Plus: porn addles male brains!
Why no post yesterday? I guess I just forgot.
Maybe because I had a couple of Sofias for lunch. Single-serving cans of carbonated blanc de blancs from the Coppola are cute, pink, emblazoned with vapid teenisms like “petulant” and “reactionary,” come with extendo-straws so you don’t muss your lipstick, and according to Texas law may be consumed only by underage girls (I get mine from a slutty neighbor kid). In spite of all that, I love these Sofias.
“But Twisty!” you protest, “carbonated wine in a cute pink can?” As a matter of fact, yes. The wine really doesn’t suck. And anyway, a spinster aunt can have facets.
Meanwhile, reader Henry sends along this link to an article about a study assessing the degree to which studly muthafuckas are affected by the sight of a hot babe en deshabille. The degree is—believe it or not—a high one, which finding has understandably sent absolute shock waves through the global studly-sexual-response community.
According to the study, so-called “high-testosterone” men, so determined by the length of their ring fingers (yeah, that’s not what I would have measured, either), go absolutely to pieces over two-dimensional images of women* capitulating to the sexbot mandate, to the extent that the aforementioned dudes will stop driving “hard bargains” and accept crummier deals when in the presence of porn. The same result obtains even when they have so much as handled a bra. When these same men view pictures of old women, surprise, they are not affected in the slightest.
On the other hand, “low-testosterone” men, who are identified, I suppose, by their comparatively larger brains, appear to retain their dignity even when exposed to “the effect of a well-turned ankle.”
Who funds these stupid studies? Is it not obvious to everyone that dudes only conduct asinine research like this as an excuse to get paid for looking at porn all day?
* Women are defined by the article as “sultry sirens” and are illustrated as a concept by a stock photo of a young blonde hottie in her underwear.
The really strange thing about this research, once I have read the article, is that either the scientists or the journalist mix up watching images of beautiful women with looking at a prospective partner. “perhaps, the researchers suggest, with a ‘mate’ to impress the men were driven to have some wealth”. They did not have a ‘mate’ to impress. they just had a photograph, if I have understood the article correctly. It makes perfect sense to me that someone with a very high sex drive is easily distracted from other activities if presented the right sexual stimulus; it would confirm the old joke that “men can’t do more than one thing at a time”. Trying to turn that into an explanation of men’s behaviour in respect of prospective _partners_ implies two things: one, men are too stupid to make a difference between a photo and a human being. Two, the researches don’t see that difference at all.
I’m always amazed that women are considered to be “hormonal” and scattered when it seems so obviously men who are constantly distracted by hormones.
On the other hand, fizzy wine I like. Especially cheap fizzy wine. I am such a peasant. Getting over the can is an obstacle for me. I even like my cheap champagne to be in a bottle with a cork for that satisfying POP.
so who’s going to fund the study to determine how many women have been denied equal standing due to hormonal wackiness?
wish i had me some fizzy wine to dial down the ol’ obstreperometer right now.
So THAT explains the calendars in auto repair and industrial parts shops!
And all this time I thought it was just fucktard male bonding. Now I see it’s a highly developed profit scheme.
Manliness is measured by the length of the fingers? Where did they get this? From a group of eigth-grade girls? Because honestly, that’s the last time I ever heard a version this particular nugget of physiological wisdom.
I will take your word for it, of course, but I have never had a blanc de blancs that didn’t utterly suck, and I also have a real problem with the taste of aluminum. Wine coolers I have quaffed aplenty, though, straight from the bottle and all. Heteronormative food snobs need to flex their palates, too.
As for your question, “Who funds these stupid studies?” Well, duh, other guys, or so I’d imagine. Grantors probably clap each prospective researcher on his lab-coated shoulder with a grin and a thumbs-up sign while delivering the award confirmation personally.
We all know whom to blame.
Take it from me: excitedly leafing through the bathrobe section of the Sears catalog during arbitration is a really bad idea, epecially when you’re an ankle fetishist.
I was so addled by the mere thought of a well-turned ankle that I forgot to blame the Patriarchy! That’s how huge my ring finger is, mom!
I just love the word ’study’. Manly men doing serious studies! Men studying male desire with vim and vigor! Gotta figure this sexual arousal thing out! Don’t know enough about it yet! Not quite fucking yet! Yeah!
I’m quite certain it was funded by men with longish ring fingers.
There was a study performed about 10 years ago that sort of showed that you could predict a male’s sexual orientation tendencies from the length of his fingers. the length of your fingers is affected in utero by exposure to hormones. Females tend to have index and ring fingers that are even, guys with more testostorone have longer ring fingers, I think. I can’t really remember, and the office is currently guyless, so I can’t even present an anecdote.
I have no idea if there was a study that showed that longer ring fingers predicted higher testosterone levels later in life. One of the studies that talks about the in utero hormone exposure is “Second to fourth digit ratio, body mass index, waist-to-hip ratio, and waist-to-chest ratio: their relationships in heterosexual men and women.” by B. Fink, N Neave, JT Manning in Annals of Human Biology. There are more, that was just from a quick Lexis search.
What that has to do with their lack of social skills, which are learned behavior, is beyond me. We see pictures of half naked hot women so much that they become expected background noise. How exactly are guys not walking into lamp posts all the time if they’re so affected by it?
Bea Arthur smiled at me once, and the next thing I knew I’d bought a vacation timeshare in Fort Stockton.
I’d never heard about the ringofingometer before; I’d always heard it was the size of a dude’s feet. I can’t tell you how many times that “fact” has helped me sit through dull meetings and public transportation rides…
As for the “real” research, apparently done by thumbing through magazines, say no more. I can barf on demand.
Fizzy pink canned vino…hmm…if I have any slutty neighbor-girls. I like the “POP” that comes in those pretty blue bottles. When that was intro’d it also came with a straw.
You can get a grant to study anything apparently.
norbiz — you kill me! *another* one of those things they forget to teach in law school: “whatever you do, DON’T take the sears catalog to arbitration. unless it is an exhibit, of course.”
so — i’m not a manly dude, and this stupid post made me realize that my ring fingers are longer than my pointer fingers. this probably isn’t a recent development, either. based on some serious pondering, i have concluded that my ring-fingerdness has [a] not led me into bad real estate transactions, and [b] not afforded a shield against the patriarchy. can i get a grant to ponder further?
