I mean annoying, and wierd.
Now, don't get me wrong, I am damn thrilled that many people from all over the feminist scale, from radical feminist, to expats, to anything and everything in between, have called out this skeevy jerk Kyle Payne.
But yeah, this, (in comments) vexes me.
And nah, the part that vexes me is not Maggie being surprised I wouldn't judge all anti-porn rad fems by Payne...but the whole "please do not judge us ’cause of that scumbag" thing.
Why? Well, because regardless of repeated requests and all, Maggie still calls all women in the sex biz "prostituted women", and comes up with really offensive, hurtful statements like this:
"pro-"sex [slavery] work" activists"
A term she uses (often) for people like, well, these. Like those of us, in and out of the biz, who will be gathering in Chicago next week, those of us who, well, know what is needed here, in the really real world, right now. People who won't, in their crusade, presume to tell other women when they have or have not been raped, while exploiting them in their own manner.
No, I won't judge Maggie or any other Radical Anti Porn Feminist by the Kyle Payne's of the world. I don't for a second feel as if they would condone his behavior.
But oddly enough, I seriously doubt I would get the same consideration in return. It's pretty evident, no matter what I say, do, feel, whatever...I get to be judged by a stereotype and have no say on, oh, consent, terminology I prefer, so on, so forth.
Funny that...only it really isn't, not at all.
EDIT: Maggie has edited her post to say pro "Sex Work" activists rather than "pro sex [slavery] activists" . Now, I'm not sure why, unless she's had a change in thought, or read this (which she claims not to read here, so who knows...I could check IP's but I won't bother), or perhaps realized, damn, such language is really hurtful and dismissive to those involved in sex worker outreach and activism. Who knows?
Wednesday, July 09, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
47 comments:
I think we as women are going to be judged, no matter what. I also think that pleasing is something that must happen internally long before social acceptance. I just wanted to say I enjoy reading your blog as I think it is provocative and thoughtful.
Well, I wouldn't take Kylie as proof positive that most pro-radfems are closet sexual abusers. But further evidence that radical feminism really doesn't solve the very problems it claims to uniquely be able to address? In fact, maybe even serves as a convenient figleaf for those problems? Yeah, I take it as that, definitely.
As for evidence that pro-radfem men have, in various ways, some issues of their own with some of the very things they're fighting – that comes up too often not to notice.
"pro-"sex [slavery] work" activists"
Pro sex slavery activists............
Who the fuck would that be? Idi Amin?
Donna- thanks. Care to elaborate on this statement further?
"I also think that pleasing is something that must happen internally long before social acceptance."
Jill- Apparently, it's people like...us.
I didn't know we were pro slavery activists. When have we advocated slavery? Well of course we couldn't determine that for ourselves anyway. Lets ask a radical feminist they'll know. They studied us. Well, wait, actually they didn't, but well,
Jill, and that's the problem isn't it? We just don't, EVER get to be...people. With lives, thoughts, feelings, differences, opinions, experiences, and Prefered Fucking Terminology...oh, and actual ACTIVISM.
Those rights are reserved for other people. Sigh.
You know, someone just commented over at my blog remarking that Ted Bundy had been a rape crisis counselor, too. I hadn't known that, or I'd forgotten that I'd known that. It did sort of tilt me over a bit more in favor of the "actually, this guy was just a predator all along" theory.
But while I was googling that, I was reminded: oh, yeah, Bundy Blamed The Porn, too, didn't he:
http://www.geocities.com/Wellesley/2813/bundy_1.html
In January of 1989, the state of Florida put Ted Bundy to death in the electric chair. The night before his execution, Bundy granted one last interview to Dr. James Dobson, a known anti-porn activist and a member of the Meese Commission on pornography.
Bundy claimed in this last interview that pornography drove him to serial murder. Ever since then he has been the poster boy for the anti-porn faction.
But was Bundy telling the truth? Or was he pandering to anti-porn sentiment in order to stall his inevitable ride on "Old Sparky"?
I mean, in any case, yeah, because if there's one person whose testimony you want to rely on in building your political case, it's a sociopathic liar who never did anything that wasn't self-serving.
