Porn, BPPA, and The Left Redux: An Exchange With Ernest Greene

I recently invited Ernest Greene (who happens to be Nina Hartley’s [warning: NSFW link] husband and an sexual rights/BDSM/progressive activist on his own right) to contribute to the Pro-Porn Activism Blog….and ended up with a pretty damn enlightening exchange that points out some of issues on establishing a pro-sex and sex-positive foothold on the political Left.

The full exchange is here; I will simply issue the highlights, which include what turned out to be some crossed signals about the BPPA and its mission that were ultimately cleared up to everyone’s credit.

First, here’s Ernest’s original comment:

Anthony and Sheldon,I’ve now had a chance to visit the pro-porn activism site under discussion, and while its intentions are admirable and its content often valuable and always interesting, I’m concerned that it may be subject to the law of unintended consequences.

First of all, I think I should share with you and other forum participants here a disturbing phenomenon I can clearly observe from the panels available to me as an administrator. Over the past few months, we’ve experienced a high volume of anonymous traffic, much of it originating from geographically centralized IPs in a certain part of the Upper Mid-West, clearly seeking out printable versions of threads dealing with anti-porn feminism. By following the links from your new site, I’m sorry to say I think I know where some of that traffic is ending up. Various items from have been exhibited and/or quoted (obviously without notice to or permission from us) by presenters at anti-porn feminist events held on college campuses during that time period. The images and information used are extremely specific and, predictably, used to demonize Nina and by implication, other women who share her views.

What worries me is that your new site, just like this one, has the inadvertent effect of channeling traffic to the othewise obscure corners of the Internet inhabited by what is basically a small and isolated group of fanatics of whom the larger public to which we appeal takes little or no notice.

The question we must ask ourselves is this: in attempting to rebut their essentially preposterous arguments at great length and in excruciating detail, are we not giving them the very attention they crave and otherwise could not hope to attract? I already know how I feel about this, which is one reason why I’ve stopped posting on these subjects on this site. I don’t see any reason to encourage them to come here to or arm them with out-of-context snippets of commentaries they can recontextualize for their own despicable purposes.

This is not to say that those arguments don’t need answering or to discourage the establishment of forums for that use, but rather to raise the practical question of how best to neutralize whatever political threat to freedom of expression, their bette noir, they may represent.

For my own part, I’ve elected to engage in a the Japanese practice of “mokusatsu” – literally to kill by silence. I don’t want them using our words against us and I don’t want people from here upping their Alexa scores simply out of morbid curiousity.

Obviously, as genuine advocates of free speech, I would never ask any contributor to stop posting on this topic, but for my own part, speaking strategically, I’ve decided to let them carry on their vendetta with no help, direct or indirect, from me.

Just a thought to consider.


That particular criticism rankled some of the BPPA members as well as me, since it was perceived as a subtle slam at the blog for directing antiporn attacks towards Nina and the forum.

My first response to Ernest follows:

WOW…interesting points.

As one of the main contriibutors of the BPPA blog, I can’t speak for Renegade Evolution (who is the owner and chief founder of the BPPA blog) or any one of the other main contributors…but I feel the need to respond to your points.The main reason why so many antiporn sites are listed there is the stated policy that is agreed on by all the participants there uses the principle of “Know your enemies”; and that the viewpoints of the other side should be openly discussed and sourced whenever possible, with all transparency and clarity.

I understand and appreciate the fact that due to past circumstances and the history of previous attacks on you and Nina, you would feel as you do about attracting unwanted attention to those sites. Nevertheless, I still believe that exposing and repudiating their myopia and their positions is crucial to building an effective opposition to their policies, and that merely allowing them to promote their views unfettered only encourages them that much further. They may indeed be a tiny minority and an isolated voice, but they do have some degree of outreach that goes far beyond their small numbers…and I don’t believe that they should be simply ignored or dismissed.

Obviously, we will be much more careful about seeking your approval before posting or linking anything here in this forum; and if you prefer that we not use anything from this forum to refute their arguments or actions, just say the word and we will respect your wishes. (Here, I do speak for the rest of the members of the BPPA as well as for myself regarding my own blogs and sites.)

I will say that my own personal philosophy regarding dealing with these antipornfeminists is perhaps the exact opposite of what you prefer; I’d rather directly and openly confront all the contradictions and inaccuracies of their arguments, since I feel no need to hold back anything; nor am I hampered by any need to protect my past histories or actions on my part.

But, I do respect highly your position and your situation, Ernest, and will honor your request….and will take your suggestions into consideration along with the rest of the crew.

And I will forward this privately to the rest of the BPPA members for their consideration, too.


And initially, Ren did decide at first to remove links to Nina’s site and forum from the BPPA blogroll.

Ernest did attempt to make an initial offer to clarify his position:

Anthony,Thank you for your prompt and typically heartfelt reply. As I said, I’m not really asking for any specific action on your part or that of your compatriots, whose views I largely (though not entirely) share. I merely ask you to consider the situation strategically. I like to think of myself as a principled person who willingly takes risks on behalf of dearly-held beliefs, but my real-world experience has taught me that the effectiveness of those risks is what makes them worth taking. If by exposing myself or others to potential harm, I achieve nothing more than serving the purposes of my opponents, the risk is not worth the reward.

I completely agree with you that the preposterous arguments of anti-porn feminists must be confronted and exposed for the crypto-mystical, anti-rational, anti-intellectual bunk that they are. I suggest, however, that the most effective ground on which to join that battle is their own. Obviously, as they have nothing but contempt for anyone who disagrees with them in the slightest, indeed for the very idea of reasoned argument, they’re not about to allow you or anybody else to address their vicious lies and warped beliefs on Web sites they operate or at gatherings they sponsor. But there does exist a larger leftist/progressive community consisting of numerous blogs, publications, organizations and events through which they could be challenged to defend their destructive fixations that have cost the left as a whole so dearly, along with the nation itself and the greater world that might benefit from leftist dissent uncontaminated by their toxic brand of identity politics.

It has been their ability to shame and shout down all who do not embrace their rabid fanaticism in those venues that has, to a great extent, prevented the emergence of both an effective leftist critique of their madness and, more urgently, the formation of a unified opposition to the catastrophes of resurgent American imperialism abroad and the rise of theocratic absolutism at home. It is the responsibility of sane leftists with realistic priorities to kick these lunatics to the curb on their own street, rather than making it the onerous burden of those of us already embattled against a rabidly hostile regime bent on throwing as many of us as possible in jail and driving the rest of us out of business to have to fight a second front against this small but vocal claque of hate-mongers on ours.

That’s why Nina knowingly exposed herself to the savage hostility certain to follow by debunking Chyng Sun’s so-called “research” at AEE on Counterpunch rather than simply railing against it here. As she said at the time, the internal leftist/progressive struggle over pornography is really a battle for the hearts, minds and wallets of liberals who support progressive causes, if not necessarily progressive ideals.

It is the objective of Chyng Sun and her allies to humiliate defenders of free speech into backing away from protecting explicit sexual expression that makes them dangerous not only to us, but to anyone who regards open discourse about sexuality as a progressive priority. The success of the gang from KPFK in forcing NION to give back Larry Flynt’s money both demonstrates this danger and emboldens those to whom suppressing dirty pictures is more important than saving Iraqi and American lives.

Rather than starting up more Web sites and chat groups where we who deplore such moral disasters of the left can tut-tut about them and ventilate our anger and frustration over them (though, BTW, I have no gripe with anyone doing so, as we all need the support and reassurance of like-minded others), the more critical task lies in meeting these false-flagged reactionaries on the common turf of Z-Net and at the university campuses where anti-war groups are bullyed into turning away desperately-needed potential allies in the name of ideological purity.

Certainly, given the vile tactics anti-porn feminists employ and the personal viciousness with which anti-porn feminists attack all who dare stand up to them, I can’t blame anyone for preferring to lob rhetorical water balloons from behind the safe anonymity of friendly homepages. As one of the founders of BPPA pointed out, in contradistinction to the seemingly more menacing foes we face on the right, anti-porn feminists are much quicker to engage in the ugliest kind of trolling, hacking, DOS attacks and ad hominem smears. We’ve experience all these things repeatedly since Nina dared to tread on the sacred cyber-soil of Counterpunch. Nina has become nearly as popular a target as Larry Flynt, an honor I know she appreciates but a noxious burden nonetheless. As an example, here’s a lovely quotation from a recent article by APF stalwart Rebecca Whisnant:

“Thus it is that prominently featured on the website of “feminist pornographer” Nina Hartley is a new film entitled “O: The Power of Submission.” (13) Perusing Hartley’s list of favorite links, one finds a site called Slave Next Door, which carries the tagline “real sexual slavery.” The portal page of this website reads, in part, “Slave Next Door is the graphic depiction of a female sex slave’s life and training for sexual slavery. It contains extreme bdsm situations and . . . sadistic training.” In clicking to enter the site, one is told, one affirms that one is “not here in the capacity of law enforcement or religious activist.” (14)”

I can practically see all the grave faces and nodding heads in the room as Whisnant delivered this laughable “evidence,” which simultaneously distorts Nina’s opinions, this site, my movie, consensual BDSM and the perfectly sweet and thoughtful blog of our friends Master N and embre, to a group of fellow porn-bashers at one of the many recent conferences where said bashers meet to come up with new ways of heckling us. Who wants to be subjected to that kind of treatment?

And yet, if leftists and progressives who don’t buy the APF line hope to prevent it from prevailing and thus further enfeebling an already isolated, fractious and fundamentally ineffective community, that’s exactly the kind of warped logic that must be addressed where it lives. Twenty years ago, it was a group of feminists, led by Betty Friedan (founder of NOW), Rita Mae Brown, Kate Millet, Adrienne Rich and other icons of the women’s movement, who filed the amicus brief in the appeal of the McKinnon ordinance that helped restore mainstream feminism’s committment to civil liberties for all. Sensing an opportunity in the current atmosphere of political repression to undue that courageous stand, the new crop of APF fanatics shows signs of gaining real traction within the tiny, nearly invisible left that remains in America today. If they succeed, they’ll make sure it remains exactly that: tiny and invisible, though surely pure of corruption by the “harms” of porn and its defenders.

