Tag Archives: gender

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.

Advertisements

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.

Calling Out Feminist Men

I worry a bit that posting this makes me as creepy as Hugo, who seems to have an obsession with FCM’s posts while not actually understanding or replying to them at all.  (Have you noticed they never quote FCM radical feminists in general?  Makes it much easier to misrepresent what they say.)  But I don’t think it does, because there are a few major differences.  Firstly, the major reason this needs to be pointed out is to say with big neon letters that even “feminist” men can be creepy rapist motherfuckers. It also is a sort of case study on what FCM said in On Crediblity.  And as to why I’m motivated to this, Hugo is essentially going back on his word, where he invited to reopen comments on his posts describing the affairs, since I might have a “new take.”  Only if he believed my analysis of his past to be irrelevant to the topic does my ban really make sense, since calling his “affairs” outright rape is obviously a “new take” on them.  But since he didn’t mention me being off topic, I can only guess I analyzed his past a little more than he would have liked.

Alternatively, I was banned because I was “arrogant and entitled,” and “threw the word rape around” for nearly any sexual act, by calling Hugo a rapist for fucking his students.  It’s interesting to me they say these things, because the rationalizations of these commenters are the same ones I have seen from rapists and rape apologists I’ve encountered (or been raped by).  The general lack of seriousness with which they treated my judgment of his actions also says quite a bit about “feminist” men’s definitions of “consent” and how they react to women accusing men of misogyny, in this case manifesting as rape and an abuse of power.

One of the most frightening responses was from someone who said I had a “right to my opinion” that he had raped his students, but that I shouldn’t apply labels based on it.  Which I assume translates to: You can think he raped those women, but don’t call him a rapist because that’s mean and irrelevant.  Thanks! But more so than this guy’s concern for Hugo’s fee-fees, the analogies that followed this are incredibly frightening, considering the subject matter.

Ms Citrus – No one that I’m aware of is saying “that liberal men don’t consider a professor sleeping with student rape, or even predatory”.

If I had several accidents caused by drunken driving where I injured or killed others – I would clearly be a “murderer” or similar to some. To hear that years later would be different from shortly after the last “accident”. (None of this happened.)

There is plenty – if you want to criticize Hugo – related to his past and certainly material he writes of now. There is no need to make things related to Hugo or others as a: “you’re with me or against me” mindset as you are (unfortunately) doing. Thanks!

The key words in his analogy are “accidents.”  This commenter is, yes, comparing accidents that happen while driving drunk to a teacher fucking his students.  As though you can accidentally fuck someone.  The fact of the matter is these “affairs” of his takes intent.  He could have, I am sure, found willing sexual partners in his own age range.  But he didn’t.  He could have even dated people half his age who weren’t his students, or simply waiting until whoever he was interested in graduated.  But he didn’t.

He deliberately chose to fuck his students-whether that’s because he knew they weren’t in any position to say no, or simply because he had some sort of fetish for student/teacher relationships isn’t clear.  What is clear, however, is that his affairs with students were no “accident” and not due to any spiritual or emotional connection to the women involved, since he fucked multiple students in the same time period.  Despite what “feminist” men like Hugo, my ex, and the commentators who support him might imply, you cannot accidentally fuck someone, nor can you accidentally rape them.   Rape is never a “mistake” on the part of the rapist, to use the same term of another commenter.  Nor is fucking students a mistake that everyone could make.  It occurs when a man wants to fuck a woman, regardless of what she wants.

I don’t think it any different than how people have labeled Andrea Dworkin and may others. Dworkin was obviously Much More Profound an influence on most of us than Hugo is and didn’t have a Past of which she was Ashamed due to things she’d done – as Hugo does, but she wasn’t “perfect” in her visions. Criticizing specifics of her ideas is fine, but labeling her as oft times is done shows More of the limitations of the Labeler than anything about her.

Because labeling someone as a bitch or a “misandrist,” based on their theory, is just as bad as calling someone a rapist based on their actual history of  fucking their students.  Most of the time I’m convinced this is deliberate stupidity, because I don’t see how else anyone could say things like this and not realize how moronic they sound.

I was able to recover one of the comments I believe I was banned for, which *just so happened* to contest his account of those “affairs,” although I added some points and stuff so it fits into the post better:

Of course I’m going to be hostile-Hugo is a fucking rapist as far as I’m concerned, and “feminists” are listening to him.  You cant sleep with someone you have that kind of power over “consensually,” and even if HE says it was consensual, that doesn’t mean it was.  We’re hearing the perpetrator’s perspective, and the sad thing is people are taking it seriously.  I’m not going to take the word of a man who fucks women half his age while in an authority position over them on whether or not they were willing.