I guess y'know the theory is that deathbed confession is Teh Truth or something. (I have seen APRF's as well as Dobsonite rightwingers point to Bundy's testimony as proof that yes, porn really IS that bad). but I mean: even if it didn't actually save his ass, why would one suddenly assume he's telling Dobson the truth instead of what he knew he wanted to hear? The latter's what he'd done his entire life.
yep, ted blamed the porn. its a common defense really...because apparently it works. easier to believe in the evil of porn than the evil of humans, I guess.
and yeah, they've got some rather um -interesting- ideas of what "sex positive" means, there. Renegade works for organizations like HIPS, Jill has SWOP East; these are dedicated to getting women -off- the streets, help, etc.; but y'know, because one might also argue in favor of labor organization and so forth for sex workers who -don't- want to get out of the business for whatever reasons, one is apparently now, what is it? well, not a "white slaver" these days, something more au courant...She-pimp, was it? Something.
-shakes head-
Or, you know, those of us who really just never gave all that much of a shit about porn per se before stumbling on this weird little pocket of frozen-in-amber 70's style feminism on the Internets, and still don't particularly, -as such.- I mean, if they want to call my POV "pro-porn," fine (I'm not a member of the pro-porn activist website, m'self, because it ain't my thing, but I see no need to dissociate myself from it either) but really: I'm not the one showing them all the dirty pictures, there...
Heh, actually Jill and I are both Swop East. I still do stuff with HIPS sometimes, but yeah...
ANd I really never did get the whole "Team Yay Porn" / "sex poz" thing...so far as I know, of the posse, me, and well, amber I guess, are the only two who have EVER been like "Hell yes, I love porn!" and I'm, er, the gonzo one.
So yes, I think they are confused. Same goes for the she pimp thing.
That Maggie, she may have edited her post. Has she? Because I cannot see any "(slavery)" written in her post, just pro-"sex work" activists.
That's odd. Was "slavery" written there before?
"As for evidence that pro-radfem men have, in various ways, some issues of their own with some of the very things they're fighting – that comes up too often not to notice."
Speaking of which, I remember coming across a rather odd duck by the name of Lierre Kieth, one of the organizers of Stop Porn Culture alongside Jensen, Dines, and Whisnant.
Keith gives a rather lengthy interview here, and its a fascinating read, because it starts out from a kind of hyper-radical 'left' stance, like Jensen but moreso, then gets increasingly bizarre, with talk of overthrowing industrial civilization, survivalism, and vigilantism against "sexual predators":
"So regarding sexual predators, I've got two words: Smith and Wesson. As industrial culture falls apart, we aren't going to survive as individuals. We're going to survive as local communities, both economically and civically. Community policing and defense are going to be the way we protect ourselves from anti-social elements. Women and pro-feminist men could take charge of that task. We could make sure that rape counts as an atrocity and treat predators accordingly, both predators internal to the community and threats from the outside. But it's up to us to do it. If we continue to accept male domination, we'll keep getting male domination.
The facts are not easy to face. They're painful and gruesome. Vast numbers of men are predators, and the looming industrial collapse and civic chaos are going to provide them with more opportunities to act like it. Perpetrators don't change. No form of therapy or rehabilitation makes a dent in their sociopath entitlement. So to put it bluntly: shoot them. When the bullets run out, I've got two more words: long bow. The long bow is such a lethal weapon that the church tried to ban its use in the middle ages.
And I've got a question here. If everyone knows that men are going to behave this way, what are we waiting for? Bullets are available now. Why are we accepting the unacceptable? We know who they are because they're already preying on us. And yeah, every perpetrator is someone's son, someone's father, someone's Mister Special. Get over it. Every perpetrator has to be stopped."
So, Lierre Keith, meet Kyle Payne....Oh, I see you two have already met....Well, I'll just leave you alone to do your business....
yes, the word SLAVERY was there.
I saw the word "slavery", yeah. It's that level of stupidity that really fucks me off. Was going to, ahem, look at this post in detail at some point in the near future.
Caroline-
I read it, and thought about responding to it, but you know...I've done that 1000 times before, and it does no good. None at all it seems. Which yeah, frusterates the hell out of me, makes me angry, and yep, it hurts to see the work of sex worker outreach types so utterly dismissed, mocked, and even demonized.
I mean, nasty ass burns and all, I am going to Chicago for the DA sexworkers and allies event, because I really, really do think that it is important. I might post on that later, but yeah, seeing that dismissed? It's, in my opinion, simply not right or fair at all.
I read it, and thought about responding to it, but you know...I've done that 1000 times before, and it does no good. None at all it seems.
mhm.
