Log in

View Full Version : who's twisting these biatches tits?



Pages : 1 2 [3]

mr_punk
12-22-2006, 09:14 PM
but if men were just horny there are better, more convenient more legal ways of relieving it. (Just ask around. mr._punk will tell you).huh..i will? oh yes..yes, quite right. when i get horny. i prefer the donkey punch method, lil vixen. however, i don't know if it's legal, but it sure is convenient.

What? This is absurd. Sorry hon, but it is ridiculous! <snipped feminist angst>my, you seem to be working yourself up into quite a frenzy there, red. what's the problem? did she betray the sisterhood? BTW, what do feminists do with traitors to the cause? do they line them up for execution or force-feed them Dworkin and MacKinnon in their education camps?

LilSweetVixen
12-30-2006, 02:26 PM
It is a sexual appetite insofar as it is expressed through sexual means; but if men were just horny there are better, more convenient more legal ways of relieving it.

But the man might want that particular girl.


Date rape is not a grey area. I'm just saying - rape by someone you know is just as unconsensual. Grey zone sex is sex that is hard to define either as consensual or unconsensual (situations of high pressure, for example). Not just some guy who knows you who decides that you've opened your legs enough to owe him.

Agreed.



Further, I might add - walking down the street (the activity under contention here) cannot be considered taking a risk. In fact, I don't really see what is a risk. What do you regard as "risky"? Like, in what circumstances does the woman "really have it coming" and lose her right complain about non-consensual behaviour?


Walking down the street is in fact taking a risk. Those are the wages of independence. Risky would be what we do as strippers. That's why it's for women who don't get easily offended.



Like outside of simply asserting - if you ever spread your legs expect to admit the whole world - why can I not insist that my consensual sexual activity is private and personal and should be treated as such while unconsensual sexual activity is criminal and should be treated as such? I should ABSOLUTELY be sheltered from that, just as every other person is.

You can't be sheltered. Or else you will go back to being controlled by nature and by "patriarchy" if there is such a thing. But the wages of sin is death. I'm not saying admit the whole world. How would anyone know what women had already spread their legs? I'm saying if you want indepedence and liberation, you have to get in the ring and take your licks like the queer boys.



We demand freedom in terms of controlling private property - it doesn't mean that there should be no laws against theft. I may sell, give away or otherwise alienate anything I own (say cash) there are very few circumstances in which the government may interfere with that. However, it is still a criminal act if someone just takes it. Why do you regard your body as being less deserving of protection?


It means if you're walking down the street with your purse open it might get snatched. Yeah there are laws against it, but once it happens it happens anyway.



Honey, you need to go back and re-read your separatist feminists. Now everyone who thinks that Dworkin and MacKinnon have no relevance in society can look both to Maryland and you.


Separatist feminists? No thanks. Are you serious when you as a stripper say that you support Dworkin and MacKinnon? They see you as a victim who is degrading herself and they see these layback fellas here as evil enemies. And they are absolutely irrevelant in the real world along with most of feminism since Roe v. Wade. The only group that has left a mark are people like Madonna because that parlayed into Cosmo magazine and Sex in the City.



I mean, essentially what you are saying is that because women are sexually "liberated" their consent means LESS not MORE than it did before. That women do not (any more than before) get to choose who to be sexual with, but that instead of being relegating to "bad" and "good" women, for this purpose we are all "bad" women. In a nutshell - we ALL deserve it.

No their consent means more than it did before but they are at the driver's seat not society as before. There are no bad women. And no one deserves to be raped at all, but it does happen when sexual enticement is in the air.

mr_punk
12-30-2006, 03:53 PM
Or else you will go back to being controlled by nature and by "patriarchy" if there is such a thing.choke..sputter..no such thing as the patriarchy? watch yer eyeballs, lil vixen. them's fighting word to a radical feminist.