“Bea Arthur smiled at me once, and the next thing I knew I’d bought a vacation timeshare in Fort Stockton.”
HA!! Too many Sofias…
So, what’s the “take away” message from today’s blog? Are we to expect to see a bunch of hatchet-wielding Blamers out there chopping ring fingers?!?!
If so, I gotta find a place to hide… I got the longer ring finger.
I also have male pattern baldness. Aren’t both supposedly signs of higher testosterone levels?
Men have trouble working around women they’re attracted to (and images of same)? Well, our course of action is clear. We must expel women from the workplace.
It’s only fair.
Remember, if some aspect of the workplace makes it harder for women to work it’s because they just aren’t as good as men. However, if some aspect of the workplace makes it harder for men to work, it’s a disater that needs fixing immediately.
Juxtaposing carbonated girly drinks and testosterone laden lads has got to be one of the greatest imaginative leaps I have ever witnessed. How long do you think Tony Soprano’s ring finger is? Screwing women and murdering other guys, what a man! We are in the realm of mythology.
The ballsiest male I know is my dog Buddy. He’s a little guy, but my oh my. He’s uncut, and not little where it counts! Ask the neighborhood bitches, they’ll tell you.
We are not animals, for Chrissakes!
finnsmotel — i’m not in favor of the hatchet option, personally. just guessing that the cleanup is hell.
my second angst of the post is, how come i never heard of this sofia bubble-wine-in-the-can thing? “the wine country” is nearby. maybe i don’t get out enough. there is the strong possibility that the local paper is biased against canned goods, at least where wine is concerned. maybe they market it elsewhere. c’est la vie.
Haven’t tried any fizzy wine in a pink can. But I can recommend Duplin Vineyards Blackberry Wine. There are few occasions that will not be improved by its influence.
It’s a conspiracy to make you buy “real” wine.
So what does it mean that my ring finger is longer. Should I stop thinking and run around drooling and grabbing at people since that’s all I’m supposedly capable of?
Oh, wait, it must be different for women, we’re just freaks then, right?
Addendum:
Twisty I have learned from your blog that I am a freak woman who apparently has too much spinal fluid for a female and freakish manly fingers. Awesome. Just don’t tell anyone, they may take me away to study my freakishness.
(Also not learned from here but further proof I’m a freak: I’m a physics/mathematics major)
I currently have the mental image of two sociology students checkling the mail and one says, “dude! You will so not believe which of those grant proposals you wrote got funding!”
And then they fire up the bong.
Twisty, don’t you have a well-turned ankle (courtesy of Bert the Artist)?
Now I know why the fundies are so fearful of Teh Gay taking over the world.
This study seems to suggest that men are wired differently from each other. I thought men were only wired differently from women!
So what does it mean that my ring finger is longer. Should I stop thinking and run around drooling and grabbing at people since that’s all I’m supposedly capable of?
Oh, wait, it must be different for women, we’re just freaks then, right?
I think the current theory is that there is a correlation between women with longer ring fingers and lesbianism.
Take that with as much salt as you deem appropriate.
Hello,
This is a completely random out of context contact, I guess you’d say. I was in a band circa 1990-91 with Lori Blue called True Wheel. I graduated from high school in ‘91 from Kirkwood High School and then moved to North Carolina, subsequently losing touch with her and many of my old friends in St Louis.
I just found out today what happened to her. It saddens me deeply because I always remember her as someone who was full of laughter and was very giving of herself. I don’t have a single bad memory of her. She sold me her old Rogers drumset from the late ’70’s because she trusted me to not sell it to anyone else, and told me to sell it back to her if I ever considered selling it. Of course I still have it, and in fact recorded an album last year playing those very drums myself, having no idea the significance of it all.
Anyway, I just wanted to let whoever it is that reads these posts know that Lori was such a great person, and that it was my loss to have lost touch with her from the time that I did until now. Throughout the course of life we usually assume that we can eventually catch up at will with old friends and relatives that have touched our lives, but every now and then we’re reminded that the carpet is often pulled out from under us when we do not expect it. Such is the case with me now. Lori, you were great.
Stephan
#25
That must salt would crush me.
Well, I have big honkin’ feet AND long ring fingers (and ever-so-slightly crooked middle fingers, whatever that might mean), and I’m a het girl.
Well, I’m fairly sure I am, anyway. Hmmm.
Argh. The last comment was supposed to say that much salt. Bah.
I have to object to the study on several grounds. First off, I’m skeptical of any study that determines testosterone levels in men by finger length, and not by, say, doing brain scans or blood tests, or looking at traits such as body hair content or sexual activity. The assumption here is that high-testosterone men are naturally less intelligent or discerning, which is bull. I’m a high testosterone male with a 160 IQ. AND I’m a diehard feminist, AND I have a certain soft spot for pornography, so you figure it out.
Anyway, there are other flaws in the study as well. For one, the study fails to take into account sexual activity levels in its test subjects. It is my opinion, though I’m sure there are studies to back it up, that individuals of EITHER gender, when sexually frustrated, are going to perform more poorly in cognitive reasoning tests. Seems to me like a poor attempt to justify and glorify stupid behavior by men, while proving to part-time soccer-mom divorcees that men really are pigs. Which pisses me off even more, because if there’s one thing I can’t stand, it’s been looked on with scorn just because my father gave me a Y chromosome. Sure, a Y isn’t really any better than a double-X, but I happen to like my Y chromosome, thank you.
/rant.
Stephan alludes to my girlfriend and bandmate Lori, who killed herself in 1999. She is usually referred to as “the inimitable” Lori Blue. She was an extraordinary girl and an extraordinary drummer. Examples of her playing in our old band Johnny Magnet can be heard here. For extra pathos, listen to our out of tune Neil Young cover, which features Lori on vocals doin’ the high parts. I’ll save the rest for the book or whatever it is that I’m going to have to write about her someday.
Freeman,
Wow, a diehard feminist who looks at one of the single most damaging, degrading and harmful thing to women; *shrug* guess ‘diehard’ means different things in our books.
OK, so who’s selling ring-finger enlargement pumps, pills and racks?
