|
Post by jemand on Jan 25, 2010 18:27:23 GMT -5
susan, so do they not get that in the BDSM world guys can sub and women dom? And that maybe that dominant woman in all the rest of her life might be a dom in a BDSM relationship with a guy as well....
wait. I'm not sure what happened to the posts I was replying too.
|
|
|
Post by susan on Jan 25, 2010 18:45:55 GMT -5
Do you mean to say that ALL women are out there trying to please men in everything they do? I actually think that most Prairie Muffins, and indeed most fundamentalist Christian women, do indeed see ALL women as very man-focused, whether these women admit to it or not. I.e., I think they label all feminists and lesbians as man- haters -- focused on men with their hate -- and since the opposite of love is apathy (not hate), to call someone a "hater" is to actually say that they are still passionately-focused on, and defined by, the object of their hate. And I think Prairie Muffins would say that women who succeed in the workforce are "competing" with men -- which would still make them focused on men and on doing better than men, and not focused on their own goals. And, regarding all the women who are somewhere in-between -- not Prairie Muffins but also not career-driven or feminists or lesbians -- I imagine that they'd see these women as focused on getting all the wrong kinds of male attention. One of my fundamentalist friends onetime told me, "If you see a dominant woman, you can bet she's sexually-active." She went on to explain how all women have a need to be dominated by a man, so the ones who are the most assertive and in-charge in their external lives, probably have a very strong need to be dominated sexually. I wouldn't be surprised if there are even Patriarchists who claim that all of the women who are piercing and cutting themselves, are being driven to do this because their needs for male dominance aren't getting met. But, in reality, the one friend I know who used to cut herself, actually did so because she felt so much guilt over being sexually-abused by her dad and her uncle for many years. The guilt would well up and the only way to feel better was to cut herself. It wasn't that she hadn't been dominated by men -- she actually had been totally subjugated from around age 9. Hurting herself was a response to her own feelings of powerlessness, and a misplaced sense of responsibility.
|
|
|
Post by susan on Jan 25, 2010 18:48:53 GMT -5
susan, so do they not get that in the BDSM world guys can sub and women dom? And that maybe that dominant woman in all the rest of her life might be a dom in a BDSM relationship with a guy as well.... wait. I'm not sure what happened to the posts I was replying too. Oh, I'm sorry! I thought of a better way to phrase all that, and deleted and rewrote my post. I really need to quit doing that! About BDSM relationships -- it does sound like people in these role-playing relationships DO take turns ... and I think someone here also mentioned that there's a "safe word," which seems to be absent from most or all Patriarchal relationships.
|
|
|
Post by jemand on Jan 25, 2010 19:10:36 GMT -5
well, if you take turns, I think you're technically called a "switch" though I think some people may call themselves "dom" or "sub" in the context of a given scene even if they switch between them... I think it's just matter of terminology. Even the relationships in which one person is permanently dominant, and the other submissive, that pattern is not gender linked overall.
About safewords, there is a big push in the BDSM community as such to stay "safe, sane and consensual" which means they always have a safeword. Minor caveat, occasionally I have heard of people in the BDSM community who work out a detailed scene plan, lasting a limited period of time, and then do it without a safeword. They see it as basically no different from getting on a rollercoaster, you know what's going to happen, you want to get on, but you can't stop the coaster in the middle of the ride. Even in this case, they still have a much higher priority of communication throughout, and adjust their behavior according to their own desires, instead of being told which role they have to have.