Separatist feminists? No thanks. Are you serious when you as a stripper say that you support Dworkin and MacKinnon? They see you as a victim who is degrading herself and they see these layback fellas here as evil enemies. And they are absolutely irrevelant in the real world along with most of feminism since Roe v. Wade. The only group that has left a mark are people like Madonna because that parlayed into Cosmo magazine and Sex in the City.sniff..sniff..i am shedding tears of joy right now.

xdamage
12-30-2006, 04:56 PM
You can't be sheltered. Or else you will go back to being controlled by nature and by "patriarchy" if there is such a thing.


Agreed regarding "You can't be sheltered" else women will return to their former social status.

As for there being a "patriarchy"... I personally have no big disagreement with the notion that there is such a thing. My disagreement has been with some feminists (not all) that live in a fantasy world with regards to human nature, and are oblivious to how their own patterns of thought, behaviors, and selection of mates, as well as their ancestors, has contributed to the shaping of society (and the "patriarchy").

Of course this is not surprising. People tend to want to take credit when a situation turns out for the positive, want to blaim others when a situation turns out negative. They also tend to want to sit on the sidelines and complain about what others are doing, but when it comes to their own behavior or contribution, make few personal sacrifices.

As for the specifics, many women in modern society have grown up very sheltered. They don't really understand human nature, or that they're playing with fire sometimes when it comes to the multi-billion year old genetic sexual drives. Sort of like waving food around in front of a starving person, the laws may protect you, and you may have the right not to have your food stolen, but it's still risky (and obviously so if you understand human nature).

Being sexual in public is fine, and I'm all for pushing for more protection under the law, but changing human nature? That will take hundreds if not thousands of years. In the mean time, when you act sexual in public, you're going to attract both those you want to attract, and those you don't. And in a city, you can bet you'll attract plenty of people (often poor, or poorly raised) who are driven more by their nature then by laws.

p.s. Go study what happened in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina to see how quickly a city of people reverted to their darker nature when society and law enforcement breaks down, and basic wants for food, shelter, and sex are left over. Theft, murder, rape, survival of the strongest and fittest. And you can bet the last thing on any women's mind was how to look hot in front of men who are free of law enforcement.

In a strange irony, it's precisely our patriarchy that has slowly but surely provided people with enough protection, enough free time, and enough law enforcement that ultimately led to people having higher aspirations, like equal rights for women and people regardless of race. But our society is still a fragile a thing, and human nature (the good and the bad) is still there behind it. The laws can only protect people so much, and beyond that, they still have to rely on good common sense and not wave money in front of the needy, not wave food in front of the hungry, not wave sex in front of men whose drives aren't limited by the law.

Jenny
01-03-2007, 03:52 PM
But the man might want that particular girl.
I think that's more or less my point. If the guy is just unbelievably horny, frankly, it doesn't much matter who he sticks it in. If it HAS to be one particular girl - that is a power relation.



Walking down the street is in fact taking a risk. Those are the wages of independence. Risky would be what we do as strippers. That's why it's for women who don't get easily offended.
That is ridiculous. I don't know how to put this more simply - walking down the street being risky is NOT a wage of independence. There is no difference in this particular behaviour in 2006 or 1906. This is not something that just started happening when women became "independent". In fact the basic tenet of "independence" was that women SHOULDN'T be subject to such activity for walking down the street - that women should be ABLE to walk down the street.


You can't be sheltered. Or else you will go back to being controlled by nature and by "patriarchy" if there is such a thing. But the wages of sin is death. I'm not saying admit the whole world. How would anyone know what women had already spread their legs? I'm saying if you want indepedence and liberation, you have to get in the ring and take your licks like the queer boys.
Again - we're arguing that the gay bashing is a natural and right way to behave? As opposed to a criminal act that should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law? And that "queer boys" shouldn't go to the police after being bashed or assaulted because that would be appealing to the straight hegemony to protect them? Because I seriously think that is sick and kind of homophobic.