No matter how unpleasant the prospect, it’s up to you and your friends to do what Friedan and her compatriots did two decades ago. You must take your fight to the enemy instead of hunkering down on safer terrain. It’s your movement that’s at stake and you need to take it back from posers like Gail Dines, Bob Jensen and Stan Goff. If you won’t stand up to them where they are, how can any of the rest of us be expected to join you when you exhort us to stand up to the real power and potential fury of the ruling elites?

While APFs may claim to have been “censored” and “silenced,” the truth is that Gail Dines can get airtime on Fox News to spout her claptrap at no personal risk whatsoever, while we have members of our tribe facing 75 years in prison for selling videos. We know very well the real dangers of incurring the wrath of the real patriarchs, as opposed to the imaginary version against which leftists are constantly inveighed to do battle. If your gang isn’t ready to haul a few loud-mouthed mountebanks out of their ivory towers and expel them from your midst, why should we trust you to carry the standard into far more dangerous combat?

I’m just raising these questions. The answers need to come from your side. So far, all I read is a lot of electronic bickering. When I see you all picketing outside the gates of Wheelock College, demanding equal time for Nina to answer the slander and abuse heaped on her there, I’ll be more favorably disposed to help you make your case here.

As I do believe in freedom of expression, I won’t oppose your use of our bandwidth to channel traffic to your site, but I hope you’ll take into consideration the nuisances to which you expose us in doing so and offer up something in return that will make it all seem worth the additional trouble.


My own rebuttal of that:

Welll…that’s a lot to think about.

I’m not sure, then, that the BPPA would be the proper venue for such a campaign that you would want, Ernest; since that blog is more for a generalized defense of porn rather than an explicitly Left critique. (The founder of that blog is more of a traditional conservative libertarian.)I’d guess that a more explicitly Leftist “pro-porn/’sex-positive” organization which directly confronted the smears and lies of antiporn “feminists” and their allies would be more productive by your suggestions. That would be a splendid idea, especially as an compliment to the more general mission of BPPA; and as soon as I get my bandwidth issues resolved; I will get to work on that by developing a forum dedicated to that very need.

I should say, though, that perhaps your targets should also be turned towards not only people like me who have indeed gone into the bellies of the beast and directly confronted APRF idiocy (remember Gooney Goff?? Z-Net??) but also towards more mainstream liberal and leftist groups who have remained generally silent or have avoided debate on this topic. Whatever happened to groups like Feminists for Free Expression or the Feminist Anticensorship Taskforce, who at least attempted to build a progressive critique to MacDworkinism in the 80s, but disappeared as soon as the battles seemed won?? Why aren’t there more porn talent who happen to be progressives (or even, heaven forbid, even Leftists) speaking out explicitly on the connections between defending sexual speech and expression and other left/liberal values that they profess in supporting?? It can’t all be a one-sided mission, you know.

Yes, indeed, there is a great need for sex-positive progressive folk to directly confront antiporn ideology whereever it wields its head; and to be much more open and loud about it. That will take both time and effort, however, and even some patience.

Also….considering the closed-loop policies of such organizations as Z-Net in its obvious biases towards antiporn ideology, wouldn’t it be more useful for sex-pos progressives to develop their own institutions of support and outreach and education, rather than waste time and energy attempting to roll over existing organizations that are simply too rooted to change??

Finally….like I said before, I am only one person, with limited time and resources; I’m sure that no one will question my dedication to the mission of defending the principles that I believe in; and I most definitely don’t question you or Nina’s dedication to the same. All I ask for is that we all respect our own methods and tactics, even if we may disagree with whatever tactics we may persue to the same goal.

Just my own personal opinion.

And may I assume that you speak for Nina as well on this??


And in the next post, I cited both Trinity and Ren defending the mission of the BPPA blog (cited with permission from the both of them):

Incidentially enough; here is Renegade Evolution’s response…..

…upon learning of Ernest’s critique (posted originally via email, with permission granted by her to post here)

I can understand Ernest’s concerns, but hey, as my people are wont to say “Silence = Death”…and I will point out that the BPPA is, for me, not only somewhat FUN, its also a theraputic and LITERARY way to point out my flaws. It’s not as if I’ve not “taken these issues to the people”…after all, I did engage in that long and futile email forum debate with Bob Jensen, I, along with Jill and others, sent letters of protest to Weelocke for NOT including sex workers in their conference, sent letters of protest and raised quite a stink about their use of porn performers images without consent or question, I then informed the porn companies whose work was sited of the use of that work by Wheelocke, and well, I’m a member of both HIPS and SWOP East…so yes, I BLOG about porn, sex ed, anti porn tactics, the 1st Amendment…I also DO in real life. I also know that I’ve had a decent number of “on the fence” feminists say by reading what I’ve put out there, they’ve rethought their feelings on porn and other aspects of sex work, and even some rad fems reconsider their beliefs on the matter, and to me…well, that counts and progress.I also think exposing the tactics the other side uses is important, because there still are a lot of people sitting on the fence, and I’d rather have them leaning to our side and have places where they can read the other side of the story and rebutals to the MASSIVE amounts of anti-porn propoganda out there. I mean gee, it’s not like I’ve been threatened or outted before, right? Damage is already done…I might as well, both in life and on the net, stand up for what I believe in.


Incidentially, she has also went ahead and removed all links to this forum from the BPPA blog as well, out of respect for Ernest’s concerns.Update: Trinity of A Strange Alchemy; another contributor to the BPPA blog; just recently added this question for Ernest:

Anthony,I’m a little unclear on what exactly Mr. Greene wants us to do.

Is he saying he wants us not to link to NIna’s spot, or that he thinks we shouldn’t link to the *antis’* spots (because then they’ll see the trackbacks)?

Because if it’s the second, I think it’s important to link to them to prove what we’re saying AND to allow opponents to rebut. Think about how gross it is that they don’t link to us, and can make up any context they will for what we say. I don’t think it’s right for us to do the same.


A legitimate question, I’d say.Anthony

To which, Ernest finally comes correct and makes his points clear, and directly addresses Ren’s and Trinity’s concerns [special emphasis added by me]:

Anthony,Thanks for getting back to me on this, and for a number of points well-made, as usual.

I think I may have created some misunderstandings that need clarfication and you have raised a question or two that need answering.

First of all, let me say that I don’t think sites like BPPA are bad things. On the contrary, I agree that exposing the lies and distortions of anti-porn feminism in whatever forum is a good thing. I do have concerns about amplifying their volume by callling attention to them, but that concern only applies if nothing else is done beyond preaching to the converted. I merely suggest that activism consists of more than just sharing opinions with those of like-mind.

As such, I give full credit to you for your willingness to take the battle to the other side’s terrain, and I commend ren for doing the same. I particularly appreciate ren’s challenge to the use of our intellectual property against us, and would offer as a further possibility the idea of acquainting APFs who use stolen explicit images in their propaganda that they, too, are subject to the requirements of 2257 and may find out for themselves the truth about just how “lawless” and “unregulated” our industry really is if they continue to do so. The measures you and ren describe are exactly the kinds of things I’m talking about and I hope you’ll do more in the future. I hope your influence grows on the left and that eventually you’ll help return some balance to the conversation about porn in that community. In short, I’m not criticizing you, your friends, what you’re doing or what you’re not doing. I’m merely raising strategic questions about how best to achieve our common goals.

In response to Trinity’s question, and yours, please remember that I began my post by saying that I am not asking for any specific action concerning BPPA. I didn’t ask that the link to our site be removed, or that you not link to APF sites. In fact, I’m sorry if that’s how my comments were interpreted. As far as linking to is concerned, the damage was done long ago by the other side, which knows all about us and will continue to come around here whatever you do. I’d as soon have our link back on your site, as at least we might get a few more friendly contributors as a result. And I fully agree that air and light best serve in separating good arguments from bad, so I don’t support the idea of silencing any point of view. I think knowing one’s enemies is important and I appreciate BPPA’s willingness to address all points of view and to expose the specious claims of our opponents. Frankly, I’m sorry my comments seem to have been taken some other way and apologize for not stating them more clearly. Personally, I would like to see our link restored at BPPA. We are all part of the same struggle and I don’t wish to see us excluded from solidarity with your efforts over there.

Where you and I don’t agree is in your implied criticism of progressive elements in the industry for not joining you at the barricades. Those of us who can certainly do. Nina is most definitely a case in point, as it was her blast on Counterpunch that made her such a popular target for APF attacks. And while FACT seems dormant for the moment, FFE is very much alive. Indeed, BPPA links to their site, where you’ll find such familiar names as Carol Queen and Candida Royale.

And I don’t buy the argument that the larger leftist community and its organizations and media are so closed to counter-arguments about porn there’s no point in confronting them directly. That’s a costly concession of defeat when the other side has simply dominated the floor by intimidation and should be challenged, as they were successfully twenty years ago, which was one of my main points earlier. Setting up alternative institutions is fine as far as it goes, but ceding the larger leftist entities to the other side, which is exactly what happened at NION, carries dangers not only for those of our particular persuasions regarding the expression of sexuality, but for the left as a whole, which the NION episode demonstrates all too vividly.

Indeed, when you propose that liberals should take a more active role in this struggle, you make my point for me. First of all, they are the ones who do so most effectively. Nadine Strossen and the ACLU have done more to protect sexually explicit expression than all the self-identified leftists in the land. They’re the people who put up the money and the time to fight the court battles that directly impact what we do. However, they’re largely excluded from leftist forums in a way that avowed leftists are not. Moreover, they are the very element Chyng Sun and her friends are trying to shame into abandoning us over here, and to some extent (I’m not defending this, BTW), traditional liberals have been cowed by the ferocity of APF rhetoric into avoiding the whole debate. As someone who doesn’t much respect liberals when it comes to stands on principle, you of all people can hardly expect them to conduct a campaign to reassert support for Amendment One among leftists who have largely turned against it. Liberals and their organizations have no credibility on your side of the fence.

The suggestion that working porn performers could get in the fray is problematic as well. Most are very young, very busy with learning their way in this business while trying to sort out their own sexualities, and generally not politically inclined. They’re extremely resistant to organization, as we’ve found to our dismay through repeated attempts to do so over the years. Morevoer, when they do step forward, as a few have on talk shows and in other mainstream media, they get beaten to pieces, much as Belladonna was by Diane Sawyer and Jenna Jameson by Bill O’Reilly. They don’t get the kind of respectful treatment APFs can always count on from fundamentally conservative news sources.