apparently I have read way to much about this lol
|
|
|
Post by staceyjw on Jan 26, 2010 3:15:40 GMT -5
From the inside- I don't know is this helps, but I have a feeling not many women here know a stripper, esp a feminist one, so I wanted to comment on the remarks about exploitation and such I was a "pole dancer" aka stripper through college, and I LOVED IT. I got lots of cash, had an easy schedule, lots of friends, and gained lots of confidence and knowledge (as strange as that may sound). The place I worked was full of women that were not exploited in the least, and it was a good place to work. I've been sexually harassed at almost every job I've ever had, but never felt disrespected in this way as a dancer- weird, I agree, but true. It all depends on the woman, and the place they work, but I wanted to point out that there ARE many women who are not exploited in this job. It allows freedom that you just don't get in most other lines of work. I think of it like this- TIME is priceless, and you never get it back. Selling your TIME for low wages is worse to me than selling your IMAGE/BODY for a LOT- this way you keep your best asset (YOU) and your priceless TIME. Another point, from the inside, it's the ultimate sales job and hustle, when done right, both sides think they have gotten something! A good dancer gets what SHE wants, and leaves the guy feeling like he was in charge- though most men that have been sent to the ATM a few times realize they are not in control in the least. Its more about putting on a fantasy- that the man you are in front of is SPECIAL and desirable (really)- then it is catering to their demands. Its as psychological as sexual, which is why you don't have to be hot to make lots of cash. Now I'm in the corporate world, and that job is a decade in the past, I wouldn't trade that time for anything! BTW, I LOVE the prairie muffin/pole dancer thing- its very true that we are ALL sisters, and should stand together to end oppression of the female half of the population. I hope both sides can keep an open mind to other types of women- though I admit its hard to do when prairie muffins push to oppress ALL women with religion. ;D Keep up the good work.
|
|
|
Post by staceyjw on Jan 26, 2010 3:26:14 GMT -5
Quick comment on submission in sex: In my experience, women are almost always the doms, at least 80% in hetero-sexual BDSM. It may surprise you to know that the #1 thing men ask for in a professional dungeon is to be dressed up as a woman and treated slutty (8 out of every 10 calls were for this, REALLY). So who needs to be submissive? ?? Not the women, we get enough of that crap already, LOL. I guess Q/P men don't understand what sex is like without a power play. If they think powerful women that are sexually active do it out of a need to be dominated, they are ignorant to the ways of modern women. How sad. Those men (and some women too, sadly) are just looking for ways to shore up their pathetic, outdated belief systems.
|
|
|
Post by jemand on Jan 26, 2010 9:21:45 GMT -5
thanks staceyjw for your input. So in your experience, your job was basically just like an acting job? Psychological, play a role, etc? I've always thought that those women who do choose to work in the sex trade probably have jobs there that are very much like the mainstream acting jobs in the movie industry. Have to be able to play a character, show and play emotion in your body language and expressions, etc. Even the fairly high price for the work is similar-- acting, despite what everyone thinks, is certainly not a trivial job and not everyone is good at it (even if they're all stars in their own minds lol ).
|
|
|
Post by sargassosea on Jan 26, 2010 10:48:49 GMT -5
Stacyjw – Welcome and I’m glad you’re enjoying the series so far There are a number of things I’d like to touch on here but I’ll have to keep it short because I should be writing Point #3 right now… You say that you were a stripper a decade ago and that you (and your colleagues) didn’t feel exploited. Lots of cash, nobody gets hurt, don’t even have to be “hot”. At some point though, a woman who professes to care about true solidarity with other women must stop deluding herself that she was not exploited by the sex industry. Again, she can 'feel' whatever she wants but the fact remains that the sex trade is a patriarchal institution that robs women of their autonomy and renders them nothing more than a piece, or several pieces, of sexualized meat. “Psychological” or not, acting or not, your naked/ish, fetishly feminized body is what men are spending their families grocery money on and that is exploitation. And this: “…though most men that have been sent to the ATM a few times realize they are not in control in the least.” A dime for every time I've heard that old saw*... as in: See! Men who buy fantasy sex with women are Victims of the Partrarchy too!!! So, it totally makes it okay for me to strip because I'm the one in 'control' of his debit card!! Look at me exploiting the men!! OMG, I'm a feminist! (Way back in the day it was the Liberal Doods who would pull that out... 'one of my best friends is a stripper and that's what she said.' Only now the women are actually saying it. Yet another example of patriarchal brainwashing in action ladies and gentlemen.)
|
|
|
Post by kisekileia on Jan 26, 2010 12:17:11 GMT -5
Sea, how exactly is it feminist to deny the reality of a woman's lived experience? There's no reason a woman can't freely choose to work in the sex trade, as Stacey obviously did.