It means if you're walking down the street with your purse open it might get snatched. Yeah there are laws against it, but once it happens it happens anyway.
Again - absurd. As you said - still a crime and if you snapped a picture of whoever stole your purse, open or not, that person would indentified, investigated etc. I think it is interesting that everyone always falls into property crime of a kind in which the perpetrator is hard to identify to contrast with sexual assault. Essentially, we assume that it is hard to find out the indentity of someone who stole your car or your purse and we use that to create a parallel that says that people should not be prosecuted for sexual assault or that women shouldn't mind being assaulted. But if you knew perfectly well who stole your purse or your car, you are perfectly legally entitled to get your shit back. Nobody is going to say "Well, I think we're going to let Bob here keep your purse, because you did leave it open."

Further, by the above rationale "don't whine when you take risks" (if we accept that walking outside is risky and not a behaviour that everyone in the world has to engage in on a daily basis and that women should expect to be assaulted when they go OUTSIDE) women ought not to get married, have siblings, go on dates or have parents. Because these are people that mostly sexually assault and assault women. Getting married or having a long term boyfriend is WAY WAY riskier (statistically speaking) than walking down the street.


Separatist feminists? No thanks. Are you serious when you as a stripper say that you support Dworkin and MacKinnon? They see you as a victim who is degrading herself and they see these layback fellas here as evil enemies. And they are absolutely irrevelant in the real world along with most of feminism since Roe v. Wade. The only group that has left a mark are people like Madonna because that parlayed into Cosmo magazine and Sex in the City.
I didn't say that I supported Dworkin and MacKinnon - I said that their explication of the construct of sex and consent could still bear scrutiny if we have young women in this day and age saying that their consent or withdrawal/withholding of consent didn't mean as much as the fact that they walk down the street, and that sexual assault is the "wage of independence". That under that kind of twisted analysis, a revisitation of sex as a male dominated construct, something that is constructed and defined by and for men could be toward and that anyone who says that they are talking nonsense, that sex is or can be equally defined by women (as I would) and that sex is empowering, not disempowering for women (as I would) can take a look at your postings in this thread to show how relevant their analyses are. In an inverse way, YOU are supporting Dworkin and MacKinnon - because they would agree with you. I don't.

And I'm sorry, have you met some of these "fellas"? I mean, I find them as humourous as the next girl, but do really think that punk and x see strippers as empowered? Take a look at the perfect storm threads; take a look at the threads that give detailed minute instructions on how to use economic leverage to force a woman to put out; take a look at threads that encourage dancers to use drugs in order to maintain the physique that they (the customer) like. Like I said - I find them amusing and/or affable, occasionally intelligent and more occasionally nice but you are fucking deluded if you are imagining that these guys are on your side. It's not a matter of us seeing them as adversaries - that is how they see us. You can choose not to be bothered by it, but it is silly misunderstand it.


No their consent means more than it did before but they are at the driver's seat not society as before. There are no bad women. And no one deserves to be raped at all, but it does happen when sexual enticement is in the air.
A) who determines when sexual enticement is, in fact, in the air?
B) if we accept that rape is the inevitably by product of what you call liberation, I'm still confused about how we've progressed at all, since rape was also the by production of not being liberated.
c) what driver's seat are we in if rape is the wage of independence? To me "being in the driver's seat" means being able to make the choice. If I don't have any choice, where exactly am I driving?

xdamage
01-04-2007, 07:16 PM
but do really think that punk and x see strippers as empowered?

OH seriiously, we're so far beyond that phase.

We see women and men as equals, and now we judge you as individuals within society. We don't give a fuck about gender, we don't care if you feel empowered, we just compare your achievements with the rest of the individuals in society. Nobody gives a shit about women being empowered anymore. If you want to make a mark on society, do it, else expect to be treated like everyone else, just another person who is born, does their own thing, and dies.