Oh, and Kathy A, I’d say you should _definitely_ bring the Sears catalogues to negotiations, and rely on the magic XX genome to protect you
Freeman in 30: “if there’s one thing I can’t stand, it’s been looked on with scorn just because my father gave me a Y chromosome. Sure, a Y isn’t really any better than a double-X, but I happen to like my Y chromosome, thank you.”
What you happen to like, Freeman old pal, is not a chromosome, but being a dude. It is my not inconsiderable experience that any “diehard feminism” claimed by wankers who defensively tout their testosterone levels and fondness for porn on radical feminist blogs is highly suspect.
By the way, this whole post was a joke, Mr. IQ 160. I know feminists aren’t supposed to think anything is funny, but that’s how I roll.
bitingbeaver,
I see the point you’re trying to make, but you’re making sweeping generalizations. Can porn be degrading to women? Of course. But it can be just as degrading to men. Ask my wife–also a porn fan. Or ask Marc Wallice and John Holmes, both male casualties of the 20th century porn industry.
Pornography–only the most recent manifestation of a long historical tradition of visual erotica (dating back to Neolithic European sculpture), yes, DOES have the potential to be exploitative of its stars. But anyone serious about women’s equality must concede that exploitation is not solely the province of women.
Anyone who has been abused on camera, exploited by greedy agents, become addicted to drugs, or contracted HIV while working in adult film can be said to have been exploited–regardless of gender. But porn, like any indulgence, is often about “set” and “setting.” Or, as users of recreational drugs would put it, it’s about “where you do it,” and “with WHOM you do it.” Erotic films are not automatically the same as cheap DVDs here stars are tortured with car batteries and forced to consume human feces. To imply that ALL porn is exploitative is simply ridiculous and irresponsible. By that logic, any horny married couple who has ever taped themselves having sex is guilty of exploiting women. And believe me, I know of quite a few women who have fantasized about such things, and taken action.
The best way to combat women’s–AND men’s–exploitation in porn is simply not to purchase or support material where such exploitation occurs. Porn in and of itself is not necessarily exploitative. Anyone who claims otherwise is little more than a prudish latter-day Comstock, uncomfortable with their own bodies or biological imperatives.
I fail to see how my affinity for visual representations of consenting adults having sex on camera conflicts with my beliefs in equal pay for women, equal opportunity, reproductive freedom, or freedom from gender violence.
Sarcasm is the riposte of the weak-minded, bitingbeaver, remember that.
P.S.,
Of all the things out there harmful to women, I would have actually listed porn last. I guess those things like lack of information about STD’s, lack of access to family planning agencies, and cultural biases that even now insist on “blaming the victim” in cases of rape are just trivialities, huh? Comment triste est-ce que ca?
Part of being feminist requires being well-informed.
re: #32
BitingBeaver,
Anyone who reads a periodical, watches television, or glances at billboards “looks at” porn.
More to the point, I’ve observed that men and women who are inclined to seek out and enjoy pornography often outgrow the interest. I assume that they come to the realization that porn (as opposed to sexual fiction) is boring. I also assume that those who don’t outgrow the interest, fail to do so for developmental reasons or in response to external influences. What those reasons maybe seems to me to be best ascertained by the individual, their psychologist, or whatever moral and ethical mentors they apprentice themselves under.
To judge a person’s politics, character, social contribution, or self-identification based solely on evidence that the individual is still maturing and developing seems (to me) to be less then constructive.
Of course, no one asked my opinion.
Damn it. I just read Freeman’s response. Now I’m going to have to close my browser for a while or gouge out my eyes to end the agony this flame war’s promising to inflict on my rhetorical sensibilities.
[re: Freeman in 35]:
What’s this! A “what about the men” argument? In defense of porn? On this blog?
That whole equality thing is patriarchal bullshit, Freeman old pal. Any feminist with an IQ of 160 knows that. She also knows better than to parrot that dumb old saw about sarcasm.
Twisty,
I wasn’t taking the “what about the men” tack. I was pointing out that blanket statements about a form of expression that has been with us since before Hammurabi are indeed more harmful to women than the medium itself. And I employed that “tired old saw” as you put it, because I believed that this was a forum for rational dialogue. Evidently I have been sorely mistaken.
Call it patriarchal bullshit, if you like, but I came to your site out of legitimate curiousity and an earnest desire to support your message with my bandwidth. I had hoped for a meaningful discussion of women’s rights issues, a set of causes for which, as a modern male, I felt it important to follow and show my support.
Yes. Patriarchal thinking has done society a lot of damage. But men, too, are entitled to be feminists. How dare you insult me on semantics without once actually examining the roots of my argument. I am deeply disappointed in the knee-jerk hostility you have displayed toward me, a supporter of your cause. Shame on you. You should know better.
Perinteger,
You’re right. I apologize for my reaction. It was wrong of me, and I apologize for any negative contribution it has had on the current discourse. Please take what I have said with a grain of salt. Thank you.
I take it Finn, you don’t know Biting Beaver?
{I didn’t want to work today anyway}.
When I was her age, and the age of most here I would do what they’re going to do to you. I learned long ago guys with ideas like yours aren’t worth it. Note. Not the ideas, they were always not worth it. You. Aren’t worth it.
Bandmate or no.
Twisty, Re: Freeman in 30,
That post was likewise a joke. Yes, I enjoy being male. But that has less to do with any sense of cultural entitlement, than with the unique quirks of simply being MALE. I celebrate my own gender as much as I celebrate the opposite. Call it–how did the ancient Greeks put it–the Sacred Duality. Vive la difference, as they say.
Also, Pony, I’m not sure… just to be clear, you’re NOT confusing me with Finnsmotel then? And if you’re not, why is HE not worth it? Forgive me, I’m new here.
Apologies to the inestimable Finn. Obviously my comments were addressed to Freeman.
“I learned long ago guys with ideas like yours aren’t worth it.”
Hmmm… I’m thinking maybe you accidentally associated me with someone else’s posting… there have been a lot of “f” names showing up lately.
Anyway…
I was about to ask if anyone else had mentioned that the article/study in question is on a site that charges a monthly subscription? I’m sure it’s probably worth the price, but… I don’t have it right now. Anyone know of a place where the article can be read for free?
I think Finn is right. And if so, “band mate?” I said “bandwidth,” defined in the Oxford English dictionary as follows:
“The transmission capacity of a computer network.” I’ll ignore your atrocious skills in reading comprehension to make one final point.
