![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
This is like some kind of hat trick of fail
When your post was guest-posted at Womanist Musings I was sickened enough to want to stop following that blog for airing your views, for your paternalistic pre-emptive dismissal of anyone who might disagree with you as 'fun-fems' or male-identified, for the condescending superiority dripping from your every word. Your argument was barely comprehensible, but as near as I could make it out, is roughly 'If you contracted for sex in advance and were unable to fairly renegotiate or back out that would be rape, therefore all porn is objectively rape at all times and anyone who disagrees is unworthy of engagement because they've been patriarchally brainwashed'.
Okay, so I disagree that pornography (by which you apparently mean human-acted visual pornography) is innately rape (which does not mean I think it is never rape, or don't have strong issues with lots of it), find your arguments lacking, be sickened by your presentation, and get that out of my system by ranting to friends and lovers. Fine.
And then, this. Over at your own blog a trans woman dared to disagree with you. So you told her she is being too academic, for reasons like defining her terms (which would have greatly helped me to understand what you were saying if you had done so). When you have, several times already in the thread, talked over actual sex workers telling you that you are wrong in your characterisation of how pornography, giving examples from their experience of how negotiation works, and proceed to tell them that they don't get sole discretion to decide if they've been raped, and you can decide it for them because your theory is more important, hypocritical is the mildest term I have for it. Disgusting and marginalising of the people you claim to be helping are others. When someone pointed out you were the one who started with the trying to prove things objectively and academically, your response is it is okay for you to use logic and academic access but not for men.
Yes, that's what you said. You told this woman you didn't like her tone when she disagreed with you, and now you have discovered the reason is because she is 'really a man'. You proceed to say that, because she is a 'man', it was misogynist of her to be perceived as having an academic tone.
You go on to say that in your opinion trans women are what is wrong with feminism. You say:
How dare you say women can't rape? How dare you dismiss every one who has ever been raped by a woman? This vile perspective of yours that rape is only something done to cis women by men is an apology for horror.
How dare you tell black women what is and is not an appropriate response to the racism of white feminists?
How dare you blame trans women for the actions of cis women? You really think you are fighting against the great evil, don't you? By denying the genders of people you have the privilege to do so to, by trampling on the people you want to declare as raped, by trivialising the harm done to people who aren't your pet cause, you think you're fighting for justice?
Your very next paragraph, you say only someone born a man could even conceive of the idea of comparing women to rapists. And then, THEN you say that trans women and [cis] men trivialise rape because, being unable to get pregnant, to them it is merely like being beaten up. Let me quote that for you, in case you think I am misrepresenting her:
Would you look at the high opinion she has of black women. Yep, apparently they're so easily led astray that trans women (presumably always white, because nothing intersects ever) can trick them into thinking rape is, like, totally equivalent to 'having your feelings hurt' and therefore when they liken white (the absence of cis here is deliberate) feminist racism to rape they must mean something insignificant.
And trans women? Apparently they can't be raped at all. I'm sure plenty of people will be pleased to know they were never raped, and therefore are probably fine or misogynist or something. Goof thing fertile cis womanhood is a prerequisite to being raped, or a lot of things being done to infertile women, men, children and others would be really awful. But let's focus our disgust on things people consent to.
I'm actually amazed. I wouldn't have thought I'd ever see self-identified misandry used to actually be oppressive, but apparently when there are trans people about miracles can happen.
You say you're fighting against rape, but what you are doing is marginalising sex workers, infantilising black women, and engaging in some breath-taking rape apologism yourself. In fact, reading over the comments to write this post, you don't even seem to care about whether porn is morally rape, only if you can define it as legally rape. I think that's wrong, too; rape is rape in my view because it is wrong to violate sexual consent, not because the law says so, and the law could stand some improvement in how it considers rape.
Okay, so I disagree that pornography (by which you apparently mean human-acted visual pornography) is innately rape (which does not mean I think it is never rape, or don't have strong issues with lots of it), find your arguments lacking, be sickened by your presentation, and get that out of my system by ranting to friends and lovers. Fine.
