pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Dec 17 2015 : 10:02PM
^ I don't think you know what third wave feminism means, it is usually associated with 'sex-positive' feminists who support sex worker rights and elements of pop culture.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Dec 17 2015 : 10:12PM
Dude, you're on a PORN forum. Seek help, you are either riddled with self-hatred or a hypocrite. PS. You really think Anne Desclos and Catherine Robbe-Grillet are mentally inferior because they practice(d) S&M? They were certainly better writers than anyone I know.
[Link]
Canadian_Cindy Deactivated User
1102 Posts 2/15
Posted - Dec 17 2015 : 10:22PM
I was not saying empowered women and BDSM are incompatible. I was saying, Deen's action and choices are not what BDSM is about and that is incompatible with someone calling themselves a feminist. If Sam Swinger pulled any of that stuff in a club, he is banned. Period, end of story. I know this is porn and there are different things happening. However, I feel anyone holding up Deen as an example of the BDSM lifestyle and connecting it to feminism is hugely misguided or very naive.
[Link]
Canadian_Cindy Deactivated User
1102 Posts 2/15
Posted - Dec 17 2015 : 10:24PM
Furthers my point..... nobody knows or agrees on what feminism is and it is just a term thrown around like candy by people who want to make themselves feel good.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Dec 17 2015 : 10:42PM
When it comes to politics practically no term has universal agreement on its meaning, from Fascism to Marxism. That is the nature of language and politics. Doesn't mean we should give up using the terms.
Sex positivism is not gender based. The repression of one inherently represses the other. 3rd wave feminism by and large had become marked by nonsense. Anyone can support sex-positivism without gender bias. As with most causes that fall out of popularity, they started out good and then devolved into monsters. Again we would be much better off if feminazis didn't hijack and inevitably sully the cause. It's like how neo-cons have ruined the GOP. Feminism was cool in the 1st and 2nd waves. Republicans were cool back in Lincoln's day. But times change and so do the contexts, conditions, circumstances, etc. Most of the embarrassing voices in politics today tend to come from the GOP (for the record I'm not letting Dems off the hook either; nobody's off the hook, not least of all those adhering to antiquated political ideologies or parties - EVER). But here is the Wiki entry overview of 3rd wave feminism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-wave_feminism Nothing about sex positivism in there. From what I've learned of sex positivism, or more specifically sex positivism feminism, it predates 3rd wave feminism, or modern feminism, and all this nebulous social theory winds up clashing with itself as often as it does galvanizing it. Sex positivism of the 80s spearheaded by many figures, from typical academics to performers who we all here should praise as champions such as Nina Hartley, was just the type of reformation we need in modern feminism now, instead of all the sex shaming feminazis who have ridden the swinging pendulum to the opposite extreme. Sex positivism still exists but has been overshadowed of late by mobs of feminazis and other ridiculous SJWs looking to crucify the innocent and cash in on this, e.g. Anita Sarkeesian. Look at what's happening on college campuses across the country. This has become the theater of the absurd. Edited by - Melvyn on 12/17/2015 11:15:41 PM
I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13
Posted - Dec 17 2015 : 11:15PM
I don't see it as problematic that there are different schools of feminism. Diversity is healthy. Problems only arise when the culture at large, especially the media, identifies and treats one particular subgroup within the movement as being representative of the movement at large.
Problem is the loudest voices get the most attention, and more and more often they tend to be the most ridiculous. We need look no further than the recent Mizzou fiasco. Even liberals are rolling their eyes. The reason I'm not overly bothered by it is I find solace in realizing that these hostile lunatics ultimately destroy themselves. The pendulum swings back and society receives a reality check. Edited by - Melvyn on 12/17/2015 11:22:11 PM Edited by - Melvyn on 12/17/2015 11:24:26 PM
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Dec 17 2015 : 11:36PM
Wikipedia is hardly an authoritative source for a definition on anything, let alone a political term, way too much internet bullshit swirls around politics for Wikipedia to work as an independent, semi-objective source.
I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13
Posted - Dec 17 2015 : 11:59PM
^^I don't at all agree that the loudest voices get the most attention. I've heard too many loud feminist voices that don't get heard outside of San Francisco to believe that. Meanwhile, Jessica Valenti is handed a mass audience by Guardian US.
[Link]
IkeMan Deactivated User
40 Posts 12/15
Posted - Dec 18 2015 : 12:28PM
I don't see the correlation with self-hatred. Care to elaborate? Also: what makes you think that people who are active in porn-forums are necessarily pro-porn? Being pro-porn is not a requirement for registering and actively engaging in a porn-forum! About these disgusting and honorless female persons - I've never heard of them before and I don't want to waste any time on their biographies.