When white college students joined black peace activists in marching for civil-rights reform, were they shunned by their compatriots? No. They were welcomed as friends and allies in a noble cause. I, a feminist (regardless of what anyone says) and newcomer to this site, give my thoughts on one post, and am immediately shouted down before any sort of rational debate can take place. I’m truly insulted and hurt.
Just as well, I suppose. There are plenty of other feminist blogs, such as Feministe or Echidne of the Snakes, that welcome debate and honest discussion, without criticizing the demographic backgrounds of their readers.
For shame, Twisty. For shame.
Finn: the moderator has deemed my initial apology to you not worthy. So here’s another one. Sorry yes too many Fs today. By way of contrition, here:
http://www.econ.kuleuven.ac.be/tew/academic/market/members/researchers/papers/2D4D and cooperative behavior.pdf
More on Siegfried and Kobe’s research motivations:
http://www.econ.kuleuven.be/tew/academic/market/members/researchers/kobe.htm
http://www.econ.kuleuven.ac.be/tew/academic/market/members/researchers/papers/2D4D and cooperative behavior.pdf
Me big he-man with giant ring fingers and raging libido! Me also sensitive feminist man who likes looking at objectification of women! Me blame patriarchy for all woes of men! Cower before me, womenfolk, for I am like Charmin, soft and strong!
I never thought I’d see that on this blog.
And slavery has been with us ’since Hammurabi’ too. Does that make it peachy keen?
Perinteger
Of course you realize that respectful head-tilting apology you got from Freeman should have gone to Twisty.
What an interesting series of posts. Someone teaching Feminism 101, like at the grade six level, should use them for a class.
Freeman, I’ll not dog on your pornophilia (though I sure would like to, but I’ll try and give you the credit you’re asking for and refrain–yet, nonexploitative porn?), but I DO have a bone to pick with that wack French. I mean, technically, it’s not entirely miserable, but it’s a direct translation of the colloquial expression “How sad is that?”, which isn’t any normal French expression I’m familiar with (comment ca est triste or comment est-ce que c’est triste would be the normal construction, with striking differences in intent). Of course, you could be part of a super-formal reverse-construction Franco-enclave, but if not, well . . . . I suppose it coud be a parody of sorority French majors.
I think you would have been better off using something more like “quelle blague!” (what a joke!, what a laugh!), “quelle connerie!” (what bullshit!, what a load of crap!–though not literally; connerie is more equivalent to assholery) or “tant pis!” (how sad, too bad–again, not literally, but in terms of usage). The last expression is probably best suited to your intent, but you could always come in with an hyper-fort quasi-allegoric shaming expression, something really bizarre to knock our socks off (in order to better reveal our well-turned ankles for the premium ogling of ankle-gawkers).
Freeman, before you go around “support[ing] [my] message with [your] bandwidth,” whatever that means, perhaps you’ll trouble yourself to discover what that message actually is. The mystery is revealed in the FAQ. Please read it before posting again. Bonne chance with Echidne. As they say.
Yes, Freeman does take me back. Back to the days when men saw the sexual advantages to them of “women’s lib.” Back to when people talked about having “high IQ’s.” To the good old days when women strove to be “nice” and non-aggressive and knew how to show their gratitude at all times for the interest and support of the #1 gender.
But let us move on. We do not need to focus on Freeman and his opinions. He just doesn’t get it.
Finn, yesterday the link was free. Today it suddenly isn’t. It is the way of the internet. But I promise you, it was a really dumb study.
Twisty
Above, I’ve given the link to the full pdf of the stupid study.
I couldn’t get any of the links to work right. But, it’s no biggie.
Mostly wanted to make sure I wasn’t taking flames for someone else. hahahaa
I can’t believe I saw the no really I’m a feminist so my exploitation of women is OK arguement here at IBTP.
Wow. I’m still in shock.
seems to me that chris clarke’s points about feminism have been nicely supported.
firefall — you forget that the sears catalog sells almost everything. the skivvies sections are unlikely to distract me, but i’m having harsh thoughts about the stove and thinking of another model. had to unplug the damned thing last night, because [of all the parts that could break] the timer refused to shut up. tell me what arbitrarion is more important than sanity in the domestic sanctum? [ok, i could just get a repair. remind me, which ring of dante’s hell deals with repair calls that might happen tomorrow or next week, sometime between 8 a.m. and forever?]
* arbitration, i meant.
I’m married, meaning that the sexual advantage to my support of feminism is zero. However, as a child of a diverse coed upbringing, I am vehemently opposed to bigotry and inequality of any sort. As for my French, well, that’s what secondary education gets you. But before you get to dogging on my philosophies, marital practices, and demographic, why not seriously take a minute and hear me out?
Both my wife and I consider ourselves diehard feminists. By that, I mean we have regularly contributed financially and in terms of time to various women’s health and rights organizations, such as Planned Parenthood, NARAL, NOW, and VOX. We contact our congressional representatives regularly on women’s rights issues, and have even been known to sign the occasional petition or march in the odd protest every now and then. In addition, we both frequent and contribute to various feminist blogs. This is a practice that goes back to before I met my wife, back to my days in college with the local Campus Green Party. So I think my credentials as a longtime progressive easily distinguish me from the average beer-swilling fratboy dickhead attending a few poetry readings in search of a quick hook-up. So, out of courtesy, please respect that my intentions are genuine, and women’s rights are a serious concern of mine.
That being said: My wife and I both enjoy erotica, both of the film and literary variety. It’s a creative stimulus for us; a way of sparking serious discourse on our love life, and a way prompting innovation and experimentation. If nothing else, it’s cheap comedy when the acting or male performances are particularly stilted Contrary to what one might expect, “non-exploitative” erotica does exist; indeed, there is an entire niche market of such adult films marketed solely to women. Unfortunately, most of the porn currently out on the market is targeted at young, college-age or older single men, usually a couple of Lambda Chi boys looking for a volunteer to help them “pull a train.”
What I find disturbing is this: I feel as though my thoughts on the subject are devalued before I’m even out of the gate, on the grounds that I am white, heterosexual, and male. Such prejudice hardly befits a group of people actively campaigning for a society free from gender biases or limitations. So I have to admit, I was angered and hurt by the reactions to my statements. I hardly expect the entire world to agree with me, but a little considered debate would be welcome.
