?

Log in

No account? Create an account
So, what is this degradation then? - Demonista

> Recent Entries
> Archive
> Friends
> Profile

October 6th, 2008


Previous Entry Share Next Entry
01:11 am - So, what is this degradation then?
bppa.blogspot.com/2008/10/    coming-soon-spoofing-of-sarah-palin.html

i split the link, just close the spaces to see.

it's just another reason to think ernest greene is icky. he thinks its ok to sexually satirise a woman because you don't like her beliefs. yes, that's right, he was advocating sexually mocking a woman -- nonconsensually -- just out of spite. hmmm... needless to say, it's with Hustler, and he's defending slimeball Flynt.

edited to add (oct 10). belenen expresses feminist objection to this brilliantly:

I myself am very against the use of the word rape as a metaphor, but that's not what I meant here... it's hard to explain. I meant that since an actual attack on Palin is punishable by law, they're creating a fake Palin to use sexually in a way that the REAL Palin would not want or enjoy. I'm not saying they are actually sexually using Palin, but that they are expressing a desire to do so.

(32 comments | Leave a comment)

Comments:


From:laurelinrain
Date:October 6th, 2008 08:52 am (UTC)
(Link)
I heard about this elsewhere. This is vile and cruel.
I wish women could sue arseholes like these for damages when they (or their names/ likenesses) are abused in pornography.
Flynt can go straight to hell... maybe there he can think about why he shouldn't have sexually abused his daughter...
From:maggie_hays
Date:October 7th, 2008 08:56 am (UTC)
(Link)
I wish women could sue arseholes like these for damages when they (or their names/ likenesses) are abused in pornography.
Flynt can go straight to hell...


I couldn't agree more. I wish all that too.
[User Picture]
From:demonista
Date:October 8th, 2008 07:24 pm (UTC)
(Link)
it is. i wish she could sue the pants off of greene, flynt, etc in a way they would NOT like.
[User Picture]
From:belenen
Date:October 6th, 2008 09:51 am (UTC)
(Link)
spoof? satire? more like a deliberate attack on a woman because ze is perceived as being strong. Being strong is not allowed, and outright rape might earn jail, so they settle for 'metaphorical' rape.
[User Picture]
From:demonista
Date:October 8th, 2008 07:25 pm (UTC)
(Link)
EXACTLY. greene doesn't like a woman, so he intentionally sets out to sexually humiliate and violate her. real feminist there, ernest.
[User Picture]
From:fierceawakening
Date:October 8th, 2008 08:18 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I don't like it either, but phrases like "metaphorical rape" make me pretty uneasy. I understand why you say it (though people in the industry have told me that there are very strict rules in all but the MOST gonzo of companies against depicting anything as nonconsensual, so she's probably going to be depicted as gleefully consenting anyway), but... rape is not a metaphor. Rape is a specific and devastating particular harm. Rape isn't a metaphor, rape is a reality.
[User Picture]
From:belenen
Date:October 9th, 2008 05:03 am (UTC)
(Link)
in response to fierceawakening:

I myself am very against the use of the word rape as a metaphor, but that's not what I meant here... it's hard to explain. I meant that since an actual attack on Palin is punishable by law, they're creating a fake Palin to use sexually in a way that the REAL Palin would not want or enjoy. I'm not saying they are actually sexually using Palin, but that they are expressing a desire to do so.

But yeah, I agree I should have come up with a better way to say that, but even now I'm a little at a loss as to how else to explain. :-/
From:miz_evolution
Date:October 6th, 2008 04:11 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I don't agree with this style of picking on Palin either, actually. Dislike her politics or whatever else, fine, but I don't agree with what's being done with this movie.
[User Picture]
From:fierceawakening
Date:October 8th, 2008 08:11 pm (UTC)
(Link)
My opinion's posted over there as well -- I don't agree with it either.
[User Picture]
From:fierceawakening
Date:October 11th, 2008 05:37 pm (UTC)
(Link)
And... I'd just like to say that from talking to Greene himself, I don't think that he's icky. He's a person. With a partner, and friends, and people he cares about and defends passionately. I don't agree with him on everything but I don't get why he's Satan to people who have never actually talked to him directly anyway.

Like I said, he's not behind this video, though as those comments reveal he's not against it. I just want to say that, well, while I know what radical feminist theory has to say about "pornographers" I really think you might get a different picture of them if you actually asked them "Okay, how IS it you see what you're doing?" without precondition.

There's a lot out there on radical feminist websites, a lot of little short quotes from various pornographers that are really gross. And I don't mean to say that those people didn't say those things. I just think that, well, when you listen to someone as a person, you find out more than one sound bite. (And I actually suspect some of those sound bites are designed to offend/bad jokes/etc. myself.) I'd like to see a lot less of "pornographers are bad! These theories say so!" and a lot more of "You know, I know so and so personally, and while he's nice to puppies, strictly obeys these particular regulations designed to minimize coercion or harm, and loves his grandma, I can't condone this, this, and this that he does."

