This is what they need to do for everyone, then they can start concentrating on what matters most – corpse identification.
And we sink further and further into the police state: where the police aren’t there to PROTECT us, but instead are there to PUNISH us on behalf of the state.
DALLAS – Prostitutes in Dallas can soon submit their DNA to a database in case they become victims of violent crime.
Dallas police Lt. Christina Smith said the collection could start soon after the next roundup of area prostitutes area in three weeks.
Dallas police and other local authorities have garnered national attention for their prostitution diversion initiative, which rounds up prostitutes in the area and gives them the option of rehabilitation instead of jail time.
Prostitutes would submit DNA samples voluntarily.
Dallas police say prostitutes are much more likely to be victims of violent crimes than the general public. The new DNA database would help identify prostitutes whose bodies might turn up at a crime scene.
Maythia Hicks, who spent 20 years as a prostitute, said the dangers of prostitution are rampant.
“It’s a big problem because you never know what you’re going to run across out there,” Hicks said. “You’ve got crazy people out there.”
When I first saw this I thought it would be really handy for women whose fellers can’t find the clit, to point it out, but I was mistaken. I’m not talking about that big pink soft looking… thing… over there though, because how would that thing be helpful for clit-discovery class? It doesn’t even have an actual, ya know, clit on it… or maybe it’s just a real teeny one…. No, it’s actually a skin dye called “My New Pink Button”. As usual, I’m all worked up about what other people are saying, and being all contrary and what-not…
Another article about un-marrieds having sex is in the news, the study is titled:
“Casual Sex and Psychological Health Among Young Adults: Is Having “Friends with Benefits” Emotionally Damaging?”
“I’m not a whore. I’m not a tramp. I’m not an escort. I’m not stupid or a bimbo. I’m very strong. I will survive this. At the same time, I’m vulnerable. I’m not here to make myself into a victim, but I want people to remember I’m human-there’s a whole other side to me. I’m caring and generous and the type of person you’d want to be friends with. People have to give me a chance.”
—- Rachel Uchitel, Official Brazen Hussy
Via take your goddamned pick
Oh honey, just stop trying, you’re a whore, tramp, escort, stupid, bimbo and you’ll probably be a lot of other things before this is over, don’t waste your energy on denials.
Whoretrampescortstupidbimbos are always strong.
And apparently the View folks were taken to task about calling Uchitel a hooker or something.
I love the word hooker, it cracks me up. I don’t really know why though. Ugh. “should the view have had to apologized for hooker joke”, says some tabloid – I don’t care, I guess, or maybe not, or no way, or absolutely, or are you kidding me? this is news? you dirty dirty media pigs, i’m onto you with your machine of distraction, used to keep us from looking at news that really matters.
This is about the slut-shaming suicide of a 13 yr old girl who killed herself. Hope Witsell sent some naked photos, they got passed around like naked photos always do, her school, students and teachers alike, slut-shamed her mercilessly.
This is what sex-positive feminism is all about. It’s not about liking sex, it’s about teaching that sex isn’t shameful. Teaching that sex, and that nudity, is “positive” is the opposite of teaching that it’s shameful. We can’t teach “not shameful” without teaching “positive”. It’d be really great if we can, if you know how, please let us know.
Passing around photos that you do not have permission to pass around or use should be a criminal offense, or at the least, you should be able to sue for damages. Of course, you can sue – unless they are pictures of you naked and you’re not a celebrity. Then you and your case isn’t just about the picture, it’s about sexual conduct. Un-consensual, consensual, what have you, and this tragic case shows the terrible price we pay, and will be paying more often, the longer we continue to make this about the “sex” and not about the “consent”.
This girl got the same shaming in the hallways of her school, from boys and girls both, that so many bloggers heap on playboy centerfolds. I know, we don’t call them sluts anymore so much, we know something doesn’t feel right about that, so we say they promote “rape-culture” and women’s oppression, if the centerfold happens to have said that she feels “empowered” by it, we tell her she is confused, possibly brainwashed. Delusional, stupid, childlike, “doesn’t get structure”, weird. That is shaming.
The idea that sex is not the most important thing is what, I think, all feminists want to teach girls. I understand the perception a lot of people have of what “pro-sex” feminism is; that it’s about liking sex, and thinking that sex is great, but “pro-sex” feminism is just a different way to teach girls that sex isn’t the most important thing.