My earlier apology to Perinteger extended to everyone reading the debate. I’m not one to resort to ad hominem attacks or name calling in a forum such as this, and I genuinely regretted my part in denigrating the level dialogue.
So as you can see, I would like everyone here to understand I’m not the chauvinistic caricature that some have made me out to be. But this brings me to another question.
Answer me honestly: What can a young, sexually active, monogamous and progressive male do in order to establish himself as being “NOT” somehow in league with the All-Knowing Patriarchy? Please, treat it with the utmost seriousness, and feel free to email me with your responses.
The floor is yours.
ANYONE OUT THERE WHO LIKES/DEFENDS PORNOGRAPHY: Do some research on pornography and it’s relation to rape and violent assualt and murder of females, and you will NEVER get a hard-on (or get wet) again when viewing it. It isn’t neutral. It really is B-A-D. Add to that that most of the females featured in Porn are runaways and desperate.(Just look at them!! No wait, DON’T!) Add to that “snuff films”, something so degenerate that the very idea that even ONE exists makes me feel like like simultaneously throwing up forever and randomly killing males for sport. (I don’t advocate that though. Don’t want to descend to that level…) I know that oh so many people want to believe that porn is Okay and victimless like pot smoking, but it isn’t. And OH BIG SURPRISE rape and violent sexual assault against women is increasing, in part because of the TOTAL OBJECTIFICATION and Non-person status of females in rap music. Wow. Tell immature young humans that all females are Ho’s, and they believe it.
I agree in general with you KMTBERRY, but I wanted to throw in one data point: There is not one known snuff film. Check out the venerable Snopes roundup at http://www.snopes.com/horrors/madmen/snuff.htm.
You’ll need Adobe Acrobat to open it. The link has more substance than the study:
http://tinyurl.com/nnquc
http://www.econ.kuleuven.ac.be/tew/academic/market/members/researchers/papers/2D4D and cooperative behavior.pdf
Re: #49
Pony,
Nothing short of complete agreement in this corner.
And hopefully This Slightly Modified Version Your Link will cause Finnsmotel and others less trouble. Thanks for supplying the original - you continue to raise the bar around here.
What #59 said.
Freeman,
tekanji over at shrub.com has an excellent letter addressing questions like yours. I recommend reading it all, even those parts that don’t directly apply to your question as it’s a well considered introduction with dealing with one’s own entitlement.
Cheers.
Oh thank you Freeman for the best laugh I’ve had in about a month.
“I’m married, meaning that the sexual advantage to my support of feminism is zero.”
Why thank you Perinteger. I do my best. Dear Readers, P. means he wants the actual study not just some journalist’s opinion of the study. Sometimes it makes a difference to one’s understanding of the research. Sometimes, a journalist wrote the actual study. Then, the journalist is called a medical writer. By the polite.
Hello Blamers,
Loathe as I am to dip my toes into this without the requisite irony, self-indulgent witticisms, or over-complex and passive sentence structure, here goes.
You’re all very mean to Freeman, who probably gets what he deserves for defending porn on a feminist site (duh!) and for displaying his IQ and his French (good or bad) like a phallus standing proud. Many of you are guilty of similar showing off, though. The idea that feminist theory (like queer theory, Marxism or that odd and jumbled body of ideas called “liberalism”) is a body of texts to be learned in order to reach a higher order of consciousness is odd. It’s also evident in a lot of what you write. The followers of feminist theory are a group who have seen the Truth: they can ascend higher states of feminist consciousness through deeper and more extensive readings in feminist theory. Therefore if you are, as Freeman is, “new” to this theory you are to be inducted into the consciousness-raising process. But if you refuse some of it, you are to be attacked and villified. It’s like a club. Perhaps it would be better to turn it into a proper political organization?
The patriarchy evidently exists, but what we should do about it is a difficult decision to make. Many feminists are also liberals, and think consciousness-raising and education are the best ways to change things; others are Marxists, who see patriarchy as a construct of capitalism which must be overthrown by government. I don’t see much debate on this site about how feminists should organize themselves, which is perhaps more productive than mutual back-slapping.
Oh dear god what have we here now. Is he curled up in a fetal position somewhere and sent the troops in here to defend him?
Here’s the thing: Freeman is responsible for his own consciousness raising and feminist education. We, women mostly, aren’t put here to give it to him. And that’s right from Feminism 101.
Re his defense of porn: Freeman is lucky he’s not been torn asunder by now. Think logging onto a Jewish site and explaining the positive side of the Holocaust.
Springy, most of the folks who enjoy this blog are of a radical feminist sort. Twisty herself makes it pretty clear she’s a radical kinda gal. You seem to have passed through the Fem Theory Buffet at least once so I’m sure you’ve heard of us radicals. Perhaps in your haste to defend freeman you forgot that radical feminism is nothing if not feminist activism, so I’ll forgive you that. Perhaps in your excitement over slinging passive-aggressive insults you didn’t realize that IBTP is not Feminism 101 for enlightened, porn-lovers like freeman.
We don’t debate much here about how to organize against the Patriarchy and I’d imagine it’s because 1) we already figured that out long ago and 2) the lot of us need a bit of respite from our real lives where, as radical feminist activists we work day-in and day-out to make the world a better place for women.
But check out Susie Bright’s blog, because I hear she’s organizing a letter-writing campaign to end female genital mutilation worldwide.
Why can’t people read the rules/FAQs before commenting on a blog? Seriously, is it that much more work, because really it doesn’t seem like it.
Hi Puffin and Pony,
I didn’t notice that I was defending Freeman; it is possible to criticize both the subjection of women and the lack of serious discussion about how to end it. That’s great you all work hard at it, though - I didn’t mean to say you didn’t - just that it would be good to see some comments about what action feminists should take to change society. Otherwise it’s all preaching to the converted.
For those interested in the research, the link posted above does not go to the research described by the journalist’s article Twisty linked to, but to another paper.
The correct link is here.pdf. If anyone cares to read it. I have access to it through work. I don’t know if it is free for everyone. I have not read it myself, just scanned it. But the plots of the supposed correlations between finger length ratio and “minimum acceptance ratio” look pretty unimpressive to my eyballs. Compare figure 1a (not significant) and 1b (significant) and 1c (not significant) and 1d (significant). I have never run these particular statistics tests in my work, so I do not know the details of them, but I’m not super impressed.
