people to lie for them doesn’t mean you have to believe them and discount what a victim says happened to her. Rapists are the worst liars in the world and just because a victim changes her story doesn’t mean the truth of it isn’t real – trauma messes up a person’s memory. So no I’m still not convinced in the slightest that you put rape victims’ interests first, not when on certain occasions you’re willing to believe rapists over their victims. Like I said just because you put victims first sometimes, doesn’t make up for the other times you don’t.
But slippery and indirect as ever “I don’t know” means you don’t have to take responsibility for your shit. Even though “I don’t know” means the rapist walks free and the victim is left being not believed about the harm that was inflicted on her, which is exactly the same as saying “No I don’t believe she wasn’t raped”. Two different statements, same outcome – one of them though you don’t have to take responsibility for the harm you are doing with it though. Good move RE.
If you have sex with someone you know damn well does not want to have sex with you that is rape.
It is no-one’s job to be raped.
I find the attitude that she wasn’t raped because she was ‘paid’, and because it was ‘her job’ utterly appalling.
Well exactly Laurelin. Roxx’s pimp knew she didn’t want to do that sex act but he sent her along anyway because he’d get his 50% cut or whatever it is. Marc Anthony heard her say “no” but insisted. They are both rapists by proxy as are any of the scumbags who watched the scene on film (as is every scumbag who watched Deep Throat and got off on it – I’m sure RE will join in condemning them too).
Now hell if they were getting her to weigh oranges in a greengrocer, no harm no foul probably, but her “no” was to getting two penises stuck in her rectum. Penetration you don’t want is rape. And lots of women don’t call their experiences rape. It took me fourteen years to call my rape, rape. It doesn’t mean that that wasn’t what it always was though.
You don’t have to believe Jill about Nikki. I don’t have to believe whomever about Duke. Amazing how that works, eh? Neither of us has to agree with one another’s decision. And no, I don’t believe the guys who were at the party at Duke, but the words and testimony of the other dancer there has some credibility with me, as do the words of other women who worked with the victim at a club and spoke on her story of the evenings events and actions after it. You believe Nikki over Jill, well, lets say I am taking other strippers testimony into account here in what I think about the Duke situation. And I have pretty much figured that my mere existence makes you sick. Oddly enough, that is not going to keep me awake at night. I still just do not know what I think on that particular case. If that makes you sick, so be it, it changes nothing.
Oh, and I have defended Lovelace’s claims about her history, actually. And really, quit jumping on me for not taking responsibility for my shit when there is a whole lot of that going around. Me saying I do not know whom I believe about Duke is not being dishonest, it’s what I think. I take responsibility for that. I am taking shit for it right now. I note everyone jumping all over me for “I do not know”, but that charmer Stormy can sit there and speculate about what has happened to me on a set and no one challenges her at all. Very interesting, really. Then again, the some women are more equal than others school of thought is nothing new with a great many of you. I’ve asked for an explanation on this very sort of thing countless times, and never received one. Gail Dines can say ipso facto when a woman has been raped-without ever having talked to her- and no one bats an eye, yet I say: “I do not know” on the Duke case and…what? I am somehow far more guilty of denying womens experiences than she is? Stormy can make her little innuendos and the same rules apply? That makes sense, how, again?
I am not sure, but I think the scene involving Roxx was pulled and is not being viewed by anyone. And yes, I would join in on condemning people who watch Deep Throat.
But Delphyne, you can define your experience as you see fit, as you see it, as you call it. Other people get to do the same and you do not necessarily get to correct them on that. Like I said, if Lara Roxx actually said, in her own words, she was raped, I’d like to see it, until then, I will go with how she said it, which was she was pressured into doing something she did not want to do, but she did it anyway. Unfortunate? Absolutely. Do I think the director and her agent should be punished? Absolutely. But unless she, as the person involved, calls it rape, I am not going to either.
Well do you consider then the director and agent to be rapists?
By that I mean, these bastards pushed an unwilling woman into sex. Are they not by definition guilty of rape?
As for allowing Roxx to ‘define her own experience’ (rape is an ‘experience’ now? I thought it was torture), that means you are steadfastly refusing to call the rapists by their true names.
And I think you should refer back to Delphyne’s comment too, about her own ‘experience’, when speaking of ‘defining [one’s] own experiences’.
‘Experience’ hides the fact that we are talking about an act committed against a woman by a man, in a world in which women are socially, economically and politically subordinated to men. We are in a world in which women’s sexual ‘experiences’ are constantly defined for them by men as ‘not rape’, as ‘regetted sex’, as ‘just a bit of fun’ etc.
When we call rape rape we are referring to the actions of the rapist. That’s the point.
“You don’t have to believe Jill about Nikki. I don’t have to believe whomever about Duke.”
Oops, there you go again – comparing a falling out amongst feminists to a RAPE. Yes we need to believe people about their experiences of sexual violence because they know better than anyone what their experience was, not the other woman there, not the lying rapists themselves, not the women who worked with her afterwards. You don’t get to tell a woman she wasn’t raped and why would you want to anyway? Calling rape victims liars is one of the pillars of male supremacy and if you’re serious about supporting victims then you’ll stop doing it.
And no we don’t have to believe everybody who has a grudge against a radical feminist, particularly when that radical feminist has her own version of what happened. It just isn’t the same thing and you’re flailing if you try and make out it is.
“When we call rape rape we are referring to the actions of the rapist. That’s the point.”
Yup the guy who raped me knew what he was doing. He was relying on what a lot of rapists rely on, that I would blame myself. Which I duly did.
Marc Anthony knew that Lara Roxx didn’t want to do be double penetrated. When she said no and he used his power to pressure her into doing something she didn’t want instead of saying “OK I respect your no”. The reason he didn’t respect her no is because he’s a rapist.
With respect to Nikki Craft, we know what Nikki herself and others have had to say about the facts Jill is referring to, so it isn’t a guessing game or a matter of who believes who. The facts are either all there for us to look at or they aren’t. They line up or they don’t.
Too, Jill has a habit of attempting to use some of us against the others without permission — i.e., “Look what radical feminists did to poor so-and-so,” when poor so-and-so wants no part of Jill’s chivalry. At least one person has made a public statement about this and asked Jill to stop doing it.
The Linda Lovelace quote supports what I wrote up there about her. She was disappointed that radical feminists did not financially support her. Again, I understand. She nowhere says, that I have ever found, that radical feminists abused or exploited her. What RE posted up there is all the basis there is for the smear campaign against radical feminists wrt to Linda Lovelace that has gone on for years now on the internet. And also again, Lovelace is being exploited *right now*, though she is dead, because films she wanted destroyed are still being bought, exchanged, sold and viewed against her will, against her consent. She made something like a thousand bucks, less than that, I think, for “Deep Throat.” the porn industry has made *millions* off of that film.
As to this difference between rape and a woman being talked into something, here is something on point from my moderation queue posted March 1.
[e-mail address omitted] | [IP address omitted]
All you have to do to see that Max Hardcore should be in prison if not the death sentance is watch Max Factor 11 ( European Uncut version). In the third scene he literally rapes the girl and says so repeatedly. she begs him to stop, ”I can’t do this any more,” and he says, ”Too bad”. She tries to push him off as he has her head hanging off the bed and humping her mouth, he holds her arms down and keeps going as she cries.
From Smackdown Time for Max Hardcore: Jury Finds Paul Little Guilty on 10 Counts of Criminal Obscenity, 2009/03/01 at 7:03 PM
This is the kind of thing that gets defined by some as a not rape, just a woman having been “talked into something.” The only thing she got talked into was being in pornography in the first place. To be credibly anti-rape, at a bare minimum, we have to all agree that NO means NO. But it doesn’t necessarily in porn. If a woman signed the contract, then anything that happens, including the rape described above, can be cast as something you also agreed to because she signed, didn’t she? Too bad if she got “talked into it.”
Comments like “Lenny’s”, by the way, one of hundreds, maybe thousands, posted to my blog over the years, is one reason I don’t allow comments anymore. It’s not only that I feel sick to my stomach reading it. It’s that I know that if and when I approve it, people like some in this thread are going to call the raped girl a liar, the poster a liar and are going to defend this despicable human being who has destroyed women’s lives and is still destroying them now by way of his films. The fact that I haven’t approved these comments, doesn’t mean I’m not saving them. I save every comment that has value to me, for whatever reason.
Get over yerself truck/die/choking.
It was a speculation and nothing more, truck/die/choking has every right to refute it. But I am quite often on-the-money about (underlying) motivations.
However, I did write more in general. But I did forget the Golden Rule: Make it ALL about truck/die/choking. Oh dear. Mea culpa.
Truck/die/choking would actually have my sympathy, if not for being so malicious and self-serving.
See what I have done here truck/die/choking? I have cleverly turned semi-directed interactions into a third-party format. Truck/die/choking is still stuck in grade school of direct interaction. Seriously, truck/die/choking needs to lift her game to be on a level playing field. Truck/die/choking may be able to out-vicious me, but cannot out manoeuvre me. That is why truck/die/choking has such a *problem* with me. It would be best for truck/die/choking to actually give up and not refer to me by name.
In the case of that particular director, I would absolutely say he facilitated the sexual assault of another person, and chances are, if he pressured Roxx, he pressured other people too, and yeah, I think he should be held responsible.
But I also think if we do not let women define events in their lives by their own terms something else is also wrong there. I just do. Once again, no one is forced to agree with me on that.
Delphyne: But you see, that is exactly what Jill has claimed has happened with her- her experiences were denied and twisted by other women. And where in any of this have I said I think the Duke victim was lying? I said I do not know what I think, that is not calling her a liar. As for believing other womens words, that is exactly where we are at with the Jill/Craft example. Believing one woman over another. That is the same thing as me taking into account the words of other women in the Duke situation. How much have you looked into that case? How much of the documentation and interviews and such have you read? I think I have read just about everything I could get my hands on involving that case because yeah, I would like to have a clear cut opinion, but even after reading tons and tons of police reports, interviews, court documents, forensics, and witness statements and all of that stuff, I still don’t know what I think.
“They made a few bucks off me, just like everybody else”
You don’t take that as someone feeling as if they have been used and exploited? Really? That’s exactly how it sounds to me.
And no commentary about the double standard on folk like Dines deciding when others have been raped? Interesting, but not surprising.
Stormy- I have problems with you because you are, IMHO, an idiot and an ass who threatened me. And yeah, I far prefer the direct approach. That pointed enough for you? And I seriously doubt you could maneuver yourself out of a paper bad without a flashlight and two assistants.
I read a whole lot that was going on at the time RE and there was *nothing*, *nothing* that suggested that the victim wasn’t raped. It was pretty clear that there was an awful lot of work going on to let the rapists off the hook though.
Anyhow I think you almost managed directness not quite:
“You don’t have to believe Jill about Nikki. I don’t have to believe whomever about Duke.”
Because as far as I can see in this context the only person “whomever” can be here is the victim. Of course you carefully didn’t say “the victim” so you’ve still got deniability.
As for Nikki and Jill Brenneman. I don’t believe that Nikki did discount Jill’s experiences. I think that is more crap from Jill to take the focus of what Nikki was criticising Jill for which was that Jill was promoting pro-prostitution propaganda from an organisation and website that were set up to help women who were trying to escape from it. So that’s what I’m disbelieving Jill about. I think Jill used the experiences Jill had had to try and manipulate Nikki into backing down from criticism of Jill.
I don’t think what Lovelace said equals being “utterly used and abused by the anti-porn industry,” which is what you (and others) have said.
I have no idea what you’re referring to with respect to Gail Dines. If you provide me with something, in its context, I’ll take a look. However, if what you’re saying is that Gail Dines will agree that a woman has been raped without talking to the woman, don’t bother. The problem at issue is, women, especially pornographers, who DON’T believe women have been raped, not women who do believe them.
In this speech, Dines says that any woman who has done pornography was raped her first time on set.
That counts as deciding when a woman has been raped, without her input.
Well, what I read about it makes me say “I don’t know”. We’ve beat this horse enough, yes? I don’t see either one of us changing our minds.
Yes it’s fine, you admitted that you don’t think you have to believe a rape victim because you reckon you get to decide what happened to her, not her. And we’ve had an entertaining demonstration of your slipperiness.
At least you finally acknowledge that Linda Lovelace was raped to make the porn movie Deep Throat. Enough people have dismissed her.
I don’t need to watch that youtube to say that I don’t have any problem with what Dines said (if she said what you wrote there). For one thing, most women who have been raped don’t acknowledge that they were raped, all the way up until the moment that they finally do acknowledge it, which might be (and often is) decades to a lifetime after the fact. Further, making reference to the rapes of women in general, or groups of women in general, is not the same thing as saying a woman has been raped without talking to her directly. Finally, how does a girl or woman give anything remotely equal to consent to sex with a man or men (or women) she’s never seen in a situation completely foreign to her? Signing on the dotted line doesn’t mean she is going to want to have sex with the guy or guys or woman or women when the time comes. It means she is going to have sex with whomever whether she wants it or not. That’s rape.
Wet paper bag alert!