The sweeping stuff... well, like I've said none too nicely before, I think it's ugly (and scary when you get to "these people should be killed" territory.) I don't see how that's productive, any more than, say, the actual Palin's actual comments that have stirred up extremist conservatives who yell "KILL HIM!" about Obama at rallies.
[User Picture]
From:demonista
Date:October 14th, 2008 09:25 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I read the last couple comments in my lj, and the latest two entries about me. Thanks for the fair treatment of me in the earlier 3. The last one got me pissy. So I have a feeling I'll sound off-kilter in this and future responses.

To explain my comment policy for the umpteenth time: all logged in friends are not screened. all others are screened. the ones that appeared before yours were never screened in the first place, because i don't filter lj friends-comments.

It had nothing to do with me "censoring" you (ha!), but me, you know, actually doing shit outside of the internet. As I said in this http://demonista.livejournal.com/103514.html post to which RenEv linked you to, and that you read, I said "i'm doing something huge this weekend, and talking with jacob made me realise what i was getting myself into. it hit me--and i ended up crying--when he was showing his concern, and actually giving me a chance to give my...informed consent to this. i have been mostly out of the knowledge loop, yet i'm at great risk here. because of the last paragraph, I won't be able to get to comments until Tuesday." Was I unclear somehow?

btw, the thing I was doing this weekend? planning and executing this: http://www.thestar.com/article/516418

Does that take precedence over my perceived censoring?

One thing I'll also address is this: re: greene. of course he's human. of course he has family and friends. duh. But people who do a various assortment of awful/bigoted/racist/misogynist/etc things are, according to those close to them, often the "fine upstanding citizens who are too lovely to do such a thing"--from pornographers, to men who rape their daughters, to KKK members, to Nazis, to abusive johns, to gay bashers, etc. Nazis have family who love them, fer christsake.

In regards to the Palin, Obama, and racism comparison, it doesn't hold. Pornographers are in a positition of privilege and power over women, not the other way around. Palin, as a white woman, has white privilege over Obama. Just as a racist isn't the black in the scenario; they're the white using their race to incite anger and violence. In his case, he's the pornographer using sexualised misogyny to incite anger and violence against women and feminists.

I've never heard of ANY feminist killing a pornographer. I've heard of plenty of pimps and pornographers killing women.
[User Picture]
From:fierceawakening
Date:October 14th, 2008 09:33 pm (UTC)
(Link)
To explain my comment policy for the umpteenth time: all logged in friends are not screened. all others are screened. the ones that appeared before yours were never screened in the first place, because i don't filter lj friends-comments.

Okay.

It had nothing to do with me "censoring" you (ha!)

Can you point me to where I used this word? I think my post was pretty clear about my awareness that you are not the government:

"THAT's why I don't like the not approving. Because yeah, trolls are trolls. But when you start going, "This person is beyond the pale and not worth defending, so no one will see you doing it," well -- no, that's not "censorship," but the idea of it, of wanting to prevent people challenging your ideas in your spot, strikes me as motivated by similar concerns: fear some people might start to wonder if the "other side" is right."

I also said this:

"I don't think it's WRONG of D, for example, to not approve those comments by me."

So yeah, I didn't accuse you of implementing repressive state policies. Snicker unwarranted.

"of course he has family and friends. duh."

Point missed. I didn't say he *has* family and friends. I'm saying that he has a partner he absolutely and clearly loves. How is this possible if he's an evil person who delights in tossing women to the wolves?

"In his case, he's the pornographer using sexualised misogyny to incite anger and violence against women and feminists."

Can you cite an example of anything he's produced that has done this? Can you offer any sort of plausible explanation of why this would be his intent?

I've heard of plenty of pimps and pornographers killing women.

Pimps, sure. Pornographers? Names, dates, cases please.
[User Picture]
From:demonista
Date:October 14th, 2008 09:37 pm (UTC)
(Link)
the last sentence should specify: unless she was being directly abused by him. some women have killed their abusive husbands/fathers/johns/pimps who have made pornography of them.
[User Picture]
From:fierceawakening
Date:October 14th, 2008 09:54 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Demonista,

I've publicly apologized to you for my mistake here:

http://demonista.livejournal.com/102522.html?thread=581242#t581242

Again, I'm sorry.
From:miz_evolution
Date:October 12th, 2008 06:13 am (UTC)
(Link)
D. what I think you forget is Ernest and Flynt are two different people. They are. I can honestly say, with what I've been through recently, I could not have asked for a better friend that Ernest. I wouldn't say it if I did not mean it. I don't know Flynt from Adam....Ernest had been a real, there, honest to..whatever..non-exploitive friend. You can't ask for much more than that.

> Go to Top
LiveJournal.com