Category Archives: femdrama

Poor, poor, johns

I swear. Most of the “sex worker” activists I have met constantly talk about how we shouldn’t “demonize” the johns, because they’re usually married/partnered*, etc, and they are simply seeking understanding for a sexual act that their steady partner cannot or will not provide.  Men aren’t just looking to “bust a nut,” they’re seeking the love and understanding every human wants.  Or that some people are just “incapable” of relationships with the opposite sex.  And they’re normal men just like your coworkers and friends. So they need an outlet.

If I don’t have, or can’t have a relationship, I don’t feel like I should have the right to exchange money for sex. I don’t. Especially since there would be no way for me to know if they had “chosen” sex work, or had only chosen it from a range of other shitty options (minimum wage jobs, etc, etc). Essentially, no one has the right to buy sex or sexual acts-we know that a great amount of abuse exists in this industry, and anyone who risks the chance of raping someone so that they can “get some” is sick.  No one has the right to sex, period.

However pitiful some women are, however lonely they feel, I don’t see them thinking they have a right to sex.  Women want love and understanding just as everyone does, but we never get it.  Yet somehow, we don’t use prostitutes.  Women, FOR SOME REASON, generally don’t purchase sex; women represent sex, thus they are usually sellers.   Why are the roles in prostitution so gendered?   Who has the resources and the money?  Men.  Who has the prestige?  Men.  Who has the power?  Men.  Who represents sex?  Women.   Most men believe they are entitled to sex, and as a result they make up most rapists and most johns.  Women are not raised to think of themselves as “entitled” to sex- sex is something women give and men take.

Wanting love and understanding does not make johns understandable or sympathetic, unless you’re the type who “understands” MRAs.  Yeah, they’re human, but so are rapists.   Wanting love and understanding means get a goddamn therapist, or failing that, talk to people.  Hell, you could even just talk to the prostitute, and not fuck her.  It does not mean you should fuck women.  The fact that people say johns are just seeking understanding and love is disgusting.  If they were, they wouldn’t have the sex, they wouldn’t need it, they wouldn’t demand it, and they wouldn’t be violent, they wouldn’t ask for unprotected sex.

These men aren’t seeking understanding: they are seeking the image of it.  A woman, nurturing like a mother, but also a whore, who will nurture the man through whatever sick fetish he’s developed.  A yes-woman, who will agree that his wife is a bitch, frigid, stupid, whatever.  Consequently, the image for a “sex worker” is that of a college-educated middle class white woman (preferably aryan) who drops every career opportunity and hobby to fuck men for money.  Her image is no different from that of “good mom,” who leaves her potential career behind “by choice,” because she wuves her kids so much and wishes them to have the best.

But, here are a few large differences:  children have a need for someone to care for them, men, on the other hand, and specifically johns, have jobs and the full development necessary to take care of themselves.  No one needs to take care of grown men. However much they seem or act as helpless as babies, they aren’t.  It’s an act.

This whole outlet thing is the same bullshit that says men’s sex drives are natural and unstoppable;  therefore they have a right to an outlet.  God forbid we raise men to NOT feel entitled to sex, so that they will not rape or purchase “sex.”

No one has ever died from lack of sex.   Ever.

So can it about men’s sexual and emotional “needs.”  Women’s right to not be raped and used sexually is more important than some douchebag’s orgasm.

*So are most child molesters, rapists and serial killers.  I doubt this is a coincidence.

Rape Fantasies & Why We Have Them

Much to the delight of men, women have rape fantasies.     In evo psych arguments it comes up as evidence that rape is natural and women are naturally submissive.  When it comes up in more liberal and feminist circles, it’s in defense of BDSM, pornography, or “roleplaying.”  The explanations of why women have these fantasies are male-centric, and usually just amount to some kind of justification for men’s messed up sexuality.  I haven’t seen women’s rape fantasies taken on from a radical feminist perspective, so I’m going to do that.

To start, we have to look at how rape (and sex, for that matter) is framed in our culture.   Some examples: “He couldn’t control himself”, “he couldn’t help himself”, “he was just so horny”, “she provoked him wearing that skirt/top/sweater.”  There’s always disbelievers when an attractive woman says she has been raped, but people will disbelieve an unattractive woman even more.  In the popular narrative, rape is about sex and desire, and an act of passion.  It happens when a man wants to fuck a woman and she doesn’t want to let him.

The measure of force a man is willing to take in pursing a woman is said to be a direct measure of how much he loves and desires her.  Following this worldview to its logical endpoint, rape becomes the ultimate expression of desire and attraction.

Is it any wonder, then, that so many women have rape fantasies?  Who doesn’t want to be incredibly desirable?

This is only amplified by the effect of the media, which tells us that we’re ugly and undesirable, especially when compared to that girl.  Most women feel hideous, and are expected (and do) to appreciate any attention from men, with more appreciation being required the less conventionally attractive we are.  I suspect that the less conventionally attractive a woman is, or the uglier she feels, the more likely she is to have rape fantasies.  With nearly all of us having some insecurity about our bodies and our desirability, its no wonder lots of us fantasize about being raped-which in our culture, means being desired by men.

I have to credit Twilight with me putting the pieces together.  (I know, what the hell?)  It’s always seemed there are more fans of Jacob than Edward, for whatever reason.  My lover wondered frequently why Jacob’s fans say that he “loves Bella more,” when he clearly is manipulative creep with a rapist mentality, and thought liking someone so obviously dangerous was stupid.   I got quite pissed, because he essentially was calling women “stupid” for feeling insecure and wanting to be wanted, which is completely understandable.

On a personal note, I used to have them myself, and even though I only let myself think of healthier things now, I can’t deny that sometimes they seem more appealing than my partner always asking what I’d like.  The thing is, even though I hated being touched without asking or after I said no, it still made me feel desired.  I think I would feel more desired if control were taken from me, even knowing what it means.  A part of me simply doesn’t care if I’m objectified, because I want to be wanted.

Stating the Obvious: I don’t blame women who have rape fantasies at all, even if they  seek to “roleplay” them with their partner or feed them privately with romance novels.  I do, however, blame anyone who goes along with “roleplaying” as a rapist.

Women shouldn’t have boundaries, Agency is Sacred (unless you’re a prude), and other things I learned from men

Reading the Hugo’s post and the comments on the Enemies of Eros (or whatever the pretentious title was)  made me realize just how sick the men we’re dealing with are.

For context, I provided on that thread a pretty detailed summary of my sex life.  I wanted to demonstrate that it is possible to have heterosexual sex that doesn’t end or even center around intercourse, mostly for the benefit of straight women who feel like they just have to accept it as “part of” sex, even though for most “foreplay” is the most enjoyable part.  Secondly, I wanted to see how they’d respond to the lived experience of someone (me) who belongs to a group demonized as anti-sex and anti-male.  Would they ignore it, call me a liar, or realize that radical feminism has never been against sex and that its portrayal as such is a simply a lie used to dismiss it?  As most could guess, the latter never happened.

The men on that Hugo thread completely ignored my hobbies and anecdotes about my sex life.  My sexuality clearly was still unhealthy, because I’m experiencing “anxiety” about intercourse and don’t want to have it.  Men never take the female sexuality seriously, unless it’s pleasing to them (see their rationalizations on burlesque/”sex work”).  To men, female sexuality requires fucking, because we’re voids just waiting to be filled.  If you don’t want to be fucked, you must be a lesbian or a prude.

But, I think that the complaint is not just that we’re against intercourse, judging by their comments and portrayal of me.  It’s that we’re setting a boundary-a sexual boundary, at that- that cannot be crossed.  We’re saying no, and for that they call us mentally ill.   Men have pathologized “frigid” women over the years, as well as demonized those who have sex on their own terms, via masturbation or lesbianism.

No doesn’t mean no, of course-it means we’re immature, we have “anxiety” about intercourse that we shouldn’t have.  And instead of dealing with it, by taking hormone-altering substances for the rest of our lives, we’re simply saying no.  This is unacceptable.