Honestly Jenny, the schools are wide open, businesses are wide open, opportunties are wide open, if women aren't taking advantage of those opportunties that's no longer men's fault. And quite honestly, I think a lot of feminists are just whiners and cowards now. It's so much easier to sit around and complain about how unfair everything is vs getting out there and competing and cooperating. You're primary enemy is no longer men. You're primary enemy is yourself. Competing is HARD WORK. Get a degree (or don't, a lot of us didn't, and still succeeded, well beyond those who did), and compete and cooperate like the rest of us. That's a lot harder then sitting around whining about men.

With equality comes equal responsibility. Women are now being held accountable for their outcome in life. If they end up being losers, oh well, they can no longer blaim men, they can blaim themselves - such is the burden of equality.

What Punk and I think is entirely irrelevant. Society will judge individuals based on what they accomplish and how they treat others. If women want society to affirm they are empowered, then they need to (as individuals) do things that impress others enough to make them feel like doing so. Just being a Woman though, isn't enough, just like being a Man, it's quite easy to be entirely ignored by society if you accomplish nothing.

Jenny
01-05-2007, 09:10 AM
So...
you DO see dancers as empowered? And part of your stripclub experience is the exhibition of empowered sexuality? How about that? I never would have guessed. That will teach me to make assumptions.

xdamage
01-05-2007, 09:47 AM
So...
you DO see dancers as empowered? And part of your stripclub experience is the exhibition of empowered sexuality? How about that? I never would have guessed. That will teach me to make assumptions.

I don't think about it at all, just like when I buy something at the store, I don't think of the clerk as empowered, just like I don't think of a construction worker on the street as empowered, just like I don't think of the nurse taking care of my sick mom as empowered.

We all work for the same reasons, we need money to survive. It's your body, your life, do with it what you like. I really don't think at all about gender when it comes to the tens of thousands of numerous jobs people are engaged in, however...

That doesn't mean I (or the rest of society) views all human contribution equally. Some people contribute more then others, most just do what they need to do get by, and some are leeches and do more damage then anything else. So for example, the physician and surgeon taking care of and operating on my sick mom impresses me far more than the waiter that takes my order for lunch. One person is making minimum wage, and walked in off the streets, trained in a day while the others have been studying and making life and death decisions for over 20 years. The later is far more impressive, rare, and deserving of greater rewards for a greater contribution.

That's all there is to it. And by the way, my mom's physician is a woman. And guess what? It's completely and utterly irrelevant to me. The only thing that's relevant is that she is good at what she does.

As for stripping, enjoy it, do it, and I enjoy visiting the SC a couple of times a year the same way I enjoy going to a restaurant, or live music, but you can't demand I (or anyone else for that matter in society) be as impressed with stripping as they are with every other job. It has nothing to do with gender. It has to do with people are more impressed by factors like how much money you make, how difficult your job is to learn, how rare is the talent required to do the job, how much contribution does it leave behind for others, how dangerous is your job (e.g., mortality and injury rate), etc.

As for the exhibition of sexuality in the SC. I really don't think about it. If it makes you feel empowered, geat, but to me it's just what sells. Hey, sexuality has often been used to sell products (well in this case the strippers are the product), but putting aside the PLs whose minds are weak, I just view it as what works (really no different then using sexual imagery in advertisements). Sexuality attracts me, but it has no power over me, nor do I see those as using it as empowered. I still take responsibility for my buying decisions, and I don't worship those who are sexy.

Jenny
01-05-2007, 10:13 AM
Oh, I see. So what you're telling me is that you're refuting my comment that customers such as yourself don't really see strippers as empowered by discussing a lot of stuff that has nothing to do with my comment? And that, in fact, my assumption was entirely safe and well founded? Well, now I'm just confused. Now it just seems like assuming is the way to go.

xdamage
01-05-2007, 10:50 AM
Oh, I see. So what you're telling me is that you're refuting my comment that customers such as yourself don't really see strippers as empowered by discussing a lot of stuff that has nothing to do with my comment? And that, in fact, my assumption was entirely safe and well founded? Well, now I'm just confused. Now it just seems like assuming is the way to go.