As to confronting APFs in their campus strongholds, both Nina and Ron Jeremy have done so and will continue to do so, not only because they believe in the importance of this work, but also because they have the luxury of time and the visibility that come with being senior members of the industry. Remember too that we’re involved in a much higher-stakes conflict with the feds. Come October, at least two major obscenity cases will go to trial in federal court with long prison sentences on the line should our side lose. That’s a battle outsiders don’t face and I’m sure you can understand why we conserve much of our strength for it. That’s the place where we must make our best arguments, not only for our own sakes, but for those of anyone who values freedom of expression, even that of our enemies.

No one questions your dedication or your principles and while I may respect your choice of methods and tactics, I would hope you and your friends would be open to some outside examination of the latter. We’re all seeking the same thing, but we may not agree on every article when it comes to the best method of achieving it.

And yes, Nina and I have discussed this at length and are in agreement on these issues. She will be out debating Susan Cole on college campuses this fall and will continue to take the fight wherever she can get on the field. She just leaves this part of the task to me, as we’ve found that letting her do the talking and letting me do the writing is a more effective distribution of labor. We’re on the same page as far as basic philosophy is concerned and share the same tactical perspective born of many, many years in this struggle.

In no way is this a one-sided mission. We all have contributions to make suited to our resources and beliefs. Nina and I welcome support for the cause from virtually any source. Unlike our enemies, we have no litmus test that excludes leftists, progressives, libertarians, sexual liberationists, liberals, or anyone else who embraces individual liberty.

The last thing I wish to do is add to the internal dissension within that loose coalition. I hope you and your friends will regard this as a message of solidarity and conciliation and will simply consider the practical issues I’ve raised.

Again, I’m not attacking anyone here or proposing any specific changes of approach. I’m merely offering a perspective for others to examine.


Based on that post, the links were put back up…and they remain to this day.

Later on in the thread, Ernest goes on on what he sees as one of the main problems with passive Left acceptance of antiporn propaganda:

Oh lord, please don’t let me be misunderstood…

I think it’s smashing too. Lot’s of good, thought-provoking reading and many important ideas, (and Sheldon’s too – kidding) all centralized in one place. Excellent. I wish nothing but the best for BPPA. I don’t even have to agree with everything said there to see its value.I like to think I make myself pretty clear, but sometimes I wonder if all these years of W.’s rule haven’t started to affect my relationship with the English language. Never intended to be critical of BPPA, its value or its intentions.

That said, I’m still stuck, if that’s the correct word, with my worries about what might actually be effective in countering the hammerlock that APF thinking seems to have gotten on leftist debate. By an ironic coincidence, in a completely unrelated thread in this section, Eric posts a letter he’s sent to Noam Chomsky seeking clarification of Chomsky’s denunciation of Hustler after having granted Hustler an interview.

I may not always agree with Chomsky, who was a huge presence in the left of my own radical era and remains one in the left of today, but he’s always been a man of courage and committment regardless of the waxing and waning of his popularity. I’d like to think he’d speak his mind when it comes to Hustler or pornography in general without worrying about how his comments might be received in certain quarters. And yet I’m not optimistic that Eric will get a straight answer on this one out of Chomsky – or any answer at all.

That’s what I’m really talking about on this thread. When figures of Chomky’s stature have to engage, as he did, in all kinds of backpedaling for having dared allow his words to appear in Hustler, I can’t help worrying about the APF influence on the left as a whole.

This sort of degenerated into one of those endless and useless wrangles over who is more responsible for the current state of affairs, when what I really want to hear discussed is what might be done to take back some of the ground we’ve lost. Why was there no counter-pressure from our side in the NION affair? Why did no one raise a voice in anger when KPFK devoted an hour of airtime to (using a favorite phrase of Stan Goff) San and Ann Simonton to bash Nina and subsequently refuse her even the courtesy of an explanation for refusing to allow her an on-air rebutttal? Why does the left cave so quickly to identiy politics of all kinds, this kind in particular? What is to be done if there is ever going to be a broad-based anti-war movement to resist what threatens to be a much longer and even more destructive conflict than Vietnam? Kronstadt may think the domestic anti-war movement was largely irrelevant to the outcome that time and that the NVA simply hammered the Americans on the ground, but I was here at the time and know otherwise.

For the left to regain credibility as a political force in American life, whether the issue is pornography or Iraq, it will have to address the problem of identity politics directly. No faction’s individual interests or orthodoxies can be allowed to so dominate the discussion as to exclude literally milliions of potential supporters from participation in dissent against the worst and most dangerous policies this nation has ever adopted.

I’m still waiting for anyone on the left to take on the very real issue of what to do in the face of a Supreme Court that will be hostile to civil rights cases for the rest of most of our lives. Even within our own interest group, where there was once hope that laws against so-called “adult obscenity” would be overturned by the current porn prosecutions under Lawrence v. Texas, there is now the grim realization that, should any of those prosecutions actually reach the high court, those laws will not only be upheld, but may be substantially broadened.

In short, my real complaint is that the left is rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic in much the same fashion as Bush where Iraq is concerned. In both instances, a defeat of epic preportions looms with terrible human costs, and no specific means to prevent either of these related disasters has yet been put forward.

I’m not a leftist myself anymore, but I know this nation needs leftist activism now even more than it did three decades ago, and I’m not reassured by what I see so far.

Again, this is a general observation that implies no criticism of the nice folks at BPPA, any individual here or any other well-intentioned person. It’s just a lament and a plea for action where action is urgently needed.

When I have the time, I do hope to get over to BPPA and post a purely friendly and completely non-critical greeting. I can only offer my full and unconditional support to such a worthy enterprise.

Now, if somebody will tell me how we’re going to keep Rob Black and Lizzie Borden (whose work I don’t like at all but who shouldn’t be facing ruination as a result of it) from going to the pen for the rest of their lives, I’ll feel a bit better.


 Interesting and fascinating questions…anyone up to the challenge???

“Pro-Porn Activism”: It’s Our Time Now!!!

Ahhh, lookee here…guess who got really fed up with being misinterpreted and distorted??

And look what she has created in response??

And who in the hell is that whom she invited to guest host there?? Gee….who’d thunk it?? 😉

YeaPornies of the world, go there and unite!!!!  You have nothing to lose but your inhibitions…..and a foe of those heavy chains.

Renegade Evolution: Pro-Porn Activism

Nez Kicks, Ren Rocks, BfP Flames, BA Whacks….and J-Val Merely Sucks

[UPDATE (5-14-07): Thanks to some recent clarifications by ‘Da Queer Bitch; I’ve gotten some second thoughts on Jessica Valenti that may have made my critique of her a bit too strong and off the mark…more on that in a future post. I’m retracting my original critique of her pending a further review of her book, and making editing adjustments thereof to this post.]

I am writing this at around 1 AM (Lafayette time), just off a shift from work, while my mind is still awake before the sheep start barging in….so excuse the stream of conscious thought.

To say that it’s been an interesting week around the Prog 101 Fighting Headbussa Brigade ranks would be a freakin’ understatement.

First, there’s The Badassssssss Mexicano known as Nezua over at The Unapologetic Mexican , who’s been taking the names and kicking the asses with a series of pinpoint accurate posts on not only the react to the May Day LA police riot, but the seeming lack of action amongst certain A-list liberal bloggers….not to mention the overall attitude of what he derides as the “WHITEPROGRESSIVE”(tm) attitude towards issues affecting people of color and poor people.

I find it very interesting, as a hallmark of this “White Lens” that I continually speak of that one group of people is allowed to decide the reality for another group (or many groups), as well as what is best for them. True, it’s infuriating, but more than that, it’s sad. It’s frustrating. It’s challenging. Because the very dynamic that continues harm on the Brown™ prevents the mind suffering behind the dynamic from coming to awareness of same. So tricky.

This “knowing what’s best for all” is typically White® and what I call “the colonizer’s” view. If you grok my use there, you understand better the controversial post I wrote about Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt’s transracial adoption habit, titled Nezua’s 2006 Colonizers of the Year.. When understanding this “colonizer’s view,” as I call it, we can just hear Kirk on the bridge, talking about some good but primitive group of aliens that need the Federation’s intervention to find their way. This is part of why some grow so very offended and befuddled by my take on Jolie. In their eyes, I am attacking benevolence. How gross. What on earth is wrong with me? How DARE I posit that placing a brown baby from some “third world country” and immersing them in the home and culture of an American celebrity, giving them a snazzy new name and a place in the roost of our collective dreams—American celebrity—was not THE MOST bestest thing you could ever do? What am I? Some kind of Jolie-hater? Some kind of woman-hater? Some kind of commie?

A recent comment on the post asked me “where’s the data to support the claim that kids uprooted from their ‘true’ cultural/ethnic heritage and raised in the US suffer/are alienated/resent their colonizing parents?” And I have to assume they did not read the thread. And thus, don’t really want to learn about what we are discussing.

“Data” they want, so they say. And what would this be? Books housed in accredited libraries, perhaps, they want. Science journals measuring the fractions that add up to a pile of sharp-edged and fractured identity and pain in an individual. I don’t have that data. What I do have are numerous blogs that swarmed to link to me after that post. Blogs like The Transracial Korean Adoptee Nexus and Twice the Rice and Racilicious. I got letters from transracial adoptees thanking me profusely for making the post. I dug up wounds, and posts ensued where memories, and pain and anger poured out, and others reading got to understand a bit of what was behind such a seemingly benign and benevolent act as the wiping out of a person’s culture in the name of “colorblindness.” Those who wanted to understand, that is. Because like that commenter’s rebuttal to the post, most challenges such as this—”prove to me that my view on others is wrong”—come in the form of an impossible request. There is no “proving” to these people that their views on others are not the end-all-be-all on that issue. If I point them to personal stories, they say that this is “largely speculative and anecdotal.” Very snazzy English. Very arrogant Deciders. They refuse to consider that they may not understand everything in the world, even when at issue is the lives of others, the thoughts of others, the feelings of others.

This is the White Lens. And it will not be pried off. This is why my brown friends do not engage in trying to change any minds on it. The owner must one day turn and realize there is a painful glare in their eye. Then, they can do the work of tearing it away themselves. And just as my verb choice indicates, there will be pain in this loss of vantage point, as it implies a loss of privilege.

— excerpted from “The Unapologetic Mexican: The True Front of Progressivism”; reposted at Jesus General and CorrenteWire

I’d rather that you go over there to Nez’s blog and read up the whole post and the commentary…I can’t do the man more justice than that.

