<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Undercover Sex</title>
	<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/02/15/undercover-sex/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:43:52 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: B - but not Dagger!</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/02/15/undercover-sex/#comment-12046</link>
		<author>B - but not Dagger!</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Feb 2006 12:39:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/02/15/undercover-sex/#comment-12046</guid>
		<description>To me it seems that many posters miss the point. For me the problem with prostitution is that people accept that having sex (though I personally wouldn't dignify it with calling it sex)with unwilling bodies is ok. It doesn't matter how much money the prostitute gets. What matters is that our culture has a view of sex as something that doesn't have to be mutual.

As an aside - for a woman who isn't aroused penetration nearly always leads to problems such as vestibulitis or similar diseases. Something completely ignored in a culture where women are expected to "put out".

To repeat. The problem is that people (mostly men) think that having sex with someone who isn't aroused or interested in them is a fun and ok thing to do. 

"Working" conditions, abuse, drug use, level of choice involved are all secondary issues. These issues only exist because of that first sick mindset.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To me it seems that many posters miss the point. For me the problem with prostitution is that people accept that having sex (though I personally wouldn&#8217;t dignify it with calling it sex)with unwilling bodies is ok. It doesn&#8217;t matter how much money the prostitute gets. What matters is that our culture has a view of sex as something that doesn&#8217;t have to be mutual.</p>
<p>As an aside - for a woman who isn&#8217;t aroused penetration nearly always leads to problems such as vestibulitis or similar diseases. Something completely ignored in a culture where women are expected to &#8220;put out&#8221;.</p>
<p>To repeat. The problem is that people (mostly men) think that having sex with someone who isn&#8217;t aroused or interested in them is a fun and ok thing to do. </p>
<p>&#8220;Working&#8221; conditions, abuse, drug use, level of choice involved are all secondary issues. These issues only exist because of that first sick mindset.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kate</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/02/15/undercover-sex/#comment-11999</link>
		<author>Kate</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Feb 2006 20:44:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/02/15/undercover-sex/#comment-11999</guid>
		<description>Hedon says: "And then I thought, wouldnâ€™t it be nice, while we feminists fight the Patriarchy (and wait for HELL to freeze over), if the sex-industry were to dry up because all the prostitutes and porn stars were able to â€œpriceâ€ themselves out of the market because they had better options?"

Exactly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hedon says: &#8220;And then I thought, wouldnâ€™t it be nice, while we feminists fight the Patriarchy (and wait for HELL to freeze over), if the sex-industry were to dry up because all the prostitutes and porn stars were able to â€œpriceâ€ themselves out of the market because they had better options?&#8221;</p>
<p>Exactly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kathy a</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/02/15/undercover-sex/#comment-11951</link>
		<author>kathy a</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Feb 2006 15:22:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/02/15/undercover-sex/#comment-11951</guid>
		<description>spotsylvania decided to abandon this law enforcement technique, lest they become the "laughingstock of the nation":
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060218/ap_on_re_us/undercover_sex;_ylt=AoqcclB6KLt6tWUm1HoJE3ZI2ocA;_ylu=X3oDMTA5aHJvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA--</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>spotsylvania decided to abandon this law enforcement technique, lest they become the &#8220;laughingstock of the nation&#8221;:<br />
<a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060218/ap_on_re_us/undercover_sex;_ylt=AoqcclB6KLt6tWUm1HoJE3ZI2ocA;_ylu=X3oDMTA5aHJvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA--" rel="nofollow">http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060218/ap_on_re_us/undercover_sex;_ylt=AoqcclB6KLt6tWUm1HoJE3ZI2ocA;_ylu=X3oDMTA5aHJvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA&#8211;</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Twisty</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/02/15/undercover-sex/#comment-11948</link>
		<author>Twisty</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Feb 2006 14:36:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/02/15/undercover-sex/#comment-11948</guid>
		<description>I'm saying the discussion you want to have is irrelevant to the post. I'm also saying male prostitution is irrelevant to the post. The post is not about happy hookers. You have hijacked the thread. Knock it off.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m saying the discussion you want to have is irrelevant to the post. I&#8217;m also saying male prostitution is irrelevant to the post. The post is not about happy hookers. You have hijacked the thread. Knock it off.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NancyMc</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/02/15/undercover-sex/#comment-11934</link>
		<author>NancyMc</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Feb 2006 10:25:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/02/15/undercover-sex/#comment-11934</guid>
		<description>&lt;em&gt;
NancyMc, however gracefully, asserts that some women love prostitution so much they would rather boink for bucks than do anything else, and that their decision to live this idyllic life is derived from an inner strength so awesome that they are able to exist outside the overwhelming forces of patriarchal sexbotism that afflict every other woman on the planet including me.&lt;/em&gt;

So basically we can't have this discussion, is what you're saying. Because you refuse to respond to my direct questions.

