On the other hand, here's a Major Chick Pundit who must be applauded for the pioneering work she's done in furthering the cause of sexual harassment, a very new and necessary crime in our law. (Jeez, I hope I'm not sounding patronizing. Any man who ventures into a feminist discussion knows that uncomfortable feeling of putting his very balls, two sensitive and easily bruised organs, on the line.)
OK, let's get down with her argument. Look, many men, including me, share MacKinnon’s belief that many men fear and despise women. But, the idea that pornography bears a significant causal responsibility to male domination and violence is not supported by evidence that sexual violence increases when pornography becomes more available in a society. Some of the most misogynistic and abusive cultures are those with the strictest censorship, and some of the least misogynistic, such as Sweden, were the first to lift restrictions.
MacKinnon also undervalues sexual pleasure. Porn serves us by feeding our fantasies. OK, most male fantasies might be degrading to women, so why not just ban male porn, since that is what most porn is: male? But what about female pleasure? Are their porn fantasies all that less degrading? Many women have rape fantasies, which are pretty revolting in themselves.
It doesn't seem right to use the law to try and control people's private sex fantasies. You cannot invade the personal autonomy of individuals in the name of group inequality. Otherwise you get tyranny in the name of equality.
As someone who grew up in apartheid South Africa, where most of the West's literature canon was banned on sexual grounds, I can attest that the greatest human right is freedom of expression. And that is what is wrong with feminism as it is popularly perceived: they appear to be against freedom of expression, especially freedom of sexual expression. Which more or less puts them in the same camp as Evangelical sex-hating gay-bashers.
Until some sexy cock-happy feminist appears to gainsay this stereotype, feminism will remain lurking in the shadows of popular culture. It needs a poster child bad.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - DrPat
Oh, Adam - I was with you until that disastrous last line. "Porn," "freedom of sexual expression" and "needs a poster child bad" just don't belong in the same essay!
2 - Nicolette Rivers
The closest feminism has is Camille Paglia. There needs to be a younger, straighter version.
3 - Natalie Davis
Hmmm... so only het chicks need apply. Tragic.
4 - Mark Saleski
what about susie bright?
5 - Natalie Davis
Susie's cool. But she isn't new -- she has been a well-known pro-sex feminist for years. I don't remember; it's been a while since I read any of her work. Does she, as the author so crudely put it, dig cock?
6 - Mark Saleski
i think she plays for both teams (i could be wrong tho...)
7 - Nicolette Rivers
Only het chicks need to apply to, um, fill that particular void. People already associates lesbians and man-haters (classifying them as two distinct groups)with feminism. Your average cock-loving, boy crazy chick might not feel there's a place for her.
8 - bhw
And that is what is wrong with feminism as it is popularly perceived: they appear to be against freedom of expression, especially freedom of sexual expression.
Key words: PERCEIVED and APPEAR.
Radical American feminists of the late 60s and early/mid-70s popularized the rhetoric that "all sex is rape," and the like. They were always on the fringe, although they were quite vocal and did, in fact, help women [particularly white, middle-class women] make many social and legal gains. The rhetoric was a sign of the times, and it did serve its purpose fairly well.
Some of that rhetoric remains today, but it's even more marginalized than it was 25+ years ago. Unfortunately, the term "feminist" is used loosely and has retained a stigma: women are sometimes afraid to call themselves feminists because they'll be considered "man haters."
Some women, even those who don't consider themselves feminists consider all heterosexual porn to be exploitative and dangerous to women. Others don't. The difference between anti-porn feminists and gay-bashers should be evident, however.
Feminists don't need a poster girl who advertises that she is "cock happy" to counter-balance anti-porn feminists. That's just another stereotypical extreme. We just need normal, everyday women [of any sexual preference] who believe in gender equality to identify themselves as feminists and to eschew the "feminazi" label that would be put upon them/us by others.
9 - Angie
Perhaps I'm not a feminist since I do enjoy sex then?
10 - Natalie Davis
I recently attended a conference on women in media and we had many discussions about making feminism relevant to young women. We are now in feminism's third wave and, obviously, the world is quite different than it was in the times of the suffragettes and the women's libbers. I understand that we have to try and reach people where they are. It's just that the notion of stipulating -- unofficially, of course -- that any new feminism standard bearer must have any one characteristic (beyond being a feminist, natch) is repugnant to me.
11 - bhw
Egggzactly, Natalie.
12 - Nicolette Rivers
If we were talking one standard bearer: absolutely. Repugnant. Agreed. I think what's being discussed is showing there's diversity and a place for all women.
13 - bhw
And men! We need more men who are willing to say they're feminists.
14 - gonzo marx
since i am a lesbian trapped in a man's body..i will state it...i luv women!!
count me as a feminist!!
