Men's Health magazine. How to choke a woman. I don't want to live on this planet.

PurpleAmathea

Why are you blaming adult women and not adult men? You think it's OK that men are passing down that it's okay to choke and slap and spit on your partner?

You have a very exaggerated idea of how easy it is for a woman, naked underneath a man, when the man suddenly starts choking her, to escape. It is easier for the woman to go along with it,, easier for her to rewrite what happened as her consenting.

What the fuck was wrong with the man though???????

We should empower women to say no but its far, far more urgent for the men to stop. The women need to be taught self defense (which is not always effective). But the men need to be taught not to be such fucking sickos. Its totally different scale of problems.

PurpleAmathea

Yes I want to be clear I'm not defending bdsm, I am saying that at least they had this one point correct

PurpleAmathea

I feel like you missed my point. Is the problem the fact that women are being paid for sex, or the abuse?

The being paid is a cover for the abuse. That the payment is used to legitmize things payment should not make legitimate.

I pay you 10,000 dollars to chop off your arm. Is that consensual? Maybe you're desperate for money, maybe you're mentally ill, maybe you're very, very insecure and needy for validation. Does that make my behavior less evil?

Obviously not all porn is equivalent to chopping off an arm. The massive spread of STDs, the risk of anal prolapse, the bdsm porn with choking and beating, are not all porn. The scenes being changed without the actresses consent (aka rape) are not all porn. Not being able to stop midway (aka rape) is not all porn. But in every single one of those situations, the money is supposed to magically make it better and OK. The problem is the abuse, but the money is the cover for the abuse. As if women's pain is a commodity that can be bought and sold.

If hypothetical world allows for safe sex work (maybe decrimalise, regulate, make it easier to NOT have a pimp for sales and "protection"), would the idea of women using sex appeal for capitalistic ends still be a problem?

In a hypothetical world where misogyny did not exist most of radical feminism would cease to be relevant. We do not live in that hypothetical world and appeals to that hypothetical world, which we have zero evidence is possible to create and which certainly does not exist now or in the near future of this time line in which women's rights are being actively eroded, is a derail.

Nor is prostitution/pornography equivalent to "using sex appeal", you are again minimizing what is actually happening.

Also, you do know women look at porn, so it's not all about poor peepee.

People care about legalising porn because of the 95% of men watching 99% of porn, not because of the 20% of women watching some much smaller percentage of porn.

Fuck, there is an entire subset of sex work that is devoted to people with physical disabilities that cannot get anything even approaching intimacy otherwise. Is that as bad as a queensnake video?

Its interesting that you think being disabled makes it OK to rape someone. If someone with physical disabilities is paying a trafficking victim's pimp to have sex with her that is precisely as evil as someone without disabilities doing so. Same for someone with disabilities paying the producer of a video in which a woman is raped on screen.

If the disabled person is "incapable of getting anything approaching intimacy otherwise" that presupposes no one would willingly consent to be in ntimate with them (otherwise they would be capable). So your very formulation of the question requires the sex work victim only be consenting under duress.

The general concept of consent not actually being consent within the radfem discourse is probably the thing that I found difficult with the group. Consent is always questioned, with the radical and of radfem saying all hetero sex is rape because women can never truly consent away from social pressures/.

Again, in the real world of actual statistics about sex work, the 90% who said they weren't able to consent get more weight than the 10% who felt it was consensual. I'm not denying that 10% exist. I am saying they give cover to what is happening to the other 90. Their airbrushed accounts of sex work exist to legitimise the exploitation and abuse of the vast, overwhelming majority of sex workers, who don't have the privilege and platforms that minority do.

I don't think women are incapable of consenting. I also absolutely do not buy into consent-obsessed culture, as if the only thing that matters is whether the woman consents. Not whether she didn't enjoy it, not whether it traumatised her, not whether it was then used as leverage to control and humiliate her. None of that matters as long as she consented! And maybe that's fine as a legal standard for convicting people. But as an ethical standard for assessing an industry, its not OK. People consenting to being harmed is not sufficient. We prosecute people selling heroin even though every one of their customers was 100 percent willingly consenting because they ruin lives.

(really consent obsession is just back to the same sick misogynist model of sex where the man is the consumer and the woman is the product. The only thing we care about is if the product "consents". The whole sex work industry is just further reinforcing women as sex dispensers, not people. And you can literally just look at the titles of porn to see this, its not like they bother hiding it)

PurpleAmathea

THERE IS NO WAY TO CHOKE SAFELY

At least in bdsm circles this was common knowledge, they even had to specifically separate between "safe, sane, and consensual" (which choking cannot ever be) and "risk aware consensual kink". They were very explicit about this! There is no safe way to choke your partner. Ever.

But now that bdsm has become "mainstream" people who know nothing about safety are touting how to safely do things that ARE NEVER SAFE. NEVER.

I hope these men start getting sent to jail.