Segue over to the lucious and lovely — but very deadly, if you push her too far — Renegade Evolution, who has been spreading her…..errrrrrrr…..wings of late on almost everything.  Like, for instance, the apparant conflict amongst some feminists between freedom of choice concerning abortion and reproductive rights, and the supposed lack thereof concerning consuming and producing porn.

When it comes to abortion, the battle cry is often “Her body, her choice! Her right! You do not get to question! How dare you judge? How dare you ask? How dare you seek to control, influence, shame, or otherwise do anything to this woman? It is Her Choice!”

But when it comes to porn, well…it’s not her choice! She’s been duped, controlled, has no choice! She cannot be expected to think and decide for herself! There must be something wrong with her! She must have been abused, or on drugs, or tricked! We must ask! We can judge! It is our business! She did not make a choice, there is no such thing as a choice when it comes to this, no one would make this choice! No one would willingly and with forethought do that with their body! There is something wrong with her! This is not a choice!

Well, see, I find that ironic, and little sickening, actually. Truth is both are choices women make, in a variety of conditions, for a variety of reasons. No choice is made in a vacuum, but both are choices. Her choice. Yet one is supported, defended, and protected without question in a great many circles. The other is not accorded that same consideration, at all, in those same circles. Both come down to the same thing…the idea of a woman’s right and ability to choose what to do with her body and what happens to and in it…yet…

One choice is a sacred, personal, and rallying point choice.

The other is decidedly…not.

Why is that? Do tell. Call me curious.

— excerpted from Renegade Evolution: Abortion and Porn: Choice Revisited

And then, there is BlackAmazon, who always seems to find the perfect stream-of-conscious phrase to put some jackass fool in his or her place….especially when she gets really pissed off.  Like this throuogh ass-whupping leveled at Feministing’s Jessica Valenti for her recently released bromide for rich Valley Girl slut wannabes book,  Full Frontal Feminism:

Nubian who has of course left for her sanity was right about this six months ago


But this has nothing to do with me.

As a woman of color

As a woman of a certain class

As a woman of a certain education level and mindset

As a woman of a certain faith

So officially when I say

I’m not a feminist but,

If this is how you will be introducing “feminism” to young women,

Ms Valenti

When I say this is not me,

I would appreciate if you not be so brilliantly uninformed as to try and disrespectful as to try and dismiss offhand like I was some recalcitrant toddler or couch your condescension by only quoting the most baseless ( yet the fact it comes up in every piece you talk about ) homophobic bile in an effort to make yourself look better.

As a 22 year old women reading this book , I felt disrespected. As a teacher of nearly 9 years especially of “at risk ” youth, I was appalled.

Young women do not need friends who reduce their problems with feminism to some issue with the coolness factor.

The definitely do not need it from people who would choose a very specific half naked torso and various approximations of Valley girl lingo .

I am a young woman who is NOT a feminist. I am a young woman who is one of many young women who has disagreed ,disengaged, delinked, and been disrespected by many of the feminist sisterhood.

I am part of a much longer line of women who has been caricatured, stolen from, and used .

— excerpted from Having Read The Fine Print….: Imperative of the Life

BA has a hell of a lot more to say about J-Val and her brand of feminism…but you get the gist of where’s she coming from.  Ren gets in her licks as well here.

And then there is the saddest part of this post….namely, that Brownfemipower may have had enough of blogging; mostly from a combination of continuously banging her head against the wall from frustration over the constant racist barbs she recieves for defending herself as a radical Latina.  As in…this nice masterpiece love letter to her that she posted yesterday:

I am tired of reading sob stories detailing how these criminal aliens are “invisible” and must “live in the shadows.”

Myself, I see them everywhere. Target. Walmart. Mobil gas station. My apartment complex. My place of employment.

They talk loud in Mexican and advertise their lawless presence here in the US. They move into our neighborhoods though we make it obvious we don’t want them. They march openly and defiantly against America yet they survive chiefly as a parasite to America’s public assistance programs.

UGH! What an ugly race!!!!
Ms Taletha of Texas | | IP:

Such deep affection for the human race, no??? Could have been written 40 years ago about Black folk…or gay/lesbian folk, or Native Americans, or…..

But it may have been something else that finally snapped Bfp over the edge…something related to J-Val’s brand of poor rich Valley Girl feminism. Quoteh Bfp in her “Fuck this shit, I’m outa here” post today:

[…]  * white women continue to be the dirty little slut of color at their oh-so-funny south of the border parties…

* but will it make a difference to anybody that most latinas have had to deal with the “HOTT” mamacita stereotype most of their lives? that white women express their sexuality by being “exotic” and “spicy” like the dirty little slut mexicans (or black women, asian women, arab women etc)–and that their sexuality is based on nothing more than our embarrassment and shame? does it make a difference at all? Does it make a difference that it’s NOT the patriarchy that is fucking up latina’s sexuality in this case–and that it’s NOT “just sex” either–that I’m not slut-shaming, I’m not sucking the patriarchy’s dick–I’m just sick and fucking TIRED IN MY BONES of racist white women making me feel ashamed and horrified to be Latina? And scared to death that my daughter is going to hook up with some racist white man or woman who thinks that she’s a dirty hot mamacita that loves to fuck like crazy? Your sexuality makes me fear for my daughters mental and physical well being BECAUSE I KNOW WHAT IT’S DONE TO ME–does that mean nothing to you???


* I just don’t have the drive any more–nobody gives a shit about mother’s being ripped from their children, nobody gives a shit if the cockroach slut is “rounded up” (and i don’t care if you hate that term, you’re still a bitch for saying it) and incarcerated like an animal, and EVERYBODY considers that a criminal latina may be lying when she speaks her fucking reality–oh, and I forgot–centralizing women in the immigration debate is dividing the community, letting the whites win, blah blah blah (as told to me by both male and female Latin@s).

I’m beginning to think that nubian was right–that there really is no place for a woman of color to speak specifically AS A WOMAN OF COLOR in this blogging world–blog posts directed solely toward other women of color get a handful of comments–blog posts to anybody, begging somebody to please, for god’s sake, pay attention–only get attention if they are angry and hostile and contain more energy than I’m willing to put into any more.

* And goddamn it, yes it bothers the shit out of me that when black or white women are shit on by sexism, men of color have something to say about it, but when latin@ mothers are fucking ripped from their children, imprisoned, deported–there’s silence–silence that is interrupted by nationalistic fuckheads that call me traitor and vendida. Is it being a traitor to remember your own? It’s being a traitor to love the your sisters and mothers and aunts and grandmothers?

I’ll just let her words speak for themselves….although BA’s words in response can speak volumes, too.

I notice that no matter how many times Twisty degrades and insults you yoou make sure you keep her as a high respected blogosphere link.

No matter how many times you steal form BFP and report race issues smugly with little consideration, you can’t be arsed to put up one sentence when she’s gone?

Stumbling into conversations about memories of bar and fictitious happy childhoods and I’m not evil I swear it while she and others fight for our lives.

You talk about wanting to hold media responsible yet the only attention you pay is to ” big fish ” while women who claim to be fore literally face death and fury and threats for putting words to page.

How many times does KOS of Firedoglake have to do dumbshit before the price of it to real people is less than the opportunity to mug with Hilary Clinton or have a new byline ?

Links for us and comments are not about traffic. Links are what makes it known that you cant come to a certain place and degrade our lines. comments are the voices that let the trolls and the assholes know you will be reckoned with.

They are the things that keep us from disappearing in the night. You can’t be bothered to be challenged or discuss or even say

We’re here so you don’t have to be alone in front of a motherfucking keyboard.

While debate dissecting our shit for your own self glorification

and you know this when you joke at calling people sluts. You know this when you sit and talka bout how much smarter you are than the discourse, you know this when you call us stupid, or misquote us , or mischaracterize us , or deliberately disrespect or requests for privacy and autonomy.

Use our names and bodies for press or conveniently rember how important it is to be one of us when you can get paid.

But it’s not really powerful until then,

We can’t organize till then

Our lives aren’t worth it till then


You know how little it takes to not feel alone or left out

You know how powerful a simple I’m here can be

And you fail

you fail us time and time again

Clavicles are more important than bombs, than children

Torsos need more defense than the first amendment

with I don’t have the time or I didn’t know or I can’t I can’t or oops I missed it

but never a chance to get paid for it or worshipped for it?

Time and time a gain the ball seems to get dropped with no steps towards being better


Fuck you .


This, friends, neighbors, and Clones, is the very reason I am a radical, not a liberal.

An Independent Leftist, not just a liberal Democrat.

A (pro-)sex radical, not just a libertarian.

A democratic socialist, not just a social democrat.

A Black man, not only an African American.

Because I know more than anything else that it’s not just right-wingers and Klan bigots who use and abuse Black  folk and Brown folk and female folk and sexual outcasts.

They are just the most boisterous and open about their hatred.

It’s the pseudo-“liberals” who mask their loathing of us outlaws behind the sacchrine of “unity” and “equality” and “human rights” and “colorblindness” and “let’s all get along” and vote for the lesser evil because the Republicans are pure evil”…yet are the first to grip an moan about “why you talking about us; we’re your saviors?” when called out for their presumptions of speaking for the outlaws.

And yet, for all their preening and squawking, they still can’t beat the conservatives and “centrists” at anything.

No thank you, J-Val, Kos, and the rest.  We outlaws aren’t playing this game least, not with your rules.

Between Feministing Ariel Levy and Genderberg; Daily Kos and Townhall; Democrat and Republican; Radfem, Liberfem, and AntiFem; MRA and Burning Man, Randi Rhodes and Bill O’Reilly, there is only a flip of the same tired coin of traditional White privilege.  For the rest of humanity, there is only the basic principle of social solidarity, struggle, and the queer notion that humanity is non-negotiable, and not subject to either debate or majority vote. 

To Nez, BfP, BA, Ren, Nina, and all the other outlaws:  may you ride long, fly high, and kick ass….and smile, laugh, and fuck a hellava lot during the journey, too.

Jill. Freakin’. Brenneman. Original. Headbussa.

Not in the literal sense, of course….but she’s been on a freakin’ roll of late with some righteous takes on everything from the DC Madam case to the defense of sex workers from APRF distortions.

But it’s this long overdue pixellized ass-whopping of The Troll Better Known As Der Gregor that puts her over the top and earns her the Fighting 101st PHB (Sex Workers Defense Regiment) stripes.