Zmog truck/di/choking, the truck/die/choking postering is so fucking transparent.
Guess what? I don’t fucking care! I don’t care if you (and your misogynist buddies) try to discredit me. I don’t care. You lot have done that already, along with discrediting every radfem in the known universe. It actually isn’t about me! Truck/die/choking just hates radfems.
Oh. but I forgot. This week we are playing at to-be-taken-seriously-whateveritis. I will prentend to be humbled. Or something.
“every radfem in the known universe”
Yes, every single fucking one all the fucking time. Non-stop, forever and fucking ever. Oops my swearing has come back.
We’ll forget about this thread and go back to other stuff. That bunch of wankers will still be attacking us, spreading shit, telling lies. Ugh.
Fuck I bet Nikki Craft stopped talking about Jill Brenneman years ago. On the other hand Jill Brenneman and Jill Brenneman’s pals *cannot* stop talking about Nikki Craft.
Delphyne: Whatever. I said I don’t know. That’s not good enough for you? Oh well.
Heart: I’m not surpised you do not feel the need to watch the video, nor that you have a problem with Dines deciding she has the authority to make that decision and call for any, every, and all women who have ever done pornography thus eliminating their decision making skills, judgment, and autonomy altogether. I, however, have a real problem with that and see it as an issue worthy of noting.
Decision making skills?
Yup right. 18yo’s, 20yo’s, so equiped and knowledgeable to make correct decisions.
How come most of us recognise that people with age and experience make better decisions, but 18yo’s fucking men for money or on film, have a complete grasp on the overall situation?
They can barely drive cars properly ffs.
Oh no! I forgot it was ‘sex’ and ‘agency’ and all the other BS.
Ren, holding a perspective on an issue, having an opinion, does not equal taking authority or acting with authority with respect to that issue. Neither does holding a perspective or having an opinion “eliminate” any other woman’s perspective, opinion or rights to both.
About 47 minutes into the presentation, here’s what Gail actually said, and she didn’t say it about all women in pornography:
“I watched a very interesting interview with some women from pornography. Now, you know when you see anything on E Entertainment or HBO with women from pornography you understand they’re on the job when they’re doing the interview, right? You’re not going to get some insightful analysis. But what was very interesting is they all basically said the same thing.
They all said, ‘You know, I signed a contract, I’m willing, it’s my consent, but something happened to me that day on the set. That first day something crossed over in me and I don’t know what it is but something changed.”
Now, I think tomorrow we’ll talk about that because it’s very complicated what did change, but they experienced rape on that set. I don’t care if you sign a million fucking contracts, that’s rape.”
When prostitutes like Lara Roxx and the women in the show Gail watched say, “I consented but then something changed’, what changed was their consent got erased by porn-makers coercion.
The women’s consent to make porn was changed by the men on the set into an excuse to rape them and film it. Lara Roxx’s consent to make porn was exploited to get her to the set where her pimp and pornographers then executed their plan to make her perform sexually in ways they knew she hadn’t consented to, aka rape.
People reading this can decide for themselves the veracity of your claim, “Dines says that any woman who has done pornography was raped her first time on set.”
We let 18 year olds go to war, right? And to college. And do countless other adult things. Oh, and I am on the record as saying I personally think the age for going into porn should be 21.
Heart- Standing in a room full of people at every one of these events and declaring something like that is dismissive and simply put, not okay.
Dines is assuming she knows what changed for those women, and calls it rape. She does not know what changed, but declares it rape anyway. Does one’s life change after making porn? Yes. It does. Without question. But saying they were raped-default is exactly that, Sam, deciding for other women that they have been raped even if that is not in any way even remotely close to whatever change they were talking about.
And she does not seem to spend any time wanting to know their opinions on the change either. She just goes ahead and calls it rape.
I think most radfems would be anti-war (possibly for similar reasons, as in sending the young, but also the pointlessness of it all, as well as other reasons).
And nah. Me as an 18yo, not seriously capable of making life-long decisions (and have seriously changed focus). And I was overly mature for my age. The other 18yo’s…? But hey, it’s all just ‘sex’!
Consent. Say the mantra! 18yo’s can make decisions that they will NEVER regret for the rest of their lives!
That so works for me. Not.
Well you know the day after I was raped my friend said to me “That was rape” when I told her about it and I disagreed with her. It was fine though, it was her opinion – she didn’t do it to hurt me or to take something away from me as the rape-deniers are doing. Telling someone they were raped is not on the same moral or emotional plane as denying to someone that they were raped or denying it behind their backs.
“telling someone you think they were raped”
Like Laurelin says its a judgement about the rapist’s behaviour.
delphyne- I think that can depend, maybe, on the person and how often they hear it, but I don’t know for certain. Shrug.
Stormy: and yes, I know most rad fems oppose war. I assume you saw my statement about 21 and are just ignoring it because it makes things easier for you, yes? Either way, as the world is now, 18 is considered an adult in most-if not all-places, and thus, 18 year olds can engage in adult things.
Women so often do not call their rapes ‘rape’ because they have been told so much by men that they were not raped, they wanted it, they were making a fuss, they didn’t know their boundaries and would know better next time (the last one courtesy of BDSM apologists), they should’ve said no louder, more often, should’ve fought…
This is why this ‘I’m letting her name her own experience’ crap rings very hollow for me. People allowing me to ‘name my own experiences’ certainly never helped me in the long run- they just used the same words as those who harmed me.
And ‘experience’??! I still can’t get over the use of that phrase. The further we get away from what rape is, from what was done by men to Roxx, the easier denial is, the easier it is to say banal words like ‘experience’ in the place of ‘torture’.
When women are in charge of their lives and not in fear of male violence then they will be able to name their experiences- that can only be done in a position of freedom and physical safety.
It is imperative that we call rape rape when we see it. We owe it to ourselves, and to survivors.
Laurelin: That’s fine. Women naming their own experiences is pretty important to me, to say how things are in their own words…I think it’s important. As always, no one is obligated to agree with me.
The women’s consent to make porn was changed by the men on the set into an excuse to rape them and film it.
Yes. This is exactly, exactly right.
The age requirement for entering pornography should not be 18, 21 or any age. Pornography is a human rights violation and should be — and will be, in time — abolished.
Re standing in a room and analyzing rape culture, porn culture and prostitution and that being “not okay.” Who forced anyone to attend and listen? What is keeping anyone attending from going out and speaking her own mind in her own venues?
More fundamentally, if Dines is wrong to say, in a seminar setting, that women in porn have been raped, how in the hell would it be fine and dandy for pornographers to DEPICT men raping women 24/7 throughout the world in a million different venues where there is (1) no opportunity or way for women to stand up and say NO, what you’re seeing in that pornography is NOT what we are for, and (2) people find themselves exposed to this stuff when they don’t want to be and haven’t sought it out. Is the message that women exist to be raped and brutally sexually assaulted, and like it, somehow less a message because it’s on film and not in a seminar?
Not an unexpected answer. As Delphyne accussed me of exceptional political spin earlier, I will say you too have a gift for it. I was pressed for flat out answers earlier, well, you know, I’d like some myself.
Is it okay or not okay for Dines to make a statement which suggests she knows what constitutes the rape of another woman or not, that the change these women discuss is, by default, rape? Yes or no?
And best of luck with that abolishment thing.
WHEN does it end?
The same names, engaged in the same debates, over and over again. These personal vendettas have been raging for literally YEARS now.
Life is too damn short for this.
I honestly don’t mean to sound like a self-righteous, smug little prig here. I no longer blog and no longer feel any real negative emotions toward any blogger nor do I consider myself alighned in political/ though with any group or blogger exclusively.
What I did feel, after I watched the video of the young girl being violent attack and my stomach literally heaved, was horror.
Scroll down to post a comment and then feel — deflated.
Women against women over and over again.
That’s most a rhetorical question.
Best to all,
(Sorry for the spelling errors. Once a non-proofreading Commenter, always a non-proofreading Commenter, it appears.)
RE, you said above that one’s life does change in a significant way after making pornography. Could you say a bit more about what those changes are?
I’m happy to give my perspective on the statement by Gail Dines. It’s a hugely emotive statement to make and it’s shocking to hear. It’s also a statement that would be difficult to prove either way, but one which I would tend to agree with and support her right to make the assertion. Partly because of the culture and experiences which lead women into pornography (and can impact on notions of choice and agency) and partly because of the culture and experiences within pornography itself. That being said, it’s always risky to make generalisations and can often be problematic.
Have you watched the documentary ‘Hardcore’ which was shown on UK TV a few years ago? We are taken along on the journey of a woman who – hugely manipulated by her agent – explores entry into the pornography industry in the States. In the beginning, she has clearly defined boundaries (wanting to do only female to female scenes for example). By the end of the process all of those stated boundaries are gone and she is broken down and traumatised by the experience.
The agent is central to the manipulation and pressure to remove the boundaries (he brought her all this way, he worked to get her this opportunity, he stands to loss, blah de blah) but it’s clear that there exists within the pornography industry a well rehearsed process by which those involved are routinely ‘broken in’ (groomed? worn down?). 2 examples of this: The woman has to strip naked – completely unexpectedly – and be inspected by the men producing at her first meeting to discuss what ‘opportunites’ will be available to her.
In her first meeting with Max Hardcore she is raped – on camera – after having to also strip for inspection by him. The makers of the documentary eventually intervene (a few days later when the assualts are then being filmed by Hardcore) when her level of distress is such that they cannot stand by any longer. The makers of the documentary did not intend to make an anti-pornography documentary. Quite the opposite. The crew were horrified by what they witnessed and, while initially were caught up in the choice quandry with regards their right to intervene, eventually had to acknowledge that a range of factors (including emotional and mental co-ercion as well as actual sexual violence, and, the woman’s own complex history) made it difficult for the woman to actively choose anything.
I would say that scenarios like the above are those to which Dines is referring and I would say that scenarios like the above are not uncommon in women’s entry into pornography. Indeed, what might go on when there is no documentary team filming the process? A documentary team who are also on record as traumatised by what they witnessed and their own complicity in what transpired.
Kim, I couldn’t agree more. Reading stats about attitudes about violence against women, blog articles dismissing the recent Amnesty 1 in 10 campaign (and more horrendous attitudes expressed in the comments aferward by so called liberal lefties) and stories about women being forced off the web has left me reeling this week. We have lost so much ground and the backlash against feminism seems to gain momentum. There’s so much work to do. I wish we could mobilise and use our energy and anger in some organised way. What can we do?
Thankyou Cath, by the way, for the one bit of wonderful news about the resolution passed by conference
Ha ha, you won’t give straight answers yourself but you demand them of other people RE. How about you give a straight answer to my questions? Are you able to say:
“Linda Lovelace was raped on the set of Deep Throat” (because you still didn’t specify that she was)
“Lara Roxx was not raped in my opinion”
“I don’t believe the Duke rape victim, but I do believe the accounts of every other witness about her”
Because you didn’t answer it. You just tried to shrug and back off in the end, although you first came out swinging before with your BS and insults. That’s another politicians trick – being disarming. Try making some direct statements for a change.
Here’s one for free just so you can get the hang of it:
It is OK for Gail Dines to say that those women were raped to make pornography. She’s making an observation on what they themselves are describing. She’s not saying “It didn’t happen”, she’s not saying “I’ve read what the other witnesses say and I don’t know what to believe”. Same thing with Lara Roxx. She describes being coerced into submitting to an incredibly dangerous and painful sexual act that she didn’t want. That’s rape. I believe Lara Roxx when she says she was pressured, I believe Lara Roxx when she said she didn’t want to have her body used in that manner. On the other hand the Duke victim has said she was raped and you don’t believe her because of a whole lot of BS and lies spouted by people who weren’t even there with her when it happened or by the rapists themselves. Are you really stupid enough to believe that rapists or gang rapists do it in front of everybody else so there are witnesses?
Now it’s your turn to be direct before anybody else takes up your challenge.
Delphyne: I have given straight answers.
Yes, I think Linda Lovelace was raped.
I stand by what Lara Roxx said of her own experience.
I am still not sure about Duke, and no amount of you badgering me is going to change that. And, Delphyne, the OTHER DANCER performing with her that night-as in, why yes, she was THERE- is one of the accounts I have read that makes me question the event. You know…someone who would count as a…witness????
There you go. My answers.
As for me coming in swinging, I came in saying it was unfair of people to judge Jill because she associated with me. I am not the one who brought up all this other stuff- that, I believe, was you.
Now, go listen to what Gail says. She has not spoken to ANY of these women. She says she does not have to. They were raped. Consent and contracts be damned. A generalized statement for Every woman who has Ever flimed a porn scene. Your turn for an answer: Okay, or not?
Life is different because you have done porn. You have had sex on film for money, anyone (family, friends, future employers) may see it. The more you do, the greater this chance increases. When people know that, they will treat you differently. You will be judged, shamed, and often, treated like crap. People will make all kinds of assumptions about you: you are stupid, a drug addict, have been abused, are being abused, cannot make decisions-and heaven for fend you have a partner, because they will get their own fair share of bullshit. Did I change after doing porn? Yep. That was the change, it had nothing to do with being raped on set, but rather the attitudes people have towards those who do porn.