I'm telling you that because I see men and women as equal, that the search for feeling empowered is old news, I don't care about. You're assuming there are two choices:

A) I see strippers as empowered.

B) I don't see strippers as empowered.

There is a 3rd choice though - I don't care because I think the need to feel empowered is irrelevant, or should come from within, not depend on what others think. Women are now equals. So just like the guy who is out busting his ass on a construction line isn't thinking about "feeling empowered", you don't need to think about it either. You do your job, he does his. As an equal, it's not the responsibility of others to feed into your desire for confirmation. At least in the United States, we are well past that point. OTOH, it's also not your right to demand that everyone else in society be impressed with your job. Some will, some won't, most don't give it any thought. Just like all the rest of us equals. It has nothing to do with stripping, or gender.


p.s. Another way to think of it - now that everyone is empowered, the question is who is and isn't empowered is no longer interesting. Now it comes down to judging individuals, not by their gender, but by their accomplishments. I suspect most people are like me, and agree that not all accomplishments are equal, but this has nothing to do with gender. Personally I weigh accomplishments based on how much contribution it leaves behind for other members of society, how difficult a job is, how much personal sacrifice is required, risks like the cost of making a mistake, and a few other factors.

Jenny
01-05-2007, 12:03 PM
Well, sweetie - without trying to condescend by pointing out the obvious: obvoiusly I find it interesting because is clearly and obviously what I'm talking about (note the line you quoted). If you do not find it interesting that is your perogative but I would wonder why you spend your time discussing the matter, and I wonder even more why you are trying to tell me that what I like to discuss isn't interesting. On the other board once I tried to start a conversation about Mary Gaitskill; nobody responded, thread died (it actually went over much better here, I think; now THAT is irony (and I do love irony)); that is the usual expression of lack of interest. Not "Geez Jenny. Mary Gaitskill is so boring. So I think you're really discussing Lord of the Rings." Which leads me to my next point - if I am responding to a comment on the empowerment of construction workers, the YES, I am absolutely considering whether they feel empowered and I am interested in that topic. Now again - seeing as you are not actually commenting on or interested in anything I'm saying, but rather on an imaginary discussion that is going on your head - which I fully support by the way - I see no reason to involve me in this at all. Seriously - you can do this all by yourself. So you have fun with your argument-masturbation, but please, for the love of god - keep me out it.

xdamage
01-05-2007, 01:00 PM
I was simply responding to your comment of:

"but do really think that punk and x see strippers as empowered? "

This is a great technique to try and sway her opinion by finding a common enemy, and a common cause. I'm just defusing that technique by saying the issue of empowerment is no longer relevant because, at least as far as I see it, men and women are equal, and have equal opportunities (or close enough).

I see strippers as no more or less empowered then anyone else in our society.

You may be confusing my critical comments with complete devaluation. My brain doesn't work that way. If I'm critical of a doctor, that doesn't mean I entirely devalue their job, their person, or their opinions. It only means I'm critical of the specific thing I am critical of.

Or you may be under the impression that because I don't worship stripping as the ultimate job in the universe, that I am therefore entirely devaluing it. Again, my brain doesn't work that way. It's not all or nothing for me. I can enjoy stripping, and still see other jobs as more (or less) impressive.

xdamage
01-05-2007, 01:50 PM
p.s. To Jenny. Regarding devaluation, the same applies to how I perceive you. While I don't necessarily agree with everything you write, that doesn't mean I entirely devalue you as a person. Same with other people. I agree with some things, disagree with others, but overall I still regard you for your "female-BALLS", sense of irony, and intelligence. This is the way my brain works, like it or not.

mr_punk
01-05-2007, 09:44 PM
And I'm sorry, have you met some of these "fellas"?well, you've never met me. yeah, i know what you meant, but i don't want you to give even the slightest impression, that you somehow know me any better than she does.