PurpleAmathea

Pimp apologetics aren't welcome in GC but I'll engage for the sake of other readers.

As an industry, there is some terrible shit out there.

"some" - minimization. Actually, it is almost entirely terrible shit.

But, if the work can be done in a safe manner, then it should be viewed as just work. Putting an adult selling selfies on the same stage as trafficking and molestation is disingenuous.

You start with an if (if it can be done...) and then proceed as if the if is a fact (that it can be done).

What the actual facts on the ground demonstrate is that the field is full of exploitation, that not just a majority but an overwhelming majority (90+) of those who participate in it regret it, that even the big names speaking out for it (eg stoya) will admit to having been raped and abused in a porn context.

But here's the other if.

IF there's some small number of wealthy privileged women who enjoy selling their selfies for fun, the fact that this minority enjoys it does not make what they are doing (providing cover for widespread abuse, trafficking, and exploitation) OK. Of course pimps love Jenny with low self esteem who likes to make a quick buck off of a nude photo (although, should she ever regret that choice, she has no recourse), because Jenny is then the cover story for multiple women who claim to be doing this consensually (and by claim, I mean, that's what their pimps post on their behalf).

Every one of the handful of women so-called "consensually" engaged in sex work provides cover for the pimps who will claim that all of their abuse victims fall into the same category.

Its like how until recently there was a risky sex defense for men murdering their wives. Its cover. It is used as cover. And engaging in it is enabling that cover, and saying that because 10% of sex workers who are particularly privileged enjoy it, we throw the 90% who are exploited into the trash because, going back to my main point, heaven forbid we ever make a man's peepee unhappy, oh noes.

(and that's not even getting into the widespread degradation, violence, and misogyny of the content.)

PurpleAmathea

Step one: go to s/all, sort by new

Step two: half of what you see will be series of the same dumb posts, spammed in seven different subs by the same user.

Step three: block every user that does this.

Step four: while you're at it, mute the most common offending subs for this kind of user

Step five: a saidit browsing experience that almost doesn't suck!

Anyway, lots of people blocked. Great feature!

PurpleAmathea

Sounds interesting, what is it about?

What kinds of books do you like, if you want recs...

PurpleAmathea

Ooh, my beacon signal.

I think s/aww needs more content

This sub right here, s/asksaidit, would be great with more good, interesting, non political questions.

There's some stuff in s/books, could always add more.

I want s/gardening to take off...

PurpleAmathea

Which medium/s?

PurpleAmathea

Please pay the plant tax and post pictures.

Is there an s/gardening?

PurpleAmathea

Congratulations (and envy) on the writing productivity!

PurpleAmathea

So cool!

Is there an s/dnd sub? I'd be interested in joining it.

(my dnd good news is I got loooots of money and my character has opened up a chain business for additional wealth generation + info harvesting)

PurpleAmathea

Please tell me more garden details! And share pics!

I got my first potted plant after the office closed when we switched to work from home (just a simple snake plant) and my goal is to keep it alive. I have something of a black thumb so gardening is more like a thing I like watching other people do.

PurpleAmathea

Got a raise.

PurpleAmathea

You can be gender critical and Muslim in the same way you can be gay and Muslim. That is, there's a contradiction, but people live with contradictions all the time.

I do not think the community needs to temper its criticism of misogyny in religion because of the feelings of religious members. I am religious, discussing the misogyny in my religion is uncomfortable, but that is what this space is for.

Would I be more devout and more "acceptable" to my religious community if I was willing to swallow the party line about how my religion isn't sexist, its actually very pro women's rights? Sure, but it's a lie.

Would I be a more pure GC feminist if I went atheist? Yes, but I'm not willing. My feminism is flawed. But as long as other people aren't shaming or harassing me for it, I am willing to simply acknowledge that, and leave room for others more feminist than I to speak.

PurpleAmathea

I prefer "tired of explaining reality to fuckwits", myself.

PurpleAmathea

They can franken-surgerize their bodies to hell and back, they'll still have XY stamped on every cell of their body they didn't take from a woman.

PurpleAmathea

I do wish there was a normal Jewish sub here though. Wanna make one?

PurpleAmathea

Aw no please stay we need all the normies we can get!

(I agree it's super gross)

PurpleAmathea

Thus far no one's commented. Maybe that's just where I live and where you live is worse, but I do generally try to assume that

Most people are not all that interested in you and won't even notice or care
The people who notice, and care, and comment to you? Are completely nuts, and it's a reflection on them, not you, so you can just ignore it.

PurpleAmathea

My understanding from the screenshots I saw on tumblr was that the closing to private of r/pregnancy and redirect to babybumps happened in the past few days because of tra targeting

PurpleAmathea

I mean they also banned r/pregnancy and took over r/pcos.

The answer why all of this has happened isn't "because we were mean" it's "because they hate women"

PurpleAmathea