How very shocking of us to have more patience with the ego expressions of our fellow oppressed than we do for the porn loving members of the patriarchy. Oh, my dear paws and whiskers, whyever can’t we be nicer to the boys who just want to tell us how very similar to human we seem. Faugh.
It’s actually the same study. They’ve done a spin on the original to get more publicity, (and therefore, more funding money for further research. Oh the publish or perish game.
Kobe’s website here with references:
http://www.econ.kuleuven.be/tew/academic/market/members/researchers/kobe.htm
It’s really hard for men to accept and understand the idea that they have what I’ve learned to call Male Privilege. So Freeman can talk about things that he likes without understanding that he likes his male privilege. The assumptions that pornography embodies about women are obvious to many of us, but not to Freeman. But he could come to figure it out if he keeps reading this blog, in an amusing and revelatory way. After seeing example after example he might start to get it a little.
Maybe he’ll never give up pornography. But maybe he’ll understand the differences between how he sees it and how his wife sees it. Pornography is like a drug to a highly-sexed man. It’s hard for them to give up this form of hypnotism that can provide arousal so easily, even if it has an emotional component that has to be ignored to continue being effective.
Freeman, the strangest thing about feminism is that you can’t define it by noting that many women you admire act in ways that seem to prove that they enjoy things that titillate men. My interest in feminism has caused me to doubt that I need to be as highly sexed as our culture tells me I should be. Of course, when you have true love you can feel a lot more free of sexual excess than when you fear losing love because you suspect it’s more important than feelings in your relationship. So it’s easier for me.
Nobody can tell you whether you are a feminist or not, either, as far as I care. Trying to be an ideal man, trying to understand what women really think and transcending sexual distractions that make you feel contradictory and invalid, just trying to get it is the important work. One person here once linked to a post that said very eloquently, that he could never call himself a feminist because he would always be a man.
I think that the more people who want to call themselves feminist the better, no matter how imperfect they might be. Especially men. Going in the right direction is better than turning your back because you’ll never be good enough.
Hey there Springy. You have come to my blog to complain that all we do is complain. Good one!
Sadly, you appear to have expectations that exceed the scope of this blog. Perhaps you confuse patriarchy-blaming with some kind of organized feminist religion or something. It is not. How it works is, I elucidate, using, as you so hilariously point out, plenty of commas, my observations about white male supremacy. Then all these nutjobs write in with their own take on the topic. What typically ensues, regardless of the content of the original post, is a lively discussion about BDSM. Then this guy Mandos picks a nit, and everybody yells at him. Then I write “but I really do love babies,” because it is a popular misconception that I hate babies.
So you see, I Blame The Patriarchy is not an action-alert-activist-feminist-education site. It’s just a forum for me to express my views on babies, which, as it turns out, amuses a few other people, who visit to blow off steam.
Oh, I almost forgot the little matter of Freeman: since it is my blog, I am under no obligation to coddle liberal white males who wag their liberal white ring fingers at me, rebuking me and reviling me and telling me that I should be ashamed of myself for ridiculing their asinine views. If liberal white males want to know how to become feminists, I couldn’t care less.
Let me repeat that, just so we’re clear: If liberal white males want to know how to become feminists, I couldn’t care less.
I’m not their fucking teacher. i’m not a fucking Feminism PR person. I’m not trying to sell anyone any fucking ideology. I’m not the fucking spokesperson for some touchy-feely fucking movement. I’m just a spinster aunt with a big vocabulary, a big mouth, a big cancer, and a couple of big dogs. And I’ve had it up to here with liberal white dudes and their fucking pornsick delusions.
The good news for liberal white males who genuinely seek enlightenment is that libraries are free. I suggest beginning with Dworkin. I’d wish you luck, but, as I mentioned, you mean little or nothing in my young life. Come back when you can stand not being the smartest motherfucker in the room.
Fair enough. Carry on!
I gotta learn to use more commas.
Oh yeah, and I think they should call that fruffy looking fizzy concoction in a can Coppola Cola
…or maybe Coppola Cooler. OK. Sorry. I’m done.
I’m not their fucking teacher. i’m not a fucking Feminism PR person. I’m not trying to sell anyone any fucking ideology. I’m not the fucking spokesperson for some touchy-feely fucking movement. I’m just a spinster aunt with a big vocabulary, a big mouth, a big cancer, and a couple of big dogs. And I’ve had it up to here with liberal white dudes and their fucking pornsick delusions.
I may be forced to tattoo this upon my person somewhere because it is fabulous.
One thing an old broad like me has seen many many many times already is some huffulacious oh-so-sincere dude walking in to a group of women almost at random and telling them
a/ what they should be doing in their free time;
b/ how to do it right;
c/ how to be feminists;
d/ why he has their best interests at heart, really;
e/ why he’s qualified to give them orders;
f/ that they’re intolerant, which is self-evidently a Bad Thing;
g/ that they’re preaching to the choir (and the biggest surprise is that they’re preaching);
h/ that some of his best fucks are women;
i/ how to be better feminists;
j/ that they’re not serious enough;
k/ that his wife thinks he’s the greatest;
l/ what God thinks;
m/ why whatever he’s doing this month is more important then feminism;
n/ that feminism is boo-zhwah, and that’s self-evidently a Bad Thing;
o/ that they’re shrill — wow, I almost forgot shrill;
p/ that they can’t pee standing up;
q/ that they should be ashamed of themselves;
r/ that they just don’t welcome open and vigorous debate;
s/ that he needs a beer (this is followed by an expectant silence);
t/ that they’re taking everything he said wrong;
u/ that they’re unreasonable;
v/ that they’re ~touchy~;
w/ that they’ve never said anything about oppression of women in (choose sauce: Iraq, Afghanistan, China, sub-Saharan Africa, the southeastern USA, the ghet-to, Brazil, Antarctica)
x/ that they should apologize to him because his parents had him circumcised;
y/ that he Is Too A Feminist (which evidently means something);
z/ how they should transcend feminism and embrace humanism.
Pick any two menu items and get the third half-price; pick any three and get the fourth free. With five you get a can of wine.