Excelsior!
15 - Natalie Davis
Now that I can agree with, Ms. Rivers. And same to you, friend bhw: I love feminist men.
16 - Mark Saleski
i'm a feminist men! (uh...man...whatever)
;-)
17 - Steve S
Feminism is suffering from what many other groups are suffering from, a relabeling from the conservative right wing.
There was a time when Politically Correct meant tolerance and melting pot. Now it means stifling and oppressive to religion.
There was a time when feminism meant celebrating womanhood and fighting for equality. Now it means butch lesbians in Birkenstocks trying to stick it to 'The Man.'
There was a time when Liberal meant protecting the minority from the tyranny of the majority, and working as a community to build a better life together. Now it has been redefined by the Right to mean socialism and the State. (and they love to bitch about it while the current Right administration is building the biggest State we've ever known).
The list goes on. All the words that liberals have used in the past to promote good ideology has been co-opted by the right wing propaganda machine to now have negative connotations. And THAT is one of the primary reasons, if not THE primary reasons why liberals/feminists and all people who love the politically correct melting pot where we all work together to make a better life no longer have any power.
Now it's all about greed, screwing over the middle class and the poor, nation building, trampling on civil liberties, destroying historical documents and creating the Big Brother we all lament, so that the rich can get richer and contribute even less to the society that put them where they are today.
18 - Natalie Davis
So we stop kowtowing to the right wing. Don't allow them to define the terms. I don't. I can't.
19 - Masculiste
Nicolette said-"The closest feminism has is Camille Paglia. There needs to be a younger, straighter version."
I've always thought of Camille as ultra-hot although I don't keep up on her current views on sex, politics or feminism. One of her intellectual points on femism that I do recall was that women should take more responcibilty for their own actions.
I always thought she WAS straight though. Age-wise, I don't see a problem with her.
My dad used to quote Burt Lancaster from a movie...he said, "I gave up green apples back on the farm. Ripe fruit is MUCH sweeter." I would apply that to Paglia.
20 - Natalie Davis
Nope. Camille is a lesbian.
21 - Katharine Donelson
Feminists don't need a poster girl who advertises that she is "cock happy" to counter-balance anti-porn feminists. That's just another stereotypical extreme. We just need normal, everyday women [of any sexual preference] who believe in gender equality to identify themselves as feminists and to eschew the "feminazi" label that would be put upon them/us by others.
YES!
bhw, that is amazing. That is exactly why I go out of my way to identify as a feminist. I am pro-gender equality. In fact, I'm anti-anything-that-makes-someone-feel-like-less-of-a-human-being. I don't think there's anything radical about that.
22 - Natalie Davis
Nope, I don't either. It is a dirty shame, though, that in this world, that concept is alien to most people.
23 - Cerulean
You really have no place telling feminists what to do, and even less in that crude, breezy way you're not quite pulling off. I guess you needed some attention.
Do you have a NOW or NARAL membership? Been volunteering at the Rape Crisis Center? Do you speak up when women are called bitches and whores and what not?
Your statements about pornography are not true, at least in the US. There's plenty of research and plenty of common sense experience that contradicts that. It's interesting that pornography always portrays women enjoying sex with in highly unlikely conditions (because of men's fear that they don't know how to please a woman), and your subject is that you somehow need to dictate to women that they need to put out a scripted image of themselves as enjoying sex, like porn does. Scripts, ridid controls and the like betray a fear that the opposite is true and would emerge if it could. The crude way you speak about things that are not yours to dictate is probably from being immersed in a world of porn. Being immersed in this fake world makes it harder for a man to find a real woman and to please her.
Now, go volunteer at the women's center!
24 - Nancy
Aw, Gonzo ... and I was going to ask you to marry me. I'm crushed. Oh well, c'est la vie. BTW, every time I see your tag line all I can think of is Thurber's poem.
25 - Shark
Shark's take:
1) Women have ALL the power, it's just that 'most' don't know it.
2) the Right redefined "feminism" -- as with every other term we (lefties) had.
3) But they had plenty of help from the likes of Andrea Dworkin, who, in a symbolic move to signal the 'new feminism' -- should be exhumed, inflated with helium, and left to orbit the stratosphere as a sign of what happens to women who hate sex and tend to overeat as compensation.
4) The destruction of "feminism" was also aided by inherent genetic traits of the females themselves -- traits which have remained uncontrolled and -- when left to 'prosper' -- have resulted in:
malls
24 hour shopping channels
midriff-baring tops
low slung hiphugger jeans
thongs
high heals
makeup
plastic surgery
fake pumpkin-like tits
and THE WOMEN WHO WILLINGLY POSE FOR PORNOGRAPHY.
Chew on that kids, but before you pummmel me, remember Shark's #1!