I have not seen hardcore, but I have heard about it. There is a reason Max Hardcore is in prison-and it is too bad this woman and others, and those with her, did not come forward to have him charged with rape, but I can understand why they did not. I don’t know how typical this sort of behavior is. I’m sure it happens. I’ve not experienced it (despite assertions otherwise), other performers I know have said they have not experienced it (and I believe them), but obviously, it happens.
I get what you are saying, but I suppose you are better at letting things go than I am. I can respect that, but I am not there myself. I’d like to forget a lot of the BS as well, but it seems I am not the only one refusing to let go. Such is life I suppose.
Nope those aren’t straight answers. Those are the same indirect answers that you’ve been coming out all the way through in order to avoid having to take responsibility for your opinions. Slippery, slippery slippery.
You still can’t bring yourself to say that Lovelace was raped on the set of Deep Throat, so my guess is that you don’t think she was, despite the fact that she says that every time someone watches that film they are watching her being raped. That’s the issue here. Now why can’t you bring yourself to say it?
I don’t see why you can’t just say you don’t think Roxx was raped. Roxx has described a rape but she’s never said directly that is what happened to her. You could state an opinion but you’re just shying away from it and hiding behind her. Aren’t you famously direct and opinionated? Not here though.
As for Duke the other dancer wasn’t there. The two women were separated by the rapists. Once again you are believing someone who it didn’t happen to over the victim, but you still won’t be honest and say “I don’t believe the victim, I believe everybody else”. Why is that? Why can’t you be honest?
You can’t even be honest about what Gail Dines said – she was talking about a specific group of women being interviewed on a TV programme who all said the same thing, that after their first scene something changed. She describes what they described as rape – she certainly doesn’t say every woman who has ever done porn was raped. And even if she did (which she didn’t) saying someone is raped is not the same as saying someone who has been raped has not been raped, the former is an incorrect assumption, the latter further injures the victim and offers yet greater defence to the rapists. Now why would you want to do that for the Duke rapists?
Kim- I have to say that I don’t see what is going on here as being about personal vendettas, but rather about very serious issues. While I clearly have people I like and people I avoid/ dislike, I’m not really one for vendettas myself.
I am hoping that women are reading this thread, because I think some important attitudes and issues are really being revealed here. This goes beyond vendetta-land.
It shouldn’t distract from the topic of the OP, however.
Various short answers,
I believe the dancer that made the rape allegation against the Duke Lacrosse students is telling the truth. I believe she was raped. It was courageous as hell of her to try to get justice here in North Carolina. Her efforts to get justice were absolutely derailed by a grandstanding D.A, Mike Nfong, who was focused not on justice or her but on trying to win election. He fucked it up so much she had no chance.
D.A Nfong prioritized politics and his political aspirations over his duty to prioritize justice for the victim. She is yet another woman in the sex industry whose needs and life were placed on the back burner by someone who was supposed to be advocating for and representing her but placed the pursuit of his political perspectives, ambitions ahead of the most important component in this. Which should have been representing her and the law.
Oh, sorry, I have to name EVERY single time for you. Yes, I think Lovelace was raped on DeepThroat. I thought I made that clear earlier. I didn’t. My mistake. Yes- I think she was.
I am not hiding behind Roxx. I am standing by WHAT SHE SAID in HER OWN WORDS. Get that through your skull.
And Let Me Repeat Myself. Duke. I do not know WHO I beleive. And Let Me Repeat: You continuing to badger me is not going to change that. Do you understand? It is typed in English, yes? That is my answer. Right there. In print. Again. I do not think it gets any clearer: I do not know who to beleive.
And no, she does NOT describe what they say as a rape. I have watched that speech several times. She ASSUMES they have been raped. She takes the words those women said, without having spoken to them, and ASSUMES when they say “there was a change” that it = rape. And she intimates that those women are representative of women in porn. Come on now, do you really think after watching HOWEVER many interviews she would sing a different tune? Lest we forget, Dines has a vested interest in her theories being popular and widespread.
And I am not doing SHIT for those jerks at Duke by saying “I don’t know”. I don’t know. Now, you can stop badgering me about it, because my answer will not change.
Straight forward, right there. How many more times are you going to demand answers you are not going to get because they have been sitting there, right in front of you, in black and white, for a couple days now?
Yes I think Lovelace was raped in DeepThroat
I take Roxx at her word and by her definition of the experience
I do not know about Duke.
Write it down if you need to. They aren’t going to change.
Now, you stop wiggling and dancing and give an answer: Is it okay for Dines to assume women she has not actually talked to who do not say they were raped actually were raped? We’re not comparing levels of “bad” here. Is it okay for Dines to define the experiences-rape or not rape- of other women?
And if you think people assuming you have been raped when you have not been is not damaging? Well, you are wrong.
And as Jill said, the DA in the Duke case fucked up things beyond all belief.
Delphyne already answered your Dines question upthread:
“You can’t even be honest about what Gail Dines said – she was talking about a specific group of women being interviewed on a TV programme who all said the same thing, that after their first scene something changed. She describes what they described as rape – she certainly doesn’t say every woman who has ever done porn was raped. And even if she did (which she didn’t) saying someone is raped is not the same as saying someone who has been raped has not been raped, the former is an incorrect assumption, the latter further injures the victim and offers yet greater defence to the rapists. Now why would you want to do that for the Duke rapists?”
That is not a straight answer. If I am asked to give them, and I have answered as staight and honest as I can, well, I feel I can ask for one- ONE- in return. There is no mention of whether Delphyne thinks it is okay for her to say this or not, to assume such things for these other women or not. I want to know if she thinks that is okay, or not. What she said is not an answer.
Gail Dines and the anti porn slide show.
Gail is absolutely within her rights to present an anti porn slide show. Anyone is. As a very strong believer in freedom of speech, I certainly endorse her right to present the slide show and to present it however she feels is right. Same with anyone. I have no doubt she is trying to work on positive social change from a position that she believes. And without a doubt there is a lot of abuse in the sex industry that needs awareness.
However, Gail and anyone else doing anti porn slide shows have to remember something. Consent. You have to get the actresses consent. And that has to be without question. And yes, I agree, that there is likely to be many millions of images someplace that were taken by pornographers without the actresses consent. And that is totally wrong. And I advocate very harsh civil and criminal penalties for those pornographers. But that standard has to apply across the board otherwise the same actresses that were victimized over and over by pornographers are being victimized again by educators.
When I was with Escape the Prostitution Prevention Project. A colleague was presenting an anti porn slide show. For the most part I was busy cramming for my own speech and wasn’t able or particularly excited about looking at porn images for any reason because there are a lot of triggers for me in them.
One that I did see because of the audible gasp in the audience was one of a very emaciated african american woman performing oral sex on a horse. That to me is fucking awful. My heart breaks for that woman. For me it is impossible to see that there is a circumstance in which she could have actually consented to doing that. My feeling is that some awful circumstances caused that situation. I can understand why that frame was put there as it clearly makes a very strong statement about some of the worst things that happen in the sex industry.
But. Consent and thought about re-victimizing a victim have to a bigger factor. Her face wasn’t covered, I have little doubt that she didn’t consent to the picture from the outset, thus she did not consent to it being used in this case either. Why is consent imperative? This woman can be identified from this picture. We certainly all can agree to hope that she is in a better place in her life now where she doesn’t have to do awful shit like that. And that is sacred. And without a doubt if she is in a better life place, say working at a straight job, that picture can devastate her life. Cost her job, be a tremendous weapon by an angry ex husband to use to take her children, or a self righteous official to use to take her children by using that to declare her unfit.
She matters to. We can’t place her life below creating public awareness or any other political goal. Get actresses that consent and are willing to take the risks and fine. Present anything you want to. But this woman has suffered enough as have many others depicted in the anti porn slide shows. They need the absolute right to determine whether they are going to be revictimized again and that has to go both for commercial and educational purposes. It doesn’t matter a damn bit to the woman whose life is destroyed by the picture whether it was horrible pornographers or well meaning activists. To her it is her life being ruined. And for me, she is the priority.
I know there are a billion uses that harm the woman by pornographers and and handful used by anti porn activists. But again the victim shoujldn’t be revictimized again for any reason.
Back to flailing and aggression again RE. Still not a straight answer though.
Amazing you finally managed to say Linda Lovelace was raped on the set of Deep Throat. Three years – three years is all that took.
I’ve explained already why “I don’t know” does the exact same thing to rape victims as “she wasn’t raped”. You can bluster all you want about it but that’s the bottom line. You have no right to decide that a rape victim’s account was wrong, but you think you do and that doesn’t come from a place of support.
And I have given you a straight answer. I don’t know how much straighter than I can get when I say:
It was OK for Dines to say what she did. I support it. It is OK for her to say those women were raped even if that isn’t the word they used about what happened to them. But again you are equating suggesting that women were raped from observing their own testimonies about themselves and what was done to them is the same as disbelieving or undermining a rape victim who knows what happened to her, and it just isn’t the same because the harm the latter causes is no way similar to the former.
Interesting how upset you get at being asked to be held accountable for your own words and statements, so much so that the only way you think you can retaliate is to try and hold us accountable for other people’s e.g. Nikki Craft’s or Gail Dine’s.
Really, if you’re that bothered you should take it up with Gail Dines. There’s nothing we can do about it here.
Delphyne: I’d love to take it up to Gail Dines, trust me. And your time line on other things is a little off. I don’t spend a whole lot of time discussing Linda Lovelace, really. Have I talked about her before, sure…but you know, I think I have been asked about her maybe three times in three years, and on two of those occasions, I have said, flat out, yes I think she was raped. I applogize that I was not CLEAR enough earlier by saying on the set. I’ve applogized for that twice now.
As for flailing and aggression….well, I did not think it was any secret that I was aggressive. And it gets frusterating when you answer the same fucking questions several times and people still whine and badger about you not answering them.
And you are incorrect. Saying “I don’t know” is not the same as saying “You are a liar”. Often times people do not know who to beleive, that is not the same as saying flat out they do not believe someone. If you have to see everything as that white and black, okay, fine, you do. I am not under the same obligation.
And it is nice to see that you feel that the right to name ones own experiences is more important to some women over other women.
I am not upset at being asked to held accountable for my words. I am annoyed that I got asked the same fucking thing over and over even after I answered several times. I do not hold you accountable for Craft or Dines…I never asked you to call anyone out. I asked you what your OPINION on something was. Did I ask you to take it up with Dines, or Craft? No. I asked you to answer one question. One.
You had asked me questions, where there is no law that says I cannot ask questions back and press for an answer when the same has been done of me.
Now, you can distort as much as you like…and I am sure you will, as you already have. I’ve not said the Duke woman was not raped, I said I do not know. There is a difference. I have not said you need or should do anything wrt to Dines or Craft, I asked you if you thought what Dines was doing was okay. You answered.
Interesting to see how you apparently think it is so unfair for me to ask questions when you feel free to ask them and take it as retaliation. I just wanted an answer to a question on an issue that really bothers me. You’ve given it, and yeah, it is pretty much what I expected. It’s horrible for me to be undecided about Duke, but it is okay for Dines to say women were raped when…and no delphyne, there is no evidence, NONE, that is what happened to them, ANYWHERE…for them, despite what they say about it.
Guess what, yeah, that really pisses me off. She doesn’t play what those women say, there is no context, she says they say “something changed” so she then says their consent be damned, they were raped. Yeah, I have a problem with that. You support that, and yeah, I have a problem with that.
It’s not a secret you’re aggressive, who said it was? I’m justing pointing out that you use it tactically when it suits you.
Dines does use more context than “something changed” actually. She says:
“They all said, ‘You know, I signed a contract, I’m willing, it’s my consent, but something happened to me that day on the set. That first day something crossed over in me and I don’t know what it is but something changed.””
They are talking about what happened to them internally from what was done to them on set, and they are talking about it in the specific context of *consent*, in other words they are talking about what was done to their bodies. They aren’t talking about other people’s attitudes to them doing porn or what that means in their everyday life, they are describing an internal experience directly caused from being used in pornography.
I don’t think it’s unfair for you to ask questions. I’m just pointing out that you are trying to hold us accountable for Dine’s words, the same way that Jill was trying to hold us accountable for Ramos’s words. It’s noticeable.
But I’ve already said that I support what Gail said because whatever you argue it is *not* the same as disbelieving a rape victim or claiming that you “don’t know” if a victim was raped even when she says that she was. So feel free to hold me accountable for that.
“I’ve not said the Duke woman was not raped”
And you never will because that would be bad PR. Like I said you can undermine her and support the rapists just as easily by saying “I don’t know”.
We could always e-mail Gail and ask her for a reference for the documentary she was talking about.
I don’t really see how she could have had time to play it when she had only limited time to make her arguments. That’s pretty unreasonable to expect she could.
And you know rapists is what it is really all about. Once again men’s behaviour is hidden behind women.
Those men at Duke raped their victim.