Well, responding directly, anyway. I think all you can do is keep telling your own side/story; it's for the benefit of the other readers, though, not the ones who've already made up their minds, with whom there's really no point arguing as such.
iacb: weird. There is on the whole though a certain...narrative...of precious bodily fluids being polluted in a lot of these standpoints, so it doesn't totally surprise me either.
I'm still quite idealistic I think! Seriously, it pisses me off that that shit is out representing feminism. Plus I can't abide such blatent stupidity.
it's quite something that he, completely unwittingly, managed to get "them" and "us" speaking civilly to each other.
but I don't really know why people are surprised that "we" don't judge an entire movement by the actions of some bloviating asshole with a video camera and a guilty conscience. if they'd been reading along the whole time, they'd know that many of us started out with MUCH respect for both the anti-porn movement and many of the people in it, even though we don't agree.
AP; yeah, it's strange. I've been pondering a post having to do, sort of, with this issue. We'll see if I get around to it I guess.
also wondering where IBTP and WSTM are - I was certain they'd be out in front of it.
I don't know how often Twisty updates these days.
it's quite something that he, completely unwittingly, managed to get "them" and "us" speaking civilly to each other.
he's a uniter not a divider!
snerk @ belle.
Can I blame the fact that I was working on two different things (one of them is working on my damn dissertation!) at the same time which is why I was unclear. And even now, I can't imagine what I was trying to say... I apologize
I think what this situation throws in stark relief is the gulf between "feminism" as an attitude, and feminist ideologies.
I think a lot of people are attracted to ideologies for various ego-serving reasons of getting to be Right and Morally Superior. But being a LOUD and obnoxious preacher for any particular brand of feminism does not in itself guarantee the *attitude* of respect for the people whose cause you are supposedly championing, and this can be betrayed by the little (or in this case big) things in the way people act, or what they say when they're not parroting propaganda, or how they treat other people...
E.
Anon – I think your point about feminism and ideologies is pretty right on the money.
What I will say about certain ideologies, though, is that there are some that disproportionately attract the preachy, the borderline (and not-so-borderline) violent, and the hypocritical and that this does not speak well of the ideology or movement itself.
"But further evidence that radical feminism really doesn't solve the very problems it claims to uniquely be able to address?"
IACB: Only if one takes him to be a sincere radical feminist who was trying to get his desires in line, rather than as someone who used it as a convenient cover. If someone uses the BDSM community as a cover while trolling for women to cut up and put in barrels, that doesn't say anything about the rest of us.
"I think a lot of people are attracted to ideologies for various ego-serving reasons of getting to be Right and Morally Superior. But being a LOUD and obnoxious preacher for any particular brand of feminism does not in itself guarantee the *attitude* of respect for the people whose cause you are supposedly championing"
YES, THIS.
"Or, you know, those of us who really just never gave all that much of a shit about porn per se before stumbling on this weird little pocket of frozen-in-amber 70's style feminism on the Internets, and still don't particularly, -as such.- I mean, if they want to call my POV "pro-porn," fine (I'm not a member of the pro-porn activist website, m'self, because it ain't my thing, but I see no need to dissociate myself from it either)"
yeah, that. I mean, I do think of myself as "pro-porn"; I use the stuff, I think it's not a bad thing that it exists, I think activism against it is wrongheaded and silly.
But really, I wouldn't care all that much about it if people didn't have an Ideology that accords it a Meaning that makes it Woo Scary, really. It'd be like chocolate or coffee or CDs.
"What I will say about certain ideologies, though, is that there are some that disproportionately attract the preachy, the borderline (and not-so-borderline) violent, and the hypocritical and that this does not speak well of the ideology or movement itself."
Yeah. THAT is why radical feminism of certain sorts bothers me. Because *I think* it's prone to ignoring nuances that I think matter. And because I think it locates the problem in the wrong place.
As well as because -- well. One of the posters on the Kyle Payne thing, I can't recall who and don't remember if she's a radical feminist or not, mentioned seeing the world through "feminist goggles."
And I've been thinking a lot about that, and realizing that a lot of "consciousness-raising"-based political movements do sort of grow goggles that encourage us to see things we used to see as normal in a different light (cf a couple bloggers who have posted that they liked porn/acting "sexy"/etc. until they found radical feminism.) And I find myself feeling leery of that lately.
