Yesterday I mentioned Robert Jensen’s latest act of caring and empathy - yeah, the part where he says DP (double penetration, for those not in the know) is inherently sexist. And how does he know? Well, he’s watched a lot of sick, terrible porn (for research purposes, you understand!) and talked to some men. Which men? Well, it’s not really important; would you stop trying to distract from the main point here?? Listen: there are some men out there who like to watch DP because they think the women don’t want to do it. They get off on the idea of women suffering. Isn’t that awful? And, well, it goes without saying, women don’t want to do it. How could any woman possibly want to do such a sick, terrible thing??
Ahem. I could shit a more nuanced argument.
Actually, let me rephrase… -oh, and let me be pre-emptive, too. First of all, there is no doubt in my mind that there are some men out there who get off on the idea of a woman doing something against her will, or being physically harmed. And there is no doubt in my mind that there are plenty of instances of DP in porn that depict just such a scenario. Fuck those men and fuck that noise. Porn should never involve coercion; and I really wish I could say I gave a shit about people who get off on actual suffering, to make myself sound all humanitarian or something, but I really don’t. As far as I’m concerned they can take a long walk off a short pier.
Where was I? Ah yes, rephrasing! See, it’s not just that Jensen’s argument lacks nuance. It’s that instead of listening to what actual women are saying, he appears to steel himself against all dissent because The One True Theory must be preserved! (The irony of this article being published on a site called “The Dissident Voice” is not lost on him, surely?) Let nothing penetrate his ideology! What he’s saying is for the good of women, after all. He really cares about women - so much so that he’ll be damned if he’s going to listen to what they’re saying!
Um. And this is feminist, how exactly?
What’s most perplexing of all is the radical feminists defending Jensen, and Stan Goff (who was also defending Jensen). Antiprincess was even called a troll on Stan Goff’s blog! Does not compute. I can’t grok the cognitive dissonance. Because, see, no matter how you slice it, what you end up with is this: a MAN dictating to WOMEN what their sexuality must look like. A MAN defining for WOMEN what is sexist against them.
A man speaking for women. A man silencing women. (Because he cares.) Hmmm.
Oh and then there’s the whole heterosexist aspect of it too, which I already mentioned in a comment (responding to Russ, who dared to suggest that fingers and toys might also be employed in DP).
It’s really all just too much for me - I can’t remember the last time I’ve seen such feats of contradiction! My heart is all aflutter. Oh, what will the Radical Feminists of Blogland say next, how will they jump to Jensen’s defense as he silences women hither and thither?? It’s really a fun game at this point - come, join in! I’ll make the popcorn.
(See also: Renegade Evolution, I Shame the Matriarchy, and Fetch Me My Axe.)
READ ME: Disclaimer
8 Responses to "Oxymoron of the day - well, maybe just moron"
Yeah, I most especially love how the wimmin-firsters jump to a paternalistic dude’s defense against the ev0l wimmins. hey, Beeb even called me a “shrieking harpie,” back in the day, when i said pretty much the same thing i said here as i said to her man, for being even more of a smug creepy patronizing fuckhead than these assclowns. must…wash…brain…out…with soap…
i mean, whatever else about Heart, at least (these days i guess) she’s pretty consistent about this. no menz on the board; no menz trusted.
and dude, i have never, been about CLASS WOMAN; but if i -were,- i’d find this sort of behavior a bit, well, sketchy?
DP is not inherently sexist. DP is inherently gay.
Discuss.
The logic used to characterize double penetration as inherently sexist is inherently flawed. It would be difficult, I think, to characterize an action as inherently one thing or another. The act just is. Apply whatever label to the intentions of the executor as you see fit. Which is to say: as it agrees with your moral code. Or, you could just ask them what their intentions were. Somehow, that seems too easy.
My moral code dictates that I find double penetration to be inherently hot. Ahh, Moral Code. You make me so slavish.
Additionally, I’m not a sexist nor a feminist. Just a hedonist.
At the moment, I am one very tired woman. Sleep has been lacking. However, rage wrt this issue is high. I suspect there shall be more ranting at some point today. There is a grimly amused smile on my face, for I am now seeing several radical feminists talking about “yay bob” and the horrible, nasty degrading porn selfish people like me love and how bad it is…and you know, I find that rather odd, as many of them do not watch porn at all, have not watched it in several years, and don’t seem to care if the women in it actually, oh, might like what is going on in it…because men might like it because it is degrading. All about the men, of course. Always.
well, and it’s exactly the same for women who don’t actually fuck men; we’re just exactly the same! yes! it’s all about the Menz!
ick. at least yer average drooling hetboy who “wants to INSERT himself (tm Goff)” is more striaghtforward about his nasssty desires. usually they just want to join in the fun, icky though they might be in their own right; I respect that more than I do Mr. Scarlet Letter there and his wimmin enablers.
did I mention, ick?
seems to me DP isn’t gay nor sexists. I’ve said it before. It’s about having a hole (or two) and sticking something in it.
wimmin-firsters
ok - when I first read that, I read:
wimmin-fisters
and I’m all - now yer talkin! lemme warm up my pitching arm…
then I read it again.
sigh.
ok - according to various more friendly interpretations of this essay by Jensen, apparently he’s assiduously avoiding the claim that the act is inherently sexist and demeaning - it does not matter to him whether it’s inherently sexist and demeaning or not. what matters is that the act is repeatedly framed as sexist and demeaning in pornographic materials, and therefore men think this act is sexist and demeaning, and that’s why they like to watch it.
Nonetheless, I’m not so convinced that such was really what he meant, and I don’t think that disregarding what women think about the act, on film or off, is so useful.
the humiliating power of the act is drastically undermined when the purported humiliate-ee is un-humiliated, in my opinion.