Links: January 2, 2011

Shakesville: “The Porn King with a Heart of Gold”. . . on Vivid’s co-founder continuing to coerce Nadya Suleman (the U.S. woman who had 8 babies at once a couple years ago) into doing porn. This time, he wants her to do porn in exchange for him paying off her mortgage. How is this not debt bondage? Also, dude, SHE SAID SHE’S NOT INTERESTED. Damn the rape/porn culture. [TW for sexual coercion.]

Rage Against the Man-Chine: “You’re doing X in spite of Y. Right on. Now how about we remove Y so we can all do A through Z?“. . . on ‘agency’ and ‘fun feminism’, individualism/libertarianism vs class politics.

Via Vancouver Rape Relief & Women’s Shelter, the audio of a wonderful lecture titled, “Making the Connection: Rape and Pornography.” [TW for sexual violence, porn miscellany.]

What is the role of pornography in rape cases? Listen to Janine Benedet, Associate Professor UBC Law and Narissa Yan, Collective Member of Vancouver Rape Relief and Women’s Shelter “Making the Connection: Rape and Pornography.” This sound file is from the  Vancouver Public Library for the 21st Memorial of the Montréal Massacre, 2010.

R Mott: “What Do You See”, on what you actually are watching when you watch porn. [TW for sexual violence.]

Sociological Images: “Gender, Boobs, and Video Game Characters”. . . includes a humorous (in a LOLsob way) flow-chart for how video game creators choose attributes of characters, based on gender. Also, another LOLworthy set of images – super sexy graphic novel ladies redrawn to resemble male characters.

Quotable: Compromising with Patriarchy for Popularity

Rebecca Whisnant on sex-poz/third-wave feminism:

Now think about it: in this cultural and political context, a feminism that acquiesces to certain key male entitlements, while simultaneously presenting itself as bold and liberated and rebellious, is likely to be appealing to many women. A version of feminism that supports girls’ and women’s desired self-conception as independent and powerful, while actually requiring very little of them as far as confronting real male power, will similarly have wide appeal.

On adaptive preferences:

The basic idea is simple: if I can’t have something (or think I can’t have it), then it behooves me not to want that thing. Conversely, if I’m going to get something whether I like it or not, then I’ll be happier if I can get myself to want it and like it. So people adapt their desires to fit their situations, rather than vice versa, thus minimizing the pain and cognitive dissonance of continuing to want something that they don’t think they can get: “if you can’t have what you want,” as the saying goes, “then want what you have.”

The concept of adaptive preferences is indispensable to understanding the self-reproducing dynamics of oppressive systems. In particular, I think it can help us understand the new brand of feminism[. . .]

Quoting a blogger:

“Fuck-me feminism … is a school of thought that suggests [women] are empowered by reclaiming and controlling our own sexual objectification, by reclaiming the power of pornography and the sex industry for ourselves, and by flaunting our desire and willingness to have sex. In other words, being a man’s sexual object can’t hurt me if I want to be objectified; pornography and the sex industry can’t degrade me if I enjoy it or if I profit from it; being used for sex can’t devalue me if I’m using him too; being regarded as nothing more than a pussy to fuck can’t dehumanize me if I want him to fuck my pussy.”

What Feminism is Not

(Alternate title: “What Feminism Should Not Be”.)

*sharing tips about how to lessen your gag reflex response when giving blow jobs

*buying things that “support breast cancer research” and are, undoubtedly, pink

*using the language of capitalism to describe women’s options under patriarchy (ex: “a woman’s choice to be a prostitute”)

*(while we’re at it) saying “I choose my choice” non-ironically

*upon being called out by a POC/WOC for displaying white privilege, you refuse to seriously consider their concerns

*attacking folks who call you out on your ableist language (remember, this post is being written by a “crazy” person!)

*seeing no or few problems with relationships or pornography based on sexualized power dynamics

*not finding it problematic that “rape fantasies” are appealing to some people

*denying internalized self-objectification; saying things like “I do it for myself”, regarding wearing makeup, dressing a certain way, etc

*thinking that the personal isn’t all that political

*jumping at the chance to interject, “BUT I LOVE MEN!” to avoid the man-hating feminazi stereotype

*99.8% of the content of all episodes of Sex & the City (this is a generous approximation)

*photos of baby animals (but they do help you deal with the above items being done in the name of feminism)