I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13
Posted - Dec 18 2015 : 12:57PM
^
[Link]
Canadian_Cindy Deactivated User
1102 Posts 2/15
Posted - Dec 18 2015 : 1:33PM
If you have never heard of them and have not read their bio's; how do you know they are disgusting and honorless? Just a gender thing for you? If you are implying you are investing time on a porn forum when you don't like porn; you may need to do some re evaluation of your priorities. Life should be spent doing things one enjoys.
I know that I've said that I was done with this topic, but a few things are bugging me. Up front: I've vacillated back and forth on this one, and I still am unsure about the whole deal. So, I'm not pushing an agenda here, just throwing out some things that my mind keeps going back to: (a) Has there been a date given or have any of the details of the tweeted (alleged) assault ever been put out? I've read a lot about thoughts and feelings after the fact...and continued relationships, working together, etc. ... but little about the event itself. (It seems to me that it's near impossible for someone to defend him- / herself without being given this information. It's also quite likely that the person might not know what event is being brought up to even address it at all.) (b) The original tweets noted dismay about logging into social media and seeing Deen being referenced and glorified, if I'm not mistaken. Given that Deen was--on that same day--an update on Stoya's site, acting out a similar scenario no less, doesn't it reason that this would have been equally distressing? Yet, the scene remained. I just can't get over this fact, despite Kayden's explanations. (c) I'm dismayed that the term "victim-shaming" is being used--largely on Twitter--by certain individuals (not Stoya that I recall) as a means of stifling discussion and questions on the matter. It's fairly clear at this point that the intent is a "trial by internet". As such, it would seem that--at a minimum--civil questions should be entertained...or at least not vehemently attacked. (I'm also equally dismayed by people on both sides of the issue so dogmatically sticking to one point of view or the other. I sometimes wonder if they're trying to contribute to the discussion or merely convince themselves that their opinion _must_, without any room for exception, be correct.) Finally--on the matter of the Peters accusation: I feel somewhat responsible for its inclusion here in this thread, as I believe that I was the first to post copies of her tweets. That said, there's a lot of "evidence" (for lack of a better word) out there that has me seriously questioning her specific account. It doesn't have any bearing on the other accounts, but I'm doubtful on that one. Hoping to not be jumped on and "labeled" negatively, but this is stuff that I think is fair to consider.
I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV 911 Posts 4/06
Posted - Dec 18 2015 : 8:53PM
^^ I agree that people shouldn't use the term "victim shaming" or "victim blaming" to stifle honest discussion or try to paint accusers as beyond reproach. That said there is a lot of actual victim blaming/shaming in this thread, on twitter, and I would guess many other venues as well. It's usually pretty easy to spot. It usually comes of as very sanctimonious and starts off like "If she did get raped, she should/shouldn't have... (acted in some particular manner, before, during or after the alleged incident)" That sort of thing brings nothing useful to the conversation and only serves to undermine the accuser, regardless of whether or not the crime took place or not and it has no place in a civilized discussion.
There are many characterisations that people use to try and stifle fairhanded discussion - calling anyone who questions the allegations a "rape defender" is a popular one. However most people understand that to view the matter properly you need to consider it from all sides and scrutinise all the available information. Fairly speaking an openminded judgemment would simultaneously render you liable to the accusation of rape sympathiser (in scrutinising from the side of the alleged victim) and a rape defender (in scrutinising from the side of the alleged perp) in equal measure. And can i point out The first line of defense for a suspect (froma a strategic/legal perspective) is simple denial that it happened (wether the denial be true or false). James has not done this (with the exception of Stoya and with her apparent history of threatening false abuse allegations there are legitimate question marks over her credibility). So our consideration in such cases as the Ashley Fires incident is not wether it happened but how it happened and the context of how it happened. JD has had the honesty to aknowledge events , and his defence is that on occasions he has acted like a jerk and that some events have been misrepresented and the context not properly taken into account. From Ashley Fires side - it was sexual assualt - and no-one is querying the events or the legitimacy of Ashleys feeling which is a personal and valid one. The other perspective is that of JD. Context - Kink Palace - communal bathrooms , notorious sexual high hjinks etc. Kink - where a parallel behavioral normality existed (exists ?). Where there exists a different idea of whats acceptable and whats unnaceptable behaviour compared to what you or i would take for granted in the world outside. We need to consider the offense in the context of the behavioral norm where it happened and against the standards of behaviour that Kink fostered on their premises. Kink - where allegedlly its ok for directors to fist virgins in the ass without their consent. (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3349811/Porn-actress-Nicki-Blue-accuses-fellow-actress-Princess-Donna-helping-James-Deen-sexually-assault-her.html) Im not going to say whos right and whos wrong - im only saying people need to realise there is more than one perspective, I feel that a reasonable position would be that stricltly speaking what James did was wrong , he himslef acknowledges the fact , but in view of the context ; Kink and his stopping the advance when directed to do so by Ashley. Personally i would judge this (the ashley incident) more along the lines of a mistake rather than a malicious assault.