I mean, I find them as humourous as the next girl, but do really think that punk and x see strippers as empowered?you mean, empowered in the traditional feminist sense of the word? no, but what difference does it make? funny, i thought it was supposed to be a job to you broads, not a political movement. but hey, i'm not a radical feminist or a stripper. frankly, in the context of the sc, the word smells like the kind of cornball "fantasy", PLs eat up ITC-----"Candy, (an 18 yo, virginal cheerleader) became a stripper to empower herself and ripped off the shackles of her patriarchal oppressors. whereby, free of evil male judgement, she began to fully explore her once repressed sexuality".

Like I said - I find them amusing and/or affable, occasionally intelligent and more occasionally nice but you are fucking deluded if you are imagining that these guys are on your side. It's not a matter of us seeing them as adversaries - that is how they see us.oh, don't flatter yourself. a stripper is neither my adversary nor ally. frankly, she ranks about as high on either list as the cashier at costco.

Women are now being held accountable for their outcome in life. If they end up being losers, oh well, they can no longer blaim men, they can blaim themselves - such is the burden of equality.of course, they can still blame men. victim mentality means never having to say, "i'll take responsibility".

Jenny
01-06-2007, 09:27 AM
well, you've never met me. yeah, i know what you meant, but i don't want you to give even the slightest impression, that you somehow know me any better than she does.
I suspect I have read you more than she has; I was not implying any degree of intimacy with your twisted mind.


you mean, empowered in the traditional feminist sense of the word? no, but what difference does it make? funny, i thought it was supposed to be a job to you broads, not a political movement. but hey, i'm not a radical feminist or a stripper. frankly, in the context of the sc, the word smells like the kind of cornball "fantasy", PLs eat up ITC-----"Candy, (an 18 yo, virginal cheerleader) became a stripper to empower herself and ripped off the shackles of her patriarchal oppressors. whereby, free of evil male judgement, she began to fully explore her once repressed sexuality".
Point taken.


oh, don't flatter yourself. a stripper is neither my adversary nor ally. frankly, she ranks about as high on either list as the cashier at costco.
Really? So you log equal hours and posts at costcocashiersweb.com? Oh, I see. That's just one of those "bullshit posturing" moments.

mr_punk
01-06-2007, 06:03 PM
I suspect I have read you more than she has; I was not implying any degree of intimacy with your twisted mind.twisted? you know, when take an accusatory tone with me. it makes me not want to open up and share my feelings. seriously...of course, you're implying some degree of intimacy. isn't that the implication behind your claim of a more extensive reading of my posts? look, any poster can use the search engine, but in the end. you still won't know me any better than she does.

Really? So you log equal hours and posts at costcocashiersweb.com?why would i? i'm not a cashier, don't pretend to be a one nor do i want something from the cashier other than service. if cashiers were my adversaries. i would be on CCW (costcocashiersweb.com) posting about how cashiers are ripping customers off. OTOH, if they were my allies. well, i would still post on CCW, except that i would brown nose or doing something else. perhaps, in the hopes of getting to meet my favorite cashier OTS (outside the store).

however, hypothetical speaking, if there was a red-headed, canadian, radical feminist, ball breaking cashier who instead of keeping her trap shut. instead, constantly posted on costocustomers.com (CCC) and attempted to train customers in PC, while spreading her feminist propaganda. well, i think a swirlie is warranted in this instance.

Jenny
01-06-2007, 06:10 PM
twisted? you know, when take an accusatory tone with me. it makes me not want to open up and share my feelings.
Unfortunately, that does not seem to be the case.


however, hypothetical speaking, if there was a red-headed, canadian, radical feminist, ball breaking cashier who instead of keeping her trap shut. instead, constantly posted on costocustomers.com (CCC) and attempted to train customers in PC, while spreading her feminist propaganda. well, i think a swirlie is warranted in this instance.
Are you threatening me? Because that's assault! That is assault.