Posts Tagged ‘sex negative feminism’

Well, anyways–I needed a break away from ‘white people‘, and all of that violence, and political bad touch that they bring with them. It always precedes one kind or another of  their wars.

And the white women!! OMG!!  They scare even me with their desire to lift up women’s burqa’s, and peek under the skirts of culture.

No man–no PUA or MRA– could ever dream up a plan to get between women’s legs that is any greater, or more diabolical, capitalistic, or more invasive than the white women and ‘feminists’ have done to get a peek at Somali‘s and their clitorises.

So I went out and got hammered last night, bummed out. But really, my thoughts  started a few weeks before, when  I was talking to Skinny, in Somali. And we were talking about Moqtar, Aayan Hirsi Ali’s cousin.

The Somali’s I know like to gossip. No big deal, we do it every time we meet, and this time it was just me and Skinny talking about Aayan. But I was trying to clear a few things up in my own mind about who she is, and I couldn’t remember her.

Then Skinny,* the film maker  says  ” You remember when we were sitting at[…] that coffee shop? It was me and you and Moqtar?”

“Nope,” I said. “I know too many Somali’s–and they’re all Moqtars too.”

“No, no, you would know this guy, He’s  handsome guy. You know,”  he says, pointing to his HP computer screen.

“This one.”

Oh! The picture is from Vancouver, and he sits with a lovely long nosed girl. Then I remembered him. Moqtar is very distinctive, and very handsome from what I remembered–and in my way of remembering, or categorizing Somali’s, he looks more Isaaq than Darod.

Well, I say to Skinny,”Lots of atheists are talking about Aayan these days,” and in my mind I couldn’t remember why she was filed in my mental Rolodex at all. I can only remember something about her “passport, a scandal, or the Dutch Parliament.”

An atheist took me to task on that awhile ago [ @19 and onwards] , and virtually called me a cunt over my response. But I am a forgiving sort, well aware of the cunty sensitivities of some cunty atheists–especially the white, middle class female ones who have so little to grasp at apparently, that they can only hate you with their vaginas, despite their padded bank accounts, new cars, and Macy’s points cards…

I remember now where my thoughts about Aayan came from to begin with–from Moqtar and Skinny, the last time I saw them.  We were talking about a film.

And I remember how tall she  seemed last time I saw her; but many Somali women are tall, once you learn how to talk to them.

“You remember,” Skinny says. “She made the film.”

Well anyways, we sure did share a laugh about how white women rapeflate everything; how they try to get close to “other women”–and how the cultural practice of FGM is conflated with ‘religious practice’ by the white folks from the ‘west’–even if their rapeflation often misses the ‘nuance’ of how corrupted culture’s that themselves are slaves to religion, view THEMSELVES.

And we laughed about how rapeflation causes many Somali’s to distrust the latest form of western cultural imperialism–feminism.

After all, Africans are used to cultural Imperialism defining them, and defining their bodies as property–no one has anyything on Somali’s in the discussion of slavery, except maybe, West Africans.

Africans are used to having scientists quantify them in some bizarre Linnaean system of social order: measurements of their character, viewed through binoculars and microscopes, and reduced to the status of bugs.

No big deal. Just me, and Skinny, and Moqtar, chatting about Aayan, and western cluelessness.It became nearly a decade long conversation that shined a lens into a culture that desperately seeks affirmation, yet struggles with the mechanics of self governance amidst a climate of western projection.

And all of the recent scrutiny of their bodies, their practices, and their ‘selling points’ is coming from females–western females, with western concepts of power, not least of which is sexual in nature…

And we laughed about the Tanzanian word firconi…[to be continued…]

Nicking Clits, and Slippery Slopes: Aayan Speaks about inept western Medicine, and its genital references.

BTW: Fuck the American Association of Pediatrics–they are the folks who allowed America to whack little boys penises in half with circumcision for the last 100 plus years ( and counting)

* He has a Somali name, which has been changed into the English, to confuse the informants and the spooks whose dialect begins and ends in Mogadishu.

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

I love language, don’t you? And I hate very few things –but one of them is the word-police, who are all hypocrites, bullies, and control freaks.

Another is cultural imperialism–in this case, white American women trying to impose their politicized view of words on non-first world peoples. To white, middle class American women, the word cunt is a bad werd–regardless of the hundreds of positive meanings it has in other cultures.

But my first fun, un-fettered, sexxy thoughts came from the dictionary! And there are people in the world who would burn them, if they had half the chance.

The classic stereotype is always some prude, begging some scunt:  “talk dirty to me,” as she moans like a cow with a prolapse. We all know her, don’t we?

Then I guess she’s not the prude we thought she was…;-)

Then, after they get their clothes back on and leave the key at the front desk, that/those prudes march all about the world regulating bad ideas, and bad words, which leads to the further regulation of speech, ideas, and essentially, communication itself–which is the root of all commerce. Hypocrites.

Then, once they get you trained to see it and say it their way–  onward to imperialist wars for capital!–but there is no reason involved in emotional responses to words, only control impulses and repressed sex drives that cause conflict, while seeking to create herd behavior around buzzwords-simple as that.

But real Women Love Cunts, and so do I.  No, wait–that came out wrong. Maybe I should say–we tolerate them? Or: sometimes people who have vaginas act like real cunts.

No…that’s not it either. Hmmm…it’s hard explaining this conundrum.

Well, Sex Negative women are  women who act like cunts anyways…er, wait a minute…Cunts are vaginas, and sometimes, they are lots of other fun useful, productive things,  too. Sex positive men and women love vaginas, even when they are called cunts, or act like cunts.

Total vaginal prolapse, post-partum, cow, side...

HUGE RED FLAG: The whole dialogue about the word cunt has prolapsed. Any woman who hates the word cunt, is a big red flag for me, and I have known a few of them first hand...

Did that clear it up?

Well, you can do the thinking your self, if you would like to, but  language is the original aphrodisiac, and any woman who despises the word CUNT is a huge red flag.

The word is so full of history that it would be a shame to lose it–and the women that can’t pull their heads out of their emergency of dialectic prolapse long enough to realize that, have no clue what it really means.(See link below to Mathew Hunt)

Dialectically, word policing  is a tool of the middle and upper classes to control and manipulate the lower classes. It is the klitorisvorhaut that covers over sensitive dialogue, and it has even less of a purpose.

If you would like to see this prolapse in action, and how this dynamic of gendered class control works, go here, here, or here , use the word in any forum, and then, go here for the only uncensored opposition conversation on the internet.

Imagine that! Women and sex-negative ( they aren’t getting any) men all rallying around the word cunt, and using it to reinforce class boundaries and gender roles! They are actually trying to sound sex positive, but they really sound ‘sex negotiable,” as in “if you use words we tell you to use, you might get some vagina in our crowd.”

So–cunt isn’t the password to the magical kyriarchal pyramid? How about the holy giver of love fluid? No? Umm…the dark tunnel of deeper and deeper knowledge?  No? The  “pink padded room of sanity for the pre-negotiated benefit of the insane penis posse”? No…?

Got it! How about “twelve year old Coochie Snorcher?(1)”  Well, that one seems to make the ‘radical feminists‘ horny.

Why? Because that is what class is composed of–kyriarchical sliding doors of entrance, or denial of entrance, into the pyramid, depending on whether or not you use the right password!

The most humorous part of it is, that they say the word cunt “belongs to women.”

Try Telling that to Mike Hunt, or his brother Mathew…

But this is from Mathew Hunts compilation and etymology of the word Cunt.

The Etymology Of Cunt By: Mathew Hunt

The etymology of ‘cunt’ is actually considerably more complex than is generally supposed. The word’s etymology is highly contentious, as Alex Games explains: “Language scholars have been speculating for years about the etymological origins of the ‘c-word'” (2006). A consensus has not yet been reached, as Ruth Wajnryb admits in A Cunt Of A Word (a chapter in Language Most Foul): “Etymologists are unlikely to come to an agreement about the origins of CUNT any time soon” (2004), and Mark Morton is even more despairing: “no-one really knows the ulterior origin of cunt” (2003).

Also, from the same etymology, which I highly recommend, are these variants on uses of the word. Enjoy some cunt today!Well, no matter which cunt YOU choose to play with today, play with them nicely, have fun, and stay away from all those sex negative cunts!

1) In the original published version of Eve Enslers Vagina Monologues, she fantasized about having sex with a 12 year old girl. She later changed that girl character to a fourteen and then a 16 year old girl.

From Wikipedia’s sex positive feminism page ( the anti-academic citation source):

“Statutory Rape Laws

Also there is debate among sex-positive feminists about whether statutory rape laws are a form of misogyny.[6] As illustrated by the controversy over “The Little Coochie Snorcher that Could” from the Vagina Monologues, some sex-positive feminists do not consider all consensual activity between young adolescents and older people as inherently harmful, and there has been debate between feminists about whether statutory rape laws are misogynist.[7]”

  • Army Service Cunts’ (‘Army Service Corps‘)
  • ‘bargain cunt’ (‘person who claims to offer a discounted price via the grey market, though is unable to do so’, a pun on Bargain Hunt)
  • ‘beat the cunt out of’ (‘beat up’, a variation of ‘beat the crap out of’)
  • ‘big cunt’ (‘large vagina’)
  • ‘bucket cunt’ (‘large vagina’)
  • ‘bunt’ (‘fat female stomach’; a combination of ‘belly’ and ‘cunt’)
  • ‘bushel cunt’/’bushel-cunted’ (‘large vagina’)
  • ‘C’ (‘cunt’)
  • ‘c and c’ (‘clips and cunts’ television programmes)
  • ‘CGI’ (‘Cunt Gap Index’, ‘measurement-scale for vagina sizes’)
  • ‘CHODA’ (‘Cunt Hair On Da Ass’)
  • ‘coming the old cunt’ (‘being unkind’)
  • ‘cooint’ (‘vagina’, Yorkshire variant of ‘cunt’)
  • ‘cow-cunt’ (‘large vagina’)
  • ‘cunker’ (‘cunt’)
  • ‘cunch’ (‘cunnilingus’, ‘combination of ‘cunt’ and lunch’)
  • ‘cunnifungus’ (‘vaginal secretion‘)
  • ‘cunnimingus’ (combination of ‘cunnilingus’ and ‘minger’)
  • ‘cunnylicious’ (combination of ‘cunnilingus’ and ‘delicious’)
  • ‘cunshine’ (‘pornographic images printed on highly glossy paper’)
  • ‘cunt!’ (exclamation)
  • ‘Cunt Act’ (‘Deserted Wives and Children’s Act’)
  • ‘cunt and a half’ (‘very idiotic’)
  • “cunt-arse” (‘idiot’; Verne Graham, 2005)
  • ‘cuntbag’ (‘idiot’)
  • ‘cunt-ball’ (‘idiot’)
  • ‘cunt-beten’ (‘impotent’)
  • ‘cuntbitten’/’cunt-bitten’ (‘syphilitic’)
  • ‘cunt book’/’cunt-book’ (‘in the bad books’/’pornography’)
  • ‘cunt bread’ (‘vaginal yeast infection’)
  • ‘cunt-breath’ (‘halitosis’)
  • ‘cunt bubble’ (‘vaginal fart‘)
  • ‘cunt buster’/’cunt-buster’ (‘erection’)
  • ‘cunt butter’ (‘vaginal fluid’)
  • ‘cunt candle’ (‘outstanding idiot’)
  • ‘cunt cap’ (‘military hat’)
  • ‘cunt carpet’ (‘pubic hair’)
  • ‘cunt-chaser’ (‘womaniser’)
  • ‘cunt-cleaner’ (‘gynaecologist’)
  • ‘cunt-collar’ (‘pussy whip’)
  • ‘cunt cock’ (‘clitoris’)
  • ‘cunt cork’ (‘tampon’)
  • ‘cunt-cuddling’ (‘masturbation’)
  • ‘cunt-curtain’ (‘pubic hair’)
  • ‘cunt dentist’ (‘gynaecologist’)
  • ‘cunt down’ (‘pubic hair’)
  • ‘Cunt Dracula’ (‘idiot’)
  • ‘cunted’ (‘drunk’/’vaginal penetration’)
  • ‘cunteen’ (‘unpleasant quantity between thirteen and nineteen’)
  • ‘cunt-eyed’ (‘narrow-eyed’)
  • ‘cunt face’/’cuntface’/’cunt-faced’ (‘ugly’)
  • ‘cunt fart’ (‘vaginal fart’)
  • ‘cunt flump’ (‘tampon’, from The Flumps)
  • ‘cunt for hire’ (‘prostitute’)
  • ‘cunt-fringe’ (‘pubic hair’)
  • “cunt-fucked” (‘vaginal sex’; Jim Goad, 1994[d])
  • ‘cunt grunt’ (‘vaginal fart’)
  • ‘cunt guff’ (‘vaginal fart’)
  • ‘cunt-hair’/’cunt hair’/’cunt’s hair’ (‘tiny amount’)
  • ‘cunt-hat’ (‘felt hat’)
  • ‘cunt-hatred’ (‘misogyny’)
  • ‘cunthead’ (‘idiot’)
  • “cunthood” (‘femininity’; Jim Goad, 1994[c])
  • ‘cunt hook’ (‘car used to attract women’)
  • ‘cunt-hook’ (‘penis’)
  • ‘cunt-hooks’ (‘fingers’, a pun on ‘cant-hook’/’person’)
  • ‘cunt-hound’ (‘sex-obsessed’)
  • ‘cunt-house’ (‘venue populated largely by women’)
  • ‘cunt hunt’ (‘on the pull’)
  • ‘cunt-hunter’ (‘womaniser’)
  • “c[u]ntie” (‘little cunt’; Robert Burns, 1786)
  • ‘cuntikin’ (‘little cunt’)
  • ‘cuntinental’ (‘patron of an outdoor British cafe’)
  • “cuntiness” (‘the state of being a cunt’; Britain’s Biggest C**ts, 2008)
  • ‘cunting’ (intensifier, a variant of ‘fucking’/’knickers’, a pun on ‘bunting’)
  • ‘cuntingency plan’ (‘alternative source of sexual gratification’, a pun on ‘contingency plan’)
  • ‘cuntino filet with white sauce’ (‘cunnilingus’)
  • ‘cuntion’ (‘gumption’)
  • ‘cuntish’ (‘stupid’)
  • ‘cuntispiece’ (‘frontispiece of a pornographic book’)
  • “cunt-ist” (‘heterosexual man’; Jeffrey Merrick and Bryant T Ragan, 1996)
  • ‘cunt-itch’ (‘sexually aroused’)
  • ‘cuntitude’ (‘bad attitude’)
  • “cunt-jugal” (a pun on ‘conjugal’; Nick Gomez, 1997)
  • ‘cunt juice’ (‘vaginal fluid’)
  • ‘cuntkin’ (‘little cunt’)
  • ‘cunker’ (‘vagina’, euphemism for ‘cunt’)
  • ‘cunt-lap’/’cuntlap’ (‘cunnilingus’/’idiot’)
  • ‘cunt-lapper’ (‘cunnilinguist’)
  • ‘cunt-lapping’ (‘cunnilingus’/’disgusting’)
  • ‘cuntlashed’ (‘very drunk’)
  • ‘cunt-leg’ (‘penis’)
  • ‘cuntlery’ (‘utensil used to dilate the vagina’)
  • ‘cuntless’ (‘without a cunt’)
  • ‘cuntlet’ (‘little cunt’, a pun on ‘cutlet’)
  • ‘cunt-lick’/’give cunt licks’ (‘cunnilingus’)
  • ‘cunt-licker’ (‘cunnilinguist’/’idiot’)
  • ‘cunt-licking’ (‘cunnilingus’/’disgusting’)
  • ‘cuntlifters’ (‘old ladies’ knickers’)
  • ‘cunt light’/’C-light’ (‘pornographic film lighting’)
  • ‘cunt-like’ (‘vaginal’)
  • ‘cunt like a Grimsby welly’ (‘large vagina’)
  • ‘cuntlines’ (‘seams between the strands of a rope’; variant of ‘contlines’)
  • ‘cunt-lips’ (‘labia’)
  • ‘cunt man’/’C man’ (‘sexual athlete’)
  • ‘cuntmeat’ (‘women’)
  • “C[u]nt-mending” (‘gynaecology’; John Wilmot, 1680)
  • ‘cunt mumps’ (‘woman’s excuse to deflect chat-up lines’)
  • ‘cunt-munchers’ (‘cunnilinguists’)
  • “cunt-mutilation” (‘vaginal mutilation’; Jim Goad, 1994[e])
  • ‘cuntock’ (‘idiot’; abbreviated to ‘ock’)
  • ‘cuntocks’ (‘labia’; abbreviated to ‘ocks’)
  • ‘cunt of all cunts’ (‘incredibly stupid person’)
  • “cunt-palaces” (‘attractive vaginas’; Raymond Stephanson, 2004)
  • ‘cunt-pensioner’ (‘pimp’; abbreviated to ‘cp’)
  • ‘cunt pie’ (‘vagina’)
  • ‘cunt plugger’/’cunt-plugger’ (penis’)
  • ‘cunt plugging’/’cunt-plugging’ (‘sexual intercouse’)
  • ‘cunt positive’ (‘liberal feminist’)
  • “cunt-pounding” (‘sexual intercourse’; Media News, 2005)
  • ‘cunt-power’ (‘female energy’)
  • ‘cuntprick’ (‘idiot’)
  • ‘cunt-rag’ (‘sanitary towel’)
  • ‘cunt-rammer’ (‘penis’, an extension of ‘rammer’)
  • ‘cunt-rats’ (‘tampons’)
  • ‘cuntrified’ (‘public houses converted into wine bars’)
  • ‘cunt ruffler’ (‘provoker of women’)
  • ‘cunt rug’ (‘pubic hair’)
  • ‘cuntryside’ (‘large vagina’)
  • ‘cunt’s blood’ (‘idiot’)
  • ‘cunt-simple’ (‘sex-obsessed’)
  • ‘cuntsman’ (‘womaniser’)
  • ‘cunt smoke’ (‘no problem’)
  • ‘cunt scratchers’ (‘hands’)
  • ‘cunt-screen’ (‘pubic hair’)
  • ‘cunt-shop’ (‘knocking shop’)
  • ‘Cunts In Velvet’ (‘City Imperial Volunteers’)
  • ‘cuntsmith’ (‘gynaecologist’)
  • ‘cunt splice’ (‘partially spliced rope’; variant of ‘cont splice’/’cut splice’)
  • ‘cunt-stabber’ (‘penis’)
  • ‘cunt-stand’ (‘sexually aroused’)
  • ‘cunt-starver’ (‘errant ex-husband’)
  • ‘cunt-sticker’ (‘penis’)
  • ‘cunt-stirrer’ (‘penis’)
  • ‘cunt-stopper’ (penis’)
  • ‘cunt-stretcher’/’cunt stretcher’ (‘penis’)
  • ‘cunt-struck’ (‘sex-obsessed’)
  • ‘cunt stubble’ (‘constable’)
  • ‘cuntsucker’/’cunt-sucker’ (‘cunnilinguist’)
  • ‘cunt-sucking’ (‘cunnilingus’)
  • ‘Cuntsville’ (‘hometown’)
  • ‘cunt swab’/’cunt-swab’ (‘knickers’)
  • ‘cunt-teaser’ (‘a man who sexually excites a woman’)
  • ‘cunt-tickler’/’cunt tickler’ (‘moustache’)
  • ‘cunt torture’ (‘sadomasochistic sex’)
  • ‘cunt trumpet’ (‘cunnilingus’)
  • ‘cunt tug’ (‘pubic wig’)
  • ‘cunt-up’/’cunt up’ (‘mistake’, variation of ‘belly up’)
  • ‘cuntuppance’ (‘punishment for male infedility’, a pun on ‘come-uppance’)
  • ‘cunt wagon’/’cunt-wagon’ (‘passion wagon’)
  • ‘cuntwank’ (‘meaningless sex’)
  • ‘cunt warren’ (‘brothel’)
  • ‘cuntweep’ (‘vaginal fluid’)
  • ‘cunt-wig’ (‘pubic hair’)
  • ‘cunty’ (‘idiot’/’worthless’/’feminine’)
  • ‘cuntyballs’ (‘idiot’)
  • ‘cunty booby’ (‘confusion’)
  • ‘cunty chops’ (‘beard’)
  • ‘cunty Italian’ (‘Italian-American woman’)
  • ‘Cunty McCuntlips’ (‘idiot’)
  • ‘decunt’ (‘withdraw the penis from the vagina’)
  • ‘dirty cunt’ (‘unclean vagina’)
  • ‘doss cunt’ (‘stupid idiot’)
  • ‘double-cunted’ (‘large vagina’)
  • ‘dumb cunt’ (‘stupid idiot’)
  • “encunten” (‘to call someone a cunt’; Britain’s Biggest C**ts, 2008)
  • ‘eyes like sheep’s cunts’ (‘hangover’)
  • ‘fish-cunt’ (‘woman’)
  • ‘flatter than a cow’s cunt’ (‘horizontal’)
  • ‘full cuntal lobotomy’ (‘male sexual arousal’, a pun on ‘full-frontal lobotomy’)
  • ‘get some cunt’ (‘male sexual gratification’)
  • ‘go cunt up’ (‘go wrong’)
  • ‘gunt’ (‘fat female stomach’; a combination of ‘gut’ and ‘cunt’)
  • ‘ICBM’ (“Inter Cuntinental Ballistic Missile”: ‘penis’; Roger Mellie, 2005)
  • ‘KFC’ (‘Knob Filled Cunt’)
  • ‘kipper’s cunt’ (‘very smelly’)
  • ‘knock the cunt out of’ (‘knock out’)
  • ‘lazy cunt’ (‘menstruating vagina’)
  • ‘LC’ (“LOW CUNT” and “LAP CUNT”; James van Cleve, 19–)
  • ‘make a coffee house of a woman’s cunt’ (‘coitus interruptus’)
  • ‘make a lobster kettle out of someone’s cunt’ (‘coitus interruptus’)
  • ‘mouth like a cow’s cunt’ (‘talkative’)
  • ‘petit-cunt’ (‘petit-bourgeois idiot’)
  • ‘pox-ridden cunt’ (‘diseased vagina’)
  • ‘pushing the cunt envelope’ (‘taking idiocy to new limits’)
  • ‘RCH’ (‘Red Cunt Hair’, ‘hair’s breadth’)
  • ‘scabby cunt’ (‘diseased vagina’)
  • ‘scunt’ (‘idiot’)
  • ‘siffed-up cunt-hole’ (‘diseased vagina’)
  • ‘silly cunt!’ (‘stupid idiot’)
  • ‘sluice-cunted’ (‘large vagina’)
  • ‘smelly cunt’ (‘malodorous vagina’)
  • ‘stick it up your cunt’ (‘get stuffed’, a variation of ‘stick it up your arse’)
  • ‘stinky cunt’ (‘malodorous vagina’)
  • ‘sweet cunt’ (‘lovely vagina’)
  • ‘talking cunt’ (‘verbal seduction’)
  • ‘that’s not cunt it’s peehole’ (‘underage girl’)
  • “three cocks to the cunt” (‘with gusto’; Profanisaurus, 2007)
  • “Treecunts” (‘tree branches resembling female genitals’, in Just Sluts And Cunts photographs; Jan Willem Verkerk, 2007)
  • “Two C’s in a K” (‘two cunts in a kitchen’: two housewives in an advertisement; Stephen King, 1981 [also “2CK”; Sam Delaney, 2007])
  • ‘WRAC’ (‘Weekly Ration of Army Cunt’

Abbie Smith is a female scientist, and she is being bullied. By other women.

Do you like science?  Want to do a fun, easy social science experiment?  Your Yahoo search engine must be set to auto complete in order to do this.

1) Go to Yahoo. 2)  type in the words resources for women. 3) stop. 4) read through all the entries. Are there any resources for women?  Write down your answer.

Now, repeat that experiment, but at point number 4, type in the word men instead. Write down your answer. What did you find?*

Imagine if you were being bullied by a woman or a girl?  Statistics tell us that it is far more common than you think, and women are far more creative when they bully. Well, the same result is even more true for men trapped in domestic violence situations.

Women bully people all the time, and right now, Ms. Smith, a  blogger who writes about viruses, vaccines and HIV is under attack by some other bloggers who call themselves feminists.  Most of the bullies, trolls, and the worst of those calling for boycotts and censorship are women, but there are a few manginas, with vagendas  involved as well.

Stop by http://scienceblogs.com/ERV and lend your support to fight female bullies.

Dear-Abby

Abigail Van Buren say's NO to female bullies. Dear Abbie advises us to "run!"when we are stuck in the presence of violent women. But I ask: what if there is nowhere else to go?

WE know there is next to zero social support for men or boys who are being abused and bullied by women–so where do women go when they are abused by women?

Dear Abby, alone, is not enough to stop female bullying.

———————————–

Big Man Abused By Girlfriend Fights To Turn The Other Cheek

By Abigail Van Buren | Dear Abby – 10/19/2011

DEAR ABBY: I have been dating “Carmen” for a few years, but in the last year she has started becoming violent when we are having an argument. I think this is domestic abuse, but she claims it isn’t because I’m a man.

I’m not someone who can take abuse without repercussions. I’m like a mirror. If someone brings violence into my life, I reflect it back on them. So far, I have restrained my instincts — but eventually I know Carmen will cross the line and I’m going to snap. I have the potential to hurt her badly.

I have tried everything to make Carmen understand how I feel, but she continues to insist it doesn’t matter because I’m so much bigger and stronger than she is. When she hits me, it doesn’t hurt physically, but the anger I feel is indescribable. I’m at the end of my rope and considering breaking up with her before I hurt her.

I don’t want to end the relationship, but I think it’s the only way to make her see things from my perspective. Or should I call the cops the next time she hits me? — BRUISED AND ABUSED BOYFRIEND
——————————————————————————————————-

Men are abused by women all the time, and there is NOWHERE for them to go when things get out of control. Men are taught that women don’t do these things, and if they do, to shut up about it. Fortunately, there is Abigail Van Buren–but that’s about it--unless you are willing to defend yourself.


For more on Dear Abby’s response to the letter above, go here

*If your results are anything like mine, almost all of your results for men returned some form of phrase that inferred mental illness, or some other thing that infers mental issues?

Your results for women returned “women in leadership, business, entrepreneurs, web design, women and children, etc” and every other sort of opportunity. What does that tell you about language? What does that tell you about words, and Yahoo? And what does that tell you about resources for men?

And what does that tell you about “social engineering?” Repeat the experiment with Google. Have fun!


Related articles

Boadicea Haranguing the Britons

Boudica, wherefore art thou, Boudica?

[Warning: This post contains links to a story of old goats bullying young goats. Also, I am writing under high stress due to the fact that I am surrounded by a herd of 5 human females–one of them obscenely stuffing  her boob in a little persons mouth! Appalling, really…*]

Ophelia Benson writes books. That is how she makes her money.  And she is a misandrist, a sexist, and a snob who uses violent words, the repression of words, and tribal politics to stir up violence against other women.

Female’s bullying females is autocachthonous** within the chemistry of a war-like culture.

She advises her friends to target, and bully others. ( I won’t cite that because I am against encouraging violence, and hesitant to send any onlookers to her site, but I recommend learning self defense at every opportunity.)

Well, one of her recent targets is Abbie Smith, a virologist by trade, and a blogger who is one of the few on the internet who does not censor speech–which is really the censorship of ideas, and criticism of ideas. These types of people who are bullying Smith claim that they are battling trolls, but really, that is a hollow argument–they are actually pushing political agendas, and actively silencing dissent.

Abbie Smith has stood against the assaults of an entire internet community of misandrists, and bullies who demanded that she “get in line” and “know her place” in a social hierarchy of white middle class values.

And Ms. Smith didn’t do that. So they all piled on her–like a gang rape. I won’t link to their vile posts and blogs, but I will point to Ms. Smiths bold and unusual method of resistance to female bullying.

The thread I point to is worth the time to read, and often hilarious; and quite likely an actual evolutionary bang–the place of the abiogenesis of a new way of looking at old wormy, worn out issues that have proven themselves to be false narratives.

Many women are bullies the way that Ophelia Benson is a bully.  Part of my thesis is that this female bullying  largely goes unnoticed by the wider society–and this combines leads to other related behaviors, which are seldom studied in terms of female specific forms of social violence.

Feminist criminology is itself exclusively devoid of terminology to deal with female crimes and actual bad behavior, which  leads to larger, bigger forms of bullying–not least of which is what you see in action at the ERV blog, and those who call for censorship against it.

In fact, the lack of examination of women’s violence against women, and women’s violence and aggression against children, is the central part of my thesis. I believe it leads to war. I also believe that by not discussing, critiquing, or analyzing female violence outside of the feminist paradigm creates and perpetuates a dualistic male/ female paradigm wherein violence is more likely to occur.

I thought I had a friend, once,  an aged old silver back who was cannibalized in the feminist culture-wars and who was blind to the female half of imperialist actual wars,  who told me something about evolution which I have never forgotten–well, most of it anyways.

My former imaginary internet friend said: “There are four F’s that describe all of animal behavior; which leads to gene transfer; which leads to evolution. ”

1. Females. 2. Food 3. Fighting 4. Fucking.

I am sure there was another one or ten F’s in there but those are the basics of how it all happens. And it is also the basics of how violence begins in a herd as well. ( I mean, sure, there’s feeling, friskiness, finagling, flippant face farting and so forth that all figure into it , but they aren’t the big ones.)

No–don’t EVER presume that violence begins  merely over food–quite not. In fact, violence is a herd behavior  that is a constant, and bigger violence, which begins like a spark in a herd that is composed of females of varying ages foraging for food ( picture goats with their butts in the air, tails twitching, circled around a haystack), leads to male competition for the females–a sexual–and dialectical resource.

(male violence is a whole ‘nother issue, but most often in a herd it is one on one.)

But most conflict almost always begins when an older female initiates some form of aggression or violence against a younger female–or, in simple terms, old goats bully young goats.  And, in this case, Ophelia Benson, et al, is bullying Abbie Smith–not that the goat analogy fully fits humans mind you; we are more like chimps, or gorillas, or…ahem.

Well, you can read through it if you want to and figure out who is who. Go here for a primer.

Oh! if only women would be the actual warriors they claim to admire! Boudica, wherefore art thou? Why hast thou forsaken the white middle class feminist woman?

Ms. Benson goes on and on ( you know how they do!) about the oppression of women, and so forth. Despite the fact that she is clearly middle class, well off, and some kind of atheist or another, she still believes in demons–men are all  demons to her, and her friends.