He has every reason to lie on whether or not they “consented;” and I’m willing to bet he is.  Since he never says who initiated these relationships, yet lists every other excuse for them imaginable (she wanted it, she was older than me, blahdeblah), I’m lead to conclude that HE initiated some of these relationships, which qualifies as sexual harassment and makes any prospect of “consent” on their part far more dubious, even if you think it’s possible for them to consent.  And even if you don’t think he raped them, he’s still a fucking creep who sexually harassed (past tense?) his students.  And he now teaches classes made up of predominantly women-women in the same age group and social position as others that he habitually fucked.   It’s akin to putting a “transformed” pedophile in charge of an elementary school class so he can redeem himself.  Like hell anyone would support that.

His “past,” as he euphemistically calls it, isn’t exactly the only shady thing either.  He is currently on his fourth wife-which to anyone with a lick of sense suggests that something about the way he treats and interacts with women is off.  It’s just plain pathetic that people are taking what he says about women and other feminists to be true.

My nigel actually pointed out when I was discussing this with him, that I was “warned” in a way by Hugo, that I needed to shut up about his past: he’s made amends publicly, and “grieve[s] the harm [he] did” with” patient and persistence and the complete absence of shame.”  Which roughly translates to: I apologized, you bitch, what else do you want?

Heard the same before from my rapist and his supporters.  When I confronted them and they had the actual sense to realize they were wrong and apologize, if I didn’t immediately drop the issue, I was reminded it was years ago, that I needed to just let it go, and that they apologized.  When I pointed out that them wanting me to just shut up about it meant their apology is just a way to dismiss their crimes, they blocked me or just walked off, depending on if I confronted them on chat or IRL.   So no wonder Hugo banned me!  He made amends and grieves the harm he did, and I was still not letting it go.  What could he do but ban me, right?  It causes him so much pain to be reminded of the fact that he raped his students, and he’s made amends so I should just stop talking about it.  And men should never have to deal with pain or guilt, even if it comes as a direct consequence of their actions.  The fact is, if he lacked shame about his crimes, he would let me post my interpretations of his “affairs” and “acting out years,” as he euphemistically calls them.

This whole episode, their attitude towards going without PIV, and the manipulative mansplaining I feel the commenters did, left me doubting myself.  So I did what I usually do when I feel insecure, and started picking arguments apart and analyzing things.  Eventually I was left with a  pretty big piece of writing, and I figure I might as well make it a post since most of it was already written.

(I have to say though, the comment about me having to be a creationist because I think the idea that the desire for intercourse is socially constructed was hilariously sad, at least.)

Women = Holes

After FCMs post on neovaginas, I feel more horrified than ever at what men think of women. Even more so after doing some research of my own, in an attempt to find a least one medical diagram that shows the vagina as closed. (I couldn’t find one.) But the more I think about it, the more it all fits together.  There are so many things that reflect the belief of vaginas as holes, and I’m slowly putting the pieces together from everything.

Tampons

I always thought I was a freak, because I couldn’t get a tampon in or even a finger. I imagined that normal vaginas (not mine) were essentially gaping holes in women’s crotches. That women just walked around with them open, 24/7.  Well, I looked up some advice given to women who have trouble using tampons-and the girls were just told to keep trying, squat, or that they just aren’t used to it yet.

Now, I think the difference might not be my vagina, but my determination to use a tampon-which is nil.  My theory is that the reason most women use tampons, instead of pads, is because menstrual blood is considered yucky (this way you don’t have to see it till you pull the tampon out), because you can still wear thongs, and it hides a bodily function.  It’s possible my vagina is just more anti-penetration than other women’s (or it’s genetic, my mom can’t use them either), but considering I’ve never had difficulty with nigel fingering me when I’m aroused, if I wanted to, I kinda doubt this is the case.  Tampons desensitize and train women for dealing with the discomfort and pain that comes with pleasing of men and being feminine.

Fingering, Men’s Ideas about Women’s Sexuality & Porn

Speaking of penetration-how many women really masturbate using dick-like objects?  I’ve always just touched my clit, and nothing more.  But of course, dudes fantasize about women fucking themselves with their fingers or whatever objects are around.  My ex-boyfriend always used to say, “It’s okay to enjoy sex, clits are the only organ humans have that are purely for sexual pleasure.”  But did he ever touch it, for anything other than “foreplay”?  Fuck no he didn’t.  Touching my clit was just leading up to the “main act”-since we weren’t having intercourse, this was fingering me.   And when I say fingering me, I don’t mean he touched my clit too during it or used his whole hand against my vulva.  Nope, just the ol’ in-and-out of fucking.  Needless to say I never had an orgasm with him (although that would be news to him).