Lara Roxx’s pimp, Marc Athony, the two porn actors on the set all raped Lara Roxx or raped her by proxy.
Chuck Traynor, the producers of Deep Throat and the men in Deep Throat all raped Linda Lovelace.
Max Hardcore and her pimp, raped Felicity and we saw it in the documentary Hardcore.
The men who produced and the men who acted in those movies that Gail Dines is referencing raped the women Dines saw being interviewed. They were all rapists.
How do you, or anyone else, KNOW that is what they are talking about? Telepathy? Really? You, or Gail, or anyone else, was in the minds of those women and can say that? Is that not a bit presumptive, or arrogant of you? To say that you KNOW what those women meant, or what that cross over or change is?
And it is not about PR. It’s about not knowing. If I was worried about bad PR, would I ever write about rape at all? Ever call out any rapist? Ever mention it? Ever, hell, do a freakin’ blog swarm style link round up about a sexual predator? No, probably not. I’ve done all those things. It comes down to I do not know.
And Dines had plenty of time to include all sorts of imagery and whatnot in her presentation. She easily could have added one soundbite from an actual woman in porn. She didn’t. Happy to use their photos, but no, none of them speaking for themselves. Messes with the agenda, I suspect. But no, that is not anyone’s fault except for Gail and those who work with her on that project…
And where, exactly, did I say I was holding you or anyone else accountable for Dines words, or anyone elses? I wanted to know what you thought about her assertion. I asked a question, I did not say, “dammit, Delphyne, you need to be called to a reckoning for what Dines says!” I stated no where that “This is your fault.” You can accuse me of plenty of things, but can we at least make an attempted to make sure they are things I have actually…done?
Of course you were trying to make us be accountable for what Dines said. You’re trying to imply that there is some hypocrisy there in thinking it’s OK for her to notice that what some women are describing happening to them is actually rape, but believing it’s not OK to undermine or disbelieve a rape victim like you’re doing with your “I don’t know” crap about Duke.
So fucking what if you don’t say it in so many words RE? YOU NEVER DO. You *always* make sure you have deniability. It goes right through this thread “I never said that” – and you know you didn’t because you were so bloody careful not to say it outright at the time. You were appallingly callous about Lovelace’s rape in the first place – why has it taken you three whole years to change your mind and finally acknowledge what she said, that what was done to her was rape? You’re never responsible for anything you say or do. Actually interacting with you is a lot more fucked up than I’d even realised previously. So I think I’ll go back to the more fruitful approach and just leave you to it. See ya.
Damn you give me a lot more credit then I am due.
And what was that about flailing and aggression???
And yeah, I am responsible for what I say, I damn well know it. So is everyone else. I think Dines is an ass for what she said. I do not blame you for saying it. Jesus. Sorry you can’t handle “I don’t know” for what it is, but you know, that is not my issue, and it is the truth. Sorry if you cannot deal with that either.
Fucked up because I do not nod and agree with you and fall in line to see things the way you do? Opps, not sorry.
And I note, no reply to the whole “how do you know, telepathy?” quesion or PR statement. Not surprised. Seems like I am not the only one who supposedly has issue taking things straight on, and I know it freakin’ kills you to admit gee, maybe I am not quite the rape apoligist folk like to paint me as. That says something…
And you know, as someone who has actually done porn, I might know a bit more about what changes happen to a person doing it than Dines does, but hey, what of it, right? She agrees with you and all, so it doesn’t matter.
Typical, and later-
Yeah, let’s forget about all the women who Gail Dines interviewed, and make it all about *you*.
>>>Susan, please do some reading around – radical feminists do not “flush women down the toilet” even metaphorically. That will be the porn – you are getting confused.
NB: you do know that a significant number of radical feminists are ex: prostitutes or sex establishment workers – yes?>>>
Do some reading around? Ladies, let me tell you something. I was reading feminist literature in the 80s. I had feminist professors in the late 80s and early 90s. Some of you here were in motherfucking diapers when I read my first feminist book. Some of you probably weren’t even born yet when I read that book. So don’t you dare goddamn tell me to do some “reading around”.
Believe it or not, I’ve read even radical feminist literature, like Mary Daly, Adrienne Rich and Andrea Dworkin. I did not entirely agree with their philosophy, but I enjoyed reading them tremendously. They presented their material in a brilliant and thought-provoking way. To bad the radfems at this blog can’t present themselves in the same manner.
You say that you’re not flushing women down the toilet. Well then I guess that sex workers don’t qualify as being “women” to you, because you are flushing them down the toilet big time. You SAY that you’re against prostitutes getting arrested, yet you hypocritically support a sheriff who abuses 14 year old girls by throwing them in the slammer and giving them a permanent arrest record. This is what the so-called Coalition Against the Trafficking of Women does: they support a child-abusing sheriff. If that isn’t flushing women down the toilet, I don’t know what is.
Do I know “that a significant number of radical feminists are ex: prostitutes or sex establishment workers?” Yes, you fuckwits, I do know. Jill Brenneman is just such a person. She was a trafficked individual who became a radical feminist. But because she was a former sex worker, she was treated like a servant, even though she had been trafficked. This is how you radical feminists treat former sex workers in your movement – like maids. I can’t blame her for leaving radical feminism after that. But she also left the movement because she saw the hypocrisy of it. So do I.
And, eventually, everyone else will come to see that hypocrisy as well, and you’ll be finished as a movement.
OK I lied – one more time.
I didn’t want to get into any more arguments with you because it is just so much bullshit. You twist things around, you deliberately misunderstand and you maintain constant deniability right throughout the discussion to you, so you get people to respond to things then pretend you never even said them in the first place. Like all the crap about Linda Lovelace “I never said she was raped” – well you pretty much implied it, the first time I mentioned it to you, but you’re right you didn’t use those exact words – so constant deniability. That’s what I mean by fucked up. It’s just not worth trying to deal with you, but I knew that already, I’d just forgotten.
I was holding you accountable for your words, you were trying to hold us accountable for what Dines said and imply we were hypocrites if we supported her. The difference is I have no problem admitting what I’m doing whereas you just do some BS twist to deny what is very clearly going on.
It’s bad PR to disbelieve rape victims RE particularly amongst the feminists you like to court and who like to court you. That’s why you don’t come straight out and say you don’t believe the Duke victim but do this crappy middle ground. On the other hand it’s good PR for you to go after rapists that everybody agrees on. Don’t know why that is difficult for you to understand. Don’t know why you are trying to make out that I’m saying that it is bad PR to attack rapists – it isn’t. You might lose a lot of support though if you come out and say what you really think about the Duke rape victim – “I don’t have to believe whomever” is probably the closest we’ll see.
As for telepathy, Dines is talking about what they said happened to them, not just what is going on in their heads and she makes a judgement call on why they are having that response. They’re saying they don’t know why something inside them changed, something crossed over.
And you know I think plenty of us have either been raped or know women who have been raped and abused and know also the sort of denial at work around it. Just because it happens on a porn set doesn’t make the experience any less of a rape. It does mean that the scumbag rapists actually have a *contract* that she signed saying “she wanted it”. Every rapist’s dream probably and why they can get away with so much more horrendous acts e.g. double penetration of the anus with an aids infected penis, than they would if they were the kind of rapist without the camera and the porn company.
Although hell, the Kyle Payne incident was as much about trying to have a go at radical feminists, because he’d infiltrated himself into our world as it was attacking him (not that you weren’t right to attack him of course).
There was so much bullshit speculating about how we’d support him, I even remember reading some of it on comments on your blog. Really fucking low behaviour.
Laurelin: What women are those, exactly? Is there a list? Some documentation on the women she, personally, interviewed in order to come up with that assesment? I’ve never seen one. She watched a TV show to come up with that, and further more goes on to say you cannot trust what porn performers say in interviews anyway, so, I should not be skeptical, at all, seeing as, well, she has book and speaking deals and an academic career built on all of this? Nah, it’s not all about me. You think I am the only person involved in porn who finds this crap annoying? Not so.
Delphyne: You know, everything you accused me of? Right back at ya, wrt to bullshit and dancing. I’d like to have an ironclad answer on Duke, I don’t. Maybe someday I will, today is not that day. And wrt to Kyle Payne, I did not speculate on y’all supporting him. Other people, yeah, but guess what? Not me. In fact, in a radio show on the subject, I said something along the lines of “I may not get along with Rad Fems, but there is no way they will put up with this crap”…it’s in the XXBNSwop East Blogtalk Radio archive somewhere. He was a shit to use ANY kind of feminism to hide under, he was a shit to expect he should get support, even forgivness, from anyone, much less the women he tried to sucker into thinking he was an ally…and yeah, I said pretty much JUST that. And I don’t have a damn tag and link list titled “kyle payne is vile” just to have woo, a go at y’all. I mean, it’s not like I actually need an excuse, you know?
And yeah, this is tiring and fucked up and all those other things. I find it to be so, just as you do. You can attribute motives to me as you wish, and yeah, you will…that does not mean they are accurate or true. The idea that I am holding you accountable for Dines is not the case. I think Dines is full of shit and saying whatever the hell she thinks people will buy in order to sell books and keep her acacdemic creds and really does not give a shit about the actual women in porn. I think her research is crap, and often times, totally wrong. You, I actually do think you give a crap about the actual women in porn- disagree on everything else, I will give you that. So nah, I do not look at you and Dines as The Same. I do not hold you responsible for her doings. You did not do them, after all.
But yeah, that head meet wall sensation? I feel it too.
Susan – Do I know “that a significant number of radical feminists are ex: prostitutes or sex establishment workers?” Yes, you fuckwits, I do know. Jill Brenneman is just such a person.
So I/ we are ‘fuckwits’ are we?… well, I can’t be bothered to have anything resembling a conversation/ debate with anyone who is so ready to throw insults around.
I can’t believe this – I’m just absolutely floored that the lot of you think it’s ok to bicker and argue amongst yourselves when there are huge, terrible things happening out there. I’ve been here – in the feminist blogosphere – since 2005/2006 and STILL the same old shit, as Kim has pointed out – is going on and on and on.
I was pretty idealistic when I first started blogging about feminism. I’m now pretty jaded and sometimes really don’t have the energy to write about feminism. All of you – who call yourselves feminists – are meant to be better than this.
Whatever you believe – anti porn, pro porn, whatever – life is too bloody short for THIS. I read a lot of blogs about different types of feminisms. They all have their good and bad points. Renegade Evolution writes some really kick ass stuff, and so has Witchy. So has Michelle of Lonergrrrl and Laura of the now gone ‘I’m not a feminist but..’ (who was, incidentally, driven to delete her blog by the very same shit that is being repudiated over and over). But none of you (none of US) have THE RIGHT to say that YOUR feminism is better than another type of feminism. ALL of you twist each other’s arguements into unrecognisable derivations.
It is all about making the world a better place for women, full stop. No matter what kind of feminism we are into. I don’t really care what you think of this, because it is what I believe in. I’m just heartily SICK of all this vitriol, mud-slinging and back biting (for that is what it is, in the end). Yes, nobody really gives a shit what I think – or what anyone thinks for that matter, when they see all us feminists having another of those ‘feminist blog wars’.
So yeah, have your little back-biting fest. Who cares who is wrong or who is right or who has the ‘moral high ground’? Whilst I have been typing this, many more women have been attacked, killed, coerced, beaten up. Whilst you were all tearing each other down, someone out there is terrified and fighting for their life. Watch the video up there again. That is what the post was about.
Liz, we were talking about rape. I think that’s pretty important. And the things Delphyne and I have said on this thread needed to be said.
Don’t accuse us of twisting words when we have not done so.
I care about rape, I care about it being taken seriously. I don’t appreciate being told I’m ‘back-biting’ when I’m not, to be quite honest.
There are things that need to be said and I will say them.
Oh, and I am not going to pretend I think well of Blog X or Y when I don’t, just to be nice. Equally, I do not expect anyone to say they like mine when they don’t.
Political action is not about niceness that comprimises the conscience.
Yes Laurelin, what bigger a topic than rape – from a feminist perspective – that is.
God people argue on blogs all the time including lots of feminists of all persuasions amongst themselves, all bloomin’ the time. Apparently when it’s happening between a certain set of sex pozzies and a few rad fems it’s the End Of the World and we need a Good Telling Off though. Talk about patronising and double standards.
It’s not like these disputes hadn’t been put on ice for ages. I can think of about one or maybe two flair-ups in the past two years. Most of us have been doing a very good job avoiding one another (although the attacks have never let up from the sex pozzie side). A few posts on a blog and you’re acting like it’s WWIII, Liz. And hey if you look at the post that started it it was Susan telling lies about how Cath supports criminalising prostitutes and then Jill Brenneman coming and telling further lies that CATW does the same, despite the fact that CATW’s policy has been criminalising johns and decriminalising those in prostitution for years. Yet we’re not supposed to get pissed off by sex pozzie propaganda designed to undermine rad fem work.