Well, needless to say, she is also a white woman–which fits my thesis: no single group, social class, caste, race, or identity has ever made more money, or profited in one way or another from the violence of the world than white women.

If hearing that bothers you–run along! There is nothing we can say to each other. And, if in some way, you agree with that statement ( and of course there are exceptions indeed) continue to follow along if you want to. I promise I won’t hurt you 😉

But no single class race, or gender has ever avoided more prison time, been raped fewer times, or been sold less often, much less been held accountable for their aggression than white females. And their core belief is always to start shit, and then run! Let the police, and the soldiers do the fighting for them! You know–the little people who uphold the privilege.

Her thesis, which is odd coming from someone who claims they are a humanist.  Ah–but therein lies the rub–she was a feminist first!  Which explains why she makes her money through aggressively pursuing other women, and policing their behavior.

Old feminists in the herd ALWAYS means violence is just around the corner…Don’t say I didn’twarn you.

For more on females bullying females, click me!

* The obscenity is that they are a book club talking about how appalling the conditions in Africa are, with (totally puking now) a copy of Alice Walker in their hands–but the little guy on the boob seems to be hungry enough (I mean–he’s on the breast, not just on the boob discussing Walker’s worn out, quasi-truthful, misandry riddled account  of male female interactions). But the epitome of actual appalling is not drawing age appropriate boundaries between mother and child.

**autocachthonous is my big word of the day. It means originating where it is found.

Notice the word “little” in this woman’s video commentary about Asian women, and her thoughts on men. That is “objectification in action.” Diminishing the identity of a race class or group begins with diminutive terminology.

And notice how she subtly turns a discussion about robots into a discussion about sex robots that challenge her concept of intimacy.

Ana Kasparian from the Examiner, and  Cenk Uygur, from the Huffington Post)

Then, notice how, after she turns the discussion about robots into a discussion about men’s lack of intimacy ( one of the primary complaint’s that women have about men), she turns the commentary over to a man, her co-host–who then proceeds to blather as if her hand was stuck up his ass like a puppet.

This is how projection works. This is how women use men as tools to voice things that they are too insecure to say about sexuality.

Who needs a robot when you have men around who act like them–and are controlled by them–and speak the words that they are too afraid, to say?

Men are tools, which is demonstrated by the fact that men represent 92% of all workplace fatalities, and machinery related job tragedies.[ 2010 stats here]

This is how some women use men, and those women will use you, too,  as a sock puppet,  parading their insecurities for them, instead of being accountable for what they say and do, or conflating a false sense of morality or imperative  into statements about sex.

Notice how Kasparian subtly ( the commentator, not the robot) infers that men prefer sex with inanimate objects, and in motherly concern-tones notes that it is a “problem” with men in Japan and elsewhere?

Why is it that western women are afraid of Asian women, and robots?

Actroid-DER, developed by KOKORO Inc for custo...

Most American women own vibrators, but fear robots--why is that? Image via Wikipedia

I mean, after all, women have been using vibrators since the fifties at least. Sex toys for women are du jour, poke, prod and click me for fun, and profitable, but for men? A whole ‘nother dialogue of shame.

I bet Ana Kasparian–if she is truly a western woman– has a drawer full of dildos, and a 10-speed vibrator–one she got from her mother for Christmas; and she snuggles with her poodle all night.

And Uygur–well, as above, a male tool.

This is where objectification begins, and projection takes its form–in the minds of women who compare, and compete for personal power. Who aren’t accountable for their own sexual impulses; and the tools who uphold them.

The white, western woman is blatantly co-opting an Asian  dialogue, or subtly race baiting to minimize our insight into her own racism, and sexual anxiety. Never mind that an It begins and ends with women who compete to breed, as they market themselves to you, or compete to control men in general through sex shaming rhetoric.

The real objective of some women is control of other women’s choices, and bodies in the disguise of “all women are this and all women are that” dialogues about feminism, using male bodies as tools of conquest. The  sock puppet of ‘collective women’  is actually a mask to cover in-group female anxiety over the  ‘othered group’ sexuality–an attempt to own the other through dialogue.

Western women are at the very core, afraid of being outsourced, or of having to  face the same fears that men have every time women’s rhetoric ‘others’ people and thins as objects.

Oh, that and maintaining the western woman’s right to parade in SlutWalks, and buy bigger, better, sweat-shop made vibrators. Imagine, comparing yourself to a robot…says a lot for where these women are at in their heads.

One Million Moms, an organization affiliated with the American Family Association, announced a boycott of Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream over a new flavor called “Schweddy Balls.” The group said Friday on its website:

“The vulgar new flavor has turned something as innocent as ice cream into something repulsive. Not exactly what you want a child asking for at the supermarket.” read more about offensive Schweddy balls here.

Original Schwetty balls skit on Saturday Night Live.


Apparently, mom’s everywhere are united in their stance against rum-flavored ice cream, and sex-negative feminists and conservative mothers remain united against testicles as well. They are protecting their children from Schweddy Balls ice cream because the name “Schweddy Balls,” makes boys and girls giggle.

“Heeheeheehee,” said one fifth grader interviewed for this article, when asked “what are you laughing at?”

“Nothing….heeheeheehee…and I can’t tell you anyways in front of her,” he said, pointing to a clench-fisted, dowager-faced, plump, red-headed girl across the sandbox.

“She will make fun of me and beat me up,” he said, turning red between chuckles.

In their statement One Million Moms ask that current and future supplies of Schweddy Balls be cut off:

TAKE ACTION

Please send Ben & Jerry’s Public Relations Manager, Sean Greenwood, an email letter requesting that no additional Schweddy Balls ice cream be distributed. Also, highly recommend they refrain from producing another batch with this name or any other offensive names or you will no longer be able to purchase their products.”

They are calling for a boycott of the “Playboy Club” television show as well, united in their stance against adorable widdle kewt bunnies everywhere, and joining in the modern war on words and language with Gloria Steinem, who is currently seeking ownership of the Playboy franchise

I can’t wait to see how this turns out–because we all know American Moms can’t resist Ben and Jerry’s ice cream.

Just imagine if we could get all of that female energy focused on topics that really matter…but who ever said any or all of the feminisisms cared about what really matters? There’s just so much false activism out there, and so many kinds of free market feminisms to choose from these days. Plus, real activism is scary compared to arguing over ice cream cones.

Ben and Jerry’s Promo here

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Catharine MacKinnon

Today I declare the Save the Vagina's Before it's Too Late initiative in honor of Catharine MacKinnon, feminist legal scholar, and author of the Vagina Monolith's, and the Soccermom Diatribes. Now make sure you get home before midnight, Cindy!

Let’s get the the dull, academically fraudulent, sex negative, sexist stuff from two notoriously angry, manipulative, controlling women, out of the way right from the start.

But first! A public service message: Do you sit awake nights, worrying about hungry, sick, starving vaginas all over the world?  You CAN make a difference in the life and health of vaginas.  SAVE A VAGINA TODAY!  by donating to women’s cervical cancer research.

Now back to the porn wars: Andrea Dworkin and Catharine MacKinnon got an anti-pornography statute passed  that is still lurking on the books in the City of Minneapolis:

Pornography and Civil Rights
A NEW DAY FOR WOMEN’S EQUALITY by ANDREA DWORKIN and CATHARINE A. MacKINNON
Copyright © 1988 by Catharine A. MacKinnon and Andrea Dworkin
“Pornography is central in creating and maintaining the civil inequality of the sexes. Pornography is a systematic practice of exploitation and subordination based on sex which differentially harms women. . . .”  Their completely new legal approach–in which pornography is defined as sex discrimination and therefore a violation of civil rights–would allow anyone injured by pornography to fight back by filing a civil lawsuit against pornographers.
—————————————————————————————————————————-
Wheeew, smells like a cat box up there–reeks like the turds of  little captive animals that claw furniture and ask you for food all day long, and then snuggle all night. MeeeEEEow till I get what I want, claw furniture if I don’t….