One person (who also called me an idiot yet was not banned-nice “no attacking people” policy, liverlips) suggested that I and other women who are against intercourse are in need of sex ed, where we would learn how to “negotiate” with our partner and have “healthy sex.”  Firstly, it’s mansplaining to the nth degree to suggest that a woman needs sex ed when she clearly knows what she wants and uses the terminology related to sex better than most.  (Most importantly, that heterosexual sex != intercourse.)   It also suggests that refusing intercourse is simply a product of ignorance-that is, if you knew how to “have sex,” you’d want intercourse.   When in fact, the information taught in heteronormative sex ed- about contraceptives, STD risk, and damage control (aka the morning after pill and abortions) are precisely the reasons some radical feminists want to forego intercourse.

We’re supposed to have “negotiation” in our sex lives, as if our bodies were some kind of thing we can trade and agree to use.  I doubt it’s a coincidence the first things that come to mind when I think of “negotiation” are car sales and hostage negotiation.  Women are not allowed to enter sex with a clear boundary, as I was doing-to do so means you’re messed up or immature.

From this, negotiation seems to not mean, “talk about what you like and don’t like, and then do the only the former.”  The only other thing it could mean, as far as I can gather, is being willing to change your mind-that is, be willing to let him “test” your boundaries,* or eventually give your “consent.”  This is hardly surprising when you consider how far men will stretch the concept of “consent”: there have been studies (too lazy to find them now) that show even convicted rapists think the “sex” they had with their victim was consensual.

While these “feminists” will argue till they’re blue in the face that you can chose to be fucked using your “agency,” you can’t chose to not be fucked using your agency.    If you chose to not be fucked, you’re brainwashed by radical feminist philosophy or conservatism.

This dynamic is especially interesting considering that they argue the culture and upbringing in a world drenched in misogyny and rape has no influence on their choices, or the choices of most people.  Obviously, this would suggest that radical feminists somehow have far more influence than the dominant culture and media, since we are allegedly able to influence choices while society does not.  Which is a laughable idea, since even the majority of feminists shun us.

Lastly, I’d like to say that, as lame and nerdy as it might sound, fanfiction is a major part of my sexuality.  And I have a feeling the reason it’s ignored, stigmatized and mocked is because the primary authors and readers are women.

Really, what’s more sexually messed up: requiring female risk for sex, or foregoing activities that require female risk?

*This is a common thing in bondage, often outright called “pushing one’s boundaries,” more often/specifically pain tolerance, and is often considered an essential part of “good” BDSM.  And this is a very large part of D/s relationships, from my understanding, especially when “training” (ew) is involved.

PS: Sorry this first post after a long break kinda sucks.

Battered Women vs. Women in Porn

Any feminist of merit knows what frequently happens with battered and otherwise abused women: they blame themselves, they rarely leave immediately, and they often love their abuser.  “It’s bad most of the time, yeah, but the good times are really great.”  I know.  I’ve been there too (though he only “battered” me via BDSM and rough sex).  She often stays, and we don’t blame her for that, even when she’s rationalizing it.  We don’t say she “agreed” to be hit in exchange for money if she chooses to stay out of economic necessity.  We know battered women’s syndrome and Stockholm syndrome, and a lot of us have been there.  We understand.

But when a woman is in porn, somehow the standard feminist narrative is that they chose it, and they stay because they like it.  When someone feels that women in porn or are being abused, or even just points out that they are paid to act, we are accused of “victimizing” them and accusing them of false consciousness by pro-porn ‘feminists.’  Or worse, being “unable” to handle the idea that a woman might like having sex with strangers for money.  (Because we’re prudes, basically.)   They might be treated badly, but they make good money (better than most other entry-level jobs), they get attention, adoration, and affection.* It can make you feel fuckable or lovable.  If they chose to make money by working in porn or prostitution, even when it’s violent or she has a lack of economically feasible alternatives, most of these feminists would say she consented.

Isn’t saying battered wives who say their partners are wonderful “assuming” they’re a victim and arguing that they have a false consciousness?  Isn’t that just as “patronizing,” to say that a woman is being abused when she says she isn’t?

What is the difference, then, between an abused porn actress and an abused wife?