If the “acceptableness” of woman has been defined by patriarchy largely by her willingness to not demand attention - If patriarchy doesn’t approve of attention seeking women – whether they get attention by sex or smarts – how can approving of attention seeking women support Patriarchy? It doesn’t, no matter who says it does.Two groups have fought like hell for 30 years to keep that status quo. Conservative Patriarchy upholders and ‘Radical’ Feminism. We never turned the status quo into “women who use sex are the best!” – although many radical feminists today seem to think that we did. Since the very first woman’s studies programs began, feminism has split into a war over whether or not getting “attention by sex” is good or bad. One side says it’s bad, one side says it’s good. One side upholds the status quo, one side doesn’t.
Almost all of feminist energy, only 3 or 4 years after roe v. wade, was focused exclusively on fighting “pornography” which – not coincidentally was the go-to industry for women who wanted “attention for sex” or who used sex to attain power. It’s not a coincidence that feminists such as Betty Friedan, who literally started ’2nd wave feminism’ with The Feminine Mystique,aligned themselves against the anti-pornography crusaders. Those early “pro-sex” feminists recognized that women who use sex for gain were not the enemy that ”radical feminism” painted them as.
It’s interesting if you look at the start of things, of 2nd wave feminism, if you look at it with a skeptical eye, I have and no it doesn’t make me an anti-feminist, but it’s interesting that there were groups of feminists, and then there were women who were powerful in other areas, but didn’t actually seem to be saying very feminist sorts of things. They were lawyers and doctors and writers who were of the opinion that even though women deserve to be ‘equal’ – sluts were still bad (nevermind the question of what makes a slut). They justify that wrong-headed belief that sluts are bad with a lot of theories, which when you break them down they are all basically: hate the sin, not the sinner. Slutty Sinners are only tempted by the Devil of Patriachy with empty promises and lies.
As feminism advances, the fight against it changes, and the most hotly debated area of feminism is still all about women who use sex for attention. A sex positive feminist will say that a woman who poses in playboy is being a feminist because she earns money using sex/sexuality/her body, Not-so-sex-positive feminists will say that she is using sex/sexuality/her body to get attention. Then the quesiton is ‘what’s wrong with attention’ and the reply is that it depends on the kind of attention – right back to the belief that sex to get attention is wrong – right back to the status quo.
If you ask what’s wrong with liking attention by sex, you get a whirlwind of justification for why it’s wrong like she’s advancing ‘rape-culture’, which relies on the theories that say men are just natural born brutes and liars and sex fiends who’ll do anything to keep a woman under his control. They rationalize and justify the dislike of women who use sex with examples of what the most violent and disturbed men have done to women. If someone doubts the assertion that so many men are that violent, and if they say that some women just like sex, they are painted as an apologetic and an anti-feminist. I doubt the assertion, not because I care that men get a bad rep, but because it is clear to me that they use this image of Man as Beast to justify their own discomfort about these women who use sex. No woman would choose it, no woman would like, they must have been forced. They must have been tricked, coerced, trained to perform.
There is nothing wrong with disliking women who use sex, but it’s not feminist to try to sway everyone else to your way of thinking when you have to use lies and distortions to rationalize your questionable theories.
Being so dedicated to that feminism because that’s what you’ve been taught, to the point where you can’t step away and take a look with a critical eye, isn’t a good thing. You can’t tell that the back of the house is on fire unless you look or you have a smoke alarm. Pro-Sex feminism is the smoke alarm. At this point, we’re very very very alarmed. Not many people seem to be listening. A lot of people would like us to shut up and go away, and we will, but you have to put out the fire first.
I didn’t know it at the time, I just read about it on the Curvature about Hope, a 13 year old girl who killed herself because she was “slut-shamed” at school was published on the same day I wrote this:
I guess this is about reclaiming words, specifically the word “slut”. You know the term “slut-shaming”, and how it’s a bad thing, but who’s doing the shaming? It seems like most of the time feminist columns and blogs are helping to uphold the status quo that says “girls who like sex are bad”.When someone out there in not-really-a-feminist land passes judgement on a woman for some sort of real or implied sexual “transgression”, a lot of feminists respond:
Just because a girl likes sex, it doesn’t make her a slut.
Sluts are bad.
When are they going to start publishing photos of rape victims so they can let everyone know about the dangers women face ‘at the hands of men’, it in no way would be to shame them. Just like it’s totally not about shaming prostitutes, it’s just about letting the world know about the ‘dangers’. And shush, those dangers aren’t lack of mental health or other social services, there’s plenty of help available from God.