Liz if you don’t want to get involved in this fight then don’t. Nobody forced you to read the thread, it’s a slightly old thread on a blog that I don’t think I’ve ever seen you commenting on (apologies if that’s a mistake). What on earth are you getting so worked up about? In amongst the arguments there has been some serious discussion about supporting rape victims and believing their own story about what happened to them and about whether a woman can say another woman has been raped even if the woman herself hasn’t described what was done to her that way.
Then there was my point (an oldie but still a goodie) that the focus on the victims and what women say about what happened to them means that rapists’ behaviour always goes uncommented upon and unchallenged. Maybe you’d like to comment on that.
Or how about what Laurelin said if mine’s a bit tired and used?
“‘Experience’ hides the fact that we are talking about an act committed against a woman by a man, in a world in which women are socially, economically and politically subordinated to men. We are in a world in which women’s sexual ‘experiences’ are constantly defined for them by men as ‘not rape’, as ‘regetted sex’, as ‘just a bit of fun’ etc.
When we call rape rape we are referring to the actions of the rapist. That’s the point.”
Or this from Sam:
“The women’s consent to make porn was changed by the men on the set into an excuse to rape them and film it. Lara Roxx’s consent to make porn was exploited to get her to the set where her pimp and pornographers then executed their plan to make her perform sexually in ways they knew she hadn’t consented to, aka rape.”
Both really interesting points, both worthy of further discussion. RE has been making arguments too, not one’s I agree with obviously but they are there. But instead you ignored all that and came to berate us. I think you’re a bit out of line actually.
Yes, rape is THE feminist issue. But just because RE said she has no idea whether the woman in the Duke case was raped or not, does not make it ok for you to all jump down her throat.
She doesn’t know. She didn’t witness what happened. Justice for rape cases is shit, but why do you blame her for whether or not she knows whether someone was raped? Blame how the case was handled. Blame how the media reported it. It isn’t someone’s fault when the reporting and the handling of a case means that people are unsure of what to believe. I know nothing about the case – does that mean I don’t care about rape?
It’s your prerogative to not like blog X or Y just to be “nice” (whoever said I’m just being ‘nice’?? I have blogs I hate too) – but I genuinely think that some of the commenters on this thread do all sometimes have important things to say, despite their opposing views.
Some of you were, as I said, ‘back-biting’ (not you Laurelin or Sparkle) whilst some of you are more reasonable. If you want to debate/discuss something, then yeah, go ahead. But I have read a lot of comments on this thread that have nothing to do with rape and everything to do with plain vitriol/hate. That is why my reaction was what it is.
So this is all about us ‘jumping down [RE’s] throat’ then? All about protecting her?
I fail to see how we have done that. I find your tone accusatory, particularly considering that we hardly owe RE politeness given how she has spoken about the two of us on various occasions.
You don’t seem to be interested in what we were saying, in the fact that we have good points to make about attitudes towards rape in the sex trade. I’m not trying to hurt your feelings here, but I’m going to be honest and say that I find this pretty insulting and one-sided.
“Yes, rape is THE feminist issue. But just because RE said she has no idea whether the woman in the Duke case was raped or not, does not make it ok for you to all jump down her throat.”
OK, so it wasn’t the blog wars that were upsetting you in fact. That makes sense or I’d have been expecting to see you in the middle of every single fight in the feminist blogosphere (and boy there have been *lots* of them) knocking heads together. You just don’t like seeing me calling RE on her crap. Good to know.
You’ll also be pleased to know then that I’m going back to my non-interaction policy with the sex-pozzies Liz, so you won’t have to step in to defend RE, well not from me at least.
PS – it’s the feminist position to believe rape victims. They’ll face enough people in the real world calling them liar. The Duke victim was excoriated across the media and across the internet. Also who knows better than a rape victim about what happened to her?
I didn’t come here to “berate” anyone. I was actually reading through some of Cath’s posts, not that that’s a crime. I haven’t commented here before no, but I do read this blog quite a lot.
My point is that after a few interesting and valid comments, it degenerated into something that isn’t constructive with the point of the post.
I also find terms like “sex pozzie”, “rad fem” and stuff both pointless and unhelpful. They just perpetuate myths about feminists as having a huge chasm between them when it is more diverse than that.
I should like to add that I do not see how Delphyne’s comments can be taken as showing ‘hate’ or ‘vitriol’. What they do show is serious thought and concern.
RE, I think, doesn’t need “defending”.
I am just pissed off because I’ve had enough from everyone, both sides, whatever. I’ve read a lot of blog war threads during my blogging life. I don’t comment on threads in blog wars because I KNOW my comments will get swallowed up. I used to blog at Fate is Chance, Destiny is Choice and comment a lot at prominent rad fem and feminist blogs. I don’t do that so much any more because I’m pretty sure that nobody really cares what I have to say because I don’t define as a rad fem or as someone from the “other side” (or whatever you want to term it). I’m simply a deaf feminist, erring on the side of second wave and third wave thought.
Nope, I quite agree, she doesn’t need defending. No arguments here.
I’m just bemused as to why you’ve come here and told us off for ‘jumping down [her] throat’ and defending her words with nary a comment to her about her behaviuor on this thread and elsewhere. It’s not your job, of course, to do so, don’t get me wrong. But I’m puzzled as to why we are the subject of your rage when we have been as polite as could be expected, and made very good and thoughtful points.
As for a chasm between ‘sex poz’ and radfem, well there is. No getting away from it. It is an ideological difference, and every time I’m told I should be being nicer, what I am told in essence is that I have to accept certain things as feminist that I can never accept.
When it’s a matter of my conscience versus anything or anyone else, my conscience is always going to win (or so I hope!).
“I didn’t come here to “berate” anyone.”
Well it’s certainly what you were doing on your first post to this thread. You didn’t have to join in with that kind of post. You could have picked up one of many points that people have made here and argued that and maybe put a side note that you wish the arguing would die down.
For the record, I do believe that if a woman says, or feels that she has been raped, then she has been raped. We all know how the media and rapists make it out to be a woman’s fault and that she is just ‘crying’ rape. I read every single one of your comments on this thread (which is not easy considering that it’s almost 2am here), and yes, some of things that have been said are vitriolic and don’t have anything to do with the discussion. I agree with you re. the woman who was forced to perform, but it is up to her to say whether she feels she has been raped. That way something could be done about it. There isn’t a lot we can do if a woman doesn’t want to say she has been raped/coerced. That has to be respected.
I meant that it wasn’t my intention when I first started reading here. But wherever I have seen RE comment on a rad fem blog, she gets shouted down (even when she makes a valid point). Anyone who defines as not rad fem gets shouted down. I do know the history between everyone (since I’ve been around for a while) but I kind of think that both ‘sides’ have been as bad as each other. There are some personal vendettas going on, as there has always been, as Kim says.
If a woman hasn’t said she has been raped, then you certainly need to respect that rather than insisting that she has been raped. If being a feminist means giving women courage to be vocal, it means not pushing them to say something they don’t feel has taken place. Whether or not you agree with that.
>>>So I/ we are ‘fuckwits’ are we?… well, I can’t be bothered to have anything resembling a conversation/ debate with anyone who is so ready to throw insults around.>>>
Well, the insinuation that I can’t read and that I do drugs is just as bad.
But the real reason you don’t want a conversation is that you know I’m right.
>>Jill Brenneman coming and telling further lies that CATW does the same,>>
Actually I came here and asked radical feminists to advocate to CATW to reconsider blanket support for a Sheriff that is arresting prostitutes. I was asked to provide the reference I was referring to which was CATW’s Norma Ramos letter on a blog. Everyone got to see the letter. All of this is documented in this thread so it isn’t hard to find this. This like the other assassinations of my character here on this blog are inaccurate, baseless, woefully out of context responses and outrageously bombastic. Is there any reason you can’t make your points based on the merits of your argument rather than stringing together post after post of hateful dispersions?
Susan writes “But the real reason you don’t want a conversation is that you know I’m right.
Jill writes, Amen to that. If blatant hateful character assassinations based on woefully faulty information, deliberate mispresentations of fact, a liberal use of hate speech terms, pro porn, sex pozzie, (and having been a rad fem, I know the intent of these terms, calling someone pro porn isn’t saying the support porn, it is stating they are supporters, collaborators or outright predators in forced sexual slavery, rape and other heinous crimes) All because either you are so caught up in your sense that there is some war against you, some grand scheme against you and your movement. Well there isn’t. Susan, Ren and I don’t sit around and meet in secret meetings and talk about how we can derail radical feminism. To be honest, your own hatred and blanket support of anything done by your allies no matter how egregious does you far more damage than any of your supposed enemies.
Perhaps it would be worth considering arguing on the strength of your beliefs and movement rather than relying on endless character assassinations of all those you deem as enemies. Do your homework guys. Because the negative campaigning only gives the perception that you can’t argue on the merits of your posistion.
Liz thank you!
Ok, here is the plain old aggression thing.
If you a cannot see jumping on me, I do not know what to say for you there really. I am the odd opinion out here, and I treat uncivil with uncivil.
Truth is, in an odd we agree about almost nothing thing, I have some bit of respect for Delphyne on these things, because she speaks with passion. I know that when I see it.
But why did I come here orginally? Y’all jumping on Jill. Which you are now doing to Liz. Who on most issues would agree more with you than with me. Yet, you are jumping her anyway.
Because she occasionally thinks I say something valid? FFS, we ALL do that. Why attack people for seeing that others outside your circle do that too? Yeah, I am a mean asshole who has mocked rad fems. I have also linked them and written on things they say that woo, I think we can agree on.
I came here orginally to say it is not fair for you to judge Jill by me. Same goes for Liz. Same goes for anyone. We are all differnt. We are all our own women.
Can you not see that?
Looks like a whole lot of bickering to me, but not necessarily pointless. Ive been reading along and taking it all in. Sure its touched on insulting at times, theres been some passive aggressive stuff too, but its managed to stay out of the usual personal stuff. Theres some very long comments here and yet you all seem to be reading them through, which is pretty good behaviour in itself. The fact is youre having a political discussion bordering on argument, and when youre passionate about something, as on this subject every one of us is, things do tend to heat up a bit. Yes the discussion has stalled in places but, and i know ill be considered biased but whatever, thats what happens when people skirt around answering questions instead of being direct. It might pass for ‘reasonable’ in the house of commons or among lawyers, but it looks dishonest to the rest of us. If you want to have a genuine discussion and move forward and not get stalled, it requires an honest approach, not a bunch of qualifiers, euphemisms, etc. That said, the internet is a strange place where speaking a direct opinion can get someone a whole heap of trouble and other opinions assigned to them, which we rad fems all know from too much shitty experience, so yes RE walks a fine line, but to some extent I can understand that. I dont agree with how she’s set her priorities but im not the one having to wake up in her head everyday, walking that line and trying to keep that balance. I think im wandering away from making sense here.
Anyway the point was that compared to hundreds of other netty discussions i read, this one, while it has been a confrontational and wordy debate, it hasnt been the usual mess of insults, drive-bys, etc. Theres been some straw and other fallacies, but thats par for the course in any debate. I dont get why anyone is steaming in to complain about it – if youre out there pushing a political opinion and etc then debates are gonna happen, it would be pretty freaky if they didnt. I suggest if anyone feels triggered or hurt or upset by it they take a time out for their own sakes, but apart from that, we’re all growed ups innit. Whats the problem?
There isnt ganging up going on here. Someone vehemently disagreeing with you or asking you to put your money where your mouth is, so to speak, is not ganging up. We’ve all seen enough blog bullying to be able to identify it, and I really dont see it here.
I cannot believe that you sex pozzie and fence-sitters expect us to accept this manipulative bullshit.
You bully and attack us from your blogs. You spend a great deal of effort attacking our *work* (something I notice Jill carefully ignores addressing because Jill hasn’t got a goddamned leg to stand on about that one), you set up these scenarios as a “test” of us – like Kyle Payne, where you all sat around your blogs speculating on whether we would condemn him, rather than just getting in touch with any of us and giving us the heads up about him – even though some of us might have been in danger from him if we’d had real life contact but didn’t know he was a pervert. Did any of you do that? Because I didn’t hear about it. Instead you were happy to use that information against us. You claimed all the blogging was about keeping women safe from him but the women who he’d actually come into contact with, the anti-porn feminists, you never got in touch with. This is another wanky test – “pretend that CATW has said something outrageous and demand that rad fems act and if they don’t that shows what hypocrites they are: go to a UK blog and demand action for something that is happening thousands of miles away”. It’s bullshit, it’s obvious and you should all cut it out.
You know what I think, I think you are all, and that includes people like Liz, members of some kind of forum or list where this stuff gets discussed ad nauseum. We already know about the previous secret list, set up by Belledame to attack rad fems, which BitchLab outed (not a word from the fence sitters about that either – guess you all think that kind of thing is fine too). How much of a bloody coincidence is it to see all the old faces showing up, people who never ever comment here suddenly appear on this thread to complain about people attacking RE and pretending the blog wars are still in progress when they died down two years ago. It’s transparent. Fine, have your stupid little club, but don’t pretend that’s not what you are up to. At least anti-porn people are honest about our alliances and our stances, something that cannot be said for the people who constantly harass and attack us. Why don’t you tell us about yours? You all know we are members of G’berg and that there are private forums there. On the other hand the sex-pozzie-fence sitter alliance is kept very quiet indeed. You just do this “Oops I just happened across this blog and simply *had* to say something” Yeah right.
