Jackson Katz on porn-cinich

[elfeminista]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jackson-k ... 77226.html

[RGM]

Original article was very good; the comments, however, reflect almost everything wrong with the Left and its understanding of feminism, women's rights, equality, and so forth. What a sampling we have. Their originals, and then my snarky assessments of their enlightened misogyny in italics.

From Desiderata: "The publication is vulgar to me. I am a subscriber to Playboy. The photography of women in Playboy is art, but the subjects so beyond real women that they get only my brief glance as I turn the static-cling pages to something to read.

I agree Hustler is trash, but one person's trash is another person's treasure.

Besides, Kucinich's wife is hot. A natural beauty we just don't get to see enough of."

Read: It's OK, my porn is good porn. I'm a nice guy, and even though I don't like Hustler, all's well for those who do. Maybe Mrs. Kuchinich should be in my porn.

From DaveDave: "if it takes a slime wad like larry flynt to give time, money, attention to someone who might help our nation, so be it."

Read: He's bad, but he supports my guy, so I'll give him a free pass on what he does to women, directly in his pages, and indirectly from the responses of his readers.

From Protagonia: " It's the things left out about the Congressman from Ohio that define the perspective. Perhaps a more forthcoming title might have read:
"Kucinich USES Hustler to get message across."
America had to work with Russia to win World War II. Options were dwindling at the time."

Read: It's all right, don't worry, Kucinich will use the money taken from the sexual oppression of women for a good end. Like my terrible analogy to WWII suggests, the ends justify any means: our country so badly needs Dennis Kucinich to be the President of the United States, what's a few women in the process of achieving that?

From drkazmd65: "As much as I generally dislike Larry Flint's publication (for the record, it is a bit too in your face with female genetalia for my personal liking),...

He is a strong advocate of freedome of the press, freedom of speach, and a virulent opponent of hypocracy."

Read: Scale back a few of those pussy shots and I'd totally read it. He'll promote whoever agrees with him, and that he's taken down a couple of those dastardly Republicans is all right by me. He's totally open and honest about his woman-hating, and that beats a damn Republican hypocrite any day.

From oldpotsmuggler: "I've looked at some porn on occasion, but I've never hit a woman. Never really wanted to, even when it's period time and I'm being screamed at.

Had a wife one time who used to like to pick up dancers in strip bars so that we could have threesomes with them. You get her started on the looks of the women in a place and she would rival any man. She hit me one time but believed me when I told her that she never wanted to do that again."

Read: I'm one of those good porn users that only looks at the titties and doesn't go out raping women afterwards. Just about hit that bitch of a wife one time, but stopped short because she liked to pick up women for my gratification. Strange, though, that I'm not married to her anymore, but whatever, it's her loss and not mine. Anyways, Flynt's a flyweight when it comes to spreading hatred compared to those Republicans; remember, it's all relative, and hating women is low on my scale.

From realitytrumpsbull: "Hustler, being controversial, and having such classic features as Asshole Of The Month, IS a periodical that pushes the envelope of public decency, but no more than the tawdry smut and filth that rolls out of Rush's mouth, though the subject matter might be different."

Read: It's all apples and oranges, man. You can't really make a qualitative difference between what Flynt puts out there and what those Republicans are saying. I like looking at the naked women, not so much listening to those right-wingers; I know that some people prefer the opposite, and that's fine because it's all apples and oranges, man.

[Lost Clown]

Exactly.

[elfeminista]

'Canadian novelist Margaret Atwood once asked a male friend why men feel threatened by women. He replied: "They are afraid women will laugh at them." She then asked a group of women why they felt threatened by men. They answered: "We're afraid of being killed."~

Lucky Nickl has a variation on that :
"A man's greatest fear is that a Women will laugh at him. A Woman's greatest fear is that a man will kill her." Lucky Nickl

[bluecoat28]

I sent the essay by Jackson Katz about Kucinich/Flynt to a Green Party yahoogroups and I got a typical you're-attacking-the-1st-Amendment response from a guy:

john magnesi wrote:
Wanted to resond to your letter personally rather than through the list serve that reaches all Greens.
I am not a reader of Hustler magazine. Once upon a time, a long time ago, I saw some of the pictures.
I am, and was, a supporter of Dennis Kucinich.
Just a few points. I am also a big first ammendment fan. I think you trivialize that basic right in your piece. Frankly, I think that anyone who would attempt to ban this skin magazine would do harm to a basic civil right. It's also my view that if women don't want to appear in the magazine - they can choose not to. Oh of course the lure of money for paid photos is always an attraction if you are down on your luck or short of resources. But there are lots of lures out there to get money that may not be great choices. On the other hand, there is no person, to the best of my knowledge, sitting with a gun there and forcing the women to appear in this publication. If there was, then that would be a crime and their should be a prosecution of that abuser. Also, I would assume, as stated above that if a women does choose to appear, she gets paid for that photo and she accepts the money.

You also engage in attacks ad hominem. That doesn't advance your view, in my opinion.

Should the Congressman take Larry's money ? Hard to say. It's a difficult judgement call. We know what Larry Flint does for a living. But, do we have the ability to examine the background of every potential donor to see if the money is - untainted ? Do we know in advance, the truth of every rumor or allegation that can be hurled against any person who would give a buck to a campaign ? Do we have to perform a criminal background check on every possible donor and then reject the money of every former felon ? If a felon has paid society's price (jail time or probation, or both) and has been released - do we then continue to demonize them forever ? What about their rights ?
Maybe Dennis should have said no to this donation as a purely political decision in order to avoid the ire of other potential supporters and of some writers - like yourself. But, Larry's money should not be rejected solely because of his publication of material like Hustler - a magazine whose printing and distribution is protected by freedom of speech.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi John,

Thanks for responding. You're mistaken that I am trivializing freedom of speech.

Just because the First Amendment exists in this country doesn't mean people ought to be irresponsible with it and promote sexist, racist, and homophobic messages. Hate speech isn't a First Amendment right. Larry Flynt abuses the First Amendment. Larry Flynt sexually abused his own daughter, but instead of being held accountable for that, he's praised as a First Amendment hero. Larry Flynt and various pornographers promote the idea that women and girls are just bodies--- meat. The CEO of Girls Gone Wild (Joe Francis) also claims to be protecting "freedom of speech", but he's a rapist. Unfortunately, he's a millionaire and he can pay his way out of accountability. Also, I have no power to "ban" pornographers and neither does Jackson Katz. The people who have most freedom of speech are those with the most money. Porn is a multibillion dollar industry, so they are very powerful. Everytime people like Larry Flynt call women like me an "antisex bitch", they are infringing on my freedom of speech.

Women and girls are socialized by the media to see themselves as just sex objects and the porn and global prostitution trafficking industries want us to continue to internalize that the purpose in our life is to please men sexually. I believe you're not aware of the extent of misogyny (woman-hating) out there. There ARE plenty of women around the globe who are forced into prostitution/pornography and just because you see women smiling in the glossy pages of magazines doens't mean most women and girls are happy about being stuck in the pornstitution (porn and prostitution) industry. I agree with you that there are plenty of women, like those in Larry Flynt's magazine, who choose to be in porn. There are women saving their money so they can get breast implants and other kinds of surgery. I'm asking you to question WHY women want these things. Think critically about the images and messages people like Larry Flynt are promoting. When you're at the grocery store, glance at the popular women's magazines like Cosmopolitan and take note of what's on the covers:

"457 ways to look hot!"
"20 ways to turn him on!"
"Should you get a tummy tuck?"
etc...

I'm expressing MY freedom of speech by saying that I reject sexual capitalism. I reject Larry Flynt, Hugh Heffner, and all the new pornographers out there making money off of women's bodies. If Dennis Kucinich were as progressive as he claims to be, he wouldn't be friends with Larry Flynt. I think you ought to re-read the Jackson Katz piece and read the kinds of material that Larry Flynt chose to publish-- read about the racist things he published in the magazine and how he trivializes rape (just READ the Jackson Katz essay). It seems to me like you didn't even read the Jackson Katz piece, because if you actually read it and thought about it, you might be more critical of Larry Flynt types and their supporters. Larry Flynt has millions of dollars, therefore he has plenty of "freedom of speech". The media loves him. It's people like me who have less of a voice.

Listen, I wanted to support the Kucinich, because he was truly antiwar and seemed progressive. Unfortunately, until he stands up to jerks like Larry Flynt, I can't support him. People who claim to care about human rights need to take sexual violence/ the commodification of women's bodies seriously.

If you want, we can keep talking about this through email,

Estela

[sam]

Fabulous reply.

[delphyne]

Right on, Bluecoat.

[MaggieH]

Love ya, Bluecoat28!

[KatetheGreat]

hip hip hooray for bluecoat!

[elfeminista]

Awesome bluecoat!

[bluecoat28]

thanks for the cheers. Unfortunately, John has just emailed me back with another one of those "prostitution and porn will never go away" and "driving it underground will make it worse" (blaming the feminist) arguments so now I have to write another email to him. Feels like I'm writing to a brick wall. ha. hopefully he'll learn something!