|
|
|
Post by sargassosea on Jan 26, 2010 12:32:25 GMT -5
"There's no reason a woman can't freely choose to work in the sex trade..." Yes there is. It's called the patriarchy.
|
|
|
Post by kisekileia on Jan 26, 2010 12:33:33 GMT -5
Patriarchy means that much of the sex trade is exploitative. It does not mean that non-exploitative situations in the sex trade are impossible.
|
|
|
Post by jemand on Jan 26, 2010 12:37:23 GMT -5
Sea, how exactly is it feminist to deny the reality of a woman's lived experience? There's no reason a woman can't freely choose to work in the sex trade, as Stacey obviously did. I am totally with this, and sea's reply to staceyjw kind of is an example of what's bothering me about this whole thing. It's a way of separating out "sex" from everything else of life, and somehow "sex" is magic and inherently exploitative, while acting *any other role,* being emotionally invested in any other character for a movie or play, is totally fine. I just don't get that. I don't see how or why sex is OBVIOUSLY different, how sex inherently HAS to be exploitative but selling time at a job, or mental power at a job, or emotional investment in an acting job, etc oh, that's not exploitative because that's not sex. It's a double standard that I think hurts women, because, as always, women are still the gatekeepers of this magical and unparalleled sex business (only this time, if they don't fall into line, they are disparaged as "not being in solidarity with other women" and "brainwashed by the patriarchy.").
|
|
|
Post by sargassosea on Jan 26, 2010 14:25:15 GMT -5
This is like really bad timing, but I have to be away from things here for about 48 hours because I have other stuff I have to do that the clock is ticking on... In the meantime, I'll be considering everything all of you have had to say because that's the best part And I think Point #3 will be posted soon (?) so, to borrow a phrase from one of my most :-*Favorite Feminized Beings , "Ladies, start your engines!"
|
|
|
Post by krwordgazer on Jan 26, 2010 20:51:49 GMT -5
When you do get back, Sargassosea, I have a question-- not to challenge, but to help me figure out where you're coming from:
Do you think male strippers are being exploited? Why or why not?
|
|
|
Post by susan on Jan 26, 2010 21:30:27 GMT -5
staceyjw -- thank you for sharing your insider's view! I'm glad that you were treated well, and didn't feel at all exploited or demeaned.
What you said about it really being an acting job, wherein you made each man feel special and attractive -- this powerfully-reminded me of the patriarchal idea that the way for a woman to get what she wants, is to help "The Man" get what he wants.
And I think there's a complementarian ideal that if you just "sweeten your words" you'll have your man (or really the man that you belong to) "wrapped around your little finger."
Of course, the big difference is that the pole dancer just acts for the hours of her shift, and then she gets paid very well and her off-time is her own.
Whereas the Prairie Muffin isn't supposed to just look at it as an acting job -- God is watching and God sees her heart, and He'll know if she's not truly sincere in her adoration of her husband.
It reminds me of that movie "1984," where the lead character gets caught speaking against "Big Brother," and is tortured endlessly until he wonders why his torturer doesn't just kill him. Then he learns that "Big Brother" is only satisfied when each and every mind is totally subject to his mind.
So ... some women manage to act in the sex industry without losing their personhood -- and some Prairie Muffins may very well be married to exemplary men who are very easy to love. But it seems like with Prairie Muffins, there is always some loss of personhood, to some degree.
Because you can never just be two people communicating directly and working together toward common goals. You "treat him like a king" and he supposedly treats you "like a queen" (if you happen to be married to the sort of guy who likes to pamper you ... for the rest of the Prairie Muffins it's probably a case of treating him like a king "though he slay me ...").