This is what happens when you push someone a bit too far with bullcrap, parroted boilerplate, and out-and-out lies.

"Beatriz" is a reference to a female Latina who, in an earlier thread, posted an English translation of an original statement released by an Argentinian male antiprostitution feminist group; which Der Gregor attempted to mistranslate and twist to fit his ideological lunacy.  When called out correctly by Beatriz, he suceeded to mock her Latina ancestry (calling her "Beatrice"), even claiming that she was an invention of Jill used to smear "radical feminists" and promote Jill’s alleged "pro-porn" and "pro-prostitution" positions.

Ultimately, Jill reached her limits of tolerance, and belted out this comment in response to Gregor’s nonsense.

Originally found here; scroll down to 10th comment, or read the whole thread for background and context.

Gregor’s excerpts in quotations [For this reprint, also in italics]

“ What in the World are you talking about/ you are a maniac, I am cuban, a man of color an activist for 25 years,”


[Jill’s response]
Well that changes everything. What are you kidding? Peron was Argentinean, Pinochet Chilean, both sharing your Latino ancestry. And? They were both murdering fascists who claimed to be doing what they were doing as part of some war against evil. Your ethnicity means nothing because you demonstrate having learned nothing from being in a minority class. You figure because you are Cuban and a man of color that you are entitled to judge, to grossly violate the human rights of others, to make absurd allegations and to hide from any accountability? By the way, I thought you were a male person not a man. It seems now you are a man when it suits you.

You’re an activist in what for 25 years? Radical feminism? Now you prove it. Der Gregor is obviously a pseudonym. Who exactly are you? Who are you connected with? Who in radical feminism knows you? Because I know many of the radical feminist players in the last 11 years. Do you dare come out from hiding behind the screen name? If you have the connections to activism you claim, I will have at least heard of you or someone in the radical feminist circles that I know will know you and be able to validate your activism.

Your actions define you Gregor.

“"Beatriz" or whoever is behind that quick profile, came offf the gate insulting and ridiculing , “

No she didn’t. She wrote a response to the Manifesto and gave authorization for it to be posted. You took it upon yourself to translate that manifesto with artistic license and present it as authentic and got caught. You tried to play off as being a native Spanish speaker when it’s obvious you aren’t. What happened is you got in over your head. You stuck the manifesto into translator software, used a peripheral knowledge of Spanish and tried to call it an authentic translation. All Beatriz did was translate the Manifesto accurately and note your alterations.

You on the other hand wrote a document that misrepresented the Spanish and was virtually incomprehensible in English.

You took it upon yourself to ridicule and insult her. Worse you attempted to lower her to non human status. Here is a piece of information about prostitution. Do you know how the San Diego Police and other police departments refer to violence against prostitutes? No Humans Involved. Which you should know this being the great radical feminist. You should know the authors of No Humans Involved number 1 and number 2. I know them both and have worked with both of them. One closely for an extended time period.

You feel it is feminist to throw baseless accusations out challenging that Beatriz is either non human, male, a predator? You as a Latino try to denigrate her Latina ancestry by anglicizing her name? And then you claim to be feminist, a man of color, an activist………… Actions define you. Anyone can cut and paste.

“thinking she was insulting and ridiculing me but as you and her and the rest of you pro prostitution people here have no moral capital to use,”

Your actions here define your moral capital? I rest my case.

“Anyone sitting back and loking at your arguments sees the clear facts. you are a *proponent* of prostitution and porn. “

Ok, Mouth. Prove this. State your facts. I am a proponent of prostitution and porn how?

If "Beatrice" was not also a propnent of porn and prostitution she would not be esconced there next tou you in your pitch post, would she.”

This name in quotes thing is disgusting. Like somehow you have discovered a conspiracy and are showing you aren’t fooled. You are the fool.

Your bullshit calling her Beatrice. I don’t know anyone named Beatrice. There is no Beatrice. Beatrice is the creation of a pathetic misogynist racist who masquerades as a feminist. You believe that your Cuban ethnicity protects you from being the standard Gringo? It doesn’t. You are the classic loudmouth from the United States that gives the US such a poor reputation worldwide.

“so, what are you trying to say, that this Phantom person who has no picture of themselves and no profile to speak of, and is foursquare on your side is *not* pro porn and pro prostitution? “

There is no phantom person. Thus your point it moot.

BS, and PS…. That dog don’t hunt.”

Great, you are quoting my quotes now. How amazing is that?

Last topic. We’re going to talk about feminism, oppression and reality. Who do you figure you’re dealing with? You want to sit and lecture me from your pulpit about what it is like for women victimized by clients and pimps in the sex industry. You save the rhetoric that you have read in books. Your knowledge is from books. What you know about what it feels like to be harmed by men in the sex industry is what you read and what you pretend to live vicariously through the suffering of others.

Let me clue you in. I know exactly what it is like to be harmed by men in prostitution. Pimps and clients. I know exactly what it feels like. Because I was victimized. It isn’t theoretical, isn’t some mantra that I memorized from various women’s writing. Most of which being women who’s claim to their knowledge is from having interviewed women in prostitution. Not even first hand experience. Who exactly are you as a male to lecture a woman who was in prostitution and was harmed in it on what that harm is? On what it feels like? On what oppression is? Or what she needs to recover from it?

I know exactly what it feels like. And when I needed help to get out of it, there wasn’t any. When I needed medical attention, I got stigmatization from health care providers. When I needed help from the justice system after being victimized by criminal predators, I instead faced all the lack of rights and resources afforded by a society that has no respect for prostitutes, for sex workers.

You believe your war against porn and prostitution mattered? Not a bit. Since you were an activist when this was happening to me, what exactly did your activism do to help me or anyone else? Nothing.

You believe I would have needed you to explain my oppression, explain the violence, explain what the oppression is and who was committing it? Please. What an arrogant presumption on your part to believe you know better than women in the sex industry what that oppression is, what it feels like and what they need to end their oppression. You can save your theoretical, misogynist first world feminist bullshit for someone else. There is a world of difference between theory and reality and reality wins. I needed human rights, real world resources and compassion. Not some theory with vague promises of my liberation as a class. If you had any idea what you were talking about you would already know this and it wouldn’t have to be explained to you. You want to learn about prostitution and about the victimization of women in prostitution then shut your mouth and listen instead. Because your actions demonstrate that you know nothing but empty theoretical rhetoric that you try to force feed to impose your dominance and to fill the holes in your credibility.

Your actions are disgusting. Take your statements, your actions and your “proof” about Beatriz and try to sell them . Because your inept racist misogyny won’t fly well with women in general much less feminists including most radical feminists. When you try to make that sale and they realize that Beatriz is exactly who she states she is, they are going to recognize the salesman sold them nothing but disingenuous feminism attempting to cloak hatred, cultural imperialism and patriarchal misogyny. There is a reason why your best ally in your fight on this blog is xyradicalfeminist who at best is intellectually about 14 years old if not that in actual age.

Jousting is over. I’ve had enough of your allegations, absurd conspiracies and empty rhetoric. If you want to keep going we are going to match reality vs. theory. Real life experiences as a woman in prostitution vs. your male perceptions and assumptions. You want to talk about violence against women in prostitution? Violence by men? We can play that. Let’s match your theory with reality.

While we are on the subject of violence. Understand this. Your actions and words directed at Beatriz, Ren, myself and others, are emotional violence perpetrated by a man of color, male person,………… whatever you call yourself.

I do believe that a standing ovation — or five — is in order here.

While Jill can stand on her own, it’s nice to have backup when dealing with asshats like DG….earlier in the same thread, yours truly and Renegade Evolution gave him the reading he deserved as well (both consolidated in one comment by me due to some issues with MySpace’s commenting system):

[Reprinting Ren’s comment…hopefully with the code stripped for brevity]

Jill, you’ll have to excuse my bile here for a moment…but….


This man [Note: reference to Randall Tobias, the official who was outed as using the "DC Madam’s" services] was the driving force in policy that denied monies to any countries and programs that did not openly, publicly, and legally condemn prostitution. Not the johns, Gregor, the whole business. Money was cut from programs that saw to the health and education of women in the business RIGHT NOW. RIGHT NOW, not in this magical future that is…what? Just going to appear one day? After the revolution? What? Yeah, anyway, cut funding from those things for those women- Who, you know, maybe if they HAD better educations and more opportunities they, you know, might not stay in prostitution? They might find ways out and into other jobs? Something like that?

Now, I realize you think if men would just stop using porn and seeing prostitutes everything would be all better…so great…get on that…though I am not sure if you and some other radical feminist men closing your eyes and wishing hard enough is going to make that happen or not, but in the mean time, there are people in this business, and they matter, and frankly, you are a shitty humanist and feminist if all you can do is sit around and attack and insult some women who, you know, actually give a shit about and try to help women in the sex industry in the here and now…those who cannot sit around and wait for your glorious revolution, or don’t want your glorious revolution, but still matter because they are humans and all.

And finally…WHAT about the MEN? You know, some feminists, caring about WOMEN and all…don’t necessarily think EVERYTHING AND ANYTHING always has to be…you know…about the goddamn men!

Now, why don’t you sit down, shut up, and ponder that for a moment? You want to get the men to stop? Ally with like minded men? Post your manifestos where men with read them, spread the word, so on…but WHY you are constantly harassing and attacking a woman who is trying to HELP women is just beyond me. It certainly isn’t doing ANYTHING to stop men from adding the demand part to the supply and demand part of sex work, is it?

Oh, but Henchwoman, you so forget….you might as will be pissing into a Cat 5 hurricane eyewall as far as Gregor is concerned. This isn’t even about the hypocrisy of an antiprostitution activist engaging in the very same behavior that he would prosecute and demonize others for doing.

Nah….for Gregor, this is about castrating MEN as a class for the sins of having erections and thinking about women as free and equal sexual beings…which, in the eyes of the microcoded implanted endless loop computer chip program that substitutes for Gregor’s brain, directly leads to rape and abuse and "degradation" and all sorts of damage and destruction.  No, for him, it’s all about the SEX that must be totally purged and the men who must be "retrained" to reject their "base sexual desires" so that "men" like him can feel superior and offer himself to his extremist mentors as worthy.

And it’s that much harder to sell his "eternal victimhood" castration fantasies with all that sexual imagery in the way, and all those women who do happen to — horrors of all horrors — LIKE having sex outside of radfem standards, not to mention women like Jill who dare to defend these women as actual human beings rather than the foolish sluts and sexbots and brainwashed victims of "patriarchy" that need his "protection" from the evil male penis.  Thusly, she must be attacked with special fury as a "sellout", an enabler of rape, and a paid agent of Teh Male Enemy.