And if you’re the guy in question, you get a free hot cup of Shut the Fuck Up.
Carry on, boys.
Damn, I love youse guys.
Pony,
“Oh dear god what have we here now. Is he curled up in a fetal position somewhere and sent the troops in here to defend him?”
No. Living in Germany, I’m six hours ahead of most people, and it was time for freeman to go to bed. Springy here was just kind enough to actually ADD something to this discourse, rather than burning me in effigy for the evil male phallic icon I evidently represent.
By the way, in case you’re not aware, the REAL feminists I know–you know, the ones with steady jobs, healthy sexual attitudes, loving partnerships with companions of either gender, and control over their own lives–fucking LAUGH at you.
Forgive me for saying so, but the views many of you express are nothing more than reactionary; red herrings you chase and bandy about while doing NOTHING constructive for women’s rights. You ignore the real problems of women–lack of of access to education in third-world countries, lack of access to family planning in OUR country, disparities in salary–all to congratulate each other on your collective inability to propose meaningful solutions.
My wife recently said on the subject, “A vagina and a bad attitude do not a feminist make.” And she’s right. It’s one thing to reject society, but please, reject it on its own lack of merits and build something better. Don’t just sit around and fume over the injustices. Do something to help create a better society. I can say I have. Now how about you?
Sorry, dude. The job of scapegoat is *taken* on this blog.
Before Twisty nukes freeman… (if she hasn’t already.)
What exactly do you and your wife think that Twisty et al. are criticizing when they criticize pornography, freeman?
I’m always rather suspicious of “male feminists” since the social power differential between men and women ALWAYS works in favor of dudes. I appreciate what TP says upthread, but I remain doubtful that men can, in the end, be more than sympathizers. And I am unconvinced by the idea that sympathizers represent anything particularly positive. They are, at best, leaches who gain some of the benefits of aligning themselves with a cause without risking face much in any direction. I know from this kind of leaching, as someone might rightly accuse me of this habit in other issues where I linger unsettled. But I digress.
IMHO, freeman doesn’t qualify for the sympathizer label either. To suggest that being a feminist is somehow validated by the regularity with which one writes checks to feminist “causes” is absurd. Just as it is absurd to suggest that sympathizing with and supporting women and feminism, and (I’m biting my tongue here)finding a “liberated” wife who enjoys pornography with you has anything to do with feminism, let alone the realm of commentary frequently bandied about on this blog. I will heartily defend the notion that the terms of femininism are (necessarily) ambiguous such that no one has ownership over the term and its use. And I’ll spot freeman that he wields the comma adeptly, but his argument is utter nonsense. Porn is one of the filthiest and most useless incarnations of male narcissism ever concocted by none other than the patriarchy. It is NOT art. It is NOT a representation of sexual liberty. It is, in a word, SHIT.
I don’t know which post I love more, Twisty’s #76 or Ron’s #84. Outstanding, ladies. Thank you.
I’m always rather suspicious of “male feminists†since the social power differential between men and women ALWAYS works in favor of dudes. I appreciate what TP says upthread, but I remain doubtful that men can, in the end, be more than sympathizers. And I am unconvinced by the idea that sympathizers represent anything particularly positive. They are, at best, leaches who gain some of the benefits of aligning themselves with a cause without risking face much in any direction. I know from this kind of leaching, as someone might rightly accuse me of this habit in other issues where I linger unsettled. But I digress.
This is interesting though. If men can only be sympathizers, and sympathizers are not particularly positive, then you’re saying that there is no way for men to be positive. That has a lot of interesting consequences.
In fact, at the grave risk of WATM, Annie, what exactly would you suggest is a way for men to be positive, if at all? Does change include men or is it strictly a function of women in rebellion?
Ron Sullivan, I laughed out loud. I am SO poaching that.
(makeshift pout) “Poor Freeman!” Didn’t catch the gist of the blog. Patriarchy-blaming is what we DO here. But we have our lives too, ya know.
As a card-carrying exhibitionist, I am so down with the concept of other exhibitionists getting all nakee and jiggy with it on camera (it’s just not “my thing”). These are otherwise “normal” people who hold each other in high regard. Both partners get off and no money changes hands.
Still, you wouldn’t catch the Hedonisticpleasureseeker DEAD trying to defend porn on a patriarchy-blaming website. And I’ll betcha dollars-to-donughts that this isn’t what Freeman and his lovely wife are watching anyway. They are getting off on the women’s degraded circumstances and think it’s “OK.”
We say EW while they just don’t get it. But this is typical, yes? Because when it comes to Patriarchy most folk just don’t get it in general. Regardless of their gender. No need to turn Freeman into the posterboy for everything we loathe about the patriarchy.
(That said, he did rather step into it, didn’t he?)
My response to this, Mandos, got long and unweildy, and I look at the clock and realize it’s time to go get barbecued down at Cancerland, so hold the fort. I think this is turning into its own post, which will appear later this afternoon.
Perinteger (sorry for the hijack):
Thanks. I appreciate it. I’ve already adopted most (if not all of the policies) advocated on the site, but I’m still learning, and unfortunately, my patience degrades in the face of a lack of civility.
As regards the above topic: I would think that change must by necessity involve ALL parties, at least in terms of men being willing to examine and challenge their OWN perceptions of gender. Effective change, I think, requires mutual cooperation. One half of society alone cannot change the minds of the other unwillingly. Look at the efforts by India to gain independence from colonial rule, or look at the collapse of the South African apartheid. Look at our own civil rights movements. Where would we be without antebellum Abolitionists, usually themselves affluent Yankees? I’d be willing to wager a lot worse off than we are. That doesn’t say we don’t have a long way to go, but it does illustrate, I think, the importance of cross-cultural diplomacy.
If “privileged sympathizers” (And I can accept that label willingly, if I must) are sent the message that their contributions are not going to be accepted, their sympathies will inevitably erode. As for change being a “function of womyn in rebellion,” I think it is, but beware the dangers of rebellion for rebellion’s sake. History (or in this case, Herstory) teaches us that without focus or long-term planning, revolution erodes and begins to exist solely for the sake of its own perpetuation, as with any existing social system. Look at the Communist movement inspired by Che Guevara. After he accomplished his goals in Cuba, he couldn’t do anything more than try to sow revolution elsewhere. Rebellion by itself doesn’t do anything to finish the job, and so Guevara’s own ideals became corrupted. In the end, he wasn’t known for his valor in the Cuban revolution, but ultimately only for his brutality as a trainer of populist death squads.