|
|
|
Post by susan on Jan 26, 2010 22:02:15 GMT -5
When you do get back, Sargassosea, I have a question-- not to challenge, but to help me figure out where you're coming from: Do you think male strippers are being exploited? Why or why not? I'm not Sea, but I find this to be a very interesting question. I wonder about it, because I've never felt the slightest bit of temptation to see men strip. As a teen I felt some curiosity and looked at a Playgirl magazine ... but I didn't find it the least bit sexually-exciting. And I am heterosexual and I enjoy sex and have what I consider to be a healthy sex-drive -- I just don't seem to be that visually-stimulated. So I find myself wondering who is more likely to be into Playgirl and male strippers -- men or women? I just can't imagine most women laying down good money for that stuff -- except for the occasional ladies-night-out/bridal shower thingamajig. And if men go to watch male strippers, are they objectifying them just as they do with women? And as for the men who do this, are they more likely to be like staceyjw and just see it as a well-paid acting job, or to be like the women who work in the sex industry because of being forced to do so? Also, if it IS indeed women who are the bulk of the audience in male-strip clubs, I'm thinking that some of these women may feel more at-liberty to take "liberties" with the men without being perceived as abusive. But maybe the men don't feel as threatened by aggressive women as women do by aggressive men ... It's hard to say whether men feel just as exploited when/if the shoe is on the other foot. I remember, from back when I used to read Rush Limbaugh (who I now disagree with on just about everything), that he wrote about a women's group getting all up-in-arms about an ad in which a man and woman were walking together, and the woman had her hand on the man's butt. The women's group felt that since they'd been fighting this sort of treatment of women in the media, it was unfair to let it pass when it was a man being objectified. And Limbaugh said that what these women didn't get was, every guy would like to be the guy in that picture. Whereas a woman, upon seeing a picture of a man grabbing a woman's ass, feels sorry for the woman and sees such a picture as very demeaning and threatening to women -- men think a guy who's getting his ass grabbed is one lucky dude (I am paraphrasing in my own words, since I no longer have the book, The Way Things Ought To Be). I am wondering if there may be some very over-generalized truth to this? I say over-generalized, since men and women are all individuals, so there's no one standardazed male or female response to sexually-aggressive behavior.
|
|
|
Post by jemand on Jan 26, 2010 22:40:15 GMT -5
And I am heterosexual and I enjoy sex and have what I consider to be a healthy sex-drive -- I just don't seem to be that visually-stimulated. Well, I have seen statistics showing that a third of porn use is actually women watching it... a good number of women are visually stimulated, and even some that are stay away because of societal expectations. Sure, a third isn't equal, definitely, but it certainly isn't trivial either. I haven't seen any statistics for actual club attendance breakdown for men and women, though. I think the uptick in porn usage generally, and female usage particularly, maybe more recent, and perhaps the clubs haven't gotten as far toward equality as the more anonymous media have yet. But I'm wildly speculating here.
|
|
|
Post by susan on Jan 27, 2010 0:16:39 GMT -5
You know, jemand, I was just reading tapati's ideas in the thread about Patriarchy in the Bible -- and she got me thinking that maybe I actually do get sexually-excited about the female body -- not in the sense of wanting to be with a woman sexually, but Tapati was talking about how Patriarchal religion projects ALL sexuality -- both male and female sexuality -- onto the woman.
And the female form excites me because I think of men being excited by it. So, pretty much my fantasies are about me being the "object" of desire, which actually seems to go along with the Phallus-worship tapati was talking about.
Because it's like I'm basing my sexuality on being want-ED by the person with a phallus. When really I feel like sex "should" be about two people loving one another and meeting one another's needs.
And of course that's what it IS like between my husband and me. He has NEVER treated me like an object -- he is all about wanting to meet my needs, and being sensitive as to whether or not I am in the mood.
But there's this part of me that fantasizes about being treated like an object. And even though I know I would never ever want to be raped, sometimes I fantasize about being raped.