Well….too bad if I don’t happen to want to be castrated for crimes I don’t commit, or for having a working penis and the brains to respect a woman’s choices.  And too bad for Ren and Jill that they would rather risk being continuously harrassed by you so that they can stand their ground for actual justice for these women.

Somebody [better] change this broken record….please.


His response to that??  To call me "phalleocentric".

My response to him from henceforth?? To simply ignore him as a dickhead and an asshat.  But, given Jill’s blast, I do believe that we’ve probably seen the last of him there for a while. 


An Open Letter To The APRF Cult (On The Silencing of Renegade Evolution)

[UPDATE #2: Ren just announced that she is now imposing her own personal moratorium on discussion on radical feminism.  Sigh…another voice silenced.

And Andrea over at the Silver Leaf Oak has announced that her blog will be going private soon in response to the assaults on her.  And another…

And…Chasingmoksha has stepped up her attacks on me personally; I posted this response at W-W’s blog (reposted here in case she decides to delete it for obvious reasons):

Now, I know that being the Porn-Loving Patriarch that I am (not really), that my views will probably not get through the filters imposed by W-W…but Chasingmoksha’s mention of me is just too much to resist….so I will try my best.

Is it not enough for you that Ren has said openly and publically that she would stop “trashing” you and your sister ideologues, CM?? Or perhaps, only a full confession of her sins as a “sexbot” and a slut, followed by a ritual self-flagellation and a conversion to the Church of MacDworkinism will do for you?

And what I say at my blog or any other blog is MY words and MY words alone…I am paid by no one (except my current employer, and they don’t really care about what I do when I’m off the clock.

And hell, yes, I am openly and unabashedly critical of what you so aptly call “radical feminism”, because it has been proven time and time again to be nothing more than a Trojan horse for the most vile personal hatreds and loathing of women — and feminists, too — whose only crime is to not march in perfect goose step with your chosen ideology of sex-baiting and universal, collective guilt.

If you are going to quote my blog and my words, at least have the decency to smack me down in public rather than hiding behind a firewalled blog. But then again, decency hasn’t been much of a presence here lately.

You made the wine, ladies…now you will drink the cup. You will be treated as you treat others.

Oh…and please, oh, for Goddess’ sake, do please bring out all the “dirt” you can find on me you can. You may have intimidated Andrea and Ren to silence…but I believe in rapid response in kind when attacked….and I’ve survived much worse.

It is officially on, ladies. You want a reasoned debate, I’m right here. You want to go nuclear….well, I’m still here. Let’s dance.



[UPDATE:  The woman who originally outed the Genderberg forum piece attacking Ren to begin with has just put out her own blog with an explanation of why she did it….and a nice and through smackdown of the APRF cultists.

Please go over to Deep Feminist’s new Radical Feminist Terrorism blog and hear her out.

Radical Feminist Terrorism: Enough Is Enough


Influenced by this thread over at Witchy-Woo’s place; and this response by Ren)

Well, ladies (and specifically, W-W, StormyCloud, Delphyne, Heart(less), Chasingmoksha, Ly, Shannon, and Pony)….are you satisfied now with yourselves?

I guess that it really wasn’t enough for you to trash Ren personally merely because you don’t like her chosen profession, her personal sex life, or her looks.  Nor is it enough to take an insult used in anger and rage at the verbal assualt that you imposed on her cyberfriends and colleagues and distort it into a all out "trashing of radical feminists", prompting her banishment from your esteemed radfem space and of all sisterhood forever and ever.

But now…you had to go and threaten to out her private, personal life….until and unless she ceases to "attack" radical feminists.

Funny..but I didn’t know that laws against blackmail and invasion of personal privacy were mere tokens of the "patriarchy" to be broken at will when it suits your purpose.

But what I don’t get is this: y’all say that you support the highest of feminist values….but since when is threatening to "out" someone merely because they simply don’t march in perfect goose step with your beliefs such a feminist value?? Since when does lecturing another woman that her personal decisions about her own body (which do no harm to herself or to others, BTW) are innately "destructive" to all "sisterhood" and should be shunned with the scarlet letter "S" ( for "sexbot"??? "Slut"??? "Sell out"???) for all time???

Oh, but I forgot…..this is ANTI-PORN RADICAL FEMINISM, where this is done all the time.  Ask Bitch|Lab.

And the sad thing is, that such lowdown intimidation tactics do tend to work sometimes.  Ren has already posted a long response saying that she will back off if Stormy does the same. My guess is that the latter simply won’t….in fact, like Uncle Karl and the Swift Boat Liars and the Right-Wing Noise Machine to which these "ladies" really do aspire to; they will take this as a sign to threaten and harrass more critics…and who knows, maybe even report them to the authorities.  You know..those same authorities controlled by the very patriarchy they allegedly oppose??

But, got to break some eggs to make an omlet, and if fighting global patriarchy and menz’ oppression (read, their erections and women’s "moist pussies") means breaking a few sluts and sexbots (and even a few legitimate feminists) and selling them out to the same patriarchy….well everything will be better after the revolution.

You may have broken Ren (or not), but there are too many of us — male progressive and progressive feminist — who do see through your bullshit; and won’t be so intimidated.  And please, please, for Goddess’ sake, please do put out as much "dirt" on our personal lives as you can…all that shows is how fundamentally weak your movement really is. 

To paraphrase the Electic Light Orchestra’s classic "Evil Woman": "You made the wine, now you drink the cup." You think you’ve seen bad; but you just don’t know how bad we can really get when we are pushed too far.

It’s officially on, ladies. The "sexbots" and their "patriarchial" male friends and supporters start fighting back NOW.  Deal with it.


…And The Fighting 101 PHB Welcomes A New Member…

I am so pleased and honored to give a hearty SmackDog Raised Soupbone Fist of Justice welcome to Greta Christina, who had some nice things to say about my entry on the Duke rape case fiasco, and the blog in general.

And it’s not as if African-American women, and sex workers, and African-American sex workers, don’t get raped by privileged white guys. But now the ones who do are going to have a much harder time of it. There are thousands of times that this happens, and it never makes the papers — but this is the case that people are going to remember.

But… oh, just go read the piece on the SmackDog blog. He says it better than I can. And it’s a really good blog generally, and worth checking out.

Yeah, maybe so, Greta….but I have a ways to go before I can approach your level of talent.

Take a gander at her classic and spirited defense of the girls of Girls Gone Wild (the girls, Clones…NOT the jackass assclown who exploited them for his own profits) and the principle of sexual autonomy in general that she wrote a while back. An excerpt:


The writing I’ve seen about Girls Gone Wild is largely taking two directions. One is pity/concern for the poor exploited girls who are being taken advantage of when they’re too excited/too young/too drunk to know what they’re doing. The other is pity/contempt for the vulgar idiot girls who are squandering their feminist heritage by pulling their shirts up on camera… and are ruining things for the rest of us.

And I have much the same problem with both. I think there’s more than a whiff of patronization, and elitism even, in both attitudes.

Let me talk about the first one first. In the strict Marxist sense, of course the women in GGW are being exploited. They’re being paid a disproportionately low amount for their labor — they’re getting paid in T-shirts and Mardi Gras beads, so duh — and someone else is getting rich off that labor. But I’ve seen a few of these videos, and it sure looks to me like most of these girls know what they’re doing and very much want to be doing it. They like the attention; they get off on exhibitionism; they enjoy feeling sexy and wild; they like having an excuse to do dirty things they wouldn’t ordinarily do.

Will they regret it later? Maybe. Some of them almost certainly will. But you know, a lot of us have done things in our youths that we now regret and can’t take back. (My entire first relationship leaps to mind.) Making dumb choices that you regret is part of being young. It’s the flip side of risk-taking and adventure.

As to the women being too drunk to consent goes, I’m not seeing it. I’ve seen tipsiness in the GGW videos, high spirits, probably even some impaired judgement — but not blackout drunkenness, not drunkenness that would obliterate consent. I could be wrong, I’m not there on the streets of Spring Break with a Breathalyzer and a lie detector test (those don’t work, anyway)… but it sure looks to me like, hammered though many of them are, most of these girls know what they’re doing and know what they want.

Which brings me to my second point: the "they’re squandering their feminist heritage" argument.

This is the one that really bugs me. It’s as if sexual liberation is only for those of us with the right sex-positive feminist credentials — not for yahoo sorority girls who want to pull their shirts up on camera. Like they don’t deserve to have sexual choices, because they’ll make the wrong ones.

But we all deserve sexual liberation. We all deserve the freedom to make sexual choices — even dumb ones or crass ones. As someone whose name I can’t remember once said, not all censorship battles can be about Ulysses. (Does anyone know the source for that quote, btw? I couldn’t find it.) And the battle for sexual liberation and the right to sexual expression can’t always be about brilliant sex-themed performance art, or beautiful ecstatic lovemaking in loving long-term relationships. Sometimes it’s about college girls at big drunken parties pulling their shirts off for the video cameras. That’s the whole point of feminist sexual liberation — we don’t get to go around scolding other women for their consenting sexual choices. (Not on moral or political grounds, anyway. On aesthetic grounds… that’s another story.)

I’ve seen arguments that the problem with GGW isn’t the girls whipping their tops off for the camera — it’s the people behind the camera, the crassness of the videos and the company and the grotesqueness of the main man behind them. It’s not liberated or empowering if you’re whipping your top off for exploitative assholes, or so goes the argument. But while I’m certainly not going to defend the motives of the GGW empire (especially not now), I still think we should support the sexual agency of the wild girls themselves. Do you think every single porn movie that Annie Sprinkle or Nina Hartley ever made was a delicate work of artistic beauty and profound insight, made by sensitive feminists, with the profits going to rape crisis centers and saving the rainforest? I sure don’t. I’m sure that at least some of their movies were silly and dumb, and that the profits from at least some of them went to pay for the sports cars and coke habits of nitwit Silicone Valley porn producers. That doesn’t negate Nina and Annie’s sexual agency and power.