[Link]
JB_X Deactivated User
addled 1500 Posts 10/12
Posted - Dec 19 2015 : 6:30AM
Except that's exactly what he did. Denying that any of this happened on twitter was literally the first thing he said publicly. It wasn't Stoya specific, and it was well after the next several allegations against him (and undoubtedly crafted by his lawyer or publicist). Back to the drawing board for another theory, I suppose.
I don't think there is such a thing as an objective source. Because the only way to be objective is to list all possible views and let the reader decide what the 'truth' is. Most sources don't even try to do this. They just select and present one point of view that the author thinks is best.
^ If every media outlet was like the Daily Mail or Fox News, I'd agree with you but they aren't so I don't. The Daily Mail and Fox News always have their own socio-political agendas so you're absolutely right, they are not objective in the way they report. There are broadcasters and newspapers that give as many facts and views from all sides as possible and don't weigh in with their own self-righteousness or bigotry - is that not showing objectivity.
I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13
Posted - Dec 19 2015 : 11:53AM
^As far as I'm concerned, all news is biased propaganda beginning at a very basic level: What are we going to report, what aren't we going to report. That's a narrative question. All news cannot be reported, so the media will inevitably choose which stories to report according to the narrative they wish to give to the public. That also controls which stories are reported earlier in the broadcast or on what page of the newspaper they are printed, not to mention how in-depth and comprehensive the reports of each individual story are. What footage is chosen for any given story? Narrative. How many "experts" will be invited to talk on this or that issue and how are they selected? Narrative. Of course all of this is not just true of the news media. Take documentaries for example. All are biased, all are propaganda. I remember when "Jesus Camp", a documentary about a Pentecostal youth camp, was released it was highly praised for it's lack of talking heads and for just letting the footage speak for itself. How naïve. I actually like that documentary and am glad that it was well received, but viewers and critics should have asked themselves why the specific footage they were seeing survived the edit and other footage didn't. Furthermore, the criticisms by Pentecostal theologians and other Pentecostal experts that the choice to not contextualize some of the seemingly bizarre religious practices captured in the documentary was itself a biased narrative choice. On the other hand, what did those Pentecostals expect? The necessity of narrative will inevitably kick in, and within that lies bias and propaganda. So I'm not surprised when a headline that eating bacon is as bad as smoking cigarettes turns out to be nonsense, or when the claim by the paper of record that “1 in 4 Women Experience Sex Assault on Campus” is revealed to be bullshit. Why would I be? Stories like that are just part of the narrative those news organizations are trying to sell to the public, and the sooner we recognize that bias and propaganda are inherent in news media the sooner we can become more cautious about taking so much of the news that we hear and read at face value. Edited by - misspornUSA on 12/19/2015 11:56:20 AM
I honestly feel like it would be a bittersweet moment if US porn somehow ended up getting banned because of this twitter judge and jury, I'd love to see all the Deen haters crash and burn, we'd literally get to see their souls vacate their bodies in slow motion, it would be an amazing feeling and I'd still have Euro porn and amateur porn plus I'd be saving a lil cash...lets see what happens.
Why should I? You Deen haters all have a strong belief that you don't have to explain how you managed to come to the conclusion that he's a guilty, rampaging rapist so why should I present you with something you're not willing to present me? It's almost 2016 dude equality transcends ..do the needy or stay quiet.
Huh. seems I was wrongAs a matter of interest, Ben Mockridge, why the spirited defense of Gerry Adams? Are you a Sinn Fein/IRA member/sympthizer, by any chance?
Simple. I brought up Ashley Fires' recent open letter, which included her saying that she suppressed what happened to her, and that the memories were triggered and became overwhelming for her after Stoya's tweets. I pointed out that this is consistent with known rape/sexual assault victims' reactions, using as an example now-Irish Senator Mairia Cahill, who was raped by the IRA after the Good Friday Agreement of 1998, had it covered up by Gerry Adams, tried to suppress the memory of what happened to her, only to have it all come back during the 2014 trial of Liam Adams for raping his daughter Aine. Gerry Adams, the leader of Sinn Fein/IRA, covered up both incidents for years, which is why his name came up.