As for ganging up – RE shows up on a thread where she’s already attacked a number of people previously and expects what? A warm welcome? A chance to parade her and the other sex pozzies’ manipulations and we’ll just swallow them? None of us go to the sex pozzie blogs because you are just so vile about us. I went a couple of times and got a whole lot of shit. Nobody noticed that in fence-sitter land though. None of the pretend neutrals showed up to defend me from people jumping down my throat. None of the pretend neutrals have ever defended the new rad fem bloggers who basically walked into a lions den when they started putting anti-porn stuff on the web and have since then faced a barrage of vicious attacks designed to shut them down.
Jill this is your lie:
“As radical feminists you have the ability to call on CATW to reconsider it’s support for arresting women and girls in prostitution with the possiblity they will hear you.”
All the way through this thread you have tried to argue that CATW support arresting prostituted women and girls. It’s a lie and you know it. You twisted their support for the Sheriff going after CraigsList into support for arresting prostituted people. We can’t lobby CATW to reconsider its support for this because they don’t support it – all their *work* (that word again) has been completely against this. Stop saying this shit when you know it isn’t true. I bet you’ll manage to twist that into “Oooh, the big meanie rad fem is attacking me again”. You won’t address the substance, you’ll just pick up on the frustration and ignore everything else that doesn’t suit you. It’s noticeable.
As for this:
“Perhaps it would be worth considering arguing on the strength of your beliefs and movement rather than relying on endless character assassinations of all those you deem as enemies. Do your homework guys. Because the negative campaigning only gives the perception that you can’t argue on the merits of your posistion.”
Say it in front of the mirror Jill. You are constantly attacking rad fems, even ones that aren’t here to defend themselves. It’s. What. You. Do.
Mailing lists I am on: SWOP East- Sex Workers.
Another one that is 4 bloggers from different countries who write about sex work.
I was on the list you mention, but left several months ago over some political differences.
You know, just a few minutes ago someone I consider to be wise, a former hardcore enemy even, said something wise to me. I asked her why do people who do not even share my opinions get attacked for speaking to me. She replied with something along the lines of well, because women are seemingly trained to get mad at other women rather than the people they should really be mad at- men. I think there is some wisdom there. We should be mad at the cop who beat up the girl in the above video. The men who rape. The prosecutor who screwed up the Duke case. The director who took advantage of Roxx. The politico in Chicago. These are the people, whatever side of whatever issue we are on that we should truly be mad at.
Do we piss eachother off, yeah. Disagree? Yeah. Get annoyed and frusterated and whatever else with eachother? Yeah. But you know what, I am pretty sure no one on this thread, Rad Fem, Non Rad Fem, anyone inbetween, has ever beat up a girl in a police station, or raped anyone. It is odd that we seem madder at eachother sometimes than at those people.
And D, to answer your one question to me there, flat out and everything, regarding alerting Rad Fems to Kyle Payne directly? I did so with 2 that I had ways of contacting. I probably should have done so with more in some manner. I alerted one large Feminist Blog many of us from all sides read on occasion, but that probably was not enough. Oversite on my part. In the future, I will endeavor when news like this happens, to alert more Radical Feminist because I know it is of interest to all of us.
I don’t know about anybody else but I’m not “mad” at Jill for speaking to you. It’s not all about you you know. I’m “mad” at Jill for all that nonsense about the Wheelock College conference and Jill’s actions towards people like Nikki Craft and others. I’m also mad at Jill for silly posturing about Norma Ramos and the Cook County Sheriff designed to try and paint rad fems into a corner. If Jill had really wanted something done why didn’t Jill e-mail Cath say, and make the request? Instead it had to be done in a public piece of theatre.
As for the rest of the anger – well I’m never going to feel friendly feelings about someone who hoped me and others would fall under a truck and die choking on our blood, not to mention all the other anti rad fem blogging. Can’t get past that. Sorry. Don’t see why I should be expected to either. I don’t want to work with someone who has had feelings like that towards me. You’ve pissed me off, but never in a million years would I wish you dead.
But the last time we has this big discussion we tried to get an agreement to stay in our various corners of the internet and work with people who did want to work with us, because despite whatever anybody tries to pretend there are a whole lot of those on both sides. Rad fems sex pozzies working together is by no means the ultimate in politics, particularly when our aims are so diametrically opposed in a lot of ways. It’s like saying conservatives and socialists must put aside there differences and work together – it’s a blueprint for an explosion and for not getting anything done.
And no I’m sorry the not contacting rad fems about Kyle Payne wasn’t an “oversight”. It was part of the point of the exercise to talk about him on your blogs and then speculate about how long it would be before any of us said anything because apparently we were such hypocrites we’d even support a porn-loving pervert criminal. I know for a fact you know how to contact Sam at G’berg, because you’ve done it before, that would have been the *obvious* route to go to protect women from him. That’s not just down to you of course there were other people whipping up the frenzy who did nothing, Belledame that is. As is often the case you are taking the flak for shit that belongs to other people too.
“It is odd that we seem madder at each other sometimes than at those people. ”
Come on Ren, you know why some of us are pissed with you. Read your own blog, maybe? Look at the company you’re keeping? Consider the various ways we’re forced to silence so that you can be the One True Spokeperson? Say – have you noticed how many women have disappeared online after taking a virtual beating from your friends just one time too many, after being rendered completely invisible for the thousandth time? I don’t suppose you have.
You make out like there’s space for all voices, but you don’t seem at all aware of how much space you’re taking up. You know that whole blog colonialism war thing recently? When I read it, I could not get you out of my head. When I think of tokenism, I think of ‘big feminist blogs’ asking you to guest, you who is so loud about not being a feminist – have they ever, ever, featured guest posts from other women who have alternative (based on experience) views on the SW subject? Do you see radical feminists guest posting in those places, or do you see us slandered across multiple blogs?
I think of how so many people link to your own rants and articles, who claim to hold a feminist and correct view on sex work because they ‘listen to sex workers themselves’ – meaning they listen to *you* – but they dont make space for all the women who have other stories, unless it is to call us hateful bitches and the like. I think of how many different women there are with all these nuances of opinion, out here showing that it is not a monolith, as youre so fond of saying – and I see them constantly shouted down, slandered, or just plain ignored. We watch from the shadows while people who make an effort to be your friend, who parrot you, are given opportunities and space to talk, because they belong to the ‘right’ group you see. Us, we don’t count, because we’re not hanging in the right clique. We all know how this shit works, christ i could drop some ‘all radfems are evil’ stuff tomorrow and probably id find myself inundated with love bombs. Give it a while and Id get the links, the love, all for the bargain price of only my own voice!
Is it your fault this all happens? Probably not. But you don’t exactly discourage it, do you? Ive not seen you turn up to one of these pile ons to say, “hey come on, its not a monolith, you are being disrespectful to that person who holds a different view. Her voice is as important as mine! You non sex worker people who only promote my view, this is tokenistic, and something you should avoid”. Maybe I just missed it? Sadly i’m sure if you did say that it would end up twisted by the fan club into ‘isnt ren gracious, arent those bitches ungrateful’. What can I do but shrug.
Anyway – as far as Im concerned, you have your limelight, whatever. But cant you leave us ‘little people’ alone, can you not just enjoy that big stage you have, leave us to make our own spaces to speak? Why must we endure so much negativity and abuse and harassment and mockery from you and/or your friends?
Anyway, the reasons why some of us are pissed with you, all the above pretty much covers it for me. I just do not get why you do not hear us when we ask you to leave us alone, repeatedly. It feels abusive to me, it feels like harassment, it feels like you say you feel about this thread. But its not just one thread, its every fucking day. If you cant respect our right to think differently, please just fucking leave us alone.
What Delphyne and V said.
I should add I don’t want to imply there that other people might be “mad” at Jill for speaking to you, RE. It seems that it also about Jill’s anti-rad fem work and the 2257 stance (and issue which I haven’t got my head around). Speaking to you seems the least of anybody’s issues with Jill.
Delphyne, I”m not going to respond to emails with hate speech directed at me. I know exactly what you mean by the term and the hate that’s behind it. I am neither pro porn, fence sitter or sex pozzie in any of the hateful shit contexts you mean it. Nor do I know anyone who is. The equation of all prostitution is sexual slavery and bought and sold rape, porn is a system of prostitution, and therefore anyone that you choose to label with those terms is therefore a supporter of rape, sexual slavery and whatever else you add to it. That’s hatred for the sake of it.
You want answers to your questions. Get off the hate speech and the outrageous accusations and have an adult discussion. I’m not going to argue with someone acting like a 12 year old
Congratulations Jill on deliberately ignoring every single point made. Some sort of award will be on its way to you soon, I suggest a red herring glued to a bit of cardboard and spray painted some metallic shade would do the job nicely.
How many times have I admitted that yeah, I can be a real asshole. Many, and yeah, it is true. That said, I have the same right to write what I write as anyone else does. I’m not out there making people blog, or not blog. That is a decision made by others. Hell, you ask me what I’ve noticed? You know, I have noticed people on both sides of the fence have stopped blogging because they are tired of this or that. And I’ve not appointed myself anything, if others look my way on certain subjects, well, they do. I’m not forcing them too…and you realize I have nothing to do with whom various larger blogs pick to guest blog, right? If you have issue with them asking me and not asking other people, that is something you should take up with them, because they are the ones who make such decisions.
And surprisingly, I have told folk who comment at my blog to not be assholes to those commenting there who have had different experiences or thoughts on sex work.
And you ask me to leave people alone. Once again, I will state that is a two way street. I am not left alone myself, and you know it. And no, I don’t feel like that for whatever reason I should just sit there and take it. So I don’t and I won’t. I do not care if you think differently; you are perfectly welcome to think differently. I have no issue with you thinking differently. You feel as if I am mean and nasty to whomever on every whatever thread. Well, I feel the reverse is also true…and you know what? I have seen people from the rad fem side apologize twice, exactly twice, for their behavior. And I have seen once, exactly once, some one from the rad fem side admit that yeah, that side can be just as vicious or what have you as we are consistently painted as. This idea floating around out there that it is all aggressive from one side and all being attacked on the other? Untrue. And it seems that cannot even be admitted to.
Maybe that has a little something to do with why I am pissed at various people, and act accordingly. Maybe if there was less what seems to be universal decree about how It Is for All people in the sex biz I’d be less pissed. Maybe if my name were left out of things that have nothing to do with me- like early interaction with Jill in this thread- I’d be less pissed. Maybe if other people who are not me were not taken to task for association with me, I’d be less pissed. Maybe if people stopped accused me of doing or saying things I have never said or done, I’d be less pissed. Maybe if certain folk left me alone, I’d be happy to leave them alone right back.
As for me and my big stage or whatever and picking on whomever? You know what, a lot of the people I have taken issue with are on stages just as big as my own. Doing the “oh, you are popular and have readers why do you pick on wee little us” stuff is not going to work when I know several of the people I have had issue with have plenty of supporters and popularity themselves- complete with commenters who can be wholly dismissive and abusive to and of those who disagree with them. And you know, it is not people like me who are informing public and political policy on sex work, no, it is more radical leaning people. I take issue with that, and will say so. I take issue with universals, and will say so. There are times when I have tried to be civil, and reasonable, and it seems to be a one way . That happens enough times, well, you just say “fuck it” sooner or later. I’m willing to be reasonable if other people are also willing to be reasonable. I am willing to leave people alone if they will do the same. If folk want consideration, well, they need to show some themselves.
A few weeks ago, a rad fem whose blog I actually like a lot of the time suggested that some kinky people should kill themselves. She clarified and apologized for the statement, which you know, okay, fine by me. Cool. Done. If various folk want to dwell forever on a statement I made about a truck and death, which was not, despite spin, aimed at anyone directly, was made in a moment of extreme anger, and was aimed at a whole host of people, including racists and asshole men (but has been reduced to me, directly, threatening to kill rad fems)…well, nothing I can do about it. I made the statement. It was bad of me to do. I apologized. Dwell at will. I can’t stop you. And I do not particularly care if you like me or not.
I have never contacted Sam Berg about anything. I contacted Maggie Hays and suggest she share the information with Sam re; security on her site. And considering past history with Sam Berg, she would not be anyone I would contact about anything at this point. I have my reasons, you don’t have to like it, but that’s the way it is.
But you know what? None of this matters. If I had personally emailed every single rad fem I knew about Kyle Payne, there would be something else that was not done to your satisfaction, or I would be accused of harassing people, or whatever. That I firmly believe. I am under no obligation to keep anyone, much less people who I do not generally get along with, informed of things. I made some effort. Not good enough for you? Well, not my problem. You are going to think what you think, attribute this motive or that intent to me no matter if it is true or not, so why fucking bother, right? I can’t change your mind about anything, and it is now evident trying is an utter waste of my time. As for the little agreement we had going? You know, I went by that until a rad fem came to my blog and said some really foul shit. I won’t abide by one set of rules while other people play with a different set.