Anyway, if I must be labeled as a “supporter” or a “sympathizer,” so be it. I think that only creates unwelcome distinctions and value judgements, but whatever. To use a perhaps poorly-fitted analogy, soldiers in their earliest days of training are instructed that class distinctions such as race no longer matter; that all trainees are henceforth merely varying shades of green. Sure, the military still practices discrimination toward womyn and GLBTS, but again, that’s exactly WHY change must necessarily involve men and womyn working together.
Anyway, if you’re going to lace into me, so be it. Attack my gender or economic status if you must. In the words of Audioslave, “Go on and save yourself. Take it out on me.” But my point is, sympathizers like me are out there. I am not alone, and we are not going away. And without us, any dreams you may have of sweeping away the Patriarchy for good, will forever remain just that–DREAMS.
If you take nothing else away from this post, let it be this: Diplomacy is key.
Damn I missed Twisty’s last post. Priceless! I’m poaching that too.
Oh god not the barbecued in cancerland post. The other one. Shit.
Twisty, I’m sorry to hear about your girlfriend Lori. I do hope you’ll write that book one day. The inimitable among us don’t get nearly enough press.
freeman, if you really want to learn something, have a productive conversation, and contribute meaningfully, you might want to start not by announcing your IQ, your sympathy for pornography, and everyone else’s “laughable” and not-really-feminist points of view, but by *listening*. It’ll do a world of good. If you are sincere, then it should cause you no harm for others to suggest that your statements and style of approach are rife w/ assumptions and heavily colored by your own privilege. You might, for example, want to reexamine this doozy: “I’m married, meaning that the sexual advantage to my support of feminism is zero.” Woof.
P.S. And walking in and self-righteously wagging one’s finger at one’s host and crying “Shame! Shame!” What would Miss Manners say?
Not entirely sure of what I’d suggest, Mandos. What I say is not to suggest that I don’t find ANY value in male sympathizers, or male feminists (if they truly exist). My lament is really much more like a comment born from Twisty’s Matrix theory (at least in my own little half-baked mind). I mean, in the Matrix a guy gets more social credits for being a feminist or a sympathizer than women. The system, at least in some regard - even, in part, the patriarchy, says he’s a “good” guy who is concerned for women and doesn’t want to hold them down. Oh sure, the religious right will bag anyone who bandies about abortion or homosexuality as valid social practices, but the over-arching realm of the patriarchy will never suffer a male feminist the social belittlement and judgment that a female would bare. Sure, there’s plenty of room for legitimate argument against what I say here, but in the end, I cannot escape the nagging feeling that the patriarchal matrix has enough control over the order of things that dude-ist feminism, or any variation on a theme thereof, does not, cannot qualify in the same realm as feminism among women. I don’t mean it as a slam to any fine gent who treats women like equal human beings, such as you seem to be, but as a shove against whatever outer-space version of feminism freeman offered, and a regret that the patriarchy is plays such a significant role in shaping resistance against same.
Ron Sullivan, that was such a delicious alphabet soup, I believe our silly sexist noodle has spelled every letter.
What a clown, what an obvious example of why anyone who consumes the product of an industry which grinds up young women as hamburger meat can never be a feminist.
I had an interesting video documentary of an average young woman’s experience in porn, produced by England’s channel 4 called “Hardcore”. It showed the methods they use to get women to do what they do, they have to be broken before they “consent”. Indeed, if “consenting adults” is the criterion, it’s easy enough for thugs to bang “consent” out of the women, the way a battered wife “consents” to the terms of her marriage. The “agent” even said it in so many words : “now that she was raped and asphyxiated, the acts which she previously objected to don’t seem so bad.”
And this is just what they do to the miserable women used in porn, to say nothing of how presenting women as meat affects every woman.
But men like freeman aren’t even interested in knowing these facts. He equates himself with white people marching in civil rights demonstrations, when really he is the kindly slave master who’s really good to his slaves.
Okay, I have put on my helmet and am prepared to get tomatoes to the head. Let me just say, I love Twisty like the spinster aunt I never had and have gotten a lot out of this site. At first, when I found it, I was like, “Oh for goodness sake,” but now my eyes are more open to the patriarchy that deserves serious blamin’ and flamin’. I am totally down with the safe-space to blow off steam and raise consciousness that doesn’t have to be a place where concerted action is coordinated. (But then [irony alert!] I’m just a girl who likes to have a good whine now and then before I can go on with my day, during which I may or may not challenge the patriarchal order.)
However, I don’t agree with the assertion that men can never be more than sympathizers in the feminist sphere. Call me old-school, but I am down with the (pre-lesbians-are-icky) Betty Friedan when she makes the point that feminism is for everyone, male and female. Annie writes that being a feminist doesn’t have anything to do with how much (financial) support one gives to feminist causes . . . I wonder what it does have to do with, then? Because it seems like a pretty active stance to me to be donating time and money to a cause that you believe in.
This is not to say that I mind the threads here being more back-slapping than serious debating. There are times and places for things. And I reckon reading Twisty is a good motivator for us blamers to get fired up - it is for me, anyway.
Finally, on porn. Yes, it’s mostly shit. It’s mostly exploitive. On the other hand, people like to look at naked people. So, since getting rid of people-looking-at-naked-people is unrealistic as a goal, it would be more practical to take a more Freemaneqsue approach to the genre and support depictions of naked people doing sex type things that is female-friendly and non-(or at least less)-exploitative. Cause sometimes you just want to look at naked people. And I say this as a staunch feminist who sometimes likes to look at the naked people. (Ducks to avoid flying tomatoes.)
Hey, the tomato thread is up a ways.
I think the nakee people look pretty silly. The Beast with Two Backs is awkward. And rather banal.
I see the porn industry as art-imitating-life . . . women in society are already degraded, and porn just . . . pornifies it. It magnifies reality and presents it as “entertainment.” Sort of the way the practice-that-shall-not-be-named fetishizes domination and submission and calls it “transgressive.”
And then life, unfortunately, begins to imitate (gak!) “art” as it seeks to justify its behavior as “normal.”