One stays out of love or fear; the other out of a need for money, drugs or attention.  One is a “good girl”; the other a “bad girl.”  The slut is ok to hurt and punish, the virgin should be taken care of.  What am I trying to say?  Either the “sex-positives” need to blame women for staying with their abusers and defend the rationalizations they make for them, or they need to acknowledge that all kinds of abused and hurt people will deny their pain and situation.  It’s hypocritical to do otherwise.  Unless pro-sex industry feminists mean to favor “good girls” and “prudes” over whores–you know, that thing they always accuse us of.

I am sick of all this “rational choice” shit.  Unfortunately, I know that we’re heading towards blaming women from what I have seen on sites such as feministing and at the feminist club on my campus.  I am sick of empathy going out the window, and all we talk about are the pay gap or birth control.  I am tired of settling.

* What I mean here by “affection” is not actual affection, but the conflating of abuse/love that often happens with rape, especially with incest from what I understand.

Trans women and Male Privilege

Foreword: So, I’ve been reading the back-and-forth debates between some radfems and some trans women.  It’s gotten pretty nasty at times.  (The rape threat(s) directed at AROOO comes to mind.)  I’m afraid to weigh in on this, partially because of my personal experience with a trans man, but I’m going to try and get out some of the thoughts I’ve had anyway.  Much of this is really just restates what FCM and Miska have said, far earlier, more often and clearly than I.  All credit should go to them.  But I feel like I should still say something, because its not like this viewpoint is common, so it needs to be restated.   Several times.   From several different people in several different ways.  Because there are so, so many holes in the arguments I’ve heard from trans activists.  Maybe if they were just wrong or stupid I wouldn’t take as much issue with them, I would probably just lol, but they also erase the very foundations of feminism, women’s studies, and even sociology. 

Men have been raised to hate women.  To punish us, to batter us, to rape us, to objectify us, to give us their so-called “love” for our bodies.  Undoubtedly, this has an effect on every.  single.  man.  There is no exception.  If you were bullied as a man-for being nerdy, gay, smart, ugly, fat, “effeminate”–that does not stop people from treating you as a man.   None of these things stop you from receiving male privilege.  This is feminism and sociology 101 here.

When a biological male transitions to a woman (MTF), their pay will drop.  This is a known fact for feminists and trans* alike.  Yet, some people still deny they had male privilege all along?  When up until they begin transition, they still receive the benefit of higher pay?  Why would this not apply to every other privilege men receive?  Simple: It does, and gender is indoctrinated from birth, so no matter what you identify as, there will still be bits of that indoctrination left.

It starts young.  *Useful anecdote time* My lover was playing a video game that had a fat female character on screen, and his little brother came into the room to bug him.  (That’s what he does.  I feel bad sayin’ this about the kid, but he’s an asshole.)

Brother: “That’s a guy, right?”
Lover: “A girl.”
Brother: “But girls are supposed to be pretty, she’s FAT.”
Lover: “GTFO.”

His brother is only 8-years-old.  Yet, already he hates women.  Male privilege has already influenced him and made him feel like GIRLS should be pretty-even though he’s fat himself, even though he got beat up by a girl.  (Haha!)  He insists on his male “rights” because of how he has been socialized into his gender, which is assigned based on his genitals at birth.

Yet, we’re supposed to believe that a lifetime-probably at least 20 years-of male conditioning had no effect on trans women?  That’s fucking crazy.  Being afraid of people, who have been trained and conditioned for any portion of their lives to hate and hurt us is more than just sane, it’s completely reasonable.  Not wanting to sleep with someone who is a former member of the class raised and cultivated to hate you is not crazy either.  These reactions to trans women are far from hysterical, as they are treated by most.

Refusing to acknowledge your FORMER privilege is just as bigoted as not acknowledging that which you have.  I acknowledge that your male privilege is lost after transition and passing, but that doesn’t mean all traits and remnants a male personality will be erased.  It also does not mean that you didn’t benefit from being born male.  In fact, there are several things that trans women will not experience that significantly burden women (such as pregnancy, having to risk stroke to avoid pregnancy because nigel is too fucking stupid to wear a condom, obstetric fistula, etc).  But it does mean that while people saw you as a man, you earned more money for the same work, got more prestige, and had a much smaller risk of being raped than a woman would have at that age.