And then, this. Over at your own blog a trans woman dared to disagree with you. So you told her she is being too academic, for reasons like defining her terms (which would have greatly helped me to understand what you were saying if you had done so). When you have, several times already in the thread, talked over actual sex workers telling you that you are wrong in your characterisation of how pornography, giving examples from their experience of how negotiation works, and proceed to tell them that they don't get sole discretion to decide if they've been raped, and you can decide it for them because your theory is more important, hypocritical is the mildest term I have for it. Disgusting and marginalising of the people you claim to be helping are others. When someone pointed out you were the one who started with the trying to prove things objectively and academically, your response is it is okay for you to use logic and academic access but not for men.
Yes, that's what you said. You told this woman you didn't like her tone when she disagreed with you, and now you have discovered the reason is because she is 'really a man'. You proceed to say that, because she is a 'man', it was misogynist of her to be perceived as having an academic tone.
You go on to say that in your opinion trans women are what is wrong with feminism. You say:
the trans-infiltration of feminism is something that has bothered me greatly. in fact, i am starting to think that this is one of the reasons that feminists have started acting so misogynistic to one another. for example, i noticed in the most recent “dustup” between the black radfems and off our backs magazine that we had black feminists saying things like “when white feminists abuse their white privilege, they are just as bad a rapists.” HUH? not only is it abusive to equate any woman to a rapist, its simply NOT an accurate comparison, at all.
How dare you say women can't rape? How dare you dismiss every one who has ever been raped by a woman? This vile perspective of yours that rape is only something done to cis women by men is an apology for horror.
How dare you tell black women what is and is not an appropriate response to the racism of white feminists?
How dare you blame trans women for the actions of cis women? You really think you are fighting against the great evil, don't you? By denying the genders of people you have the privilege to do so to, by trampling on the people you want to declare as raped, by trivialising the harm done to people who aren't your pet cause, you think you're fighting for justice?
Your very next paragraph, you say only someone born a man could even conceive of the idea of comparing women to rapists. And then, THEN you say that trans women and [cis] men trivialise rape because, being unable to get pregnant, to them it is merely like being beaten up. Let me quote that for you, in case you think I am misrepresenting her:
IMO, only a fucking born-man would come up with a concept so idiotic! because born-men cant get pregnant from rape, men and transwomen think its just like getting beaten up, or otherwise generically “oppressed.” well guess what? rape is its OWN THING, and only born-women can be thoroughly vicitmized by rape. transwomen dont get to appropriate that, and black women know better!! so where did they get this language that rape is just-like being, you know, oppressed? from transwomen, is my guess.
Would you look at the high opinion she has of black women. Yep, apparently they're so easily led astray that trans women (presumably always white, because nothing intersects ever) can trick them into thinking rape is, like, totally equivalent to 'having your feelings hurt' and therefore when they liken white (the absence of cis here is deliberate) feminist racism to rape they must mean something insignificant.
And trans women? Apparently they can't be raped at all. I'm sure plenty of people will be pleased to know they were never raped, and therefore are probably fine or misogynist or something. Goof thing fertile cis womanhood is a prerequisite to being raped, or a lot of things being done to infertile women, men, children and others would be really awful. But let's focus our disgust on things people consent to.
I'm actually amazed. I wouldn't have thought I'd ever see self-identified misandry used to actually be oppressive, but apparently when there are trans people about miracles can happen.
You say you're fighting against rape, but what you are doing is marginalising sex workers, infantilising black women, and engaging in some breath-taking rape apologism yourself. In fact, reading over the comments to write this post, you don't even seem to care about whether porn is morally rape, only if you can define it as legally rape. I think that's wrong, too; rape is rape in my view because it is wrong to violate sexual consent, not because the law says so, and the law could stand some improvement in how it considers rape.
no subject
...wat?
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
What she implies, though, is even worse than what she says. That's the really chilling part...
no subject