Not because I find the whole idea of consciousness-raising bad; I do think privilege exists, and colors how we see things. So shifts in perspective aren't bad all around.
But, well, when I was a radical feminist -- and I was less of an absolutist than some of the bloggers -- I found that the goggles were so powerful *everything* looked all wrong, and everything I knew seemed like a lie.
And that, well... when you get to the point where if anyone isn't looking through the goggles she's wrong, I worry. And I DO think some of the radical feminism on the internet is about goggle-sharing and goggle-spreading. And I'm not sure the goggles are even of much use any more.
amber I guess, are the only two who have EVER been like "Hell yes, I love porn!"
Heh, did I say that?
Funny thing is, I don't watch much porn. I'm very picky about it, and most of it just makes me laugh. But when I find something I *do* like, I'm unapologetic about it; and I am very much pro-porn in the sense of everyone should find what they like, and I can't seem to muster the energy to get all worked up about what other people do and don't like.
""But further evidence that radical feminism really doesn't solve the very problems it claims to uniquely be able to address?"
IACB: Only if one takes him to be a sincere radical feminist who was trying to get his desires in line, rather than as someone who used it as a convenient cover. If someone uses the BDSM community as a cover while trolling for women to cut up and put in barrels, that doesn't say anything about the rest of us."
Yes and no. I'm just looking at the flipside of it, because Kyle's behavior is the very behavior that our side is accused of fostering. And I'm certainly not claiming that there aren't BDSMers or pornographers who are abusers. (In fact, I remember the Jack Venice case from last year, where he was busted for behavior that resembled our friend Kyle more than a little.) And on that level, I'm calling them out – prove to me your house is in order before you go calling other people out. Prove to me that the Jack Venices of the world implicate sex-positivity, but Kyle Payne and Evelina Giobbe have no bearing on radical feminism. And if you can't demonstrate this, then maybe a little humility and fewer shitty accusations are in order.
That's where I'm really coming from with this.
Hmm: I don't quite agree IAVB, because they're not attacking us right now. (If things go back to "you all are for violence so you can get off, slimy people!" I will be right up in there being disgusted. But right now no one is saying that. Even Maggie edited her post -- and the post Ren mentioned is, from what I remember, from before the story broke and everyone got so conciliatory anyway.)
zbut on to what I do agree with: I see a lot of "this proves men can't be feminists" from some of the people blogging on this, but y'know *crickets crickets* when someone brings up Ms. Giobbe.
Which just makes me wonder, really, as someone who has taken a lot more shit from women than from men. I understand why some women are fearful of men as a group, yeah. But I really don't get why this guy who is clearly an abusive ass who knows full well what he's doing is revealing what men are really like, somehow, if someone like Giobbe isn't revealing what women are really like.
Hmph.
IACB: Only if one takes him to be a sincere radical feminist who was trying to get his desires in line, rather than as someone who used it as a convenient cover. If someone uses the BDSM community as a cover while trolling for women to cut up and put in barrels, that doesn't say anything about the rest of us.
Yeah, that. Well, I mean, BDSM is not an -ideology-; but, well, it still holds. Renee/Rainsong is not representative of trans women, the BTK Killer is not representative of "respectable" men, the London Underground is not representative of a political movement, etc.
and yeah, I did say that wrt "male radical feminists;" but it's just, well, I've only known of a handful of -those-, and they've -all- seemed, to me at least, deeply creepy. There's just something about the combination of the dirty fork self-loathing and the righteous moral purity crusade that's a big ol' red flag.
trinity: yeah, exactly.
Trinity said:
"Hmm: I don't quite agree IAVB, because they're not attacking us right now. (If things go back to "you all are for violence so you can get off, slimy people!" I will be right up in there being disgusted. But right now no one is saying that. Even Maggie edited her post -- and the post Ren mentioned is, from what I remember, from before the story broke and everyone got so conciliatory anyway.)"
Says Dear Maggie:
"I think we should keep in mind that Kyle Payne WAS (in spite of all his claims to “support radical feminism” ) secretly PRO-PORNOGRAPHY."
--Head hits desk--
You were saying, Trinity?
Then again, perhaps I'm mistaking Maggie Hayes for someone who's opinion actually matters.
"You were saying, Trinity?"