So dualistic–so negative–so typically feminist, but indeed, undeniably, pornography IS differential in the treatment of the subjects involved. Civil rights? Meh.

I better go to the dictionary on that one. Not Civil rights, silly–we know how hard feminists work against those!

But Pornography–wha tis it? The free download of the Sage Dictionary , a dictionary for linguists, gives me a common working definition of pornography: Creative activity (writing or pictures or films etc.) of no literary or artistic value other than to stimulate sexual desire.

Pornography depicting coitus, cunnilingus, felatio, sodomy, BDSM, and the many other etcetera’s of sexual action is everywhere you look–three mouse clicks or less  from every man, woman and child in the ‘civilized’ world of cyberspace.

 [warning: you are three clicks away from free, virus- free, relatively harmless adult sexual material here ]

That may or may not be a bad thing, but the dialogue about porn is important, and definitely headed in the wrong direction–because it is actually a dialogue about speech. You can decide for yourself. I will wait as you peruse the hundreds of various links–after all, their actually is something for every-BODY.

Straight, LGBT, TS, hard and softcore bodies everywhere you look–we are all different.

But the more important dialogue about pornography has yet to take place, and that dialogue has its roots in the same definition of pornography that is in common use, a dialogue that is the most important dialogue of our next decade; one that hasn’t taken place yet because it has been constrained, AND restrained.

War pornography. War pornography is how we bully young males into submission, and objectify them, via images of men as tools, objects, and perpetrators of violence. Good men, bad men: soft-core, and hard-core males. Either way, men are more disposable than used condoms, and always presented in dualistic terms.

It begins with shame. Male shame. Shaming males into submission.

Pornography, by the definition, involves ‘creative activity’; that portion of the definition is not really in dispute by anyone. Porn is a created product, and is often quite creative as well. The big bone of contention seems to be the next part “other than to stimulate sexual desire.”

What does THAT mean? We are all different–stimulation begins in the brain.

But I have a bone to pick with such a vapid generalization [Sage… dictionary, definition 1, not 2, because definition 2 at least uses the words ‘flavor’, and ‘tang’ to describe ‘vapid’? The use of the letter V anywhere can arouse me, by design of the current feminist propaganda [V-day and the Vagina Monologues are sooo in your face every year, whether I want it or not].

But ‘flavorful tang???’  I am blowing my top…Even the propagandists missed that shameful naughtiness in the word ‘vapid,’ while they were hyper-focused on ‘vaginas’ [ Sage, vagina: definition 2 a moist canal in female mammals]. Western propagandists make their money from pandering to vaginas.

Flavorful tang…I am going full bore boner!  My penis is suddenly a weapon of thought! An underwear-agent in a propaganda war!! Tang, is like ‘poontang’; and then,  by a stretch, the coochie is tangy??  I am dick-dog rape crazy, according to the feminist literature.  I gotta run out, and rape all of the holes in Coochie right now! Holes, plural, IN coochie?

 Poontang and coochie  are words that likely have Chinese or Korean origins, as their form mirrors Korean and Vietnamese language structures. But the popularity and use of these words directly mirrors American imperialism in Asia. Cu Chi, a city in Viet Nam, is most likely where we get the word coochie. Ouch–look out for the booby traps, and holes full of bamboo spikes…but I digress.

No wonder all the boys, and radical feminists, are lost on Asian porn..

I apparently can’t help myself, according to the rhetoric of the current crop of feminist propagandists. I am a natural born rapist. Engendered male, porn is only one of ‘my tools’  for oppressing ‘all’ women, and especially gender feminist, lesbian academics–both male and female– who feed off of them. These people actually, physically,  wage war on me with the rhetoric of ‘men and porn’, by making me a sexual suspect in their rhetoric, and then, an actual suspect under the law.

Then, they invest in Hillary Clinton’s war chest, so she can save America from the Libyans. Either way, it wasn’t, and it won’t be anytime soon, me raping women overseas, for male or female warlords, or anywhere else to feed American women’s children with a soldiers pay.

But full-bore boner-words, phrases, ideas, and pictures that make me horny–even if no one is around!? I might make my own money off of that–and I will fight to be able to use words, images, pictures and text to understand my world.

Me–all by myself, drowning in the Onanist impulses of symbols and language, I can conjur fantasies of sex–without those ‘real’ women like Kate and Dre!  I really don’t need pictures–they are just nice accessories to remind me exactly why I prefer my own company over the company of weirdo’s who want to interpret what I feel for me, and extrapolate what it ‘could’ mean–or try to  tell me what ‘my’ mind is thinking, before they sweep out their own heads.

Nurse Ratched: Aren’t you ashamed?
Billy: No, I’m not.
[Applause from friends]
Nurse Ratched: You know Billy, what worries me is how your mother is going to take this.
Billy: Um, um, well, y-y-y-you d-d-d-don’t have to t-t-t-tell her, Miss Ratched.
Nurse Ratched: I don’t have to tell her? Your mother and I are old friends. You know that.
Billy: P-p-p-please d-d-don’t tell my m-m-m-mother.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073486/quotes

Shame on me. More shame on me….guilt, guilt, guilded male–and then more shame on me. They did all the thinking for me, and porn is killing, and oppressing everybody, most of all, women, children,  and vaginas. Shit–what do I do now to assauge my guilt?? Do I combat the capitalists who drop depleted uranium on children? Do I just vote for Hillary in the next election, because Dick Cheney supports her?

No! I should run out and save a vagina today! Blame it on da pornz! War is all about oppressin’ da wiminz.

Dear Woman: Here’s some free or low cost sperm–hell, you can have my nuts–but please raise a cop or a soldier who will protect the vaginas, and your vagina! Here’s a pedestal–keep your vagina up there! I will even cross the street if it helps you to trust me again, and makes you feel less scared of my weiner!

There’s some stainkin’ thankin’…

Think for yourself, and everything turns out o.k. I promise; but let them inside your sexuality? Let them define you? They will wage war.  You become the deviant in their construct–because you let them inside!

And they will tell you more about themselves in one sentence about their own construct of a purely hypothetical construction of ‘you’ than you could ever learn about them by torturing them to death in a snuff porn film. Just don’t tell them that even idiots know the CIA is the only American talent agency that actually makes snuff porn.[Nick Berg: poor dead guy; and here, too.]

What is striking in every way is how narrowly focused the gatekeepers of knowlege are in attempting to limit my full-bore brain-boner: academics, militarists, feminists,  and anti-feminists have been  limiting the discussion to thoughts about ‘womens bodies’ for centuries, instead of the vagizillions of other forms of pornography that don’t seem to ruffle their feathers.

My first full-bore boy-boner was the dictionary.

We should regulate the sale of dictionaries to children–because if even words can make us horny, what is next?  ‘It’s for the children‘, they always say–then they shut them up early, and keep the kids illiterate.  Besides, they rage, one of them damned Webster’s dictionary people supported the Fugitive Slave Act a hundred and fifty years ago!(1)

What next?? The children?????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So, in the feminist paradigms, language is the true oppressor. It’s high time to outlaw dictionaries. And apparently, boners kill women and children, and are big enough to intrude on civil rights.Never mind the inherent contradiction when they tell you men have tiny dicks…

How easy it is  to obliterate, or ‘snuff’  from the definition of pornography the portion of the definition that talks about “creative,” and focus instead on “stimulation of sexual desire,” and in so doing, to create the appearance that everything, and every image with a woman is potentially pornographic, and thus, every image without a woman is somehow NOT pornographic, or that images that lack women are nearly snuff porn.