On page 11 of the .pdf there is a list of the charities ‘providing services’ to those “prostituted persons”. They are:
“Anisogamy marks the start of male exploitation of females”
- Anne Campbell Feminism and Evolutionary Psychology
I can’t decide what to write about… but I have been motivated to ramble on endlessly at other people’s blogs, and in an attempt to disguise my blogging procrastination I offer them for you here:
On Jem’s Lair I read an interesting post on Sex as negotiable action, with this bit:
“I don’t think I could do sex work myself, I’ve never felt the curiosity to try, nor have I ever had the need (thankfully). Not because I think it’s icky – it’s sex and it’s no different than any other sexual relation in that regard – but because I dislike the idea of engaging in sex for someone else’s sake rather than my own. That’s purely my own feelings, though, and I respect and understand that people are different and that others won’t mind this like I do”
which got me rambling:
I have a video tape of myself from 20+ years ago (omg), when I was 18 where I said almost this very same thing. Almost verbatim – I really need to find that tape again and get it onto my computer….
Anyway, here’s the thing….
Over on Concerned Women for America I came across audio of Martha Kleder interviewing Dr. Janice Crouse about the Center for Sex and Culture’s “Strategic Plan to Promote a Sexualized Culture” (audio pop up here or download here – note: made my browser lock up, fine once I closed the player) – The bolded bit is from me in order to point out the slanderous lies:
MK: “Dr. Crouse, it sounds almost ridiculous – a “strategic plan” for promoting I guess a positive view of sex – but there really is one [a strategic plan].”
DrC: “Well, it’s not very positive Martha. (laughs) The Center for Sex and Culture is a San Francisco, California group - no surprise there, right – but their recent four year plan, a strategic plan has just come to light, and it’s alarming. Their goal is to change the way Americans think about sex and obviously it’s an effort to desensitize Americans so that aberrant sexual practices will be considered mainstream. It’s astounding because the document is a well thought out strategic plan, they want to acclimatize the public to everything from sadomasochism to consensual sexual practices that are far outside the mainstream. They want to change the way that Americans think about sex, so that there’s a wider range of acceptability in sexual practices and that people will not react negatively to homosexuality and to some of the non-mainstream sexualities that they would like to see promoted.”
MK: “Well obviously it’s a San Francisco group trying to eliminate the ‘ewww’ factor from the topic of homosexual sex, what are some of their strategies?”
Quoting from the article:
They argue that women who invoke a new kind of feminism — the right to have sex whenever and with whomever they choose — is demeaning to women.
“A popular thing to say among this intellectual crowd, in the ivies and in feminism in general, is to say that sex is empowering and a real woman uses her sexuality in any way she pleases,” said Rachel Wagley, a 20-year-old sociology student who is TLR’s co-president. “It’s blatantly false and a lie that this culture tells to girls for their own benefit.”
Gee where have I heard that before? Oh that’s right I hear that from half the feminists I run across every day. Heck, you don’t even have to be hooking-up, just showing your flesh gets the “you’re not empowered, you’re stupid” shaming treatment.
As annoying as that is, that this person says ”A popular thing… in feminism… is to say that sex is empowering” – is even more annoying. It’s totally obvious she’s never been to IBTP or any other of the many sites out there that don’t believe in the “casual sex is empowering” stuff – so how can she even say she knows ANYTHING about feminism if she doesn’t realize that this is a HUGE debate within feminism? If she even googled “sex empowering” or anything, she’d have known that her theory that “feminism in general” has a hive-mind belief of any kind is simplistic bullshit. Oh but that’s right, she knows, and she meant to co-opt the whole thing – don’t credit radfems for the theory; while simultaneously pushing “feminism in general” into the role of the opponent who wants women to be big-ol-dirty-sluts.
Gah. that’s annoying. I don’t care what side of the empower-ful debate you’re on, it’s not cool to have non-feminists claiming feminist theory as their own.
“England, who set out to explore the dating habits of college students, found they were kissing, having oral sex and sometimes intercourse with “no expectation that either party has an interest in moving toward a relationship.”
The horror. NO relationship?! AT ALL?! The absolute horror.
“There’s a lot of degrading treatment of some women and it is empoweringly free for other women,” she told ABCNews.com.”
I bet 10 bucks right now that next we’ll hear that women who do like to “hook-up” only do so because they have been abused or are victims of incest.