I think that trans women should be a little more understanding of women’s fear of people who were raised to be members of the gender class that has been raping and killing us for thousands of years. If someone was raised as a man but was biologically intersex or female, I would take the same stance that I do with trans women.

This is not essentialist.  Saying it is means you don’t understand the argument at all.  The fact is that your born sex determines what gender you’re assigned.  I don’t believe in binary sexes, and I don’t believe in gender, but that doesn’t mean I can ignore that being born female means you’re raised as a woman.  That’s how the system works.   I will always act, think, and talk in womanly ways due to conditioning, no matter how much I try to overcome it.   It’s not radical feminist’s fault that biological males are raised and treated as men, no matter how much they feel like they’re in the wrong body.  But that’s what happens.  And that, personally, is why I do not equate trans women with nontrans* women, especially when it comes to separatist spaces.  Maybe it’s not fair, but that’s how the social constructions that fuck up our lives are assigned.  It’s all about socialization.

*I’m not using “cis” because from what I’ve read, the term comes from “cisgender,” and I think gender is a social construction; so, since trans seems mostly about discomfort with the body, I use the term “transsexual,” since sex it specifically refers to the body.  Not to mention the people I’ve seen who say cis women are privileged say we aren’t raped for being biologically female.

Ignore the man behind the curtain (NSFW Image for point)

from some post on how burlesque can save the world (and stop rape and misogyny too I assume)

The sex-positive rallying cry, at its most basic, is that our culture is profoundly sex-negative.  The evidence?  Abstinence education, the slut shaming of women, and overly religious values.  If you look at only these things, it becomes easy to prove and condemn the “sex negative” attitude of our culture, and outline the harms it does: increased amounts of unwanted pregnancy, the spread of STDs, the crushing of young women’s reputation and self-esteem.  But you know what else causes those things?  Rape and sexual harassment.  Mandatory intercourse.  Unsafe intercourse.  Pornography and the sexualization of young girls.  The fashion and beauty industeries.  Yet somehow, these are all ignored so that “sex-positives” can cry about abstinence education, despite the fact that STDs cannot be directly caused by ignorance–they are caused by intercourse and especially intercourse without a condom (which is demanded of most females).  The idea that education will solve this problems is laughable, just as the idea that education will stop men from raping is.  Men want to rape and men like dangerous fucks.

While related, that was a tangent on a single problem with the “sex-positive” approach.  Lets look at the evidence in our culture and see how “sex negative” most things are.  The simple act of looking at a magazine rack, however, will prove the situation is more complex than it seems.  Maxim.  Playboy.  Cosmo.  Celebrity magazines.  What do all of these focus on?  Looking at and talking about women men would like to fuck, becoming the women men want to fuck, how to fuck (for women), how to get a woman to fuck (for men), who’s fucking who, what to wear when you fuck, when to fuck, how often to fuck to not be a prude but not be a slut (for women), and so on and so forth.  You could not honestly tell me that sexuality is taboo in America.  It would be just as ridiculous as saying rape is taboo, that racist jokes are taboo, or that drinking is taboo.  Whenever someone says that our culture is anti-sex, I laugh.  In their face.

Is it publically condemned?  Of course it is, but again, only in certain ways.  I remember D.A.R.E. and the other stupid shit attempting to keep us out of drugs.   Yet, somehow, people do drugs anyway.  Tobacco and alcohol, along with illegal drugs, are widely consumed and glamorized.   To think that official programs advocating abstinence makes our culture sex-negative is just as ridiculous as saying the US is anti-alcohol and anti-drug.   As always, it’s only anti-badthings in the case that the nonwhite, nonrich, nonmen use them for their own benefit and pleasure.  Its ok for a woman to have sex, so long as its for a man and under his conditions, whether those are marriage, kinks, or anal.  Just as with drugs, sex is a billion dollar industry with a lobby.  The only difference is that the advertising for the sex industry (porn) is also one of its products, making it self-perpetuating.