His terrible bedroom skills aside, this situation still seemed so weird to me.  He clearly knows that the clitoris exists, and he touched it, so he clearly knew where it was and that it feels good for me to be touched there.  And yet, he never touched it except in the foreplay before fingering me.  Why?  Because women have holes that need to be stretched and filled by dicks. The vagina is the central part of our sexuality, as men see it. (And because we’re taught the male perspective, women see it this way too.)  I’ve never even heard of a man touching a woman’s bits without fingering her.  If a man doesn’t have intercourse with a girl, or she doesn’t want to go that far and the dude is a Nice Guy™, it’s blowjobs and fingering.  I mean, even gay men get that just being fucked is boring-that’s why they have reach arounds.

Can you tell which are medical models and which are sex toys?*

But of course, men’s asses are closed.  Gay men who bottom are not asked to have their asses pryed open annually to ensure their health.  Men are also not paid $450 in exchange for medical students getting to use their asses to practice prostate exams on.**  I couldn’t even find a model dummy that helped students learn how to perform prostate exams or STD tests for men.  (Someone should alert the MRAs of this reverse sexism.)

Women’s asses, on the other hand, are now just as open as  our vaginas.  In porn, men will repeatedly pull out of vaginas and asses, and the camera will focus on the “gaping” of it.  How it remains open because of being fucked repeatedly.  The man will enter again, fuck, and then pull out.  Or just keep entering and exiting.  And just leave their dick outside of the “hole.”  I’ve seen quite a bit of both gay and straight porn, and I rarely saw this in the gay stuff, and if it was there, it was in the more BDSM kinda shit.  For facials, women often leave their mouths open as well.  Our vaginas aren’t the only holes we have any more—now we have three.

Another common thing in porn is inserting various objects into a woman-not just dildos, but coke bottles, pool cues, and entire fists.   For my FTM ex, before he got a strap on dick, the goal of sex was basically to see how many fingers he could fit inside of my vagina or my ass.  Now, I’m horrified that my body could adapt to that-because even just two fingers feel uncomfortable, and anything back there is a hell no.  I don’t understand how I possibly survived his fist being in there.

Our Personalities & Socialization

The entire construction of woman, as men have created it, is based on vaginas being holes, and women being only vaginas.  This is sorta like what Dworkin addressed in “The Root Cause,” but if I think the idea of male as the positive and female as the negative needs to be connected to how men see sex.  Women are gaps, spaces, and some sort of abyss.  Our entire personalities and lives are constructed around this.  Without PIV, or without a man, women often feel empty and pointless.  And we’re told our lives are pointless without men, thanks to fairytales, porn, and the comments of others about lesbians, and celibate or single women.  Our vaginas and lives must be filled by man.  Or at least other people, and never ourselves.

I wish I could say more about this, but I’m having a lot of trouble finding the words to express what I mean by this.  Hopefully I’ve gotten it across even though I’m lacking on detail and clarity.

Rape

Everytime I think of how men see vaginas, and by extention women, I get an image in my head I just can’t get rid of.  A woman, just sleeping. And a dude thinking that her vagina is gaping. So he does what all dudes do to any hole, gay or straight-he sticks his dick in it. And it’s not rape to him or anyone else, because she has a hole.  And vaginas are always open and ready for sex.  Women are always open.  We’re always “consenting” because our sex organs are always open for fucking.  Men have to get hard.  But women don’t necessarily have to get wet for intercourse to happen.  Men invented lubrication for this purpose.

I’m sure my experience is a common one.  A man is attempting to fuck, or finger, a woman.  When it doesn’t go in easily, what do men do?  They keep pushing, or they tell the woman to just relax.  Or, if they have a condition such as vaginismus, the woman receives “treatment,” where she dilates her vagina using dildos until it can accommodate a penis.  Or the most recent method-botox.  If you’re born without a vagina, or with one too short for a dick, doctors can make one.  (More fucked up: In the FAQ, pretty much every question is asked about creating one with surgery, except can I orgasm with this vagina?)  Or if you’re having a kid, you can have a c-section for “vaginal preservation,” so your hole isn’t too big for him to fuck anymore.

Well lookie here, that cervix thing was pretty easy to find, wasn't it? Fyi, this is a medical model. That students use to learn how to give gyno exams. Yikes.

*I made it black and white to emphasize that they have the same fucking structure.  The only real difference is the porn tan and color detail given to the sex toy one.  Color is available here.

**Credit for the inspiration for this sentence goes to the quote in the article about modeling for medical students, from sex educator/female-empowerer: “I  provide a vagina and breasts to medical students learning to do their first pelvic and breast exams.”  She doesn’t provide feedback so doctors can know when something hurts a patient or how to make them comfortable—she just provides a vagina and breasts.