So what ARE those type of images, devoid of patriarchy? Oh, yeah–empty headed Fabio…or Pat Califia’s dick…

What is commonly called "girl porn",--romance novels-- aren't even close to the 'meat' of the issue of women's actual objectification of men.

What is commonly called "girl porn",--romance novels-- aren't even close to the 'meat' of the issue of women's actual objectification of men..

Just try to imagine, an image without women. Next thing you know, imagination is imagery, according to them, time to clean your mind of it’s filth–your mind, I remind you, not their projections.

These folks are counter-productive in the least, snuffing themselves out like that. Counter-productively snuffing me, too, with their preemptive, eternal rhetoric of objectification.

It leaves  the nasal impression–the stench– that images of men ‘with’ women have a lurking and deviant sexual intent; images of women with women is ‘slavery’ performed before patriarchy–despite kyriarchal advancement; images of BDSM,or leather boys and girls  in Hitler gear, schtupping each other; ‘ one  is re-enacting ones own subjugation,’  but mostly, the actual stench is the carcases of dead heterosexual men, and ‘othered’ men and women not worthy of eroticism, mere bodies, filthy, and pornographic in or of ourselves, tossed into a dumpster, or a heap of fire in yet another war zone that was created to feed hungry western capitalists, both male and female.

Men have been denied the truly erotic–they tell us that images of women and ‘others’ are objectifying and pornographic, and images of men are not. You don’t have to be gay to figure out that cuntnundrum*

But simple analysis of any and all images tell’s us with certainty–that you must ask yourself, or ask the image,  not those who tell you that the moon is made of Swiss cheese, and poke holes in you for impact. Images provoke thought, and thought can produce desire. Words do that too–ALL WORDS. Humans have evolved to communicate with each other.

Hence, communication in any form is the essence of the erotic; the seeds of desire, regardless of the method of transmittal.

But what IS that desire?  Is it exclusively physical and sexual, a thought that leads only to action related to that thought, as they try to force us to believe? Each and every word, image or filmic representation spoken or shared one person to another is a symbol, a communication of some form of desire, a piece of the bigger desire. Yet a desire to talk about the meaning of words does not equate with any action other than to talk to someone about desire, or it’s opposite.

Add images and films? They are just word enhancers.

And words that we say only to ourselves about actions, or non-actions are certainly meaningful as well; if not the singular most important thing, they are the second. Our inter-persona, intra-psychic communication doesn’t necessarily equate with a desire for actual ‘sex,’ at all, any more than a desire for ‘communication’ of our ideas, some of which are about sex, but some of which are about other things too.

Does looking at the expensive dress in the window equate with buying the dress? Sure–for the rich, the hedonistic, the bored, the selfish, or the foolish. Those who are bought, buy as well. But what if you can’t be bought?

So, if anything IS or can be pornographic, it isn’t the ‘creative’ portion of the definition. We are all producers of creative impulses, and many enjoy the intellectual processes caused by viewing  porn . But definitions of porn are in fact the relational, superimposed and interpretatational, relative, objectification of intentions  by others with whom we interact, and communication which takes place, or could take place from those objectifiers have the explicit intention of preemptively circumventing your personal interpretation of your own intentions.

It is not a concrete, monolithic absolute that porn hurts viewers at all, or even most actors involved.

Porn is fantasy communication, like thoughts one could have for a conversation with Gandhi, Dworkin, or Freud. Porn creates a psychic space that is an intellectually, or emotionally safe distance from which to have a fantasy dialogue with others–and with yourself. THAT is where you stand the largest chance to begin fulfilling the ‘desire’ that images can create–in defining for yourself what you are perceiving, and then communicating that desire–in words to others, if it all works out.

And viewing idealized body images increases personal satisfaction for some people.It’s no stretch to imagine similar things about naked bodies and sex.

Adding the gross misrepresentations and anecdotes of abuses that have taken place in some forms of sex pornography is akin to adding hot-pepper to your morning oatmeal, and telling you that’s what oatmeal is.

Viewing images of dogs can invoke feelings of affection, security, comfort, and a thus, a whole host of other feelings potentially related to sexual expression that could take place in a home  (and which I suspect can also stir up the oxytocin releasing, orgasm producing mechanism in the brain). Emotions are, at their base in the lymbic system,  related to those that produce sexual feelings; images of families, or images of children ( see dogs and families), are no stretch if one wished to conflate images and political agendas.

If we accept the paradigm that viewing pornography does NOT equate with having actual sex any more or less than images of dogs equate with family, home or security, we cannot say that images and video’s of nude people are pornographic any more than the word ‘vapid,’ snapshots of Fido, or militaristic  propaganda pictures of flags waving.

Those who are in porn enter the psychic space by our own consent–whether they are ‘victims’ or not is a separate issue entirely.

Yet if we accept the feminist and militarist, and by rote and association, the judicial definitions of pornography as a tool facilitating ‘rape, power, or sexual violence, that enslaves, or steals from women and children’ ( a common pro-war feminist trope*),  we must also then say also that sexualy stimulating pornography for them are the body counts in the news, the stories of conquest of ‘othered’ men, images of ‘othered’ men cleaning up dead male bodies,  images of men at Abu Ghraib, or images of dead babies who have been exposed to uranium, because these images stir up feelings of ‘power,’  whose only relation is to ‘desire’.

Patriarchy and modern feminism are inseparable mates in the creation of pornography.

Images of power relationships cause arousal, according to the definition, and MacKinnon- Dworkin, and all other sex negative feminists. So, the  images of disemboweled, oppressed, enslaved, or dead men, women and babies, whether written or photographed or filmed, are not merely ‘vacant’ images [vacant, ala Sage: definition 1 , cancel officially; definition 2 ‘leave behind, empty], but also images that cause dialogue;  leads to creative impulses, and hence, as per the puppy= security paradigm, can cause female arousal which can be termed sexual.

The debate has been constrained thusly: it is most always limited to discussing women’s bodies, women’s sexuality or women’s perspectives about sex; it is always spoken from one monolithic feminist to another; and it has in recent years engaged the gay community, and sex positive feminists in other dialogues about other forms and perceptions of sexual stimulation through pornography; it has informed the discussion that there are many perspectives of what is sexually stimulating.

But it is the actual communication that has provably opened the doors to sexual liberation–talking to each other makes us horny.

Yet the dialogue has never sufficiently addressed every day images of men that on the surface are not  prima facie sexually stimulating; by THEIR definition.  Yet images of men, dogs, and families have the wider effect of being ultimately, sexual in their evocation of sexual possibility, sexual power, and their portrayal of the myth of home and family, where masculinity and femininity in union, and in dialogue, ‘create’.

These types of images cause dialogue–and  oxytocin levels to rise in the brain.

The soldier in uniform; the basket ball player in sweats; the  cop beating a peace protester or a mentally ill man to death is especially dear and stimulating to militarists and “radical” feminists who openly call for the exertion of power to cause male death; and images of  men conquering men certainly causes some pornographic dialog window to pop-up for these ‘domestic’ types.

And words which women use to describe men, writing what they have written about men– entire women’s studies departments at any major university that discuss, or employ images of men;  any ‘liberal’ or ‘conservative’ blog which employs competitive themes,  and any discussion where power is present, is a hotbed of pornographic representations of masculinity. The spaces wherein definitions of pornography or men are debated, are urgent, hormonally charged, verbose environments full of pornographic illustrations–and thus, are also pornographic by definition.

Which is why I am NOT a feminist–nor an anti-feminist, or a militarist: because according to the truth of MacKinnon and Dworkin, “exploitation and subordination based on sex which differentially harms women, “ is what porn is.

That might be true indeed, if I were a woman.  Differentially only means different. And if I could choose, and not let them continue to choose for me, or pursue me against my will? I choose NOT to have my body photographed at Abu Ghraib; photographed while being water-boarded,  have a mugshot taken, or be photographed dead.

Differential? Of course, by definition, nude representations can be sexist–differential only means different. That certain forms of pornography consume the dialectic? Preferential in the dialogue? Definitely. Men are over-represented in most imaginings of male–represented in a pornographic manner–dead, and truly voiceless–we expect that of men.

We expect that by their definition of men, and patriarchy, without ever discussing women who are pro-war in the dialectic and in their votes, whether feminist or not is subsidiary to the fact that they conceive men for war.

But I might add, theirs is a literally vapid, vacant definition, too, because male voices are missing in that discussion–prohibited from openly declaring any ideas thatrelate to themselves as exploited persons; voices missing even in their own bodies, which are conceived as war objects, while female voices, their panderers,  and their patrons just bitch about camera angles and perspectives.

It leaves ME feeling used, and counting days till I pass on into the next life–if there is one.And there isn’t.

[ cue the oompa-doom-papa porn music]

Given the choice, I would give those murderous fuckers–those voyeuristic, predatory  bitches and bastards–all the boner shots they want of me reading my dictionary–into eternity, if photos, and pornographic representations in words can live that long.

And get ready–where are those sun-glasses? But here’s the cum-shot: You can all go fuck yourselves for awhile (but in a sex positive way, of course), until you figure out if you are able to know what porn even is: as the Felix Frankfurter once said in  Butler v. State of Michigan about obscenity, and which applies to current feminist ideation in this area”you burn down the house to roast the pig.”

Or the sows who capitalize on your ignorance–your silence– in this dialogue.That perverse, feminist, domestic-war-mongering has been conflated for decades with naked, living people and pornography, and today seeks ownership of the industry–not moral high ground, but pure profit potential.

And limiting the definition of pornographic representation to women’s bodies? Now that’s obscene, even by the early definitions of pornography.

But you aren’t. I am not.

War is.

Yet no one really see’s it, ever, much less ‘get’s that’, because of all that pussy in your face. And now, I am not talking about the raging Coochie, or the Poon Tang,  either. I am talking about you. Walking talking porn of one sex or another, even if you never lifted the cover of Playboy magazine–a magazine that CIA feminist, and publisher Gloria Steinem is attempting to own and control right now.

Now go cast some stupid vote for Them or theM, a vote that kills, maims, or chemically alters the DNA of some actual babies, and  ‘othered’ men– their fathers no matter which side you are on.

But stop worrying about internet porn. It will outlive you. Your son, if you have one,  may not.

*trope: language used in a figurative or non literal sense. In this case, a myth of culture that is espoused by militarists, feminists, and so forth, which is encouraged and enhanced by the presumption that only women and children comprise a ‘literal’ family, sans males or fathers.

*cuntnundrum: the illogical logic that is employed in feminist rhetoric. Like Christian rhetoric that says “first their was G-d,then everything eklse, so, everything =G-d,”  radical feminists posit “patriarchy, thus it’s all mens’ faults.’

1) Peoples History of the United States, Zinn, Howard. pg.177 (1995 edition, chap 9, ‘Without Submission’ )

Cover of "Pornified: How Pornography Is T...

Cover via Amazon

Sex negative feminism is a fascist element that plays upon fear and preys upon weakness, conflating national interest with individual choice,  and it works against the United States Constitution.

Equally, it attempts to destroy  healthy individual sexuality or sexual choice by minimizing women’s responsibility for their own sexual choices and decisions(with appeals to fear), by shaming girls and women ( in attempts to assert ownership), and by conflating, or creating phony statistics in order to sell books and social policies.

And it does that with women and men disguised as social and moral crusaders who act in the self-appointed role as ‘everybodies mother’–emphasis on bodies[appeal to idealized images of women and mothers].

Fascism demands that individual choices are usurped for the larger ‘society.’ This form of feminism demands similar things, as well as playing upon youthful naivete, stereotyping, and appeals to ignorance disguised as concern over rights and sexism.

One good example is Pamela Paul, a sex negative feminist, and ur-fascist, would be yenta, and author of “Pornifiedwhich was named one of the best books of 2005 by The San Francisco Chronicle, according to Pauls bio.

Below is a reference for the .pdf file of the Senate Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on the Constitution, “Why the Government Should Care about Pornography: the state interest in protecting children and families”, where Paul spoke against sexual choice, and pornography.”

She said, in part:

“While some polls show that up to half of all women go online for sexual reasons, the percentage of women who say they do are likely exaggerated by the inclusion of erotica, dating, and informational sites in the definition of “adult” Internet content, areas to which women are disproportionately drawn compared with men. Many women who are tracked through filtering sites are linked to pornography by accident, visit out of curiosity, or are tracking down their male partner’s usage.” [Pamela Paul, Testimony and transcript .pdf here. ]

And that flies in the face of reality. While writing this article I was sitting next to a group of young, college age women, who were talking about the start of a new semester, boyfriends, and dicks.

Here are the snippets of conversation that I overheard:

“There are no real men left.” “I’m not doing porn again tonight.” ” How come all the hot guys are gay?” “Every time you see some tall sexy boy he’s gay.” ” Young guys don’t know how to ask for it.” and the real kicker “I would never date a guy who wears more jewelry than me. Unless he was, like, LeBron James…”

Regarding stereotypes and ignorance, it is important to note that these were attractive (by porn standards) white females, who were of the generation where fear of rape takes a precedence over sexual liberty.

They at times directed their conversation at me with phrases like “We’re not bothering you are we?” through wafts of unknown but delicious high end fragrances, and occasional curious stares at me when they thought I wasn’t looking, and so forth.

“No, of course not” I said, and kept my arousal to myself.

And I had a secret laugh, knowing that the pendant around my neck, tucked secretly underneath my nerdy sweater, and the chain it hangs from is worth at least five times what it would take to get into the
curious and horny pants of any of them, open as they said they were, to “a good fuck, like, some one night sex” and just kept writing.

Oh, and I had another secret laugh about Kobe Bryants encounter with young horny white women too.[ Really–insert the name of your favorite sexually objectified black basketball player here]

These weren’t your average girls: they were all there because they are part of some AA or NA after-group, and likely had been the victims of sex negative feminism along the way, which led to their stereotypes, objectification, and confusions about sexuality.

They had full  possession of half the tools to activate any wonderful toy, except one: any sense of whaty men actually are, or actually want from women. And plenty of confusion about how they should proceed to get to point B with their sex drive, before the sex-negative, shaming face of ‘the mother’ pokes itself into the discussion going on in their pants.

The single-most dangerous and predatory person, entity, or organized oppressor of young women or sexuality isn’t men ‘who get it’, and also know what to do with ‘it’–but it is in fact sex-negative feminism–separatist and gender feminists ( is there really a difference? PLO/Hamas?), conservative feminists, and ecofeminists who for whatever reason, cannot help themselves from
inserting into young women the idea that sex is bad, and men are pigs.

“Get to them early” is the mantra of public school educators and feminists who work in sex education–but what kind of feminists are they?

I question the motives, and the agendas of sex negative feminists, as these same panderers usurp the idea of individual sexual accountability with lies, and half truths that are designed (as if in a laboratory) to stick themselves neatly and unnaccountably into the
meat of young female sexual desire. A sort of ideological rapist isn’t much better than a real one.
Umberto Eco‘s 14 point list of recognizing Ur-Fascism:

http://www.pegc.us/archive/Articles/eco_ur-fascism.pdf

Clearing House for conservative and sex-negative anti-pornography links:  http://www.antipornography.org/statistics.html

Get them early links:

www.avert.org/sexeducation.htm www.mayoclinic.com/health/sexeducation/

http://educhatter.wordpress.com/2010/04/22/sex-education-in-the-early-grades-whats-the-real-purpose-of-explicit-sex-ed

Sub-committee transcript:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_senate_hearings&docid=f:25923.pdf