Y’all are not the only ones with a justified reason to be angry or uncivil. You may not see it that way, but that makes it no less true.
But yep. I am content to agree to leave you, V, Laurelin, participants here, alone- if that is a two way street.
V who do and those who have responded like you figure you are? You and many others here throw absolutely incorrect assumptions out as fact, you throw hate speech around like a piñata dropping candy at a birthday party, you demand answers in questions framed with very incorrect hate filled assumption, you talk as if you have the absolute proof of things that you are completely wrong about as the framework of a question. Like Nikki’s efforts to discredit my experiences as a rape victim survivor. Obnoxiouslly pontificating like some pre game super bowl analyst and then you demand answers in slanted questions of which you will never accept the answers.
Delphyne accuses me of manipulation. Look again. And this is consistent with many of you. When I did the speech at Wiliam and Mary, it took 1 day for the statement “jill gave a pro porn speech at William and Mary” bullshit. I have never given a pro porn speech in my life. It was a very anti sex industry speech to the point some jerk in the audience was upset they brought a rad fem to speak when he thought he was going to get his pro porn speech. But what does truth matter to you so long as you have your battles?
Many of you have given this patronizing and condescending disertation of how to win the respect of radical feminists again.. Who do you think you are? I asked you to write a letter opposing the arrest of prostitutes to a thug that is arresting prostitutes and using it as part of is effort to get elected to D.A. I don’t owe any of you anything. If you don’t want to write the letter don’t.
You figure you can throw blatant lies, blatant hate speech, pontificate on issues in the past that you know know nothing about, that many of you probably were in middle school at the time, and expect that I am going to jump and give you answers. Answers that we all know have nothing to do with getting to the truth and everything to do with being more fodder for your hatred.
You throw around absurd shit about secret lists and societies to destroy you as part of proving your point and demand we be honest with you. Here is point blank honesty. NO ONE has ever asked me about, told me about or so much as hinted at the existence of anything like that. Not that you give a shit about the truth but the truth is nothing like that has ever remotely been discussed with me. NOr would I be part of it. I don’t have to join some secret society to undermine feminism. The hatred, the xenophobia, the sacrifice the suffering for the sake of the war against your view of your enemies does far more to undermine you than any orchestrated event.
Some place many of you figure I owe you something. I don’t. Not for the Wheelock petition, not for my criticism of TVPRA and the USAID gag order, or for those that put their politics ahead of lives they are supposed to be advocating for.
You start off by calling me pro porn, sex pozzie and a bunch of other shit and figure I owe you a response so you can have more fodder for your hatred.
I asked you to advocate on behalf of women being arrested in prostitution. Something you state is your mission and your life’s work anyway. You figure the women being arrested in prostitution are better off for the 2.2 million K of ascii text you have written about your hatred of me than they would have been with a 4k email to the Sheriff? Bullshit.
I don’t owe any of those here that are so filled with hatred that you are blinded by it anything. To be honest, I should be demanding apologies for all the absolutely incorrect hateful shit you have accused me of, presented as fact when it wasn’t, and the like.
Here is something that is hateful on my part. Stick your award up your ass V. You don’t know anything about me and I have never even heard of you. You aren’t the slightest bit qualified to throw that kind of shit at me.
You seem to want apologies, but I only apologise when I’ve done something wrong. I won’t admit fault that isn’t mine.
Oh dear, she’s never heard of you, V. You’re obviuously not famous enough to hang with the cool kids.
What is this, secondary school?!
True, you’ve done nothing you need to appolgize for. Not in the least. (serious statement, not sarcasm).
I hate Jill’s actions but I can’t hate Jill b/c I know why they are happening……I worry for her….Jill… Call me!
[This comment has been edited. Erin, if you’ve got concerns about someone’s private life a blog like this is not the place to voice them. I appreciate that you’re trying to reach out to Jill, but she has a right to her privacy, and a right not to have private information posted for all and sundry to read. Cath]
>>>This is another wanky test – “pretend that CATW has said something outrageous and demand that rad fems act and if they don’t that shows what hypocrites they are: go to a UK blog and demand action for something that is happening thousands of miles away”. It’s bullshit, it’s obvious and you should all cut it out.>>>
What difference does it make if it’s thousands of miles away? You’re just using that as an excuse.
Here in the United States, women who you claim to support as victims are getting arrested. I would think you’d want to do something to put a stop to it. I guess I was wrong.
Nice of you to out personal and perhaps total bullshit information like that.
>>>I don’t know that can ever forgive or forget but I worry for her. She becomes more and more extreme in her hatred and her attacks. I think she is crying out for help.>>>
Cut the crap out, Ms. Erin. Jill keeps coming back here to try to talk some sense into your silly asses.
And I keep coming back here because you are more of a threat to sex worker’s rights than those Christian fundamentalists are.
jill – what one award wasnt enough? you want another?
do you know that youre talking non-sense? some of it is red herrings, ways to avoid the subject. several paragraphs of your most recent post,its like youre having an argument with yourself, you seem to be doing both sides all in your own head.
the secret lists thing is the only thing i can help you on – i believe that was a comment about belledammes secret (as in, the first rule is not to talk about it, as opposed to simply ‘private’) email list, used to spread information about radical feminist sites and actions, to co-ordinate harassment. ren said she was a member but left, you dont appear to know anything about it.
is erin real or part of the whole attempted turn of this thread into the “hate speech!!!111!” thing? its hard to know what to believe these days.
“i believe that was a comment about belledammes secret (as in, the first rule is not to talk about it, as opposed to simply ‘private’) email list, used to spread information about radical feminist sites and actions”
I was on that list for a while, and 1) it *was* private, and 2) it was not used to “coordinate harassment” when I was there, and I highly doubt it was used that way after I left. It was a group of friends talking.
In the interest of full disclosure, it’s true that sometimes one of us would read a blog post we didn’t like and share the URL, but that’s not “coordinating harassment.”
I’ve seen multiple radical feminists critique the same post from our side, and I don’t think such a thing constitutes an attack. Nor would I think radical feminists sharing the URL of a blog post with one another — even through email — would constitute coordinating an attack.
No, this Erin thread, whatever, perhaps a troll? There is no Erin my life and there isn’t and never has been any Andy. Nor anyone like him. No plot here V. I don’t have clue who it is and don’t care.
Susan, the USA is a super-power, and albeit by sometimes covert measures, attempts (very often with great success) to rule, dominate and influence the entire globe. However, conveniently when it suits, you expect us here in the UK to firstly be up to scratch with prop 8, laws in California and agencies that most of don’t have a clue about and so forth. What do you know about our politics Susan, and when was the last time that the UK demanded help from US political activists? Your cultural arrogance and imperialism is very impressive, but I guess we knew that anyway.
It’s funny US cultural imperialism has come up. I strongly agree with this. The US seeks to rule, dominate and influence the entire globe. I’ve seen this myself doing activism out side the country in Latin America. People suffer and die by the many thousands because of US enforcement of abstinence laws that are based on the conservative right wing’s abstinence only ideology.
It can’t go both ways though. There is strong UK feminist support for the TVPRA which strictly enforces funding restrictions that block global harm reduction efforts. I’m not saying that you personally have done so Lavalamp, but many UK feminists are strongly opposed to my stance that the US can’t be the enforcer of policy in other countries and that I see the harm and death caused by these very policies as an activist in Latin America. It’s cultural imperialism to cause the death of thousands in Latin America by virtue of cutting off funding for survival needs like condoms, food, because the orgs work with street based sex workers.
>>>Your cultural arrogance and imperialism is very impressive, but I guess we knew that anyway.>>>
Cultural imperialism, Lavalamp? That’s very interesting.
You know, ladies, making laws against sex workers without their consultation is exactly that: cultural arrogance and imperialism. Who consults with sex workers when the kerb-crawling laws are passed? Who consulted with Swedish sex workers when that fucking Swedish Model was passed? Who consulted with American sex workers when the TVPRA and Wilberforce Act came up?
It’s funny that the opinion of sex workers and their advocates is not considered whenever crafting these various laws supposedly designed to “help” them.
No Susan, cultural imperialism is when one culture (almost always the USA) start imposing themselves on another culture and assuming that culture either a)is identical to theirs or b)should be. In blog wars like these that culture is almost always the UK.
Hence y’all come over here and assume that UK laws are the same as US laws without bothering to check if that is actually the case.
And that’s why you’re a fuckwit. Well that and thinking it’s possible to read minds.
***PS – it’s the feminist position to believe rape victims. They’ll face enough people in the real world calling them liar. The Duke victim was excoriated across the media and across the internet. Also who knows better than a rape victim about what happened to her?***
Actually, Delphyne, if you look at the prosecutor’s actions in that case – it seems likely that the victim was pushed into accusing someone who hadn’t actually done it, because it would be a “star-making” case for the prosecutor in question. There is a lot of corruption in local Durham and North Carolina politics, and having been privy to some of it, I have no trouble believing it at all.
As Ren mentioned, one of the man who stood accused of the crime was not even there at the time. Oddly enough, the taxi driver who was with him and was prepared to testify, was put in jail on a shoplifting charge from years back. The other stripper who was present was also most likely bullied into altering her story – it changed as well – considering that she was also facing criminal charges on yet another unrelated crime.
There was the DNA of 5 men on the victim’s body. Oddly enough, no one on the prosecutor’s side made any public action to determine where the DNA had come from. Could it have been other Duke students? Someone else? We will never know.
I think this woman was physically attacked, at the very least – and I also think that she was then used.
Now, I’m just another ev0l Dukie and friend to Ren, so you can just go ahead and write off everything I say if it makes you feel better – but don’t pretend that those of us who have taken a critical look at this case are simple rape-apologists.
Delphyne – No, you do not get to say that I just chanced across this debate and decided to do a ‘drive by’ thing or whatever the hell you think – because you think I am some sort of member of a forum where I discuss ‘this stuff ad nauseum’.
Like I said previously, I don’t actually comment on many blogs because a) I am afraid of doing so, which is why I moved from fate is chance to cats and chocolate, because I felt as if internet radical feminism has become something quite twisted and b) Sometimes the same things get discussed over and over and sometimes I don’t have anything more to add, or can’t say it better than other commenters have. Do you have to be a frequent commenter to be a valid Feminist or Blogger? I think not.
If you want to know what ‘lists’ I am subscribed to – I am subscribed to ReSisters, London Feminist Network, Protest Now, Fat Studies etc etc all on Yahoo Groups. I am also a member of Genderberg, even though I don’t really have time to constantly follow everything that is being hashed out and discussed. I am just kind of pissed off that the same old ‘jumping on’ people keeps occurring – because you don’t agree with each other.
It shouldn’t have to be personal. You need to agree to disagree – that is the point. Three years ago I also got called a fence sitter. Then I apparently ‘defended’ a rad fem from something then suddenly I was one of the sisterhood. The same thing happened to Laura (now of the F Word) when she closed down her blog and was repeatedly attacked by so called radical feminists. There is nothing radical or feminist about personal attacks. These things keep happening, and I want to know why.
I did not actually come here with the aim of derailing the discussion or upsetting anyone, but when I do see what is apparently supposed to be heated, yet amiable discussion become something really personal, well I will be quite pissed off about it. Okay, so it isn’t like some blog war or a really nasty out and out name calling thing, but it is nonetheless, something which I would rather feminism wasn’t. Like RE says, I am not some sort of ‘infiltrating agent’ or something – you just haven’t been reading my blog.
Generally, I respect all of you – because you all have interesting and important things to say, whether or not they are things I agree with.
Also, I have been thinking about it and I think blogging, the act of writing a blog and your thoughts has been a hugely important part of me coming to feminism. So yeah, what blogs you like, what blogs you read, ARE actually important. That’s why I read a wide range of blogs and viewpoints to challenge my thinking, to take on board different ideas and ideals and beliefs.
I read Cath because she has important things to say. I read RE, because she too, has important things to say. Like she has said, we are all different. We all know our own minds. So why assume that people reading her (which includes feminists, sex workers, men, all kinds) are somehow ‘gullible’?
That would be making a big leap and saying that people who read Cath’s site are also gullible and don’t know their own minds. It’s like you think we all leap from one side to the other instead of having our own ideas and beliefs and experiences. The words ‘sex pozzies’ and ‘rad fem’ are ridiculous because it lumps people in categories when they are all very different, and say and write about different things.
>>>No Susan, cultural imperialism is when one culture (almost always the USA) start imposing themselves on another culture and assuming that culture either a)is identical to theirs or b)should be.>>>
Congratulations, Polly. You’ve just described the radfem/sex-worker relationship to the utmost. Radfems are the United States, and sex-workers are the Third World countries. You decide the policies, you make the laws, and the sex workers have no say and are the ones who get hurt.
I don’t enjoy coming here, ladies. Not one bit. But because you make yourself at the disposal of every opportunistic politician who comes along and wants to use prostitution to further his/her career, and you use that politician to further your goals in return, I’ve got to come here. I don’t find it entertaining to fight with you the way Renegade Evolution seems to.
