Look at this...

[Branjor]

We are on our way to having a "sex positive feminist forum" here on DU. But it didn't take them long to take the "feminist" out of it. I wonder why?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1652087

[mrreowwr_kittty]

1. Good luck to them. I don't see it lasting too long.

I honestly think the people starting it mean well, but I see it devolving quickly into a creep-fest.

The phrase sex-positive feminist is curious to me. It implies that anyone who disagrees with you, or any aspect of what you espouse is 'sex-negative'. Talk about defining your opposition.

[ismnotwasm]

2. Indeed.

On one hand, it might be beneficial for the sex industry apologists to have a place to hang out. Because that's what "sex positive" feminism really is for. That and a libertarian platform, which I'm not sure is DU's uh, we'll say purpose.

On the other hand, I hate to see the stereotype of feminism as anti-sex rather than anti-patriarchy perpetrated over and over. Any criticism of the sex industry, and you're automatically branded anti-sex. Any criticism--or mention, of rape culture and you're automatically branded anti-male.

But whatever, If that's what enough folks want fine. It will lean Libertarian however, as many of the authors and folks involved in this--perspective, are.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

4. It really shows how much the industry has coopted sex

For far too many people, the entire sum of their sexual experience either comes directly from porn and prostitution, or is heavily influenced by it.

Did you notice how their mission statement conflates radical feminism with conservatism? That's their trump card. Accuse us of being fundies.

I do agree with this particular statement, though I believe the emphasis is on different words in the original:

"They argue that the patriarchy limits sexual expression and are in favor of giving people of all genders more sexual opportunities, rather than restricting sexual expression in the form of pornography"

I'm sure that is supposed to mean that restricting pornography is wrong. But it can be just as easily read as pornography restricting true sexual expression. Which is a lot closer to the truth.

[Katherine Brengle]

3. It's just backlash - they don't actually give a shit about feminism.

They'll get their little forum as a big old "fuck you" to the rest of us, and that will be it.

If they cared about feminism on any serious level, they would have already found this forum.

[ThomCat]

5. The person proposing that forum has a history

of bashing this forum. Which is a shame, because I usually agree with her on many issues.

I think part of it is anti-intellectualism. We read too much, and refer to feminist theory, and use some of the jargon, so people get offended and demand a dumbed-down feminism.

I think part of it is that we are confrontational in pointing out sexism and misogyny and many people don't like the negative approach to anything, no matter how much it's necessary. They want a feel-good, girl-power feminism.

:shrug:

[Katherine Brengle]

6. My feminism feels good --

feeling powerful enough to call people on their shit feels really good. Feeling powerful enough to define my own sexual experiences instead of having them defined for me by the porn culture feels hella good.

I feel strong and capable and able to handle anything.

I think anti-intellectualism is the perfect explanation - it's the same way that conservatives handle things - tear down those latte drinking book reading libbruls.

Tear down those theory reading man hating feminazis.

Same shit, different perpetrator.

Wearing a Playboy t-shirt and watching sleazy pornos with my boyfriend is just sooooo freshman year of college for me - and I felt anything but good and powerful back then. Trying to be what the world wants you to be is a full-time job, and I'm busy.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

8. Oh god, I've actually gone to strip clubs with guys

I'm sooooo glad those days are behind me.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

7. They want that pat on the head from the patriarchy that feels like empowerment.

For many women, the only sense of power, respect, and accomplishment they ever get comes through male approval. It's nearly impossible to convince them to trade that known quantity for uncertainty, not to mention the possibility of social ostracism. I understand that and I try to put it in perspective. But it really bugs me when they call themselves feminists.

[ismnotwasm]

9. It bugs ME

That being a lesbian is evidently considered by some to make you immune to patriarchy and it's negative effects. I would think the experience would be just the opposite. Feminists have been fighting for GBLT rights for a long time. Liberal feminists like myself, ended up in the radical camp (with no apologies) as part of the backlash AGAINST feminism, ala the "feminazi" label. I sure as hell wasn't going to start to defend PORN. Gods.

What were seeing is an attempt at a "kinder, gentler" feminism. Male powered when you look into it. Stupid when you really examine it. Sex positive my ass, it's Ostrich feminism. There is also an unspoken assumption that a feminist such as myself has no experience with the sex industry. They're dead wrong. I know more that I want to, and I HATE being bullshitted about it.

And as usual, it ignores women of color, of other cultures and countries, and by nature it HAS to ignore socio-economic differences, given the numbers of women still drawn into sex work out of poverty.

[Katherine Brengle]

18. Well said.

[Scout]

12. I love your post. May I steal it for my sig line? n/t

[mrreowwr_kittty]

16. Sure! I'd be honored. n/t

[Scout]

17. thanks, I appreciate it. n/t

[BlueIris]

13. Yep. "I'm not happy unless I feel liked by men!" "Men will only like me if I like porn!"

"Fuck me! I'm 'easy-going'!"

[noamnety]

10. That's good

There should be a support forum for folks like this: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1653541

poor guy is being persecuted for empowering women.

*snicker*

[Branjor]

11. I'm not sure exactly what started

this latest round of "sex positive" group organizing, but did you see this courageous thread by undergroundpanther? It was eventually locked by a mod.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=1634113

[atommom]

14. Yes, but apparently her words don't count because "porn is hot."

:(

[cally]

15. Why was that locked?

There's not sexually explicit material in that post.

I'm so pissed right now about these porn threads. Time for another DU break.

[Katherine Brengle]

19. Yeah, the language of truth was too strong for DU.

That really ticked me off, the locking.

[Branjor]

20. Exactly!

And it ticked me off too, like the lockings of threads on this forum.

[Katherine Brengle]

21. Eh, it's the norm unfortunately.

I'm tempted to stop posting altogether, but I've heard from ex-DUers who I never even directly spoke to during my time here who have been changed by these discussions, so I think it's still worth it.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

22. Probably for the same reason an OP of mine in this group was deleted

Undergroundpanther described what goes on in typical porn movies accurately, using terms that properly convey what is going on in them, as the producers of them intend. UP went on to describe how s/he was coerced into performing, and to suggest that some of the valiant defenders of porn ought to put themselves in the position of a female porn performer and see how they like it.

Oddly enough, such descriptions are far too graphic for the delicate sensitivities of DUers, even those who are committed to informing us how harmless and non-degrading porn is.

So let's get this straight:

Porn is a benign form of entertainment that is harmless and non-degrading. This is true of every form of porn, regardless of what actually happens on-screen.

Discussions of porn that are specific as to what happens on-screen are forbidden on DU because they are too graphic and might offend people.

But porn itself is not offensive, so stop saying that on DU.

:crazy:

Thanks to all of you for keeping me sane. :grouphug:

[ThomCat]

23. "Oddly enough, such descriptions are far too graphic for the delicate sensitivities of DUers

even those who are committed to informing us how harmless and non-degrading porn is."

That is very important to note. The reasons for deleting your post, and UndergroundPanther's post, essentially prove our point about Porn having a lot more meaning and purpose than just the portrayal of sex.

[bliss_eternal]

24. I see the thread is now locked.

:shrug:

What am I missing here? Am I the only one that sees that some of the same "guys" that came out in support of such a group are also some of the same people that I've seen vehemently arguing in support of rapists, sexism in many forms, racism, homophobia, etc.?

So am I wrong to assume that such a group would include the exact same people?