Sick, I know.
|
|
|
Post by jemand on Jan 27, 2010 0:59:45 GMT -5
You know, jemand, I was just reading tapati's ideas in the thread about Patriarchy in the Bible -- and she got me thinking that maybe I actually do get sexually-excited about the female body -- not in the sense of wanting to be with a woman sexually, but Tapati was talking about how Patriarchal religion projects ALL sexuality -- both male and female sexuality -- onto the woman. And the female form excites me because I think of men being excited by it. So, pretty much my fantasies are about me being the "object" of desire, which actually seems to go along with the Phallus-worship tapati was talking about. Because it's like I'm basing my sexuality on being want-ED by the person with a phallus. When really I feel like sex "should" be about two people loving one another and meeting one another's needs. And of course that's what it IS like between my husband and me. He has NEVER treated me like an object -- he is all about wanting to meet my needs, and being sensitive as to whether or not I am in the mood. But there's this part of me that fantasizes about being treated like an object. And even though I know I would never ever want to be raped, sometimes I fantasize about being raped. Sick, I know. fantasy is never reality, even when you fantasize about losing control, you still have a tremendous amount of control because *you* are the one having the fantasy. It's a single-person sexual response that I don't think you should worry about. I think oftentimes people will work through a hurtful psychological response and twist it into a private enjoyable kink for themselves-- so unless you like the sick feeling after such fantasies (i.e., unless that drives other fantasies of yours, to think you are treading on "forbidden mental territory") I'd say try not to worry about it so much. Basically, it's kind of like the oyster making a pearl out of an irritant, women may take fear of rape or losing control, and twist it into an entirely private and very controlled mental game they enjoy. Even if you decided to move it beyond single person territory into consensual BDSM, you would still, oddly, have control over the situation even while you are pretending you have no control-- fantasy isn't reality. It's like the furries, one might think them *odd* if it isn't your thing, but what consenting adults do isn't wrong, even if what they are doing is *pretending* one of them isn't a consenting adult (i.e., an animal, not consenting, etc.). Though what plays in your own mind is even more completely your own territory. You're master of that domain lol. The first and most freeing thing I ever experienced was after leaving fundamentalism, when I got my own mind back. God wasn't "watching" every thought, every mental scene anymore. God wasn't counting every second wasted on thinking of myself, or my future, or things I liked, that didn't have to do with advancing god's kingdom. I didn't have to think about whether my personal fantasy life and every single imagination and daydream was G-rated. I didn't have to police anger, and fear, and all those other things someone trusting totally on god shouldn't feel. I was SO happy to get my mind back. And so if I want to use it for the occasional 'rape fantasy' completely on my own mental turf and on my own terms, I am NOT apologizing. That is MY mind. Policing my imagination, is something I am totally *DONE* with. Of course, that's my experience, yours may be different.
|
|
|
Post by madame on Jan 27, 2010 8:12:32 GMT -5
Susan, I find a female naked body more attractive than a male's. I wouldn't say I find it exciting, though.
But I know I'm heterosexual through and through. The thought of being with a woman is not attractive at all, and I'm not saying this just because I think I ought to. It's just the way it is. Still, while I've always been sexually attracted to men, I much prefer the sight of a man wearing well-fitting clothes than with nothing on.
I read about this on Jonalyn Fincher's blog, and apparently, it's common.
|
|
|
Post by krwordgazer on Jan 27, 2010 11:56:02 GMT -5
You know, jemand, I was just reading tapati's ideas in the thread about Patriarchy in the Bible -- and she got me thinking that maybe I actually do get sexually-excited about the female body -- not in the sense of wanting to be with a woman sexually, but Tapati was talking about how Patriarchal religion projects ALL sexuality -- both male and female sexuality -- onto the woman. And the female form excites me because I think of men being excited by it. So, pretty much my fantasies are about me being the "object" of desire, which actually seems to go along with the Phallus-worship tapati was talking about. Because it's like I'm basing my sexuality on being want-ED by the person with a phallus. When really I feel like sex "should" be about two people loving one another and meeting one another's needs. And of course that's what it IS like between my husband and me. He has NEVER treated me like an object -- he is all about wanting to meet my needs, and being sensitive as to whether or not I am in the mood. But there's this part of me that fantasizes about being treated like an object. And even though I know I would never ever want to be raped, sometimes I fantasize about being raped. Sick, I know. You know, Susan, I am in a very similar situation-- loving, supportive husband, but I still fantasize about these sorts of things-- and I think the reason is that imagining myself as not being in control, helps me loosen the controls my mind usually exercises over my body-- it helps me "let go," so that my body can take over during sexual intercourse. I have tried other kinds of images of letting go, of loss of control-- and they all help. Otherwise, it's difficult to get the thinking, analyzing part of me out of the way so that I can experience full pleasure. Realizing that this is the case, helps me understand why I am drawn to these images, and takes away the worries that there's something wrong with me for "wanting" these things that I know I really don't want.
|
|
|
Post by susan on Jan 27, 2010 14:28:14 GMT -5
jemand, madame, and krwordgazer, thanks so much for sharing! It makes me realize that I'm not so odd after all.