And I think a lot of the "won’t somebody please think of the children?" hysteria about the women in the GGW videos is just flat-out sexist. The same company that makes the "Girls Gone Wild" videos also makes "Guys Gone Wild" videos as well… and I think it’s extremely interesting that nobody, not one person that I’ve heard or read on this subject, has gotten upset about the poor stupid young college boys with low self-esteem who got drunk and let themselves be manipulated into flashing their asses and dicks on camera, and who are going to feel violated and ashamed the next morning and will regret it for the rest of their lives. It’s apparently just young women who are incapable of making their own sexual decisions and living with the consequences.

So here is my plea. Can we please, please, try not to extend our excoriation of Joe Francis to an excoriation of the women who’ve performed in his videos?

Can we please treat them like adults, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that they do what they do because they want to do it?

Can we please at least try to remember that other people like different sexual things from what we like… and not jump to the conclusion that if someone is doing something sexual that we wouldn’t enjoy, therefore they don’t enjoy it either, and therefore they’re only doing it out of manipulation, desperation, coercion, drunkenness, low self-esteem, cultural brainwashing, etc.?

Because when we treat the Girls Gone Wild with patronizing pity and contempt, when we stop respecting them and their sexual agency, it’s a small step to disrespecting Nina Hartley and Tristan Taormino and Annie Sprinkle and Carol Queen and all the other great exhibitionists of the world. And it’s a small step from there to disrespecting every woman — and every man — who makes unpopular sexual choices.

Hear, freakin’ hear.

Don’t let me stop you from going there and checking Greta out.  She’s well worth the trip.


In Memoriaum: Miss Molly Layeth ‘Da Smack Down Upon Camille Paglia

I’m not sure that I can ever do justice to the many kind tributes to Molly Ivins — journalist, progressive populist, humorist, feminist, and all around badassssss who left this mortal world almost a month ago – but rereading this particular essay flambeeing right-wing cultural critic/Ayn Rand wannabe Camille Paglia brought back such great memories that I felt the need to share it with the rest of ‘ya.

A grateful thanks to Avedon Carol of The Sideshow for pointing me to the column, and to Erich Schneider for having the forethought to save the original Mother Jones column and post it on the Internet (via his Caltech home page).

Erich’s original posting was done in 1990s Newsgroup syntax; I have altered it slightly to fit more modern standards.


From _Mother Jones_, September/October 1991, pp 8-10
(Italics are indicated like _this_.)
Impolitic, by Molly Ivins.
I Am the Cosmos

Austin, Texas --- ``So write about Camille Paglia,'' suggested the
editor. Like any normal person, I replied, ``And who the hell might
she be?''

Big cheese in New York intellectual circles. The latest rage. Hot stuff. Controversial.

But I'm not good on New York intellectual controversies, I explained. Could never bring myself to give a rat's ass about Jerzy Kosinski. Never read Andy Warhol's diaries. Can never remember the name of the editor of this New Whatsit, the neo-con critical rag. I'm a no-hoper on this stuff, practically a professional provincial.

Read Paglia, says he, you'll have an opinion. So I did; and I do.

Christ! Get this woman a Valium!

Hand her a gin. Try meditation. Camille, honey, calm down!

The noise is about her oeuvre, as we always say in Lubbock: Sexual Personae: Art and Decadence from Nefertiti to Emily Dickinson. In very brief, for those of you who have been playing hooky from the New York Review of Books, Ms. Paglia's contention is that ``the history of western civilization has been a constant struggle between ... two impulses, an unending tennis match between cold, Apollonian categorization and Dionysian lust and chaos.'' Jeez, me too. I always thought the world was divided into only two kinds of people --- those who think the world is divided into only two kinds of people, and those who don't.

You think perhaps this is a cheap shot, that I have searched her work and caught Ms. Paglia in a rare moment of sweeping generalization, easy to make fun of? Au contraire, as we always say in Amarillo; the sweeping generalization is her signature. In fact, her work consists of damn little else. She is the queen of the categorical statement.

Never one to dodge a simple dichotomy when she can set one up, Ms. Paglia holds that the entire error of western civilization stems from denying that nature is a kind of nasty, funky, violent, wet dream, and that Judeo-Christianity has been one long effort to ignore this. She pegs poor old Rousseau, that fathead, as the initiator of the silly notion that nature is benign and glorious and that only civilization corrupts.

Right away, I got a problem. Happens I have spent a lot of my life in the wilderness, and also a lot of my life in bars. When I want sex and violence, I go to a Texas honky-tonk. When I want peace and quiet, I head for the woods. Just as a minor historical correction to Ms. Paglia, Rousseau did not invent the concept of benign Nature. Among the first writers to hold that nature was a more salubrious environment fro man than the corruptions of civilization were the Roman Stoics --- rather a clear-eyed lot, I always thought.

Now why, you naturally ask, would anyone care about whether a reviewer has ever done any serious camping? Ah, but you do not yet know the Camille Paglia school of I-am-the-cosmos argument. Ms. Paglia believes that all her personal experiences are Seminal. Indeed, Definitive.

She credits a large part of her supposed wisdom to having been born post-World War II and thus having been raised on television. Damn me, so was I.

In addition to the intrinsic cultural superiority Ms. Paglia attributes to herself from having grown up watching television (``It's Howdy-Doody Time'' obviously made us all smarter), she also considers her own taste in music to be of enormous significance. ``From the moment the feminist movement was born, it descended into dogma,'' she told an interviewer for New York magazine. ``They stifled any kind of debate, any kind of dissent. Okay, it's Yale, it's New Haven in '69, I am a rock fanatic, okay .... So I was talking about taste to these female rock musicians, and I said the Rolling Stones were the greatest rock band, and that just set them off. They said, `The Rolling Stones are sexist, and it's bad music because it's sexist.' I said: `Wait a minute. You can't make a judgements about art on the basis of whether it fits into some dogma.' And now they're yelling, screaming, saying that nothing that demeans women can be art.

``You see, right from the start it was impossible for me to be taken into the feminist movement, okay? The only art they will permit is art that gives a positive image of women. I said, `That's like the Soviet Union; that is the demagogic, propagandistic view of art.' ''

Well, by George, as a First Amendment absolutist, you'll find me willing to spring to the defense of Camille Paglia's right to be a feminist Rolling Stones fan any hour, day or night. Come to think of it, who the hell was the Stalin who wouldn't let her do that? I went back and researched the '69 politburo, and all I could find was Betty Friedan, Bella Abzug, and Gloria Steinem, none of whom ever seems to have come out against rock music.

I have myself quite cheerfully been both a country-music fan and a feminist for years --- if Camille Paglia is the cosmos, so am I. When some fellow feminist doesn't like my music (How could you not like ``You are just another sticky wheel on the grocery cart of life''?), I have always felt free to say, in my politically correct feminist fashion, ``Fuck off.''

In a conversation printed in Harper's magazine, Paglia held forth on on of her favorite themes --- Madonna, the pop singer: ``The latest atavistic discoverer of the pagan heart of Catholicism is Madonna. This is what she's up to. She doesn't completely understand it herself. When she goes on Nightline and makes speeches about celebrating the body, as if she's some sort of Woodstock hippie, she's way off. She needs me to tell her.'' I doubt that.

Bram Dijkstra, author of a much-praised book, Idols of Perversity, which is a sort of mirror image of Sexual Personae, said that Paglia ``literally drags the whole nineteenth-century ideological structure back into the late-eighteenth century, really completely unchanged. What's so amazing is that she takes all that nineteenth-century stuff, Darwinism and social Darwinism, and she re-asserts it and reaffirms it in this incredibly dualistic fashion. In any situation, she establishes the lowest common denominator of a point. She says, `This is the feminist point of view,' and overturns it by standing it on its head. She doesn't go outside what she critiques; she simply puts out the opposite of it.''

``For example,'' Dijkstra continues, ``she claims, `Feminism blames rape on pornography,' which is truly the reductio ad absurdum of the feminist point of view. Of course, there are very many feminist points of view, but then she blows away this extremely simplified opposite, and we are supposed to consider this erudition. She writes aphorisms and then throws them out, one after the other, so rapid-fire the reader is exhausted.''

Tracing Paglia's intellectual ancestry is a telling exercise; she's the lineal descendant of Ayn Rand, who in turn was a student of William Graham Sumner, one of the early American sociologists and an enormously successful popularzier of social Darwinism. Sumner was in turn a disciple of Herbert Spencer, that splendid nineteenth-century kook. Because Paglia reasserts ideas so ingrained in our thinking, she has become popular by reaffirming common prejudices.

Paglia's obsession with de Sade is beyond my competence, although the glorification of sadomasochism can easily be read as a rationalization of bondage into imagined power, a characteristic process of masochistic transfer. Dijkstra suggests that the Sadean notion of the executioner's assistant is critical to her thinking, though one wonders if there is not also some identification with de Sade the Catholic aristocrat.

Paglia's view of sex --- that it is irrational, violent, immoral, and wounding --- is so glum that one hesitates to suggest that it might be instead, well, a lot of fun, and maybe even affectionate and loving.

Far less forgivable is Paglia's consistent confusion of feminism with yuppies. What does she think she's doing? Paglia holds feminists responsible for the bizarre blight created by John T. Molloy, author of Dress for Success, which caused a blessedly brief crop of young women, all apparently aspiring to be executive vice-presidents, to appear in the corporate halls wearing those awful sand-colored baggy suits with little floppy bow ties around their necks.

Why Paglia lays the blame for this at the feet of feminism is beyond me. Whatever our other aims may have been, no one in the feminist movement ever thought you are what you wear. The only coherent fashion statement I can recall from the entire movement was the suggestion that Mrs. Cleaver, Beaver's mom, would on the whole have been a happier woman had she not persisted in vacuuming while wearing high heels. This, I still believe.

In an even more hilarious leap, Paglia contends that feminism is responsible for the aerobics craze and concern over thin thighs. Speaking as a beer-drinking feminist whose idea of watching her diet is to choose either the baked potato with sour cream or with butter, but not with both, I find this loony beyond all hope --- and I am the cosmos, too.

What we have here, fellow citizens, is a crassly egocentric, raving twit. The Norman Podhoretz of our gender. That this woman is actually taken seriously as a thinker in New York intellectual circles is a clear sign of decandence, decay, and hopeless pinheadedness. Has no one in the nation's intellectual capital the background and ability to see through a web of categorical assertions? One fashionable line of response to Paglia is to claim that even though she may be fundamentally off-base, she has ``flashes of brilliance.'' If so, I missed them in her oceans of swill.

