Loading...

In "feminist circles today," is it "taboo" to oppose prostitution and pornography? - Hallo friend WELCOME TO AMERICA, In the article you read this time with the title In "feminist circles today," is it "taboo" to oppose prostitution and pornography?, we have prepared well for this article you read and download the information therein. hopefully fill posts Article AMERICA, Article CULTURAL, Article ECONOMIC, Article POLITICAL, Article SECURITY, Article SOCCER, Article SOCIAL, we write this you can understand. Well, happy reading.

Title : In "feminist circles today," is it "taboo" to oppose prostitution and pornography?
link : In "feminist circles today," is it "taboo" to oppose prostitution and pornography?

In "feminist circles today," is it "taboo" to oppose prostitution and pornography?

In "Not the Fun Kind of Feminist/How Trump helped make Andrea Dworkin relevant again" (NYT)— which I've already written about today, here — Michelle Goldberg writes something about prostitution and pornography that I need to break out into a separate post:

[T]he resurrection of Dworkin’s work and reputation is in some ways quite strange, because her contemporary admirers tend to reject her central political commitments. Dworkin, who’d turned tricks as a broke, bohemian young woman, wanted to outlaw prostitution and pornography, and in the 1980s she made an alliance with the religious right to push anti-pornography legislation. There is no sympathy for such a bargain in feminist circles today, where it’s mostly taboo to treat sex work as distinct from any other kind of labor.

In the comments at the NYT, some readers take issue with her. Among the most-liked comments is this, from a reader named Liz:

This article is false in that it’s “mostly taboo” for feminists to view “sex work” as different from work. Do your research — there are many of us (again, not the fun kind of feminists) who oppose prostitution as the exploitative, misogynistic, and violent system that it is. Pro tip: if your feminism aligns perfectly with what pimps, traffickers, and johns desire, it’s not so feminist after all. Dworkin is getting the resurgence she deserves.

And this, from a reader named Lisa:

Back in the 90s, as a young feminist, I thought Dworkin’s anti-porn stance was a ridiculous dismissal of women’s agency. Now, having worked with teenagers for 25 years, I see the damage pornography has done to young people’s sense of themselves as sexual people and to their ability to build sexual relationships. It’s so much worse with the internet normalizing the extreme.

Kids —boys and girls— are seeing hard core, brutal pornography long before they’ve even had a first kiss. Teenage girls seek to be aesthetically pleasing and fulfill porn-derived expectations without regard for their own desires or even comfort. Dworkin may have been a frizzy caricature in overalls, but she wasn’t wrong.

And this, from ML:

I was an angry feminist in the 70s. I'm a furious feminist now. I do not find this "hard to say."

My daughters' generation lives in a world that is far more sexually restrictive than mine, for this I blame pornography. Although Ms Dworkin could not have foreseen the rise of the internet and the pervasive availability of porn, she did see the root cause of the sad devolution of women's sexuality into no more than porn stars robotically performing sex acts scripted by men: "pornography eroticizes the contempt of women."

The now routine torturing of the normal female body for the sake of conformity to un-natural standards: breast implants, labial reconstruction, removal of all pubic hair were unheard of 50 years ago. The free and natural sex of the 1970s celebrated the beauty of the female body and its capacity for pleasure. Such freedom, such equality of pleasure could not last.

Who says you can't stuff the genie back into the bottle?

In "Not the Fun Kind of Feminist/How Trump helped make Andrea Dworkin relevant again" (NYT)— which I've already written about today, here — Michelle Goldberg writes something about prostitution and pornography that I need to break out into a separate post:

[T]he resurrection of Dworkin’s work and reputation is in some ways quite strange, because her contemporary admirers tend to reject her central political commitments. Dworkin, who’d turned tricks as a broke, bohemian young woman, wanted to outlaw prostitution and pornography, and in the 1980s she made an alliance with the religious right to push anti-pornography legislation. There is no sympathy for such a bargain in feminist circles today, where it’s mostly taboo to treat sex work as distinct from any other kind of labor.

In the comments at the NYT, some readers take issue with her. Among the most-liked comments is this, from a reader named Liz:

This article is false in that it’s “mostly taboo” for feminists to view “sex work” as different from work. Do your research — there are many of us (again, not the fun kind of feminists) who oppose prostitution as the exploitative, misogynistic, and violent system that it is. Pro tip: if your feminism aligns perfectly with what pimps, traffickers, and johns desire, it’s not so feminist after all. Dworkin is getting the resurgence she deserves.

And this, from a reader named Lisa:

Back in the 90s, as a young feminist, I thought Dworkin’s anti-porn stance was a ridiculous dismissal of women’s agency. Now, having worked with

Loading...

teenagers for 25 years, I see the damage pornography has done to young people’s sense of themselves as sexual people and to their ability to build sexual relationships. It’s so much worse with the internet normalizing the extreme.

Kids —boys and girls— are seeing hard core, brutal pornography long before they’ve even had a first kiss. Teenage girls seek to be aesthetically pleasing and fulfill porn-derived expectations without regard for their own desires or even comfort. Dworkin may have been a frizzy caricature in overalls, but she wasn’t wrong. And this, from ML:

I was an angry feminist in the 70s. I'm a furious feminist now. I do not find this "hard to say."

My daughters' generation lives in a world that is far more sexually restrictive than mine, for this I blame pornography. Although Ms Dworkin could not have foreseen the rise of the internet and the pervasive availability of porn, she did see the root cause of the sad devolution of women's sexuality into no more than porn stars robotically performing sex acts scripted by men: "pornography eroticizes the contempt of women."

The now routine torturing of the normal female body for the sake of conformity to un-natural standards: breast implants, labial reconstruction, removal of all pubic hair were unheard of 50 years ago. The free and natural sex of the 1970s celebrated the beauty of the female body and its capacity for pleasure. Such freedom, such equality of pleasure could not last.

Who says you can't stuff the genie back into the bottle?

Thus articles In "feminist circles today," is it "taboo" to oppose prostitution and pornography?

that is all articles In "feminist circles today," is it "taboo" to oppose prostitution and pornography? This time, hopefully can provide benefits to all of you. Okay, see you in another article posting.

You now read the article In "feminist circles today," is it "taboo" to oppose prostitution and pornography? with the link address https://welcometoamerican.blogspot.com/2019/02/in-feminist-circles-today-is-it-taboo.html

Tweet

Subscribe to receive free email updates: