«

»

Feb 23 2010

More Adventures with the Antithesis of Enlightenment

Over at Gizmodo, Dude Nation 2.0 is having a little tantrum. It seems Apple recently removed from its App Store something called Wobble, “an app that adds animated jiggles to photo breasts.” Since then, in a kind of Night of the Long iKnives, a veritable buttload of cheezy porn apps have been purged. Including the popular Suicide Girls Flip Strip app, which, as everyone knows, “actually empowers women.”

NOOOOOOO! Not the woman-empowering Suicide Girls Flip-Strip app! I just bought a new anti-jizz cover for my boyfriend’s iPhone!

The news, if you are a Male Aged 18-to-34, or if you are the purveyor of anti-jizz iPhone covers, is “devastating.”

[A] developer who talked to Apple says the future of iPhone titillation is bleak. Really bleak. Like no racy photos, no suggestive language, no bathing suits bleak. [cite]

This story is repellent on many levels. Because I am your Number 1 Quality Internet pal, I will share three of them with you.

Repellent Level One: Gizmodo dorks reveal without compunction that they have no idea what the fuck pornography really is.

Repellent Level Two: Apple, in an effort to assuage the jerkoffus interruptus of its reported 5 million Suicide Girls customers, is naturally blaming the ban on women who complained about “‘degrading’ and ‘objectionable’ content.”

Repellent Level Three: Blamers feel compelled to email me about it, thus forcing to me to read Gizmodo and contemplate anti-jizz iPhone protectors.

Naturally, Apple, in taking a hatchet to its greasier apps, has not actually had an attack of moral indignation or even of good taste; they haven’t, for instance, banned Playboy or the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit app. No, they’ve merely gotten hip to the fact that their rapidly swelling reputation for hawking low-rent smut is adversely affecting revenues. But instead of just copping to that, Apple has elected to scapegoat those pesky women complainers. That’s right. Humorless, Puritanical feminists supposedly whined so loudly about being offended and degraded by iBoobs that Apple just couldn’t ignore’em, and out went Wobble faster than you can snap a G-string.

Which, if it were true, would be the first time any major corporation has ever listened to feminists about anything, let alone pornography. Apple, in fact, not only doesn’t listen to feminists, it doesn’t listen to anybody. But this well-known and oft-joked-about fact doesn’t prevent the Gizmodoids from casting aspersions on killjoy women for wrecking their dudely access to mobile wanking on the iPhone platform.

So once again social conservatives ruin it for all of the normal people. [cite]

and

Degrading and objectionable? [...] How about we have some thicker fucking skin? [cite]

Looking at porn is what “normal people” do, and women just can’t take a joke.

Further aspersions are cast on Steve Jobs for pandering to an inconsequential minority of “moralistic women”; Jobs is apparently a communist, a mommy, Big Brother, someone who needs to “grow up,” and is “inspired” by Hitler, all at once.

Not unexpectedly, the Gizmodo comments section is crammed with sweaty, anguished wankers who cannot distinguish between pornography and sex, and who believe that an anti-porn viewpoint is nothing but old-fashioned knee-jerk godbag pearlclutchery.

This is all a throwback to American puritanism that was extinguished in Europe long ago, but people in the US just can’t seem to handle the human body. Violence is fine, but sex is bad. [cite]

Wait, what? People in the US just can’t seem to handle the human body? Jesus on a bed of lettuce, has this guy ever seen television?

Other commenters aver that Apple’s “censorship” is a slippery slope. They predict that once the company puts the kibosh on “titty apps,” they’ll have no compunction about banning other excellent stuff. Check out this zinger, zinged by an apparent National Geographic subscriber who shows he’s no stranger to the December 2009 issue:

The Hadza people of central Tanzania still live as hunter-gatherers, unchanged over 10,000 years, with no calendar, rules, numbers above “3,” or awareness of the outside world. If enough of them complain, will Apple remove its calendar, maps, and calculator apps? [cite]

Ouch, now that’s one bad-ass anthropology-based zinger!

And you gotta love the egalitarians:

I just never understood why a womens chest is censored in all forms of media but a man’s chest is not. [cite]

and

Women can also entertain themselves with a picture of a Banana Hammock. [cite]

Whoa, Capital Letters! That must be one Entertaining Hammock!

Other commenters are acting all supercilious and mature:

Who cares, really? Do you want to be ‘that guy’ with the softcore porn apps right there are your iPhone’s dashboard/homepage/whatever? Fucking open Safari for all your porn needs, both stills and video. [cite]

DNOCD.* An iPhone user should have standards. It’s tacky to have porn on your phone; just fucking use the Internet like a fucking normal person.

Although dudes may make fine and snobbish distinctions between the social acceptability of this or that mode of smut delivery, nobody is arguing that there’s anything wrong with pornography itself. Porn is, in fact, regarded as a dude’s birthright. It occurs to precisely zero of these petulant Gizmodo knobs that demanding 24/7 access to graphic representations of rape, whether on an iPhone app or the regular old Internet, is fundamentally atavistic, misogynist, and violent.

Thus must I agree with the Gizmodo poster who observed that the lot of them are a bunch of whiny chicken-chokers.

[Thanks, Julie. I think.]

_____________________
* Definitely not our class, dear.

148 comments

3 pings

  1. Sara

    From the tech side this has been an interesting saga.
    I had a big thing written but no one cares so here are relevant bits from around the techy parts.

    Someone called Apple for guidelines and this is what they said they were told:
    No images of women in bikinis
    No images of men in bikinis
    No skin
    No silhouettes that indicate that Wobble can be used for wobbling boobs
    No sexual connotations or innuendo: boobs, babes, booty, sex – all banned
    Nothing that can be sexually arousing
    No apps will be approved that in any way imply sexual content

    What I’m seeing as the reason they are leaving in Playboy and Swimsuits: Mr. Schiller replied, “The difference is this is a well-known company with previously published material available broadly in a well-accepted format.”

  2. Jill

    Apple’s list of Glamour-don’ts isn’t really relevant, though, is it? Because they’re just arbitrary fake guidelines made up by the PR department. The reason they’re keeping Playboy is that they want to.

  3. Pinko Punko

    Maybe Mr. Europe was going on about how granola commersh in Sweden have full frontal donger shots. I think that is neither here nor there.

  4. Sara

    Oh I doubt this list is made up by the PR department. I think what happened is the Wobble guy called up someone from the Connect (where developers submit apps) and asked them what he could do with his app (that app was a silhouette and let you put “wobble”ing targets onto photos I believe) and this was the list the guy on the other side of the phone line told them. Apple hasn’t released an official PR based list yet (that I’m aware of). This is the cruder version.

    I do expect it will have some caveats to allow things like Playboy which is only there for ….well being playboy. I’m not sure how they intend to word that or lay that out in guidelines.

    They’ve also allowed back into the store after taking it down temporarily an app that sold swimsuits. (Which included pictures with swimsuits.)

    I’m just trying to give you more information. I do think how they frame talking about it is important. (Speaking of framing that was the list without the commentary which was…I don’t know I stink at words.)

  5. phio gistic

    Slashdot has a similarly anguished post, with 500 comments from frustrated fappers.
    http://apple.slashdot.org/story/10/02/23/1642241/Apple-Bans-Sexy-Apps-Developers-Upset

  6. yttik

    It is frightening reading some of those comments. This is like Orwell’s 1984? Yes, I can see how taking away your porn app is very similar to being trapped in a military dictatorship and being tortured.

    Ironic was the comment about how “I guess we’re all going to just have to bend over and pretend we enjoy it.” Yes boys, Apple is raping you. Now rub your other two brain cells together, multiply that sense of powerlessness you are feeling by 100, and you will begin to understand how women feel everyday.

    Listening to men like these discuss their oppression is a bit like peering down the hole of an outhouse.

  7. Laughingrat

    Geez, ain’t it cute how they explicitly equate being on the receiving end of penetration with weakness, incapacity, and being less-than, and then get angry when women indicate that we do not, in fact, enjoy those very same side-effects of penetration, literal or figurative.

    But of course, treating women like crap is normalized, so when we demand that men cut it out, it really is like their entire world just crumbled around them. Somehow, however, I cannot bring myself to actually feel sorry for ‘em.

  8. humanbein

    My favorite insight into these men is that they think that oppression is having their privileges thwarted. They never look into the mirror, or else they might see that their pouts are indeed insufficiently plumped.

  9. Citizen Jane

    I’m confused. What exactly is Apple’s motivation for this? Is it because they want to market their product to kids? Surely they knew this move would get a bunch of entitled douchebags knocking down the stable doors with pitchforks, so why did they do it?

  10. Mistress of Boogie

    Funnily enough, if you read the BBC report on this, it states that they have been removed due to complaints from women and from parents worried about the material their kids could access. When the guy who makes the Wobble app was quoted however, he chose to ignore the women complainers altogether, going on instead about how parental controls could be introduced to stop kids accessing the apps. Let’s be generous and say he ignored the complaints from women because he knew they were unanswerable. Either that or he couldn’t be arsed to even acknowledge those puritan freaks.

  11. kristyn

    Oh, the irony. The bitter, bitter irony.

  12. Lady K

    Well, now everyone has a reason to talk about the iPhone, and, more importantly, curiously browse the iPhone apps gallery to see what survived the “pornpocalypse.”

    As previously stated, Apple is famous for generally not giving a care, and that attitude in moderation gains a company some considerable PR.

  13. Antoinette Niebieszczanski

    From Apple’s point of view, there’s no such thing as bad publicity.

    As for the whiny chicken-chokers (hee), boo fucking hoo. Cry me a river.

  14. Orange

    How quickly the fellas became accustomed to having porn on their iPhones. “When I was a lad, we had to make do with magazines. You kids these days and your pay-per-view and your internets! And your tellyphones! We never dreamed of such a thing. Phones were for talking and you couldn’t leave the house because the cord was too short.”

    Especially rich is the grumbling of the folks selling the apps. Why, they were getting rich off this porn outlet! They just assumed nobody would ever disrupt that. Well, dudes, you were making money off women’s flesh and jiggling. I ain’t too broken up about the fact that you might need to work a little harder at your chosen career, or even change career paths. There are a zillion other apps still in the App Store. Maybe you should have made one of those instead of going porn.

  15. Peri Bathos

    Whoops of laughter! NOCD? Haven’t heard that one since my grandmother died (except that she used “darling” rather than “dear.”) Hilarious.

  16. Saphire

    “So once again social conservatives ruin it for all of the normal people.”

    Nooormal people like me, who just WANA wank. Jesus chrise.

    Or those noorrmal peopowl who awr able tew take a JOKE!! Wahhhh.

    Let me have a wank, you OVER-mowralistic women.

    (You can envisage their sweaty greasy outbursts).

  17. AileenWuornos

    iPhones look pretty fucking crappy anyway. :S

  18. MM

    “People in the US just can’t seem to handle the human body? Jesus on a bed of lettuce, has this guy ever seen television?”

    That’s a little shortsighted. Vestigial Puritan prudery is the REASON there’s nudity and quasi-nudity all over the airwaves; the fact that it’s still somewhat taboo means people will still watch it.

    If you don’t think nudity is still taboo, show me your tits.

  19. Sarah

    What I don’t get (other than the overarching theme of stupidity in the human race and I’m just not going to think about that anymore lest I either start crying or rioting) is how feminists can be equated with social conservatives. Last time I checked, I filed myself under “liberal.” Nay, radical! They can blame it on conservatives, or they can blame it on feminists. Not both, dadgummit.

  20. thecynicalromantic

    Not a single one of these self-pitying dudebros would last a single fucking day as a woman.

  21. Melanie

    These dudes don’t care that Apple won’t allow open software or DRM-free formats on their phone, but they want to get all up in arms about their freedom to conveniently masturbate?

  22. Shopstewardess

    I was trying to work out how many of the notes for blamers the final sentence of this comment ignores, but lost the will to live.

    In it’s favour, it doesn’t include an ellipsis.

  23. Sarah

    A fun fun update from Apple, bowing to the pressure to “bring sexy back” by creating an “explicit” category for its boobie-apps.

  24. allhellsloose

    Well over here in the UK, which is part of Europe last time I checked, we have The Sun with its dismal page 3 girls, and The Daily Sport with its front cover daily graced with a young, too young, woman bending over and ‘ready’ for it. Despite numerous attempts by ‘humourless feminists’ to get a bill introduced to stop this in Parliament they still go on.

    Why just the other day on a Ryan Air flight from Ireland I noticed an article titled ‘Miss February’ who was shockingly wearing a bikini (Irish prudism?). I’m currently penning a letter to the CEO Michael O’Leary asking him to explain why, in these low cost flight times, he sanctions such extravagant spending to entertain a portion of his travellers. Do you think I’ll get a positive reply?

    ‘Humourless feminists’ of the world unite!!!!

  25. allhellsloose

    It was an article in the In-Flight magazine. And it wasn’t about the shortness of the month that is February…

  26. yttik

    Ah, I think I understand Apple’s motivations now. The imagery of hundreds of thousands of boys masturbating all over their iphones is even more unpleasant then Tiger Wood’s face on your breakfast cereal. I don’t even want breakfast now and I’m certainly not going to ever touch an iphone. Ewww..

  27. Treefinger

    “show me your tits”

    You clearly haven’t read many of the older posts on this blog.

  28. Tierney

    Obviously, that would make porn consumers the biggest prudes of all.

  29. Saphire

    Show us the exit so we can kick your ass out of it.

  30. Marci

    Degrading women and perpetuating the misogyny of popular American culture?

    There’s an app for that.

  31. Saphire

    England is the only country out of the EU refusing to incorporate current policies to work against sexism. England’s excuse for everything: free speech!

    That’s the only reason England’s newspapers can get away with counting down the days till a page 3 girl turns 16. The concept free speech is a complete crock of shit. It’s tacky at best, and only applies to those with the loudest voices.

    If it was homeless individuals with 10 minute spaces on national news and advert slots, or our good selves that’s free speech. A change in the type of free speech we’re used to for sure. Bullying razor advert execs making sly songs about women’s big bushes, then ignoring the complaints. That’s not anything to do with freedom, it’s bullying and oppression endorsed under bullshit, making a mockery of the word ‘free’. Who decided everyone saying what they wanted, especially when already on giant media platforms, was a brilliant thing? In the name of art. The people who get free speech are those who least need it.

    Our culture is so fucked up when free ‘people in the right place can do what they want’ speech is promoted as progressive.

  32. MM

    My point with the last sentence was that we all know it’s taboo to flash a stranger. And that the aforementioned vestigial Puritan prudery is the reason for that taboo.

    There’s nothing intrinsically great about breasts, any more than there is about ankles. In Victorian times a woman’s flashed ankle was titillating, because it was taboo. One’s own taboos seem natural and intrinsic because we grew up in them, like water to a fish.

    If I’d asked to see an ankle, I would have been met with confusion and/or silence. But asking to see mammary glands appears to mean I’m automatically a monster.

    Just to be clear: I agree with most of this post. But the veiled assertion that “lots of skin on TV” = “Americans have no issues with the human body” struck me as a bit silly.

  33. nails

    It is kind of funny how strangely weak and tantrum prone dudes are after buying into the tough guy model of masculinity. Unless everyone gets together and enthusiastically agrees to indulge a dudes sense of hyper masculine entitlement said dude will practically start crying about it. It is hard for me to laugh about patriarchy, but the style of comment you are referencing is totally hilarious.

  34. nails

    If you ask me, I am betting that some other corporations who peddle smut are getting kind of pissy about the competition. There could be countless corporate reasons, but the connections between companies are obscured on purpose and difficult to understand.

    If you are right, I don’t think that they care too much about the army of dudes. They shit on their customers regularly- remember the price shift between iphones, that punished the most enthusiastic customers by charging them more than 100$ extra for nothing? There is also the fact that the feautres of the iphone were bested by several other phones more than a year before the thing came out, but they still managed to sell a ton of them. They assume that their customers are morons who only care about how cool the commercials are, and for the most part apple is right. I work with countless iphoned coworkers who have no fucking clue how to find things on the internet, so they didn’t think to research what kind of phone to buy before spending several hundred dollars on one.

  35. nails

    What the fuck? England uses free speech as an excuse for everything?!?! Have they not read their own libel laws? Holy CHRIST.

  36. Laughingrat

    Because an actual person might not have an actual reason beyond “prudery” to expose their actual naked body to an actual stranger. If women want to prove how fun and sex-positive they are, they shouldn’t be allowed to have boundaries, dammit!

  37. Kiuku

    oh god they whine so much; men. Men whine whine and whine even more. How they think they are oppressed! They can’t jiggle a pair of disembodied human breasts in their handheld telephone. And they protest. Apple actually wants to keep its female customers and the men are reminded that apple iphones aren’t actually made for men, and neither are breasts, that the phone app, when allowed, would otherwise have them believe.

  38. Kiuku

    And I love how they just ignore the women’s complaints/dismiss the women’s complaints and the only thing that could possibly matter is the parental complaints. if Apple wants to be associated with trash then I’d say go ahead, but it’s a really bad decision to have porn applications on iphone’s, even in an “explicit” category. Women won’t be interested anymore after they see the dudes with their porn on the iphones.

  39. Jill

    Show you my tits?

    Here ya go.

  40. Kiuku

    and I think these men delude themselves into thinking the complaints of women in general do not matter, because they were able, because of privilege, because of mommy and daddy, because of the general ability to get a job and be paid a living salary, the general ability to get help from the dudes, because of their privilege in every way, were able to get some women, one or more, to tell them how great they are, because they are the woman’s house, 3 square meals, and a goddamn paycheck, or the girlfriends of their dude friend, who is their own house 3 square meals, and a goddamn paycheck…so they think their foulness must just be the lament of other women, because these women over here are just fine and dandy with it.

    I fucking hate men. I hate men. They are fine to trample and shit all over every woman on the planet, but when they have the slightest ache, problem, etc, they are the loudest complainers. And they truly believe they are the ones suffering. Like they honestly believe in the Lament the Male Hero songs, and epic stories of male suffering.

  41. Kiuku

    and the worst part about the Patriarchy, of might equals right except when I’m the underdog, is that men just, in general, aren’t really worth knowing. In my experience on this planet, in general, men haven’t been worth knowing. They are vile, and stupid. I mean they really are quite stupid. And they really are quite vile, and one dimensional. When men actually think about things, they’ve got a whole discipline to file it under: philosophy. And when men behave in you know with a semblance of morality or basic animal morality, they call it religion. Religious men. Enlightened men. And the world they’ve built, with their so called technology, is not impressive. It’s deplorable.

  42. Valerie

    Hello-
    Kiuku, that is an excellent point. I want them to keep it so I know which dOOds to stay away from. If they have wiggling on their iphone, just stay away. It’s just a drop in the bucket when it comes to porn on the internet and that way I would know who they really are.
    Come to think about it, it would be nice if all porn users had to get something stamped on their heads, just so we all know who they are. If they are so proud and manly for watching porn then they shouldn’t object one bit, right?
    I think I will write a story about that. Every man furiously paying under ground doctors to get their porn stamp removed. All for not, it just won’t come off the forehead as it won’t wash off the soul.
    Thanks Twisty.

  43. Nepenthe

    This answer made my day. Maybe even my week.

  44. Shelby

    Fuck. I hate men. I blame the patriarchy for it.

  45. stickypaws

    *Bows*

  46. Phledge

    Word. If I give you the pretend boobies back, can I have equal pay and equal access to health care and child care and the elimination of racism and ableism and sizeism and ageism and every other fucking -ism you can fathom?

    No? Well, then.

  47. Jodie

    I just can’t get over the whiny tone evinced by those comments. Gah, the entitlement!

  48. Lizard

    There’s overlap between hardcore social conservatives and radical feminists. Liberal democrats and libertarians tend to be into markets, democracy, individual rights/choice/freedoms, and property rights. A whole lot of radical feminists and social conservatives don’t have much love for most of those things, and would prefer a more authoritarian government which legislated a lot more on the basis of taking care of people/morality (obviously they have mostly different ideas of what this means) and was less concerned with, for instance, the “right” of two people to privately contract with each other however they want to.

    In the anti-pornography movement, feminists and social conservatives have sometimes come together. Concerned Women for America says “Seventy-five percent of convicted rapists admit they were acting out what they had seen in pornography,” which wouldn’t be a completely out-of-place sentiment here. And the last sexual assault comments thread got into the idea of castrating rapists, which is a lot closer to Biblical ideas of justice than it is to the idea that people shall not be subject to cruel or unusual punishment.

  49. Bushfire

    Amazing picture, Twisty! I showed it to my gf ;-).

  50. riv

    Is Bitch PhD still pimping Suicide Girls?

  51. Cycles

    What we have here, are people who aren’t used to smelling like shit on accounta they’re on the butt-end of capitalism. As Twisty says, Apple is nobody’s fool; they made this decision for monetary reasons, which includes but is not limited to preserving its image as a family- and education-friendly technology purveyor. Suddenly the porn consumers aren’t being catered to. Maybe for the first time in their lives, something they care about has been revoked by an entity with more power, and there’s nothing they can do to stop it. It must sting, learning that you are not the center of the universe, that your desires are meaningless because you – YOU, for god’s sake! – have been deemed less important.

    “If I had any feelings, I’d have the chills right about now.”

    “Not me.”

  52. kate

    Not really. “hardcore social conservatives”; albeit, wingnuts, imagine that the social system they live in rightly belongs under their complete dominance and control, anything less and they begin to scream for ‘justice’ from the courts, from school teachers, from whoever. Because they figure they are the righteous owners of whatever they claim, the stars, the universe, uteruses even government funding.

    Feminists, even hardcore ones as you claim, on the other hand, continuously show to the public that women have a right to co-exist in peace and harmony, without fearing for their lives, struggling in shame and poverty as much as the male human is allowed.

    They don’t claim to own any special rights, they don’t claim any persecution that cannot be backed up by years of well documented research and living examples everyday. They don’t want to take over town hall, run the government or even get tax exempt status (although that wouldn’t be bad), they just want to exist without being fucked with by that other half of the human race that enjoys the overall sense of entitlement called ‘liberty’.

  53. kate

    I wonder if Apple has a longer marketing plan, such as making these types of apps available at a much higher cost. The motivation behind porn is purely monetary, as everything else in popular culture is.

    I was thinking about the tastelessness and vulgarity of having nude women on one’s phone, but then I remembered my brother (in his forties) announcing at the last family gathering, with some great pride, that his wife was called into her office at work because they found he had been surfing porn on her company laptop.

    Oh to die! He laughed with himself while everyone else in my prudish (but not feminist by any stretch) family dropped their jaws in silence, “…and they brought out a stack of all the sites they printed out about this thick…!” making his fingers to show about two inches.

    Everyone whinced and got back to the dinner at hand but said nothing.

    My brother is not stupid by any stretch, very well educated, but like all men, still entitled to have a concept of women no different from that of a wanking-weary 14 year old.

  54. Lizard

    I wasn’t arguing that feminists and social conservatives had the same merit to their arguments, I was arguing that they share some values. Which is why they wind up in agreeing on a lot when it comes to pornography: that it’s bad for women, that it’s degrading, that it affects the way men look at all women, that it encourages sexual assault, and that that the negative effect of it on society as a whole trumps the “rights” of people to privately transact/sell sex/view sex. Your typical liberal dude (or woman) doesn’t think those things. Many social conservatives do, which is why when Dworkin and MacKinnon were attempting to bring the power of the state down on pornography, they worked with Christian conservatives. So the idea of mixing up feminists and social conservatives when it comes to pornography is not some random, crazy thing.

  55. Princess Rot

    Kate, I have no idea how you or your family kept your mouths shut, there. I’d have been tempted to retrieve said laptop and the dudebro brother, march HIM into the office and make HIM apologise for abusing company technology and trying to passively fob it off on his wife. I can’t imagine how shitty that must have felt for your sister-in-law, being disciplined and blamed for her husband’s pornsickness and entitlement to objectify and demean, even to go as far as to take and abuse property that isn’t his. If I were in her shoes, he’d be out on his ass in a New York minute. Sheeeeit.

  56. speedbudget

    So full of awesome. I bet MM wasn’t expecting THAT!

  57. speedbudget

    Well, I certainly fail at reply levels. I’ll figure it out!

  58. speedbudget

    Did she divorce him for making her lose her job? Around here, using your work computer for stuff like that gets you fired. Or at least severely reprimanded. Unless you’re a man.

    Duh. She probably just told them it was her husband and they probably just let it go.

  59. speedbudget

    Also, damn. I’m glad my family is prudish. Nobody would sit around the dinner table gleefully talking about their porn. That shit is NOT up for conversation.

  60. Comrade Svilova

    There is no excuse for the ridiculous and misogynistic complaints in the comments threads on the tech sites. With that said, however, I think many geeks (my female self included) have concerns about Apple’s attempts to control its users and *all* the content consumed with its products (i.e. not just porn, but music, art, DRM, etc.). What’s unfortunate is that the only story about Apple’s invasive techno-dictatorship that gets significant attention is the “censoring boobs” story. Of course we know why that story is the only one the mainstream cares about…

  61. MM

    Passive-aggressive sarcasm kills dialogue, Laughingrat. But I’m getting the impression that dialogue isn’t the point of this blog.

  62. Shopstewardess

    MM, I’ve read your reply below to Laughingrat (February 25 at 9.09am).

    You may think that dialogue is not the point of this blog, but I’ve found it helps to read the notes which are linked on the top right hand of the page before pressing “Blame”. Perhaps you could read those, and then check out Jill’s reply to you four posts down (February 24 at 7.07pm), before you try commenting further?

  63. JessMess

    Can we talk about how any conversation about so-called American’s prudishness is compared to Europe’s free-for-all objectification? As if it’s okay for Europe to do it?
    My thing is, just because Europe does it with more impunity DOES NOT MAKE IT OKAY. Period.
    But somehow this ‘argument’ is always held up as the ideal.

  64. MariaS

    Feminists often end up looking to the state for solutions or demanding things of the state because what feminists are seeking is justice, and the state operates a system of justice.

    Feminists don’t want a system of government that tells people what to do, they want a system of government that protects vulnerable people. In western democracies our governments represent themselves embodying ideals of fairness, justice and equality and police/judicial systems are meant to protect people from harm and to provide redress when harm is caused. One strategy that feminists have is to try and make those systems work to protect women and bring justice for women, to hold these systems to their ideals.

    These systems are far from their ideals of course. But they are a framework within which many feminists choose to work. The problem we have is that these systems are dominated by and saturated with men. So, we end up being frustrated at low rape conviction rates when the problem is that police officers, prosecutors, and judges are riven with victim-blaming, male-self-serving bias. We look to reframe the issue of the sex industry by turning the spotlight & the sanctions on the men who buy the use of other people’s bodies – and we end up with half-baked laws and misapplied laws where women in prostitution are still the ones left unsafe and unprotected.

    The reason feminists often look to the state, justice systems and laws, is not because they are authoritarian, but because the state is, rightly or wrongly, currently the instrument through which, a democratic society expresses its collective values and priorities. And feminists want it to express values (via policies and laws) which take a stand against women’s oppression.

    Social conservatives don’t oppose pornography because it harms women, but because it is sexual.

    (I’m thinking all this through on the fly, sorry).

    As I understand it, Dworkin and MacKinnon sought not censorship of pornography but to establish a way for women harmed in pornography or by pornography to see legal recourse for this.

    What religious or conservative groups did Dworkin and MacKinnon work with, by the way? I googled as much as I have time to google (not much) and didn’t come up with anything useful that would tell me that.

    I did get distracted by this interview with Catherine MacKinnon which turns out to be relevant in multiple ways – about law, justice, and porn – to this comment thread (and which reminds me that I should one day read her books).

    Just one excerpt:

    “… what is sexual between people is, up close, not particularly visible. Therefore you have to do things to it to make it acceptable by a camera. So already there’s an intrusion. Most people, when they are having an intimate experience, don’t have someone hanging out with a camera there. And if there is someone hanging out with a camera, what is most intimate about that experience and most equal between the people is not accessible to that camera.

    If you’ve got that material being sold, there are people who are not intimate to the experience who are experiencing it. How equal is that? Your sex is being bought by somebody over there. You’re now a thing in relation to people experiencing you sexually. How equal is that?”

  65. jodie

    Hey, if you REALLY want to be edgy, show me your Social Security number.

    Oh, you think that needs to be private? You prude!

  66. jodie

    Eek — that was supposed to go under MM’s reply. I fail even more at reply levels than you, speedbudget!

  67. Victoria

    Why I hate feministing
    http://www.feministing.com/archives/020168.html

  68. Do you want to see the bed in flames?

    ^^ Re: Victoria

    What in the feministing article do you find offensive? Pardon my question, which invariably will appear naive.

  69. Lara

    Hats off to that!

  70. Lara

    Right, it’s not some random, crazy thing. It’s a tactic to silence feminists and make radical feminists look like MOSTLY bedfellows with conservative Christians.
    Let me break it down for you:

    Ultra-conservatives/Christians:
    “Porn is BAD/NAUGHTY because it’s dirty. It’s dirty because women’s bodies are inherently dirty/naughty. Bad bad naked women, bad bad porn!”

    Porn-lovers/pornographers/porn-apologists:
    “Porn is GREAT BECAUSE it’s dirty. It’s dirty because women’s bodies are dirty. Woohoo, how taboo!”

    Radical Feminists:
    “Porn is DEGRADING because it’s based on the idea that women’s bodies are dirty/meat-envelopes. And women are NOT just meat envelopes/dirty. Porn is a tool of patriarchy!”

  71. Lizard

    Some religious arguments against porn are completely different from feminist arguments against it. Some aren’t. And feminists certainly don’t have a monopoly on “Porn is DEGRADING because it’s based on the idea that women’s bodies are dirty/meat-envelopes.”

    For instance: “Pornography exploits women as discardable tools for the satisfaction of male lust,” says the American Family Association (which is exactly what you’d think it would be, from the name.) They say a lot about being antiporn because of God – which, obviously, is an exclusive-to-them kind of argument. But about sex: their stated theme isn’t that’s dirty, it’s that it’s “beautiful, enjoyable, and productive” – but only if it’s a certain kind of sex, and porn isn’t that kind of sex.

    [On the issue of Dworkin/Mackinnon's Christian allies, here's one example: Dworkin testified in front of the Meese commission. Commissioner James Dobson - later of Focus on the Family, had this to say about Dworkin's remarks: "Pornography is degrading to women. How could any of us, having heard Andrea Dworkin's moving testimony, turn a deaf ear to her protest? The pornographic depictions she described are an affront to an entire gender,and I would take that case to any jury in the land. Remember that men are the purchasers of pornography. Many witnesses testified that women are typically repulsed by visual depictions of the type therein described. It is provided primarily for the lustful pleasure of men and boys who use it to generate excitation. And it is my belief, though evidence is not easily obtained, thata small but dangerous minority will then choose to act aggressively against thenearest available females. Pornography is the theory; rape is the practice."]

  72. Sarah

    Well said, Lara. It’s the reasoning behind the arguments that makes them either socially conservative or socially radical, not the arguments themselves.

  73. Gerald Ford

    @Lara

    I think you’re using a caricature of social conservativism to make your point there. As Lizard points out, social conservatives have made statements to the effect of “porn is dehumanizing” just as feminists have.

  74. Gerald Ford

    It’s not as if American feminism and social conservatism don’t share roots, either – First-wave feminism, in particular, owes a lot to conservative Christian groups, the temperance and progressive movements, etc. All of these movements could be interpreted as anti-thetical to libertarianism, the ideology worshipped by the iPhone-loving tech crowd.

  75. Jill

    “First-wave feminism, in particular, owes a lot to conservative Christian groups, the temperance and progressive movements, etc.”

    I smell a mansplanation!

  76. Gerald Ford

    @Jill

    I may be mansplainin’, but that doesn’t mean I’m not right. :P

  77. Jill

    Nah, all it means is that you’re a tool.

  78. Pinko Punko

    I can’t believe Gerald Ford reads this blog!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    I know, perhaps three exclamation points would have been sufficient. Or would they?

  79. ew_nc

    The wankers must have Googled this subject, found this blog and felt that they HAD to comment to set those darn feminists straight. Well, they’re good for a laugh I suppose, if only for being so entirely predictable.

  80. gerda

    Just in case there are any iphone owners out there that are not wankers (or planet-fuckers);

    http://www.skepticalscience.com/skeptical-science-iphone-app.html

  81. ash

    @lizard
    I’m an athiest, but there are all kinds of Christians out there who claim left wing values share similarity with Chritian values. Here is just one website with several examples:
    http://www.jesusisaliberal.org/
    I don’t think I’m going to give up on fighting for justice for all of the oppressed, abused people in the world, including rape porn victims, because I’m afraid of guilty-by-association accusations from liberatarians.

  82. Lizard

    I wasn’t saying you should stop fighting for anything, and it’s not an “accusation,” it’s historical fact that isn’t threatening unless you think that something is necessarily “guilty” because social conservatives say it. The bits where I agree with say, Andrea Dworkin on pornography aren’t undermined because many people on the Christian right believe the same thing, but neither am I going to argue that significant common ground isn’t there. It’s there, and that’s not a random occurrence; it’s due to some broad shared beliefs about government’s role vs. individual liberties – and probably also the need for society to protect women from men.

  83. Laughingrat

    It’s hard to imagine that the Christian Right has any genuine desire to protect women from men, given that the beliefs they hold include licensed predatorship for males within the confines of marriage. No, they’re just savvy enough to know how to make themselves look clean as a whistle while trying to get sexually-explicit stuff off the market. Where were they when we were trying to get the ERA passed, after all, if they’re so concerned for our welfare?

    It wouldn’t surprise me if some of the policymakers for the Right also realized that one way to discredit feminists was to appear to be siding with them on something. It’s certainly worked, regarding the debate on banning pornography.

  84. yttik

    When it comes to patriarchy, it is the great uniter. There is no left or right, no political party that offers refuge.

  85. Lizard

    @Laughingrat

    Religious conservatives have a mostly-different idea of what it means to protect women. It’s based on a very gender essentialist view of men and women: that wifehood and motherhood are central to being a woman; differences in the jobs and pay men and women have are nearly all attributable to different choices that men and women make; and that the sexual revolution was bad for women because it detached the thing men want (sex) from the thing woman want and which civilizes men (marriage). So the ERA isn’t really part of that – in fact, the way they campaigned against it was to say it was bad for women. Phyllis Schlafly had a whole campaign involving how it would mean women had to register for the draft, unisex public bathrooms, and reduction of social security benefits to dependent wives. I don’t know if she believed it; probably some people did.

    Some people on the right were quite sincere about porn legislation. I think it hasn’t been successful because it’s technically difficult and expensive to enforce, a whole lot of people like porn, and we have a strong concept of freedom of speech. In Australia, which doesn’t have constitutionally granted freedom of speech, there’s been a lot of porn banning lately, led by the socially conservative Family First Party, which is now trying to ban all internet porn.

  86. ash

    I actually didn’t intend for my comment to be a about the Left or the Right: Who fucks women over more question. What I was trying to say was that there are plenty of Christians who will say they believe similar values to what some feminists believe; they oppose war, the death penalty, they believe the privileged should be kind and stop oppressing the less privileged, the rich should give to the poor, etc. I’m not saying that I believe that is what Christianity is “really” about, or isn’t about. I’m just saying that because there are plenty of those who argue Christianity is about those values, I’m not going to stop having those values because as an atheist and a feminist I don’t want to be associated with Christians.
    I’ve actually listened to Dobson/FOF several times (don’t ask), and I don’t recall ever hearing anything that would suggest he/they appreciate the concept of sexual oppression of women or any form of actual non-faux feminism. AFAIK, single, non-married women, lesbian or straight are invisible in their world. (Which is interesting, because a lot of church-going straight women in my sphere are single, because of the lack of ”quality” “eligible” men, even by non-feminist standards, but I digress.) About 89% of what gets discussed on the FOF show is related to abortion and birth control, about another 10.9 % about teh Gay Agenda, and maybe 0.1% pseudo –feminist, but very transparent hat tips seemingly directed at attracting women who are repulsed by leftist male abusers of women (i.e. pornstitution users etc.)

  87. nails

    Dworkin wrote speeches to right wing audiences specifically, they are in Letters From A War zone. It is worth reading for anyone who thinks that the ‘sameness’ of the goals was genuine. Right wing politicians, as most politicians, see potential support as being worthy of effort. So they courted radical feminists, and the media decided to show it as acceptance & support. somehow.

  88. Kiuku

    There is hardly a difference in the view of porn makers, consumers, and enthusiasts and right wing, or in fact, all christians. Both Porn and Christians view sex in a negative way, as dirty. Both Porn and Christians view the female body as the embodiment of the negative, sexuality, instead of men’s own inherant impulse (instinct if you will) to stab, penetrate, and destroy.

  89. FemmeForever

    @ Kiuku

    and the worst part about the Patriarchy, of might equals right except when I’m the underdog, is that men just, in general, aren’t really worth knowing. In my experience on this planet, in general, men haven’t been worth knowing. They are vile, and stupid. I mean they really are quite stupid. And they really are quite vile, and one dimensional.

    and cruel, hateful, soulless, immature, character-free, integrity-free, and worthless – all of which is intentional and a compliment to the male psyche which strives for asshole status because anything else fails masculinity.

    So let me add one more that is not a compliment. Eternally flaccid.

    I blame the assholes.

  90. Frumious B.

    In the vein of the political is personal, how many blamers have asked their Nigels to give up porn? How did that go? Successful, not successful, grudgingly successful after multiple fights and lots of crying, relationship ending?

    While pr0n use is commonly a question of a female blamers and male Nigels, I’m interested in how this conversation plays out in all relationships. Pr0n is pr0n, regardless of sexuality.

    While I might be getting above myself in bloggular regulation with the following request, I’d like to ask that if you love pr0n and feel that using it has enhanced your relationship, please share that elsewhere.

  91. Jonathan

    @Kate:

    I wonder if Apple has a longer marketing plan, such as making these types of apps available at a much higher cost. The motivation behind porn is purely monetary, as everything else in popular culture is.

    The motivation behind porn is not money. The motivation behind porn is cultural enforcement of women’s mandatory position as the sex class. One of the conveniences of having pornography as a mostly a black market industry is to hide the fact most porn purveyors have to financially fold within a year, and that funny pictures of cats gets more website hits in the US than Playboy.

    I also have my doubts that many of these whiny tech dudebags were heavy iPhone porn consumers. The screen is pathetically tiny and a quick fumble with their off-hand literally drops $200 in the toilet with a voided warranty. Then again, maybe I’m not thinking pathetically enough.

    iPhone porn apps would be convenient for male cultural enforcement. Dudes can use them to advertise their misogyny to other dudes and intimidate women who touch their phones. It also marked their territory across most categories in the App store.

    That Apple is attempting to hide the “No Girls Allowed” sign by deleting some of the porn (while simultaneously paying cultural homage to Playboy as the only corporation that Apple won’t gleefully trample at a moment’s notice) has pissed the dudebags off to no end because misogyny is supposed to come before money under a capitalist Patriarchy.

  92. Gerald Ford

    @Jonathan

    “The motivation behind porn is not money. The motivation behind porn is cultural enforcement of women’s mandatory position as the sex class.”

    While that may very well be the *function* of porn in a broad context, Kate was (I think?) talking about motivation in the context of Apple’s business plan. People running companies don’t say things to each other like, “Screw profits, how can we subjugate women today?”

    “One of the conveniences of having pornography as a mostly a black market industry is to hide the fact most porn purveyors have to financially fold within a year…”

    The fact that it is difficult to achieve financial success in a given field says nothing about the “motivation” of those who attempt to do so. Maybe porn purveyors are just bad at running businesses.

    “…and that funny pictures of cats gets more website hits in the US than Playboy.”

    Website traffic says nothing about either profitability or motivation. Also, Playboy is far less relevant in the porn industry than icanhazcheeseburger is in the LOLcats industry.

  93. Kiuku

    Personally I think Porn is a consumable that markets itself to the innate, and culturally bred impulses of men and their view of women. Lust is in both men and women, but men’s lust is primed with their impulses for dominating and denegrating. I think men truly get tittilated from using an app like wobble to wobble a pair of breasts because this appeals to their lust because they are controlling the movement of the breasts which belong to a woman. The breasts are no longer in her control but they are wobbling to the desires of the man. This is all about their dominance. Porn is going out of style because lust is like a drug. It builds a dependence. Porn therefore must get increasingly violent and the woman must have increasingly less control and she must be increasingly degraded in order for men to get off on it.

    That’s why softcore porn and Playboy is really going by the wayside, but wobble, as just a titillating entertainment is the norm for a handheld device.

    I think a discussion no how every technology, which I believe is ultimately born of the ideas of women, once in the hands of men, becomes more important as a masturbatory tool.

    Ex. AI intelligence and sex robots.

  94. Jonathan

    Gerald Ford, it’s true that money is a key motivator for many porn purveyors, but I think the omnipresence of porn is not due to its natural profitability so much as that porn is what the dominant classes want to push on society, no matter what the cost. The illusion of the almighty dollar takes a back seat to the whims of the ruling elites (who screw profits on many occasions in order to cement their dominance) and to Patriarchy.

    That Apple acts like an actual capitalist company some of the time, and in this one instance put profits ahead of porn horrifies these dudes because it acknowledges that women (including those scary “moralistic” ones) can have an economic clout that, if truly freed could be much, much bigger than the entire porn industry.

  95. Gerald Ford

    @Jonathan

    I don’t necessarily disagree with everything you’re saying, but none of this refutes Kate’s point.

  96. Kiuku

    Both Jonathan and Kate are right IMO. It’s a combination of the two, because there is a profitable market for porn. The problem that Porn faces is that it is like a drug, and there is a built up dependence. Eventually, I think it will reach a point, in its degradation of women, and men will reach a point in their demand for women’s degradation in the bedroom, that will be so obviously sadistic and evil, as to take down the entire industry, or ruin society altogether.

  97. Kiuku

    *built up tolerance

  98. yttik

    “Screw profits, how can we subjugate women today?”

    Actually yes, there are many places that do exactly that. Money and power are closely entwined with dominance. Those porn producers who go broke after a year are likely most grateful to be able to objectify women because it gives them the same rush as having a great deal of money would. And what is the goal of having a great deal of money? So you are powerful enough to be able to dominate more women.

    Tiger woods is a quick example. He was one who said screw profits, I’d rather go out and subjugate some women.

  99. Jezebella

    Tiger Woods is a terrible example. He’s a rich guy who can’t keep it in his pants, but he wasn’t exactly lacking for willing consensual partners. Do you think having consensual sex with a woman is by definition subjugating her? I don’t agree with that at all.

  100. nails

    I am not sure that any of it can be neatly separated (porn being chiefly for money or sexism). Keeping people politically inactive and apathetic serves consumerist goals, and patriarchal support of women being the sex class is a practical tool to that end. It is all tangled up together.

  101. Saphire

    Yuck at Gerald Ford, his mansplaining. And his ‘:P’ sign.

    To second Yttik and Jonathon of course. I can think of too many cases where sexism and perpetuating the patriarchy trumps profit.

    ‘“Screw profits, how can we subjugate women today?” ‘

    This is exactly the type of thing discussed every day in corporate media rooms – despite 50% of the population being women, how can we bully them in our next virgin ad?

    If profit came over misogyny, there wouldn’t be any misogyny in the media, businesses, hollywood. As it stands, all these things have to bring misogyny. Misogyny always comes first wherever there’s a message to get across and a chance of people hearing it. Whatever loss of profit comes as a consequence, that’s really neither here nor there.

  102. Kiuku

    That’s right because I’ve seen men, time and again, choose a pile of shit, over women’s happiness. They’d rather exist in a pile of shit, than women be content, for instance, have rights equal to and separate from them.

  103. Kiuku

    It’s like, Ok men you can either have this pile of shit, or women have rights. And the men choose the pile of shit, everytime.

  104. drsnacks

    Tiger Woods is a terrible example. He’s a rich guy who can’t keep it in his pants, but he wasn’t exactly lacking for willing consensual partners. Do you think having consensual sex with a woman is by definition subjugating her? I don’t agree with that at all

    Within the rules of our capitalist patriarchal society, yes low-status women can legally consent to the will of a wealthy, powerful, and famous man; but understanding that context yes they were subjugated. He even stated straightforwardly that he was taking advantage of power imbalance between him and the women he was involved with.

    I thought I could get away with whatever I wanted to. I felt that I had worked hard my entire life and deserved to enjoy all the temptations around me. I felt I was entitled. Thanks to money and fame, I didn’t have far – I didn’t have to go far to find them.

  105. Keri

    The comments are only getting worse. You’d think the men were talking about some kind of super government. They are talking about freedom like they are in a Brave Heart movie. I’m not kidding. It’s Apple, a product that they willingly go out and purchase. How is that about their freedom? It’s hilarious. They’ve got the freedom to not buy it. How about that? That’s what they’ve been telling us all along right?

  106. Kiuku

    Tiger woods worked hard? Worked hard his entire life? Puhleaze. I wish I had a dollar for every man who believed he worked hard his entire life, for every man who wants to tell me about the “real world”, for every man who thinks he is entitled to enjoy shit, for every man who believes in the woe of men. The temptations around him? ugh. way to take responsibility.

    “I felt I was entitled”-Tiger Woods

  107. Kiuku

    “I thought I could get away with whatever I wanted to. I felt that I had worked hard my entire life and deserved to enjoy all the temptations around me. I felt I was entitled. Thanks to money and fame, I didn’t have far – I didn’t have to go far to find them.”

    “I thought I should get away with whatever I wanted. I thought that’s what the world told all men, and white men especially. I felt that my talent, as a man, in an arena and a world where women cannot use her talents, which led to my fortune, as a man, gave me the right to women.. That’s what money is for, right? What the hell? I just don’t get it. I was entitled. I was entitled to have sex with poor hard working women. I was entitled to all of them. They’ll never get anywhere. Not on their own. And that’s the whole point. What’s the point of my privilege as a male, which is what got me this fortune, if I can’t use it to have sex with women?”

  108. Jezebella

    And how does this make Tiger Woods different from every *other* rich dude on the planet?

    I just don’t get why everybody is in a snit over Tiger Woods cheating on his wife, as millions of men do every minute. But Charlie Sheen, abuser of women, is a blip. Hmmmm…. what *could* the difference be? I can’t imagine.

  109. Shelby

    Everybody knows that Charlie Sheen is a dickhead and we’ve perhaps been conditioned to accept it. There’s not much to debate. Tiger is fresh meat. All the kiddies purportedly looked up to him as a role model. Nobody has ever viewed Charlie as a role model, have they? I don’t think it has much to do with the fact that Tiger is a POC which is I assume what you are getting at? Then again, what the fuck would I know?

  110. Lara

    Good point, Jezebella. I think white men get the green light or barely a slap on the wrist for some of the awful shit they do. But then there was Kobe Bryant… bah, it depends but generally speaking, yes, white men get way more lee-way (did I spell that right?) with their misogyny than men of color do.

  111. speedbudget

    “I felt I was entitled.” -Tiger WoodsThe Patriarchy.

    Fixed that for you.

  112. Amananta

    Yes, some Christian right-wingers oppose porn because it is degrading to women. Even a stopped watch is right twice a day.

  113. yttik

    “And how does this make Tiger Woods different from every *other* rich dude on the planet?”

    Who said he was different? That was my point, misogyny, sexism, the chance to subjugate women, often trumps profits, common sense and all else. I am disagreeing with the idea that profits are the holy grail and trump misogyny. No, unfortunately they are not. Tiger is simply the latest example. If you would prefer white men as examples, well we got us hundreds of thousands of white men, too.

    Apple doesn’t have porn apps to help them sell phones. In fact, having porn apps probably hurts their bottom line. Apple has porn apps because the unspoken contract is that men must be supported in their right to feel powerful and dominant. Being able to dominate and control another human being on a little screen fulfills that. That really is the bottom line, not profits.

  114. Leah

    OMG you are awesome. Thank you so much for this, you made my feminist day.

  115. Gerald Ford

    @yttik

    “Apple doesn’t have porn apps to help them sell phones. In fact, having porn apps probably hurts their bottom line. Apple has porn apps because the unspoken contract is that men must be supported in their right to feel powerful and dominant. Being able to dominate and control another human being on a little screen fulfills that. That really is the bottom line, not profits.”

    If Apple’s bottom line is the subjugation of women, shouldn’t they be selling phones exclusively to men? Or maybe they should be selling gendered phones – the men can have full-featured ones, while the women’s can be pink, internet-restricted, and record and upload all conversations to Patriarchy HQ in Ft. Lauderdale. For that matter, why sell phones at all – why not just abandon all this tech crap and invest heavily in black market sex-trafficking? Building a company around computers, mp3 players, and phones for the sole purpose of one day selling porn apps on the phones seems like an awfully inefficient subjugation method.

    I’m not saying Apple doesn’t participate heavily in the subjugation, only that their behavior doesn’t seem to fit well with a company whose *goal* is first and foremost that. As Twisty has pointed out, intent can have no bearing on whether something is woman-hating.

  116. yttik

    Women hating is so ingrained into our culture it is often hard to see and not even questioned. Apple is not alone in promoting misogyny, it’s simply a part of business as usual all over the place. There’s no grand conspiracy here, there’s simply an unspoken rule that says men must always be supported in their right to feel powerful and dominant. How do you help them do that? You offer them porn apps on their iphones.

  117. Lizard

    “men must always be supported in their right to feel powerful and dominant.”

    I don’t think we’re doing much of a job of that, if that’s the goal. See: prisons. Even just in the world of advertising, companies sometimes decide the best strategy is to make men feel powerless and submissive – so that their product can step in to make it better. See also: Tiger Woods lost his sponsors; Spitzer resigned as governor; Clinton got impeached. So if that unspoken rule exists, I don’t think it’s particularly well-respected. And: if Steve Jobs did what Woods did and got caught, he’d no longer be CEO – not because he was subjugating anyone, and not necessarily because anyone at Apple would care one way or another about the underlying values, but because their goal is to make money and having a CEO who everyone is talking about because of his sex life is distracting to that.

  118. nails

    God, can the dudes asking stupid questions GTFO please? IBTP is my feminism refuge where I don’t have to read a bunch of ignorant as fuck opinions about how I am imagining sexism. Go to feminism 101 if there is something you don’t get.

  119. Saphire

    To step in with nails. Gerald Ford is giving me stomach ache.

  120. Isabel

    “generally speaking, yes, white men get way more lee-way (did I spell that right?) with their misogyny than men of color do.”

    Can you provide any evidence at all for this assertion? I think you are way off base, in this case anyway, especially when you say they get “way” more leeway.

    Few men of any race are as idolized as TW, besides being super-rich and super-famous. He seemed in total control and to have the perfect life all these years. A bizarre and dramatic (and therefore newsworthy) incident brought to light the fact that he was simultaneously having sexual affairs with and extensively lying to over a dozen women. This borders on sociopathic, which I’m sure accounts for some of the fascination, and I’m not sure I agree that all powerful men do this. In any case it was a pretty dramatic change in his media image, and of course people are going to talk, and tabloids are going to have a field day.

    As far as his sponsors or his career or whatever, he is a sports star, which in this society makes him a “role model” -again this seems the standard treatment. David Letterman may have gotten more leeway as far as his career being damaged, but he is not considered a role model of any type, and his family still experienced the same invasion of privacy and we still heard about all the “shocking” details for weeks. And he just had long-term serial affairs with mostly professional women who he appears to have neither favored nor disrespected and he appears to have stopped having affairs since he officially married. Once again, he is a super-famous and very private icon and it was brought to light by a bizarre incident.

    And of course Tiger Woods HAS gotten away with it all these years, as do most rich and famous black sports stars, rap stars etc. And rich men of all races around the globe. In this country at least men seem to get punished more for getting caught than anything else.

  121. Kiuku

    yea I agree the men need to GTFO. I might not be able to articulate exactly how, and in every instance, the men, for example, choose the shitpile over a decent situation in order to further misogyny, at this exact moment, or in a perfect way, such that no dude could possibly come here and debate the point. We already know its the truth. I don’t need the things of which I’m well certain to be debated, in order to discuss them. We can provide fine examples, none of which have to come out in a debate, and we’d rather not debate dudes in order to be able to discuss it. That’s how men seem to operate anyway. Everythign has to be af uckin debate before you can discuss it.

  122. Kiuku

    There is something distasteful to society, both men and women, regarding the payment of women. I believe this is the underlying knowledge that the purpose of money is the subjugation of women. To pay a woman for the work that she does doesn’t make sense at the innate level, in the way that money itself is arbitrary and makes no sense, except in the payment of men for doing “work”. I think this is why women are discriminated against and women are devalued. In addition to this, women pay more for nearly everything. The service a man performs for a man, may even be free, but it definitely costs a woman. When it comes to paying women, the idea is distasteful, yet when men perform a service for women, or a product is made for women, the markup is high, because servicing women is so exotic to both men and women, therefore it comes at a higher price.

    The basic idea behind money is the subjugation of women. So both observations about the patriarchy are right. Men see no point to nearly anything, money included, comforting, beautiful, beneficial, rich or brilliant. That thing has no poitn to men, unless he can subjugate a woman. If men could automatically subjugate women, half the human population, there wouldn’t be any money at all.

  123. Jonathan

    @Gerald Ford

    If Apple’s bottom line is the subjugation of women, shouldn’t they be selling phones exclusively to men?

    Not Apple’s sole bottom line, but until now it was more important than profits. Subjugation is still more important than profits for the guys whining about Apple’s move. Exclusion was far more important than profits for the makers of the Droid phone which told off half of their potential customer base in order to uphold Patriarchal culture.

    And for companies like Playboy, subjugation is their bottom line. Something which moved Apple enough to get them to bend own rules and keep that porn app.

    It is also something which obviously moved you to come out so aggressively to Apple’s defense for having porn apps in the first place. So is pornography OK to sell when you just don’t give a damn either way about women? Does it only matter once you set up Patriarchy HQ? You’re setting very low standards for acceptable misogynistic behavior.

  124. Kiuku

    Anything that men pretend to value, becomes worthless when women do it. Value follows men. Education, science, medicine etc. Science wasn’t more important than killing Hypatia, and burning a whole library because it housed the works of women. Winning wars wasn’t more important than letting Joan of Arc get torched, and she certainly wasn’t treated with the respect that a male general would be. History is riddled with examples of men choosing the shit pile. Men destroying their own civilizations, their own societies, as well as compeltely demolishing other societies, for the sake of their misogyny. Their feelings of insecurity toward women of talent, intelligence, scientific enterprise, societies that have managed to become civilized enough where women are attaining a relative amount of comfort and freedom from men. It’s inside men, it appears innate, to hate women who are enjoying themselves without any male involvement.

  125. yttik

    Men do often chose the shit pile of misogyny, Kiuku. They’ll throw away a presidency, a fortune earned from endorsements, heck, they’ll even go to prison over it. Patriarchy trains men to screw their own selves over in the process and many of them are too stupid and entitled to realize it.

    Value does follow men. The whole relationship between power, oppression, and money is fascinating and kind of horrifying. I think you are correct, the purpose of money is the subjugation of women and that is why it feels strange to pay women for their work. That is also why 80% of women’s work remains unpaid. Women are expected to work just because, to birth babies, to cultivate food, to raise children, where as men are given money for status, for power, for the opportunity to possess more women.

  126. JBT

    The exegesis of man-think and the mansplainin’ are purely examples of talking shit to women. Worse, what underlies it is the entitlement that men feel to our attention. No matter their degree of stupidity, like baboons banging on trash cans, they think their noise merits the troop’s attention. Even to tell them they are tools means victory. They have used the Y-chromosome-mutation privilege to claim space and attention, just as they were taught as little boys to believe they are the center of the fucking universe. They seek acclaim in other men’s eyes only, so they care not about what is written to them or even what they write: “Ooh! I stirred those feminazis up! Look at me! Look at me! Ooh! Wiggly boobies! Look at me! Look at me!” Indeed, the moniker Gerald Ford is quite a propos. Ol’ Gerry could not bring himself to defile the phallic tamale, so he attempted to stuff the whole penis in his mouth rather than tenderly peeling back the layers to reveal the spicy, soft goodness within. That’s what mansplainin’ sounds like: a giant fellating, sucking sound.

  127. Saphire

    I hate people who speak of a patriarchy HQ. Why does a patriarchy which has its own matrix type thing, a ‘patrix’, need a fucking headquarters.

  128. Saphire

    ‘It’s inside men, it appears innate, to hate women who are enjoying themselves without any male involvement.’

    Hmm yeah. I wanted to add before but forgot. About the letterbox post system. One of the reasons the inventors were literally shitting themselves: Women were allowed to freely communicate so it stalled the fucking progress of letterbox post. When misogyny was less ironic.

  129. Kiuku

    Yea Yttik it often appears as if men, the majority would rather be dead than exist equal to women, much less live in a decent society dedicated to freedom and scientific enterprise. they have no problem burning a library, living in complete ignorance, bringing about and maintaining dark ages, or hiring people less qualified to positions of power, destroying whole technologies, or preventing women from inventing/acquiring technology. If they can’t take credit for it, they often try to destroy the entire process and the knowledge of it. Then they act as if we’ve come as far as we ever have in human history, due to the you know, prowess of men. And it’s just not true.

    The letter box post system, the delaying of which, then makes a sublime example. Something so innocuous and beneficial. But women might be able to talk to eachother! Any kind of communal effort or system is going to benefit women. So think about it. If men do not want to benefit women or exist equal to them, we won’t ever exist in a society that has communal interests.

    I think if there is any sort of technological “progression” linear, first comes freedom then comes technology. Because, I mean, I’m pretty sure women come up with most technology, if not all, so there has to be a listening to and a vailability of female voice in order for there to be any inventing or scientific progress of a society, and this is something you can observer throughout the destruction and construction of societies in male history. When a society becomes powerful enough, imperial, then freedom comes because it is more threatening to the power at be to disallow freedom than it is to allow it, because the threat to its destruction comes from inside forces, people rebelling, civil war. It’s a simple strategy then, to allow freedom to people who protest for it, rather than deny it and cause a civil war..not because that society ever becomes more enlightened. Eventually, women will become free enough that the men cannot handle it anymore, and th society breaks apart from the inside. Then, another dark age.

  130. Kiuku

    Not only do men, people, not want to pay women for the work that they do, they want women to pay for it! Childbirth and rearing is central to any society. Even if something so obviously communal, like healthcare, can be devised so that it is communal only for male healthcare, anything and everything can. Women have to pay extra for natal, prenatal, and birth, which can ammount to 20000.

  131. Laughingrat

    Saphire–do you have any more info on that letterbox thing? I’m really intrigued, I never heard about that connection before.

    The thread about women’s unpaid work reminds me of something I want to put together about female semi-professional crafters and Etsy, and how we’re all conditioned to undersell the hell out of ourselves. Here’s hoping that Kaminer’s book on women and volunteering will be a useful lead.

  132. Saphire

    Kiuku, bring on the dark age. I decided just now, overhearing some people in my hall talking about ‘seeing a girl’s asshole through her trousers’ and wanting to rape her; also after reading an article about an Oxford students club targetting schoolgirls — I fucking hate men!!! Argggghhhh.
    To this day I devote every bit of my life wholly to smashing the system, using everything to make men look like the fecking silly loser blockhead pigs they are. Who drinks to that with me?!! And where’d everyone go? :’(

  133. agasaya

    Since you asked, I went far away because this thread degenerated into man hate instead of patriarchy itself being analyzed. In case you haven’t noticed, a lot of women want to associate with men as partners in living life on this planet if not some more personal relationship. Of course the dearth of decent or at least educable males makes that largely impossible for the majority of women. It certainly accounts for the huge number of never-marrieds or divorced women who prefer celibacy to the badly brainwashed males on offer today. As for health care, it isn’t helping the men very much – their cancer rate is now 50%.

    When the discussion actually returns to being just that, others will return.

  134. Saphire

    There’s no such thing as man hate. Just that cartoon image everyone conjures up of women letting loose. We’re only told that to be an angry woman is deplorable. Some the cartoon image washes a little too well with and feminism has to be first and foremost about apologising for having that deplorable courage to speak. Feminism is dominated by apologies, it’s a whole movement of apologising. When women hate men openly then feminism is on course again.

    For women like me, we wait for women to actually get a grip.

  135. FemmeForever

    Preach on, Sapphire.

  136. kristyn

    Indeed, Saphire. Also, brilliant pun in your username.

  137. Kiuku

    Yea Saphire! Among other things this blog has helped me do is just glaze over posts that could be best summed up as “but what about the men?”

  138. yttik

    Men are free to confront patriarchy at any time, to start protesting about how the oppression of the other half of the human race has harmed them and prevented them from reaching their full potential.

    But in the meantime, for women discussing things like rape, porn, and other insanity, the only healthy response for human beings is rage, anger, and probably some hatred. The men I’ve encountered who work with these issues also express outrage and occasional hatred towards men. That’s a healthy, human response to confronting evil. Unfortunately for women, we’re expected to not be angry, to never feel hatred, to always be forgiving and understanding, and for goodness sakes, to make sure we put men’s needs before our own.

  139. Laughingrat

    Saphire, Yttik–too true, too true.

  140. FemmeForever

    Preach on, Saphire.

    I talked about man hate here, near the end of the page.

  141. FemmeForever

    A quick related question. Somewhere I saw a brilliant, funny list of all the reasons it’s so difficult for feminists to unite. I just don’t remember where. Do you?

  142. FemmeForever

    I found it here. Last string post. I promise.

  143. Ames

    There are plenty enough choices of man-loving feminist blogs to escape to if that’s what you need.

    I come here because I’m mad as hell at the patriarchy AND at the men who benefit from it and I don’t want to hide that or explain it or tone it down. Hanging around with other women who are mad as hell makes me feel just a little bit more sane. The rest of the time I get to hold my tongue – so to speak – as geek feminists and academic feminists and dyke feminists and athlete feminists tip toe through the eggshells lest they be seen as ball busters.

    I come here for the wit; I stay for the ball busting.

  144. Occasional Expositor

    @Lizard: “Clinton got impeached”? In which alternate reality was that?

  145. Lizard

    @Occasional Expositor
    “Impeachment is a formal process in which an elected official is accused of unlawful activity, and which may or may not lead to the removal of that official from office. It is the first of two stages. Impeachment does not necessarily result in removal from office; it is only a legal statement of charges, parallel to an indictment in criminal law…Bill Clinton was impeached on December 19, 1998 by the House of Representatives on articles charging perjury.”

  146. agasaya

    When someone asked where everyone ‘went’, my response was there was nothing of substance being said – not that the feelings themselves were irrational.

    As for immediately pegging me as an apologist for ‘the men’, I have yet to stop laughing. I have literally been murdered by ‘the men’; the heart just hasn’t stopped beating yet. Continuously stalked and assaulted by the corporatocracy for daring to litigate and speak against their industries, not one single women’s group has responded to any call for help. Well, almost none. ‘NOW’ responded by sending me a request for money when they got my emails. Not one shelter can accept me because our admittedly meager resources go for sexual/domestic violence victims. Women activists are left in the lurch which is why there are so few of us. Of course, the male model of law enforcement doesn’t apply to women activists any more than it does to rape victims.

    When you get done with the men, remember that the corporatocracy is responsible for inciting/increasing the hatred of women that a decline in religion and increased need for two incomes in each family had just begun to erode. The corporatocracy is also responsible for the chronic diseases of women in industrialized countries along with the failure of health care to evolve in the way we need it to address women’s differential responses to their ‘one size fits few’ model of pharmacotherapy. Did you know women need only half the antigen concentration of men in vaccines? No wonder we get all the autoimmune disorders. Did you know that cholesterol meds work differently on us? The failure to make medicines specifically tailored to women is about profit. If it were more profitable, or we clamored for specialists in women’s medicine (not talking gynecology here), there would be a push to design those medicines for us; to re-calculate OSHA standards for women in the workplace exposed to poisons – generally recognize us as having body parts other than our uteruses.

    Money. as used by the corporatocracy, can increase or decrease the hatred of women although it won’t eradicate it. After all, even an oppressed man can own one. But do go on; it is entertaining although I have little time to enjoy it.

  147. Occasional Expositor

    @Lizard: Well blow me down. I did not know that (of course, not being American, I guess I may have a slight excuse).

  148. The Menstruator

    I’m working on making a new app… Pin the lit cigarette to the dick hole. I can’t find any screams that make me happy enough though to add, so I’ll just have to keep testing it out.

  1. Quote of the Day « Anti-Porn Feminists

    [...] More Adventures with the Antithesis of Enlightenment [...]

  2. Terminology (or, This Isn’t Sex) « The Radical Notion

    [...] at I Blame the Patriarchy does a good job of compiling some of the most ridiculous comments posted on a Gizmodo article about the new rules. [...]

  3. Sunday Potluck

    [...] Twisty posts on the boiz going nuts (no pun intended) over Apple’s new apps policy: More Adventures with the Antithesis of Enlightenment [...]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>