Maintaining the belief that America is sex-negative, however, is vital for “sex-positives” to have a point.  It obscures the real power and the real system, under which hetero sex is mandatory, enjoyable or not; women’s submission is mandatory, willing or not.   The politicians who condemn prostitution use and abuse escorts; the anti-gay crusaders have sex with men; the Church which condemns lust while molesting children and protecting their rapists.  Does that sound “anti-sex” or “prudish” to you?  To believe the words that come out of men’s mouths-that they are against “sexual liberation” as its taken place- is ridiculously fucking stupid.  Our culture is not anti-sex: it’s pro-fucking, pro-rape, and pro-misogyny.  “Feminist” porn is still status quo, lesbian porn is male-centered, and lesbian BDSM is even more so.   Our culture is only “prudish” about sex outside of how males conceive it. That is, without domination and submission, without hate, without intercourse or penetration, with emotion and mutual desire.

On doms, tops, partner’s of submissives, rapists, whatevs

The “feminist” analysis of BDSM is the main reason I became a radical feminist.  Women talking about how they love being spanked, etc, etc, but getting all defensive (i’m still FEMINIST GOSH SEX-POLICING) just got old.  Especially because I said the same thing-without the feminist part-when I was with glenn.  This was high school, what are supposed to be the best years of my life.  With him, I *liked* kinky stuff.

After he first raped me, I stayed with him for two a half years.  I repressed what he did and continued to have “consensual sex” with him.   I’d suggest kinky stuff, he’d suggest kinky stuff, if I was a little hesitant I might say so.  But I always did in the end.   He bragged to his friends I liked it.  I orgasmed a lot-so I liked it, right?  He loved me.  I loved him.  If you asked me about our sex?  I enjoyed it.  Really did, yes I’m sure.  Yeah, I’m just naturally submissive and a nympho.  Nothing makes you feel more desired than being someone’s sextoy.

It’s always about the woman’s desire.  What if SHE consents, what if she ASKS to be spanked, to be bound, to be “raped” in a roleplay, to dress up like a little girl.  Fine, whatever.  I know women can like those things.  I did myself.  We may disagree why they do (I say brainwashing AKA socialization, they say natural/choice), but I know women can like them.

But their partner, the man-what about him?  Like with the “sex worker” debates, the men are made invisible by the “sex-positives.”  For a couple to have “sex” like this, he’s has to do his part.  And he gets turned on by hitting you, tying you up, “fake” raping you, and pretending you’re a little girl.  For a woman to “choose” to be tied up and whipped, someone has to do the whipping. For you to fulfill your desire to be hurt, someone has to like hurting you.   You like being helpless and feeling like he could do whatever he wants to you, giving up any control.  He likes you being helpless, feeling like he could do anything to you, raping you, and he gets off on having total control.

Do I blame submissives and masochists, whether they’re men or women?  No, so long as they don’t act like BDSM is the most progressive sex ever,  avoid the whole “CHOICECHOICE” bullshit and acknowledge that abused women say use the same defenses.

Do I blame dominants, masters, tops, and sadists?   Hell yes.  They get off on pain– specifically, women’s pain.  That’s misogyny.  They have the mentality of a rapist and abuser.  They want control and your submission.

He might say he only likes it because you “consent” to it and like it.  But you can’t know that.  Considering how often men rape, and especially how often it occurs in relationships– enjoying control over you, even if it’s just “pretend,” is a huge red flag.   Kids don’t play pretend to imagine something they wouldn’t actually enjoy, or be someone they don’t like.   They argue to be the main character or the character with the strongest powers.  Most would probably WANT to be a superhero or have magical powers and shit.  The same applies to dominant men and what they “pretend” in the bedroom: if they don’t already have control, they want it.

Even if what he is saying is true, why would he like that you enjoy those things?  Why would he like you to enjoy being hurt and degraded?  The short answer is to make you a slut and other you, but I’ll elaborate on that more later.

PS: Never get on the pill.  Coming OFF of it is a trainwreck.  I had only a bit of nausea when I first started it, but now I’m having a shit ton of cramps, mood swings, boob soreness and bleeding like a hurricane.  Whatever the means.  Fuck.