Very well said, misspornUSA. The fact that people like Gail Dines and Anita Sarkeesian have the unrestricted devotion and attention of the media obscures the fact that there are decent feminists like Lorelei Lee, Casey Calvert, Cassie Jaye, Christina Hoff Sommers and Cathy Young. On the other side of the equation, Roosh V and the Manosphere's campaign to legalize rape on private property makes things difficult for people who have legitimate criticisms of feminism.
I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV 911 Posts 4/06
Posted - Dec 19 2015 : 12:42PM
Don't speak of that which you do not know. I'm no Deen hater so stop making assumptions about me. I asked if you'd like to elaborate on how you thought some people on twitter would lead to the US porn getting banned, and if you can't or won't that's fine. I just don't seen any possible way the former would result in the latter. That said, I do think it is unlikely that all of the allegations against Deen are false, which means I think it is unlikely that he is innocent. (I've not once asserted that he is a rampaging rapist) I've elaborated on the subject already, so feel free to read the rest of the thread for my extended thoughts. I'm not going to repeat them here just for you, only to have you duck the question again afterwards. Honestly I just asked the question because I figured you couldn't/wouldn't explain your outlandish assertion, so as far as I'm concerned, you've proven me right in that regard, so we can both move on now.
Well, the Mizzou #ConcernedStudents1950 got the president of that university fired, even though he was doing his best to investigate that incident. As well, there is an entire army of extreme feminists like Gail Dines (backed by extreme leftists), extreme Christians like Shelley Lubben (whose position Ted Cruz-style republicans support) and wealthy self-promoters like Michael Whinestain/AHF who are out to destroy the adult industry. Gail Dines almost got Iceland to ban porn David Cameron effectively choked off online porn in Britain Extreme feminists like Gail Dines are part of the Democratic Party base. Extreme Christians like Shelley Lubben are part of the Republican Party base (Yes, California Republicans voted against Measure B. They do not have the power of religious nuts like Ted Cruz, Mike Huckabee and Rand Paul). House Speaker Paul Ryan is a Catholic fundamentalist. In other words, one thing both Democrats and Republicans can agree on, since their base supports it, is the destruction of the adult industry. All they have to do is continue Whinestain/AHF's work in regulating the adult industry out of existence.
I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV 911 Posts 4/06
Posted - Dec 19 2015 : 1:03PM
That is totally uncalled for. Pointing out your inaccurate portrayal of events doesn't make him anything other than someone interested in truth and accuracy. You're the one misrepresenting the facts here, not Ben, so if anyone's agenda and sympathies should be called into question it's yours. If you don't like getting called out publicly for misrepresenting the facts, then perhaps you should just fact-check your posts better in the future instead of lashing out at other members.
I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV 911 Posts 4/06
Posted - Dec 19 2015 : 1:07PM
I would suggest that public opinion in general, not some twitter hashtag lead to the president getting fired. That said, your example is analogous to Deen getting blackballed in the industry, not the entire industry in the US getting banned. The Mizzou story was on the national news every night while it played out. How many times have you seen Deen and Stoya mentioned on your nightly news since Stoya's tweet?
Of all of the allegations against Deen I haven't read one that states he's a rapist, they only state he's been a tad aggressive at times like many male porn stars are, but yet he's being made to look like a marauding cave man hitting girls over the head with a giant club and raping them behind a tree when that is just not the case at all. None of you have any proof that he's a rapist, not one.. but yet you're all in this thread trying to get him kicked out of the porn industry and sent to prison, that seems like hate to me. Edited by - Mr Hardcore on 12/19/2015 1:14:39 PM
Of course I am, some people have to learn the hard way, it would set a precedent for future online feminist militias that your scum behavior will backfire and blow your fucking face off.
I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV 911 Posts 4/06
Posted - Dec 19 2015 : 1:23PM
Perhaps you should read more. Forcing himself on (and into) women when he's not shooting a scene isn't the same thing as being "a tad aggressive." I agree not all of the allegations are rape, but several would qualify as sexual assault, and if you want to split hairs about that, fine, but personally I don't think one is any better/worse than the other.Are you going for hyperbole there or just trying to erect a strawman?Perhaps you should reread the thread. I've suggested no such thing. You're no better than all of the people on here that you're trying to attack. You're misrepresenting what has been said, in order rationalize your own beliefs.