I mean, why should I pay for sex when women are for sex? That’s why God made them, so we could have sex with them! It’s like God already paid for the sex, and then he gave it to us by creating women. That’s God’s plan! Paying for it is like saying women weren’t specifically put here for a man to put his penis into in the first place, and that’s just plain crazy talk!
And you know, if you make me pay, then there is no chance that I will fall in love with you, and isn’t that what you really want? For me to fall in love with you? Sorry, it doesn’t work that way, that’s only in the movies honey, This Ain’t Pretty Woman, you know. Here in the real world men who pay for sex know that you are trash, and they won’t ever love you. So come on, you know I can’t pay because I actually kind of like you. I might love you if you let me fuck that hot cunt right now, don’t you want that? That’s what women want, I know it is, women want love and someone to care about them. You need to decide if you want love or if you want people to think you’re trash, it’s a decision only you can make.
This is so sad. So sad that you never learned the pleasure that comes from only having a dick inside you instead of the sinful deviant perverted pleasure of having a dick inside you and 300 dollars. You only think it’s ok because you don’t know any better, who taught you this nonsense?! They robbed you of the ability to love my cock, and the opportunity to earn a chance at me loving you. It’s quite tragic, actually. You just really haven’t got a clue what love is really like, do you?
Oh you say that you have people who care about you, and that you have love… but come on, do you really? How could you? You charge men for sex, and I already explained to you that nobody will ever love that, it’s against the rule that says Women Are Made For Fucking. There is no rule that says women are made for paying, you know. In fact there are rules against it!
Besides those good reasons, don’t you know that if you make me pay for it, you’re gonna make it harder for me to take other women seriously when they tell me that they don’t want sex WITHOUT love? Don’t be ridiculous and say that I should respect what those women say! How can I respect other women’s wishes when YOU – a WOMAN – have already told me that you – a WOMAN – are fine with being fucked without the bonus of me possibly loving you? You know that what goes for one woman goes for all, and how can you speak for all those decent women and say my precious love doesn’t matter? You might not care about the possibility of experiencing the wonder of my love – but what about other women? Do you want to deny them the chance? Do you really think it’s wise to send the message that it’s ok to fuck for money and NOT love?! Why oh why would you want to deny them the opportunity of worshipping my dick out of the kindness of thier hearts?
I just can’t believe that you are fine with being trash, with being a – yeah I’ll say it – you’re just a whore. I’m not gonna fancy it up with “escort” or “call-girl” because you’re no better than a common whore. I’m sorry, maybe that was out of line… you’re not that bad, you are smart and funny and you seem so normal – it just breaks my heart that you think men will love you when you refuse to even try riding their dicks without money. It’s like you don’t even consider that the feeling of my dick up in you will be worth it without money. You might enjoy it, you know. Ever think of that?
You don’t realize it, but if I give you money for something that I technically already have a right to, it automatically makes you unable to appreciate my dick on its own merits. Maybe it’s too late - even if you didn’t make me pay, you wouldn’t be able to appreciate it. You’ve gotten so used to dicks coming along with money attached to them, that any dick without money won’t even interest you! No, you might say it’s just MY dick that you don’t want without money, but I know that’s impossible, because My Dick is the greatest Dick and no sane woman would turn down the chance to have it.
You act like I’m hassling you! HA! I actually care about you. I’m probably the only person who actually does. These people who give you money – they really don’t care, you know. Oh sure, they are giving you money, and that lets you feed your children and pay your rent and save for a rainy day – but is that really evidence that someone cares, really CARES, about you? That they feed and shelter you and your children? Really, that’s all it takes? So sad, so sad.
I mean, sure, it sounds good, but only if you think of it like just another job - but it’s YOUR VAGINA!!!! it’s not your feet or your hands or your muscles or your mind or your talent or your opinions they are paying for - it’s your vagina! God gave you that vagina, and he gave it to you for a purpose. It’s your only purpose, really – to be the keeper of that vagina – that part of you that takes my seed and loves it, nourishes it, and gives that seed a place to safely grow into my children – that is more important than anything else. If you don’t realize that, it’s just… so so sad.