I think my rape-fantasy is really based on a desire to feel that I'm so desirable that the guy loses control. But I instinctively know that the physical reality of being raped would be absolutely-repulsive to me.
And maybe that's where the excitment over the female body comes in. Not that I any longer feel that there's anything wrong with a woman wanting to be with a woman. Just that for me, it's like I'm picturing myself as the desirable woman -- so it's not like I want to do things to her, I want to BE her and have things "done to" me.
And yet, this still seems like a desire to be objectified -- which doesn't exactly seem healthy. But, I find myself wondering -- what exactly IS healthy sexuality?
|
|
|
Post by asteli on Jan 27, 2010 20:56:07 GMT -5
Susan, you might be interested in a series of books about fantasies, most of the books are women's fantasies. She does analyze the different types & how they change through time. The first book "My Secret Garden" was first published in 1973, the most recent last year. Sea, I honestly don't see how that whole "women can't freely choose" bs is anyhing other than misogyny. I've heard it before & everytime it strikes me the same. You are invalidating other womens experiences, choices & feelings. Forgot to say I used to both buy Playgirl & go to see male strippers on a regular basis. I enjoyed both, although neither was really a 'turn on'.
|
|
|
Post by susan on Jan 28, 2010 17:16:58 GMT -5
Thank you, asteli! I recall reading parts of Nancy Friday's My Mother, My Self several years ago. I think I would enjoy reading more of her writings.
About female pole dancers and other women working in the sex industry -- I think you're right that it's misogyny to assume that NO women have a choice, even if they say they do. I certainly don't want to discount the experiences of women like staceyjw.
My big concern is this: for the individuals partaking of the various entertainments offered by the sex industry, how can they know for sure that each and every poledancer, stripper, or actress they're being entertained by, is 100% consenting?
Presumably a woman or girl who wants to make good tips for her pimp or manager (and doesn't want to be beat up if he's that sort of guy), isn't going to be telling any customer who asks, that she really doesn't want to be there and is being forced into it.
She would only speak up about it if she could actually visualize some possibility of getting out and attaining a better life for herself (and her children if she has any). She wouldn't speak up if she'd been so oppressed, from such an early age, that any attempts to get out seemed totally pointless.
|
|
|
Post by jemand on Jan 28, 2010 21:14:29 GMT -5
Thank you, asteli! I recall reading parts of Nancy Friday's My Mother, My Self several years ago. I think I would enjoy reading more of her writings. About female pole dancers and other women working in the sex industry -- I think you're right that it's misogyny to assume that NO women have a choice, even if they say they do. I certainly don't want to discount the experiences of women like staceyjw. My big concern is this: for the individuals partaking of the various entertainments offered by the sex industry, how can they know for sure that each and every poledancer, stripper, or actress they're being entertained by, is 100% consenting? Presumably a woman or girl who wants to make good tips for her pimp or manager (and doesn't want to be beat up if he's that sort of guy), isn't going to be telling any customer who asks, that she really doesn't want to be there and is being forced into it. She would only speak up about it if she could actually visualize some possibility of getting out and attaining a better life for herself (and her children if she has any). She wouldn't speak up if she'd been so oppressed, from such an early age, that any attempts to get out seemed totally pointless. If the establishment were in a country with a strong social safety net in general and where sex work was legal and yet regulated and inspected, and trafficking or coercion to work were a crime that was taken seriously and pursued seriously when there was evidence for it-- I would think it would be pretty clear that the workers wanted to be there. Also, there are a lot of free-lancers in the sex work industry, people who advertise and work on their own, and again you'd be pretty safe assuming they are happy with their work (again, there's the social safety net aspect of it).
|
|