[Link]
Canadian_Cindy Deactivated User
1102 Posts 2/15
Posted - Dec 19 2015 : 1:25PM
I think you should consider changing " a tad" if you want to have a more serious discussion about your thoughts. Even if you chose to believe he has never done something against someone's will, he certainly is not as minimal as " a tad" when it comes to daily behavior. Is he a rapist? Nobody can 100% prove that so far and for people like yourself, that makes him innocent. It is ok to feel that way as it is a legitimate position to only believe a crime with 100% proof. I lean towards the "where there is smoke..." and all the known behaviors (which in this case are extensive) to decide how I feel. Is he a guy who likes to hurt people and doesn't know when to stop? for that there can be no dispute. It is healthy to agree and disagree and you can make up your own mind about Mr Deen; I just think minimizing his known behavior with that term is something I had to point out. Thanks
I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13
Posted - Dec 19 2015 : 1:25PM
There are plenty of feminists of a certain kind who would be happy to see porn banned, and yet you imagine that it would somehow be a blow against them? Edited by - misspornUSA on 12/19/2015 1:27:12 PM
1. Ashley fires is a porn star, James Deen is a porn star, they were both on a porn set, porn stars tend to be very sexual people, they were both naked, Ashley Fires has a nice ass and enjoys anal, James noticed this, James wrongly assumed she's a total freak and wouldn't mind little bit of extracurricular butt sex, James decided to stick his penis in Ashley's rectum shortly which thereafter Ashley stated she wouldn't like to receive any extracurricular butt sex that day, James immediately stopped. The end. That would never stand in a court of law. That isn't rape nor is it assault, it's just a misunderstanding. Also none of these allegations would classify as rape, if they did there would be a whole load of porn guys sweating real hard right now. 2. This whole entire thread is "hyperbole" you included. 3. I've been reading the thread in silence and you're all pretty much full of shit, you nor the accusers have any evidence that he's committed any crime therefore he will not be going to stand before a judge in any court of law and as a result of that he will most definitely not be getting banned from the porn industry, in addition he should also be talking to his lawyer about suing these women for defamation. You lose, I win. #IStandWithJames
I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV 911 Posts 4/06
Posted - Dec 19 2015 : 2:38PM
Yeah... a misunderstanding. I'm sure you'd feel like it was just a misunderstanding if he forced his cock in your ass.Again, I'm going to ask for you to elaborate on that claim. Please point to where I've been hyperbolic on this thread. (no need to reply to say that you're not going to, it's already assumed)Oh well as long as you've declared yourself the winner, then I guess we're all done here. Except I will point out that is the exact same thing that you're bitching about on here (people making grand declarations without any supporting facts) I'd give some posters the benefit of the doubt here and conclude that was done as a bit of satyr, but in your case I don't think it's plausible. #IStandWithLogic
I doubt that Ashely Fires stated that she wouldn't like to receive any extracurricular butt sex. I suspect she stated something a lot more vehement and personal. That being so, I question the rest of your portrayal. However, for the sake of discussion, let us take it as is. At best, what you describe makes Deen out as not very bright, since he either can't tell the difference between business and pleasure, or he thinks it is okay to mix the two. It also makes him impulsive, since he can't be bothered to take a few seconds to look before he leaps. Maybe that would describe a lot of people in the porn biz, but, still. At worst, it makes him out a complete egoist who doesn't give any thought to anybody else's worldview. Oh, but he stopped immediately, you say. Sure, but did he stop because he's a nice guy or did he stop because other people were there who would have made him stop, and gotten him in trouble? Not a slam-dunk for the defense, I'm thinking. Fortunately, trial-by-internet doesn't count.
"You have sacrificed nothing and no one." 3689 Posts 8/10
Posted - Dec 19 2015 : 7:06PM
[Link]
Canadian_Cindy Deactivated User
1102 Posts 2/15
Posted - Dec 19 2015 : 8:56PM
I guess you also have an #IStandWithBill hastag too, right? What you have said is basically what Cosby's defenders say too. You know, your approach flies if there one or two accusers; it can not fly when there are 8+ or 50+. No rational thinking can support that this is a mass conspiracy of liars doing it just for the hell of it. Thanks for sharing your thoughts though. I hope you put those hashtags on your twitter account for real so everyone who knows you , knows where you stand.
James Deen @ Adult Empire
Posted - Dec 17 2015 : 7:05PM
I'm sure you'd feel like it was just a misunderstanding if he forced his cock in your ass.Again, I'm going to ask for you to elaborate on that claim. Please point to where I've been hyperbolic on this thread. (no need to reply to say that you're not going to, it's already assumed)Oh well as long as you've declared yourself the winner, then I guess we're all done here. Except I will point out that is the exact same thing that you're bitching about on here (people making grand declarations without any supporting facts) I'd give some posters the benefit of the doubt here and conclude that was done as a bit of satyr, but in your case I don't think it's plausible. 