It's much simpler to say prostitution is about enslaving women, and  just ignore male prostitution or women who choose sex work. But I think there's a clear logical contradiction there, and there are finer points of work and class and exploitation that are being oversimplified. 

But because I detect logical problems and because I think that finer points are being ignored doesn't prove that therefore I don't understand the prevelance of patriarchy, or don't care about the evils of sex slavery.

You're not interested in getting into the logical contradictions and fine points, and that's fine. Life is short and your focus is on blaming the patriarchy. But to claim that I think prostitution is an "idyllic life" is a shitty thing to do. Whether you're deliberately misrepresenting my views or engaging in exuberant literary  hyperbole, it's dishonorable. But maybe it's not your fault, because, you know, how could you be expected to be honorable when we're living in a patriarchy?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em><br />
NancyMc, however gracefully, asserts that some women love prostitution so much they would rather boink for bucks than do anything else, and that their decision to live this idyllic life is derived from an inner strength so awesome that they are able to exist outside the overwhelming forces of patriarchal sexbotism that afflict every other woman on the planet including me.</em></p>
<p>So basically we can&#8217;t have this discussion, is what you&#8217;re saying. Because you refuse to respond to my direct questions.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s much simpler to say prostitution is about enslaving women, and  just ignore male prostitution or women who choose sex work. But I think there&#8217;s a clear logical contradiction there, and there are finer points of work and class and exploitation that are being oversimplified. </p>
<p>But because I detect logical problems and because I think that finer points are being ignored doesn&#8217;t prove that therefore I don&#8217;t understand the prevelance of patriarchy, or don&#8217;t care about the evils of sex slavery.</p>
<p>You&#8217;re not interested in getting into the logical contradictions and fine points, and that&#8217;s fine. Life is short and your focus is on blaming the patriarchy. But to claim that I think prostitution is an &#8220;idyllic life&#8221; is a shitty thing to do. Whether you&#8217;re deliberately misrepresenting my views or engaging in exuberant literary  hyperbole, it&#8217;s dishonorable. But maybe it&#8217;s not your fault, because, you know, how could you be expected to be honorable when we&#8217;re living in a patriarchy?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SisterJ</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/02/15/undercover-sex/#comment-11925</link>
		<author>SisterJ</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Feb 2006 04:51:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/02/15/undercover-sex/#comment-11925</guid>
		<description>&lt;b&gt;FYI: Va. Sheriff &lt;a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/02/17/national/main1329964.shtml?CMP=OTC-RSSFeed&#38;source=RSS&#38;attr=U.S._1329964" rel="nofollow"&gt;stops&lt;/a&gt; Sex Stings.&lt;/b&gt;

&lt;i&gt;Earlier this week, Smith told The Washington Post that sexual contact is needed during the investigations because most professionals know not to say anything incriminating. And conversation is difficult, he said, because masseuses at the Asian-run parlors in the northern Virginia county speak little English. 

So if they were British, no sexual contact?  What's it called again when you have a separate system of justice for people of color?&lt;/i&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>FYI: Va. Sheriff <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/02/17/national/main1329964.shtml?CMP=OTC-RSSFeed&amp;source=RSS&amp;attr=U.S._1329964" rel="nofollow">stops</a> Sex Stings.</b></p>
<p><i>Earlier this week, Smith told The Washington Post that sexual contact is needed during the investigations because most professionals know not to say anything incriminating. And conversation is difficult, he said, because masseuses at the Asian-run parlors in the northern Virginia county speak little English. </p>
<p>So if they were British, no sexual contact?  What&#8217;s it called again when you have a separate system of justice for people of color?</i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Char</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/02/15/undercover-sex/#comment-11854</link>
		<author>Char</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2006 17:38:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/02/15/undercover-sex/#comment-11854</guid>
		<description>"Itâ€™s understandable however that you got a few bites: youâ€™ve lain low for a few months and there are enough new readers for you to be able to stir the shit again."

Well, clearly I fall in this category.  I'm never very good at checking for backstory.  Sorry for facilitating an shit-stirring.

Although, I'll get a last plug in for www.prostitutionresearch.com.  Well worth looking at for educational and activism purposes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Itâ€™s understandable however that you got a few bites: youâ€™ve lain low for a few months and there are enough new readers for you to be able to stir the shit again.&#8221;</p>
<p>Well, clearly I fall in this category.  I&#8217;m never very good at checking for backstory.  Sorry for facilitating an shit-stirring.</p>
<p>Although, I&#8217;ll get a last plug in for <a href="http://www.prostitutionresearch.com." rel="nofollow">www.prostitutionresearch.com.</a>  Well worth looking at for educational and activism purposes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Twisty</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/02/15/undercover-sex/#comment-11818</link>
		<author>Twisty</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2006 11:50:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/02/15/undercover-sex/#comment-11818</guid>
		<description>I'm going to take this opportunity to remind everybody that patriarchy-blaming is supposed to be &lt;em&gt;fun&lt;/em&gt;.

Meanwhile, I'm sure everyone is aware that when I say "women have no autonomy" I do not mean "women are too dumb to be autonomous," but in fact "our social order does not allow women the luxury of self-determination." Everybody is aware of that, so I don't have to mention it.

Meanwhile, NancyMc, however gracefully, asserts that some women love prostitution so much they would rather boink for bucks than do anything else, and that their decision to live this idyllic life is derived from an inner strength so awesome that they are able to exist outside the overwhelming forces of patriarchal sexbotism that afflict every other woman on the planet including me. This point, fascinating though it may be, is actually extremely tangential to the original post, which, if you'll allow me to recap, was about the hypocrisy of the state, taken to its ludicrous Spotsylvanian extreme, in simultaneously promoting and punishing the sort of prostitution where women are essentially sex slaves. Which is essentially &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; prostitution.

For the purposes of discussion on this particular post, I submit that happy hookers, should they even exist, cannot much benefit from patriarchy-blaming support since they are clearly well-adjusted and unfettered by the dehumanizing constraints that encumber all other women, and because their chosen profession is in no danger whatsoever of being eradicated.

The women in far greater need of lip service from ideological kibitzers on lefty blogs are those whose lives have been ruined by their forced membership in the sex caste.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m going to take this opportunity to remind everybody that patriarchy-blaming is supposed to be <em>fun</em>.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, I&#8217;m sure everyone is aware that when I say &#8220;women have no autonomy&#8221; I do not mean &#8220;women are too dumb to be autonomous,&#8221; but in fact &#8220;our social order does not allow women the luxury of self-determination.&#8221; Everybody is aware of that, so I don&#8217;t have to mention it.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, NancyMc, however gracefully, asserts that some women love prostitution so much they would rather boink for bucks than do anything else, and that their decision to live this idyllic life is derived from an inner strength so awesome that they are able to exist outside the overwhelming forces of patriarchal sexbotism that afflict every other woman on the planet including me. This point, fascinating though it may be, is actually extremely tangential to the original post, which, if you&#8217;ll allow me to recap, was about the hypocrisy of the state, taken to its ludicrous Spotsylvanian extreme, in simultaneously promoting and punishing the sort of prostitution where women are essentially sex slaves. Which is essentially <em>all</em> prostitution.</p>
<p>For the purposes of discussion on this particular post, I submit that happy hookers, should they even exist, cannot much benefit from patriarchy-blaming support since they are clearly well-adjusted and unfettered by the dehumanizing constraints that encumber all other women, and because their chosen profession is in no danger whatsoever of being eradicated.</p>
<p>The women in far greater need of lip service from ideological kibitzers on lefty blogs are those whose lives have been ruined by their forced membership in the sex caste.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Luckynkl</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/02/15/undercover-sex/#comment-11816</link>
		<author>Luckynkl</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2006 11:24:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/02/15/undercover-sex/#comment-11816</guid>
		<description>In many counties in Nevada, brothels and prostitution has been legalized.  But alas, apparently some of the pimps did not pay their taxes.  At least that's the claim of the feds.  Who promptly seized the pimp's property, which included the prostitutes, and went into the business of prostituting women in order to "recover tax revenue."  That's right.  The U.S. government is a pimp.  Which is in the business of prostuting women.  Who are still seen as "property" by the state in the year 2006.  

No big surprise there.  The church and state have been viewing women as property since patriarchy and worms first started crawling out from under their rocks and legalized the rape, owernership, and prostitution of women.  Which we know better as "marriage."

The patriarchy is not just made up of men.  Tho it was created by men, for men and is maintained by men.  However, some of its best supporters and soldiers are women.  Who are employed by patriarchs to use as shields to hide behind.  Sort of like how a secretary is used by a boss to protect and prevent him from having to deal with the public so he can continue on with his nasty little actions in peace.

This is not a new tactic used by the patriarchs.  Many of the overseers of slaves on plantations were black.  Many of the foremen in the Nazi death camps were Jews.  Is that an excuse to legitmize slavery and a holocaust?  Especially if they're being "nice" and "polite" about it?  Whatever the hell that means.  As far as I'm concerned, it makes no difference whether I'm shot in the back by someone that's smiling and polite, or shot in a frontal confrontation by someone rude.  I'm still dead.  Do you think it really matters to me how nice and polite the person was?  

IOWs, "niceness" and "politeness" is a lame argument.  There is nothing "nice" or "polite" about slavery, holocausts or the prostituting of women.  And it's an even more absurd argument to claim that the supporters of these institutions are being "bullied" when people en masse protest it.  Talk about a complete reversal!   The bully is being bullied?  lol.  Which seems to be the going thing these days.  What's amazing to me is how many people actually buy this crap.  Oh, it's not the slaves that are oppressed and bullied, it's the slave owners!  It's not the Jews that were being oppressed and bullied, it's the Nazis!  It's not the prostitutes that are being oppressed and bullied, it's their pimps and supporters!  Got any other swampland you'd like to sell us, Nancy and B. Dagger Lee?

All I can say is, kissing the patriarchy's ass is not going to save your own.  Any more than it did the black overseer or the Jewish foreman.  In the end, they were viewed no differently by their oppressors than those they oversaw.  At best, all they bought was a little time.  Until they were all used up by their oppressors and tossed aside like a pile of garbage.  And their fate was one and the same.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In many counties in Nevada, brothels and prostitution has been legalized.  But alas, apparently some of the pimps did not pay their taxes.  At least that&#8217;s the claim of the feds.  Who promptly seized the pimp&#8217;s property, which included the prostitutes, and went into the business of prostituting women in order to &#8220;recover tax revenue.&#8221;  That&#8217;s right.  The U.S. government is a pimp.  Which is in the business of prostuting women.  Who are still seen as &#8220;property&#8221; by the state in the year 2006.  </p>
<p>No big surprise there.  The church and state have been viewing women as property since patriarchy and worms first started crawling out from under their rocks and legalized the rape, owernership, and prostitution of women.  Which we know better as &#8220;marriage.&#8221;</p>
<p>The patriarchy is not just made up of men.  Tho it was created by men, for men and is maintained by men.  However, some of its best supporters and soldiers are women.  Who are employed by patriarchs to use as shields to hide behind.  Sort of like how a secretary is used by a boss to protect and prevent him from having to deal with the public so he can continue on with his nasty little actions in peace.</p>
<p>This is not a new tactic used by the patriarchs.  Many of the overseers of slaves on plantations were black.  Many of the foremen in the Nazi death camps were Jews.  Is that an excuse to legitmize slavery and a holocaust?  Especially if they&#8217;re being &#8220;nice&#8221; and &#8220;polite&#8221; about it?  Whatever the hell that means.  As far as I&#8217;m concerned, it makes no difference whether I&#8217;m shot in the back by someone that&#8217;s smiling and polite, or shot in a frontal confrontation by someone rude.  I&#8217;m still dead.  Do you think it really matters to me how nice and polite the person was?  </p>
<p>IOWs, &#8220;niceness&#8221; and &#8220;politeness&#8221; is a lame argument.  There is nothing &#8220;nice&#8221; or &#8220;polite&#8221; about slavery, holocausts or the prostituting of women.  And it&#8217;s an even more absurd argument to claim that the supporters of these institutions are being &#8220;bullied&#8221; when people en masse protest it.  Talk about a complete reversal!   The bully is being bullied?  lol.  Which seems to be the going thing these days.  What&#8217;s amazing to me is how many people actually buy this crap.  Oh, it&#8217;s not the slaves that are oppressed and bullied, it&#8217;s the slave owners!  It&#8217;s not the Jews that were being oppressed and bullied, it&#8217;s the Nazis!  It&#8217;s not the prostitutes that are being oppressed and bullied, it&#8217;s their pimps and supporters!  Got any other swampland you&#8217;d like to sell us, Nancy and B. Dagger Lee?</p>
<p>All I can say is, kissing the patriarchy&#8217;s ass is not going to save your own.  Any more than it did the black overseer or the Jewish foreman.  In the end, they were viewed no differently by their oppressors than those they oversaw.  At best, all they bought was a little time.  Until they were all used up by their oppressors and tossed aside like a pile of garbage.  And their fate was one and the same.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: darkymac</title>
		<link>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/02/15/undercover-sex/#comment-11810</link>
		<author>darkymac</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2006 05:30:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2006/02/15/undercover-sex/#comment-11810</guid>
		<description>edit:

where someone &lt;i&gt;else&lt;/i&gt;  is paying the bill.

I regret the misplacement of tags.  Especially since I slept on my post and should have taken equal care with the proof-reading.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>edit:</p>
<p>where someone <i>else</i>  is paying the bill.</p>
<p>I regret the misplacement of tags.  Especially since I slept on my post and should have taken equal care with the proof-reading.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