Half-expected it. But, well... maybe my comment to her saying "Please don't call Kyle Payne politically similar to *me* either" will reach someone. Maybe MH herself, though her investment in us as her enemy seems rather high. I'm thinking maybe, y'know, Debs or some of the other people who have shown moderate streaks.
Hey, we could have peace in our time! ;)
"male radical feminists;" but it's just, well, I've only known of a handful of -those-, and they've -all- seemed, to me at least, deeply creepy. There's just something about the combination of the dirty fork self-loathing and the righteous moral purity crusade that's a big ol' red flag.
Mark this day in history on your calendars, folks! I think this is the first time I've actually agreed with Belledumbass. :o
Fact is, it is UNNATURAL for a man to self-hate himself and cheerlead for the opposing team. Unless all that crusading is crusading against something shameful within himself or promoting his self-agenda in another way (like he's gay and against hetero sex like Jensen). Either way you slice it, there is something dysfunctional and incomplete about a "man" like that.
Byrd- I published that, but you use that kind of monkier for any of my friends again, and I won't. Just letting you know.
Re: Kyle Payne was never really a pro-radical feminist.
I don't know - I look at this paper he wrote about a month before the sexual assault took place. I'm not convinced what he has to say in that paper was all part of a grand scheme to get feminists to trust him — in all likelihood, he actually believed the rhetoric he was writing. Now when it came to actually practicing what he supposedly believed, he failed rather massively in that regard. He must have had a hell of a set of rationalizations to behave the way he did, or maybe he thought immersing himself in the most hardcore feminism he could find was going to somehow cure him of his desires to have power over women.
I see these really problematic male radical feminists as not unlike pedophile priests. Certainly, there's nothing in Catholic doctrine that condones pedophilia, but this institution of celibate priesthood seems to have attracted a disproportionate number of these types. By analogy, it seems like radical feminism attracts a disproportionate share of fucked-up, incredibly guilty men, including a few like Kyle Payne that have some very real crimes to feel guilty about.
So without totally blaming the Catholic church, one could say, yes, there's nothing in your doctrine that condones this – quite the opposite - but maybe this celibate priesthood thing isn't creating the healthiest dynamic, either. I think one could say analogous things about radical feminism here.
I see these really problematic male radical feminists as not unlike pedophile priests. Certainly, there's nothing in Catholic doctrine that condones pedophilia, but this institution of celibate priesthood seems to have attracted a disproportionate number of these types. By analogy, it seems like radical feminism attracts a disproportionate share of fucked-up, incredibly guilty men, including a few like Kyle Payne that have some very real crimes to feel guilty about.
Yeah, that, I'd agree with.
"I don't know - I look at this paper he wrote about a month before the sexual assault took place. I'm not convinced what he has to say in that paper was all part of a grand scheme to get feminists to trust him — in all likelihood, he actually believed the rhetoric he was writing. Now when it came to actually practicing what he supposedly believed, he failed rather massively in that regard. He must have had a hell of a set of rationalizations to behave the way he did, or maybe he thought immersing himself in the most hardcore feminism he could find was going to somehow cure him of his desires to have power over women."
Yeah, that's totally how I read it at first. I'm not sure what I think now, but I wouldn't be surprised if I could read his mind and discovered a split self: The Good Boy and The Rapist.
I also wouldn't be surprised if The Good Boy is a ruse, though.
"Certainly, there's nothing in Catholic doctrine that condones pedophilia, but this institution of celibate priesthood seems to have attracted a disproportionate number of these types. By analogy, it seems like radical feminism attracts a disproportionate share of fucked-up, incredibly guilty men, including a few like Kyle Payne that have some very real crimes to feel guilty about."
Yeah, and I also think it attracts some women I'm not sure about either. But I don't want to get into that now, really.
The psychology is murky; the "ruse" thing, it's like--thing is, with sociopaths, I think, it's like, yes and also no.
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave,
when first we practice to deceive..."
Ultimately I think you can't pull off a persona like that without investing a significant amount in it, even if you consciously more or less know it's just a mask. And, it seems like, with this guy--*something* odd is driving him, and--look, however you analyze it, ultimately it boils down to
a) he's really, really twisted
b) he's still responsible.
the rest is just sort of academically interesting, and I mean, it -is-, but--ethically speaking, it don't make a difference as far as I'm concerned.
There is an idea of a Kyle Payne; some kind of abstraction....
heh, yeah, that too.
Post a Comment