Also I hate the Vagina Monologues, seriously.  Because really, the idea that vaginas are the essence of women is so very cliché.

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.

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.

Damned Generation

I seriously feel like my generation is going to be worse-meaning more misogynist- than the last.  I know, I know, everyone says that, but there are somethings I’ve considered that kinda make it different: 1) the people saying that are usually not in that generation 2) easily available internet pornography is what my age group grew up with.  No other age group has had that.  It fucked me up, it fucked my ex-friends up, and it’s fucking up everyone.  I saw this happen myself when I was in middleschool and highschool, but I don’t remember much of it thanks to being raped all throughout those years. (Probably because of all the porn my classmates watched.)

Here’s the back story: Today, I overheard one of the women in my class tell her friend about how there’s a “secret” porn-watching club on campus.  They buy chicken express and then go watch it at someone’s house.  The woman who hadn’t known about it was really confused, asking why they did that and how that wasn’t just a gay orgy.  The woman who started the conversation said she had no idea, that she guesses it’s just like any other movie club.

Now, the chat (FYI Mr. Prude is my lover).  Bolded some of the scary and most important shit.

[9:49:09 PM] mscitrus: like most of the girls i’ve seen who’ve talked about that stuff, iv’e heard them talk about it to other women..
[9:49:33 PM] mscitrus: and they just seem so confused but nervously accepting
[9:49:37 PM] mscitrus: i duuno if you’ve seen that
[9:50:03 PM] mrprude: honestly no
[9:50:09 PM] mrprude: most of the girls in my grade LOVE porn
[9:50:15 PM] mscitrus: right
[9:50:17 PM] mrprude: talk about the films they saw
[9:50:20 PM] mscitrus: ugh
[9:50:22 PM] mrprude: like they’ll be like
[9:50:33 PM] mrprude: i saw gangbang 14 this weekend!!!!!111
[9:50:37 PM] mscitrus: o_o;
[9:50:39 PM] mscitrus: oh god
[9:50:40 PM] mrprude: i know
[9:50:48 PM] mscitrus: it really is addicting
[9:50:56 PM] mrprude: one girl said she likes anal films
[9:51:10 PM] mrprude: cuz she likes to see the women in realistic looking pain

[9:51:11 PM] mscitrus: gangbang means you’re more “wanted” i think
[9:51:13 PM] mscitrus: wtf
[9:51:14 PM] mrprude: LOOKING
[9:51:21 PM] mscitrus: “CUZ ITS ACTING M I RITE”
[9:51:26 PM] mrprude: right
[9:51:33 PM] mrprude: she said the pain is the best part
[9:51:37 PM] mscitrus: oh my god
[9:51:40 PM] mrprude: guys were like YEAH
[9:51:41 PM] mscitrus: that’s so..sad
[9:51:43 PM] mscitrus: fuck
[9:52:05 PM] mrprude: and she said it helps her get out her aggression
[9:52:10 PM] mrprude: like a vent
[9:52:15 PM] mrprude: whats the on the screen i mean
[9:52:21 PM] mscitrus: actually raises aggressions in labratory settings..
[9:52:24 PM] mrprude: men were wayyyy worse
[9:52:28 PM] mscitrus: even if it’s “nonviolent”
[9:52:30 PM] mscitrus: like how?
[9:52:36 PM] mrprude: they were like i wish it was me in the film
[9:52:41 PM] mscitrus: oh my god
[9:52:48 PM] mrprude: “fucking all those dirty sluts
[9:52:52 PM] mscitrus: ugh
[9:52:57 PM] mrprude: Mr. Belmir had to tell them to stfu
[9:53:03 PM] mrprude: or they get suspended
[9:53:05 PM] mscitrus: and sexpox think that porn will liberate them
[9:53:12 PM] mscitrus: BELMIR FUCK YEAH (dance)

It’s fucking sad, but not new to me, since the most of the girls I knew used porn.  I used to be that girl.

While most radfems know about have “sex-positive” feminism shoved in their face, I don’t think many get to know what easily accessible pornography is doing to the average girl.  “Feminists” will say it’s all well and good, but they are a very small demographic compared to girls and women as a whole.  (And are disproportionately white and middle/upper class.)

From what many radfems have said about when they were girls, it seems like everything has changed so much.  I feel like I should post things like this because most radical feminists are far older than me-the youngest one I can think of is in her thirties, I think.  I’ll probably post a variety things I see or hear from my peers, to try and give radfems some idea of what’s going down among us whippersnappers.

Also: theme changed because, as much as love my kitty, white is fucking boring.  Will probably undergo more edits during the beginning of summer.