One of her latest efforts at playing enfant terrible in intellectual circles was a peppy essay for Newsday, claiming that either there is no such thing as date rape or, if there is, it's women's fault because we dress so provocatively. Thanks, Camille, I've got some Texas fraternity boys I want you to meet.

There is one area in which I think Paglia and I would agree that politically correct feminism has produced a noticeable inequity. Nowadays, when a woman behaves in a hysterical and disagreeable fashion, we say, ``Poor dear, it's probably PMS.'' Whereas, if a man behaves in a hysterical and disagreeable fashion, we say, ``What an asshole.'' Let me leap to correct this unfairness by saying of Paglia, Sheesh, what an asshole.

No one like her; and very few to replace her, too.


Just Call Me Spartacus Van SmackDog…



In social solidarity with Melissa Ewen — aka Shakespeare’s Sister — against the loopy fascist wingnutter assholes who have now reached the depths of issuing death threats against her and Amanda Marcotte of Pandagon for the "crime" and "sin" of joining John Edwards’ campaign…and for simply being a strong, progressive woman who says the truth.

Not that she needs it with the full force behind her back, but I’m offering a free gallon of Concentrated SmackDog Whupass (TM) to her and Amanda for their full use against these bastards.

Fight on, ladies.

And a huge double middle fingered salute to you, John Edwards, for allowing them to twist so long. If you defend your principles as you defended these women, then you have no claim to be dogcatcher, let alone Senator..heaven forbid, the President of the United States.

Oh, and one last thing: Spartacus freakin’ ROCKS!!!!




Mamacita Rosarose Joins The SDC Fightin’ 101st PHHB

Not only on the strength of this righteous blast at her blog, where she lays down the law on pretender feminists, antitransgender bigots, and  slut-bashing APRF’s, all in one blow (an excerpt follows):

Oh, okay, I know! Black Amazon, BFP and other women of color whom blog! Guess what? I am one of “those women” too, and the way a lot of you white women treat WOC’s is deplorable. It is wrong. Sorry, but I don’t care how many black women, Asian women, latina women, other non-white women you know, or how many Men of Color you’ve married, slept with, made babies with, or how you, as a white woman, might identify culturally, you are STILL a WHITE WOMAN. You do NOT know what it is like to really be anything but a white woman, no matter how much you think otherwise, and all the hip-hop, biracial babies, and spicy salsa in the world isn’t going to change that. Now see, I bet you think right now that I have a problem with white women, right? Actually, I don’t. I have no problem with white women. I have white friends! But I know I am not a white woman, no matter how often I shop in the Gap or say that Seth Greene is hot. I have no problem not being a white woman. I love my culture and heritage, even if some morons see it as not as good as white. What I have a problem with is White Women who speak for WoC, the whole wide range of us, when we can do it ourselves just fine. Or when they ignore us when we dare to do so, or dismiss our first person, in the trenches WoC words and theories in favor of their own creamy ones then act as if their white makes them right, because, well, they have this friend…


The Transgender issue. My roommate? M to F. I live in South Miami Beach, which is hugely accepting of all sorts of gender sliding and expression. It is, in many ways, a utopia for those of non-concrete sexuality and sexual identity and I love it. It is a festival of difference and tolerance in most circles. And transgender people are real people, with real emotions and experiences too, and I am sick of seeing feminists attack and degrade them. “It?” Where in the numerous Chinese Hells is it okay to call someone, a living, breathing, human being “it”? Mind then if I call you “stupid bigoted cretin?” Don’t like it? Too bad, mamasita. No, trans women are not biological, born women. They have had the opportunity to suckle at the teat of the Patriarchy (Ha, the Patriarchy has teats!), but do you think, oh wise womb bearing feminists, that when they become women that the HELL they go through, physically, emotionally, in their souls, minds and bodies, and via society does not balance out the Karma just a teensy, weensy bit? Of course you don’t, that is evident, because your pain is far more valid and the only pain that matters! Most trans women I have encountered tend to be caring, soulful people who care about all women, which is more than I can say for some who were born that way. For all the boiled down whining that basically amounts to “It sucks to be a woman” you’d think some respect for women who have the intestinal fortitude to give up the “boy privilege” to BECOME women…who are subject to rape and discrimination and hate just like born women, is in order… but then again, I guess that would just give some people one less cause and thing to hate.


And rounding out the list of grievances we turn now once again to that jackbooted slut Renegade, Belle, AP and the rest of “Them”. We’ll make this simple:

“A Radical Feminist warns, "Your resolution must never falter. No argument must lead you astray. Never listen when they tell you that the Pro-porn and the Anti-Porn have a common interest….we must not come to resemble them…”

"Do not imagine, comrades, that leadership is a pleasure. On the contrary, it is a deep and heavy responsibility. No one believes more than me that all women are equal. I would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"

One was deceiving the neighboring feminists as she was also tricking her own. The scapegoat was again “them”. "Whenever anything went wrong it became usual to attribute it to “them” ." In fact many of the claims begin to sound ridiculous to the objective mind. Of course, the mission is to keep everything subjective in the minds of the feminists.

So one, with the help of her allies, shames and silences anyone who is said to be disloyal.

The Seven Commandments:

1. Whatever alters, paints or displays its body is an enemy.
2. Whatever fully eschews the Patriarchy, or supports our causes, is a friend.
3. No feminist shall wear revealing clothes.
4. No feminist shall use her body for monetary gain.
5. No feminist shall partake of pornography or unapproved sexual practices.
6. No feminist shall shame any other feminist.
7. All women, all feminists are equal.

1. (revised) "All feminists are equal but some feminists are more equal than others."

Thank you, Mr. Orwell, a bit of tweaking and this was perfect.

So, some of you feminists, if you are going to ignore WoC, and Transwomen, and accuse others of privilege, and suggest other feminists censor or delete their blogs, perhaps you should install this Logo on you own spaces:

“True White Feminist Country; No Brown People, Non-Born Women, Non-Agreeing Females or Sluts Allowed”

….but also for this blast she just posted to RenegadeEvolution’s blog on the APRF’s obsession with bashing her (RenEv’s) new blog header logo (the one with the boxed out boobs and kick-ass boots) as "offensive" and "pornographic":

Okay, so I’ve figured it all out now, logically and everything. I, Rosa, mere student and minion of South Florida, have found the great truth of “Logogate”.

The whole problem is Ren, misanthropic evil little pornified instigator and thug that she is, just does not hate enough.

Startling, I know, especially with all that vitriol and aggressiveness she is accused of, but it is the truth!

Ren does not hate “non approved’ sexual practices, men, porn, sex work, nudity, conventional beauty, money, choice, crass and crude behavior enough. Most importantly, she does not hate herself, what she does, or what she has become nearly enough. That’s her sin. She’s augmented her breasts, shaves her body, poses nude, makes porn, gets naked for money, swings, dresses as a ‘sexbot’, and she has the nerve not to hate herself for it.

How the fuck dare she not hate herself for it?! How dare she not hate men and blame them for her “seedy, degraded lifestyle”? How dare she actually state that she is willingly this way, and wanted to be this way, and refuse to accept that the Patriarchy made her do it? How dare she take pride in the body she’s worked and paid for? How dare she show off the fruits of that work and money? How dare she enjoy the type of sex she enjoys? How dare she make a living in the field that she has chosen? How dare she do and say all these things without loathing her very existence every second of every day? How dare she not hate herself, her image, her industry, the horrible fucktoy she’s become, when all these other people say she should! How dare she?

How dare Ren not despise herself, her body, her sexuality and what men do to her? How dare she get off scott-free and in the clear when so many other women despise themselves, their bodies, their sexuality and what men have done them?

And THAT’S it, right there. She doesn’t have the solidarity of self-loathing going for her. That’s the real reason she’s offensive. The bod, the fake tits, the job, the rough sex, all of that would be fine if Ren just hated herself a little bit more. If she could weep and bemoan the evils of the Pornstitution, from a personal level, everything would be just fine.

Fuck you, Ren. Fuck you for not hating yourself. Fuck you for not crying over how the business made you starve yourself, paint yourself, shave yourself and get fake tits. Fuck you for finding that beautiful. Fuck you for not waxing on tragically about how many times you’ve been raped and forced to service men in the most dehumanized of ways. Fuck you for not crying out of sadness and despair every time you spread your legs or suck cock. Fuck you for not claiming dp and anal sex are not the most demeaning things in the universe. Fuck you for claiming to be anything other than the poor, used, dehumanized piece of meat you are. Fuck you for not being suicidal. Fuck you for not being a junkie. Fuck you for not being a single mom desperately and tragically forced into this life to support a family. Fuck you for not getting beaten. Fuck you for not having diseases. Fuck you for not being a victim. Fuck you for being alive. Fuck you for making it so hard for us. And fuck you for not being nearly miserably enough.

Like you SHOULD be.

Like WE are.

Fuck you.

2:41 PM

Or, to further condense and distill:  Fuck you, Ren, (and all other rebel feminist dissenters and heretics) for not assimilating into the APRF Borg collective.

The Official SmackDog Chronicles Fighting 101st Progressive Headslap/Headbussa Brigade(tm) just got a new souljah sista.  Welcome in, mamacita, and keep bringing it. 

BTW…I believe that with those killa boots and the new attitude, I’m adding RenEv to the team, too.

For the record, the charter members of the F 101st PHHB are (in no particular order of rank):

‘Da Queer Bitch (formerly be elle)
Nina Hartley
Kevin Andre Elliot
Ernest Greene (Nina’s husband and all around hellraiser)
Dennis Perron
Renegade Evolution
Doug Henwood/Liza Featherstone
Sheldon Ranz
Bruce Dixon and Glenn Ford of The Black Agenda Report
Shauna O’Brien (former softcore actress/model, retired)
Nubian of Blac(k)ademic (on hiatus)
Molly Ivins (posthumous)

I could have missed a few…when I think of them I’ll post them here.




Serious Smackin’/Headbussin’ From The Unapologetic Mexican

Oh, but the fun that Miss Molly would have with this!!!

Memo to Firedoglake: Nezua of The Unapologetic Mexican shows you the correct way to use Photoshop for smacking down foolish wimpy-ass Democratic pols.  US Senator Joe Biden of Delaware (he of the recent foot-in-mouth comments about fellow Senator Barack Obama from Illinois) was the intended target.



(Click on the pic to go to the original post.)

Heheh.  Too sweet.

Consider yourself duly racked in the SmackDog Blogroll, Nez….you are officially a certified Progressive Headbussa.