But you’re doing an immense damage to sex workers, much more than any pimp does, because pimps do not write the laws that stigmatize and criminalize sex work. You do.
And that’s why I come. Not that it’ll make much difference in your opinions, but I’m a sex workers’ rights advocate, and it’s the principal of the thing.
So I’m assuming then Polly that you are in agreement with Susan Ren and I with ending the abstinence based funding restrictions of TVPRA/USAid? This would allow indivual countries to chart the course of their outreach in a manner they determine best rather than having the US dictate policy and allow the choice of suffocation or compliance to TVPRA?
With all due respect to those in the UK condemning the US for it’s cultural imperialism,,, you do realize the UK has had a history of it’s own cultural imperialism? Something about the sun never setting on the British Empire, etc. Umm, UK in Iraq with the US.
While this is by no means a defense of the US cultural imperialism, which certainly is there is spades. And is a global embarrassment. Certainly the US could learn alot about it’s own actions by virtue of not continuing to repeat the errors made by the UK for 400 years. History being what it is, one must remember the UK was a solo world super power for a significant amount of time. Spanish Armada to say,,,, a few years after Archduke Ferdinand got whacked in Sarajevo touching off the first world war, which left the UK as the sole super power……. Actually the US and the UK are the worlds two major cultural imperialistic nations.
Right then: Don’t know if you are still following this thread or not Delphyne, but..
This is a radical blog, where radical feminists read-
Kyle Payne is back blogging again at http://kylepayne (dot)wordpress (dot)com/. He has linked to such feminist blogs as Abyss2Hope, Feminist Law Professors & The Curvature.
There is the heads up.
I am. Thank you very much RE. It is appreciated.
Fuck me why isn’t that little bastard still rotting in jail?
Thanks for that RE
Delphyne: That is a damn good question.
Cath: No problem.
Cara has demanded he remove the link to her, and I guess he has, but you’ll note he will delete any comments that ask him about why he is out or how dare he or any other such thing in, oh, under a half an hour. Now granted, I know he just looooves the attention so blogging on him is a double-edged sword, but this guy is bad news, and I think folk need to know that. But yeah, do as you will and all.
Yes of course I realise the UK has a history of (actual) imperialism Jill (not cultural imperialism, actually invading people, unless you count the British Council, which you could say is culturally imperialist). But we happen to be talking about the attitudes displayed here and now on this thread
Personally I’m sick of inhabitants of the US of Az coming on to my blog and talking about prostitution laws, laws regarding trans people, the price of bread, whatever and assuming the situation is exactly the same in the rest of the world as it is in the USA. Or even assuming mine is a ‘cis atlantic blog’. Well it is, if you’re in blighty….
It’s the ignorance, stupid.
Susan I’ve never made a law in my life. Laws are made by governments. Which are not dominated by radical feminists last time I looked.
And opportunistic politicians don’t gain votes by identifying themselves with radical feminists either. Talk sense.
If you don’t enjoy coming here, couldn’t you just use your mind reading powers to avoid it?
Not being stupid, yes, I do know the UK’s history. But, er, that’s history.
We are talking about *cultural* imperialism, here and now. The way US culture is insidiously taking over the world. Like, er, people coming to UK blogs and expecting us to know about US politics, in detail, and assuming things are the same here.
Yes, we are talking of ‘cultural’ imperialism which suggests a world order dominated by the US in creating inequalities in cultural flow between the global north/south and powerful/ less powerful nations. It’s where the US appears to be projecting its values, beliefs and knowledge onto other countries.
It also seems to manifest rather frequently on UK blogs as Polly has described.
Polly writes “And opportunistic politicians don’t gain votes by identifying themselves with radical feminists either. Talk sense. ”
Ok, examples, Radical Feminist Donna Hughes of CATW
Hughes: The Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA) passed was passed unanimously by the House and Senate. President Bush signed it into law on January 10.
Title I — Combating International Trafficking in Persons — is important. I’ll focus on just one provision that abolition activists have been advocating for several years, that foreign countries should be evaluated in the annual State Department Trafficking in Persons Report on whether they tolerate prostitution and sex industries that create a demand for foreign and domestic victims. Now a minimum standard for the elimination of trafficking will include “measures to reduce the demand for commercial sex acts and for participation in international sex tourism by nationals of the country.” This will begin to hold countries accountable for tolerating a sex trade that is populated by vulnerable women and girls trafficked from abroad and allowing its citizens to go abroad and sexually exploit children.
But yet again Jill you are talking of the USA, not us here in the UK. Polly is referring to the United Kingdom.
We have not gone global yet – just tucked away in Western Europe.
And opportunistic politicians don’t gain votes by identifying themselves with radical feminists either. Talk sense.
Not only talking sense but including pictures. I doubt Donna and the others invited themselves to the white house ceremony and certainly they didn’t get invited without the administration having the photo opportunity of having the radical feminists invited. So talking sense, there it is. I’ll tell you up front so there is no manipulation accusation. I was invited for this reason twice while director of Escape the Prostitution Prevention Project. Once in fall 2002, once in spring 2003. I turned the offers down. A colleague from Escape chose to go. So talking sense, having radical feminists there was the exact reason for the invites and for those who attended. So that voters could the politicians and the radical feminist activists there for TVPRA related events/press conferences and photo opportunities. Pictures linked below, with the references and captions.
Anti-trafficking allies pose at the White House signing ceremony for the TVPRA: Lisa Thompson, director, Initiative Against Sexual Trafficking at The Salvation Army National Headquarters; Dr. Donna Hughes, Professor & Carlson Endowed Chair, Women’s Studies Program, University of Rhode Island; and Faith McDonnell, Director, Religious Liberty Programs, IRD. (Photo courtesy Barrett Duke)
Lavalamp I’ve been to the UK a few times. Well more than a few.
My point however, is that there are those of us from the US that strongly oppose us cultural imperialism. There are those of us who are active outside the US taking steps in direct contradiction with US cultural imperialism. I would be one of those people. Once again going back to Chile. They tend to view their own citizens as important as those from the US, UK, Argentina, etc. But they can’t fund street outreach because it runs afoul of US law. The NGO’s there have lost their funding to do street outreach because everyone is afraid of losing all their funding because of efforts like giving condoms to street based prostitutes.
People have said here that I expend a lot of energy opposing radical feminist initiatives. Certainly when it comes to the TVPRA and the terrible alliance that some radical feminists have so gleefully and glowingly endorsed with former President Bush’s administration, I have been very outspoken and yes I have worked to undermine it. Which I would assume since we are in agreement about opposition to US imperialism, that UK feminists here are not supportive of their US counterparts or their UK counterparts that back TVPRA’s gag order and funding suffocation.
ok and in conclusion that piece of shit Kyle Payne is blogging again and seems to be wanting to present himself as this wonderful man. For the record, that Kyle, a total piece of shit, is linking to any feminist websites is disgusting and indicative that he clearly is still looking to old methods to stalk for prey.
No radical feminist, not one, is responsible for his disgusting behavior. That he used radical feminists and radical feminism as conduits to search for his prey is indicative only of his flaws and nothing that any radical feminist did in any way contributed to his actions. He victimized the woman he harmed, he victimized every survivor he interacted with, and he victimized radical feminists and radical feminism. I think it totally sucks how he exploited women, survivors and radical feminists so that he could find victims for his sexual needs. I think it sucks that people may view radical feminists at fault by virtue that he was a deceptive MF that used radical feminism for his ends. Anyone who suggests that radical feminists are at fault for Kyle Payne’s bullshit or that he is remotely indicative of radical feminists or pro feminist men are totally wrong.
The only person responsible for his disgusting actions is him. Kyle Payne. Given he is still doing the same shit as before, it is my feeling the prick didn’t learn anything from prison and still belongs there as he remains a danger to women and to society.
Susan – Congratulations, Polly. You’ve just described the radfem/sex-worker relationship to the utmost. Radfems are the United States, and sex-workers are the Third World countries. You decide the policies, you make the laws, and the sex workers have no say and are the ones who get hurt.
Bizarre metaphoric rhetoric holds no place in this narrative, which is a serious issue. I suggest that you shut up and learn something before making a fool of both yourself and the concerns of a focus, which you proclaim – so loudly to be in support of.
I have just briefly blogged about Kyle Payne and linked to RE’s open letter. Its disgusting that he thinks he can get away with this 😦
I want to make a point about Kyle Payne. Kyle Payne is an evil, exploitative perpetrator that used radical feminism as a conduit to hunt for victims. And apparently has learned nothing in jail and has immediately tried to resume where he left off. He isn’t a radical feminist, he’s a perpetrator using radical feminism as a shield to hide is intentions from anyone he can victimize.
No radical feminist is to blame for his actions, no radical feminist did anything to cause them, no radical feminist did anything to enable him. He’s a predator. He is solely responsible for what he does. At no time would I ever state or do I ever feel that he is representative of the radical feminist movement regardless of what he does.
When people throw out terms like pro porn, pro prostitution with impunity, that is the equivalent of someone pro Kyle Payne. Kyle Payne is a rapist. He may not have that specific conviction but realistically he is. No one here supports his predatory actions and no one here should be blamed that he is an abuser hiding and masquerading in a social change movement.
I am not responsible for people in the sex worker rights/harm reduction movements that masquerade as activists when they are rapists.
There are certainly people in every movement that have interpretations of social change and the process to get there that are very different from others. There are people in the sex worker rights and harm reduction movements that have very different interpretations that I have or that anyone here has. It doesn’t mean they are wrong and it certainly doesn’t mean they are pro rape anymore than radical feminists are pro rape based upon Kyle Payne.
I don’t judge anyone by the actions of Kyle Payne. I don’t give a flying fuck what his excuses are. Childhood abuse made him do it, being sexually abused made him do it, porn made him do it, rape made him do it, the angle of the moon made him do it. He is sane, he knew right from wrong and he chose to do it. His excuses are total shit.
When you throw terms out at me saying Jill’s pro porn, jill’s pro prostitution, jill’s sex pozzie, jill gave a pro porn speech, you are calling me the same as if I said one of you is pro kyle payne. You aren’t and neither am I. I can’t control what other people do anymore than you can.
It would be really unfair and really illogical to assume any radical feminist would have any support for Kyle Payne or his actions. While you may not agree with the basis of sex worker rights and harm reduction types of activism any more than many agree with radical feminist based activism, is it possible that we can at least come to mutual basic point of saying we won’t assume someone is like Kyle Payne or supportive of him or his kind unless that is concrete fact?
>>>I suggest that you shut up and learn something before making a fool of both yourself and the concerns of a focus, which you proclaim – so loudly to be in support of.>>>
Oooooooh, name calling. Now I know I’m right.
Of course, lavalamp, the idea that sex workers can decide things for themselves and be in control of their own lives would be “bizarre” to you.
Of course, lavalamp, the idea that sex workers can decide things for themselves and be in control of their own lives would be “bizarre” to you.
Susan – I was a sex worker for many years. Ask around, lots of radical feminists are ex sex industry.
Susan – I was a sex worker for many years.>>>
Then you shouldn’t have any conflict with supporting the right of sex workers to work in a safe and decriminalized environment, and to not focus on “pimps” and “punters” as an excuse to ignore or distract away from that right. The more power a sex worker has, the less power a pimp has.
Then you shouldn’t have any conflict with supporting the right of sex workers […]
Nobody gets to tell me what I ‘should’ do or feel about sex work — now just get to fuck. You are a fucking embarrassment to sex work advocacy.
Are you a sex worker Susan, just out of interest? YOu might have said so upthread, but life is short, and I’m unravelling a jumper at the mo to reuse the wool.
Wow, Susan. Lavalamp only gets to speak so long as she says what you want. Love the way you get to dictate what sex workers are allowed to think. You really are a piece of work!
“I have little doubt that she didn’t consent to the picture from the outset, thus she did not consent to it being used in this case either.”
The standard pro-porn theory of consent also works for sex with animals.
If ASACP, ACLU and the Free speech Coalition, keep up the bad work, who is going to know?
It is a moral argument, and the porn industry is only one industry, the same ASACP types, fall over themselves to meet their ‘more extreme’ animal cousins.
We now have ASACP bannered web-sites with eight year old British schoolgirls, upskirt voyeurism
ASACP hit Europe like the porn Stasi, they made friends, with anybody and anything that would help the porn industry, in the USA.
NSPCC, NCIS, when it comes to the crunch, the kiddie charities wanna sit next to VISA and the Credit Cards with anybody else sitting there
There were no feminists, because feminism is not important enough to get an invite.
Brit fems are irrelevant.
“and we can(maybe)work together on trying to help change those attitudes.”
Get out of here
Your prob, is you don’t know how to win.
if thy don’t agree to abolition, they’re on the other side, and there is nothing to talk about.
With them, it is not a debate.
You’d know all about ‘schoolgirls and upskirt voyeurism’ of course, Yvette Doll/Greg Carlin, as you seem to spend a lot of time getting involved in legal cases wanting to uphold schoolgirls wearing skirts over trousers – why so interested I wonder?