And you know, you should be really glad that I don’t just call the cops on you, or rape you for that matter. Anyone else would, you know. other than these men who degrade you by feeding and sheltering you, anyway. They are just as sick as you are, maybe worse. Yep, gotta be something wrong with a guy who doesn’t have enough self-esteem to know that his dick is for worshipping. I don’t know who I feel worse for, them or you. Or maybe it’s our fucked up culture, and this attitude we have that women can just go around being sexual for the sake of being sexual. I mean really, when did that become acceptable? Even feminists can see the problem with that – a woman’s sexuality isn’t for public consumption. It’s private, and precious, and should be kept safe and cared for and out of sight.
There was time when men just took sex, didn’t ask or anything, and feminism taught us how wrong that was. We learned about asking, learned that women should be asked first, but this is just too much. Expecting me to pay is just going too far. I’m asking like I was taught – and you can say no, but you’re not even saying no! You’re saying no, unless I pay - then it’s yes! What does that say about all those lessons telling me I had to ask? Why didn’t they teach us that all it really takes is money, and we don’t even really have to ask at all? They teach us that no means no, and yet you don’t really mean no when you say no – you mean no “not for free” and yes “for money”. How are men supposed to keep all of that straight?! How are we supposed to understand that no means no, but sometimes it’s ok if you pay?! You are practically teaching men that it’s ok to rape women, don’t you care about that- about the women?!
Don’t even try telling me that YOU are a feminist! Feminists understand the worth of a woman, you sure as hell don’t. You think a woman is worth only a few hundred dollars, but I know you’re worth more than that, you are worth so much that you have no wor… er umm, I mean you are priceless, umm, you know what I mean… Women just can’t be thought of in that way – because the worth is in what they do, in how they behave, in the things they accomplish – there is no worth in just being a woman, you have to have something to offer. Ugh. NO! You CAN’T offer me your vagina, aren’t you listening? That part of you is special — in fact anywhere I decide to put my dick is special — your mouth, your hand, your ass, between your tits, … it’s wrong to expect me to pay to put my dick into any of those. It’s just wrong to expect me to pay to put my dick where I decided I wanted to put it. My God. You really are a stupid whore if you don’t understand that by now.
Ok, fine. It’s your lucky day then. I’ll pay.
Oh that is rich….. you’re a fucking hypocrite! Now you say you won’t even fuck me for money! Because I was rude?! Are you out of your mind?! You can’t actually say NO! You’re a whore!
Oh Ok, Yes, you can say No… , ok then, yes I understand that is a pretty big gun, ok I’ll just find my own way out, no disrespect ma’am, really I was just kidding… sorry, sorry…
Most of the time there is a lot of stuff I cut out of my posts. It’s a bunch of rambley digressions and ranty offshoots that really don’t have much to do with what I actually wanted to write about, but a lot of it is, I think, interesting. Or at least it’s stuff that I selfishly don’t really want to delete, so I’ve decided to make a special category called “Pre-Post Rambles” and post it anyway.
Sometimes I feel like I’m constantly plagued by self-doubt. But then I kinda think that’s a good thing, because it makes me always question myself and what I believe. That doubt has motivated me throughout my entire life, and a lot of the time it’s gotten me into trouble. Official trouble, I mean, like arrested for selling pot when I was 18. I wouldn’t have tried pot in the first place if I wasn’t so doubtful about the old “pot’s a bad thing” status quo.
For me, if everybody is telling you not to do something and the best reason they can come up with is something like “you might like it too much” then whatever it is, you should probably try to do it right away…
Last week an article in the Guardian talked about how the number of trafficked women has been inflated. In today’s Guardian Catherine Bennett responds, letting us know how very much she loves women in an article with the headline:
No trafficking? Well, there’s a hell of a lot of women suffering
Beware those who argue that prostitution is just another job. If it is, why do so many women die in this sordid trade
She ends with:
As others have pointed out, the police are not much good at prosecuting those responsible for forced marriages and genital mutilation either. To say nothing of bankers and MPs responsible for fraud. But perhaps those stories are, themselves, nothing more than mischievous moral panics?
The sub-headline is hilarious! ha. It’s like asking “Why do women keep dying from abortions?” in 1940. Goodness knows. It’s a fucking mystery, get Sherlock Holmes.
And I love the genital mutilation strawman. That’s always a good one, no matter how many times I hear it.
I love your boobs.
The boobs in this sentence have been objectified.
This is not feminism. This is language. It’s about people, and parts of people, being used as the object in a sentence. It can be done correctly or incorrectly. Correct usage gives us understandable results. Incorrect usage gives us a recipe for disaster. How many times have you had something similiar to this conversation: