Help me explain to my friend why this is really wrong

But I dread to think what the lentil knickers would be catching on, HerBeX!!

Quite right too Springchicken

This could catch on...

Not all criticism by one feminist of another is about 'why can't you Bad Feminists be nicer to men?' There are strands of feminist thought to the effect that too much feminism is about and for educated white women and doesn't take into account race/ethnicity issues. There are feminists who think that a lot of modern technology is wrong and we should really all go back to living off our own earwax and knitting lentil knickers for each other. Some feminists see capitalism as the main enemy, others are focussed on freeing women from pointless religion, etc etc, and don't let's get started on the pros and cons of lesbian separatism.
I don't have a problem with a good ruck on the feminist section. Feminists don't agree with each other about everything and there is no reason why we should.

And it wasn't every man in the world either, many of them remain serenely uninterested in her.

Oh I'm not sure it was every man in the world, I think it was our horrible sexist media. The men just jumped on the bandwagon afterwards, I don't think they would have been quite so OTT about her if the media hadn't set the (very low) standard.

Just look at what every man in the world did to Pippa Middleton - she was dressed head-to-foot in a gown that was modest and beautiful... and they STILL managed to find a way to objectify her!

It's probably a really good way to raise money.....such a shame though.

I think you've objected, wish her luck raising funds and leave it alone.

TBH, I don't have an issue with this. At the end of the day, men will always objectify women regardless of what they wear, how they dress or the way they act. So who is more stupid? The girl who gives it away for free, or the girl who uses it to raise money for charity?

Besides, it's no worse than Buff Waiters or Chippendales or even stage acts performing The Full Monty.

If she's happy to do it, let her do it. She has her opinion, you have yours. And there's nothing you can really do about it to change it. And it's not as if she's profiting from it, so parallels can't really be drawn towards prostitution or porn. Especially as the only lewdness or sexual gratification would be coming from the men, she's just "providing the material" - so to speak. But any woman walking down the street could just as easily "provide the material" for a male spank-bank.

Now realise this is bikini car wash,not porn. (computer doing some weird shit, only shows half a page, can be confusing) Same arguments apply. Appealing to'individual/ personal rights' doesn't really work when you're discussing socety as a whole.

This is the feminism thread? About pornography? Did somebody think that feminists don't have a tradition of fairly heated debate on this? It is probable that you will get a fairly strong reaction to saying that porn use is a 'private' 'personal' matter. Feminism identified that as mistaken, because 'the personal is political'. Issues like sexuality, domestic labour, childcare, are not defined by nature, but by social, political, economic circumstances. So if you come on a feminist forum and say that personal issues of sexuality and say it's purely private, with no wider implications, you are actually questioning the fundamental origins of feminism and suggesting the entire 'project' was misguided from day one. That probably won't make you popular.

LOL

I haven't told you not to post Exoticfruits. I've just told you that some of your posts are unwelcome to me and I'll let you know when they are, just as you will lwt me know when mine are unwlecome to you.

I'm not going to ignore you if you say something I disagree with, you've said yourself people can post as and where they like. I don't expect you to ignore me either if I post stuff you disagree with, but of course you're free to do that if that's what you want.

I think that you are entirely missing the point, I was not talking about being 'made to feel unwelcome' I was talking about remarks 'being not welcome here'. Why do you get to say? I find them very welcome and I am equal on here. You may not agree with my views ,but it is a free country, a free and open thread and you are not the arbiter of what is welcome or not.

I have amended my views in some places, not that you would have noticed, when people have been polite and reasonable. I am not going to amend anything if my arguments are torn to shreds, I am patronised and told not to post, and addressed like a public meeting-that always does the opposite to me and I am stung into retorts that I don't actually mean! But as you don't want to 'win friends and influence people'-it doesn't really matter. I would have thought that way to get change was to do both the above, rather than have cosy little moans with like minded people.

All we have achieved is that I might well listen to people on here with very different views- who are reasonable, but we have got to the point of nothing to say-we look at each others name and are anti with each other before we start.

Perhaps we had better just ignore each other and talk to the rest.

You are the people who are going on about not being welcome here, so I'm using your own language Exotic.

Why the fuck should you be made to feel welcome anyway? It's not my job (or anyone else's) to welcome you or turn you away. Just post and see how it flies. If your post results in people coming back and asking you direct questions or telling you you are posting a load of crap, so what? Why do you then complain about not feeling welcome? What is this not feeling welcome crap anyway? Do you go on the relationships board, or AIBU boards, and complain of feeling unwelcome when someone disagrees with you or rolls their eyes at you? I bet you don't, it only ever happens on the feminist boards, like we're under some kind of obligation to get the tea and cake out for every passer by who fancies coming in and saying things some of us disagree with.

And another thing while I'm in ranty mode - everyone always focuses on the one post that was disagreed with while ignoring everything else that was considered carefully or accepted. They focus on the fact that one of the nasty feminazis was a bit snappy and has turned them off feminism and forced them to join the Ku Klux Klan while simply ignoring the fact that a few other feminazis agreed with them, considered their arguments or simply didn't respond to them because they didn't feel that strongly about it.

It's all a load of defensive bollocks IMO.

Everyone is equal on MN. Everyone is welcome to post where and what they like. A person with one post is equal to a person with 1000 posts. There is no MN royalty-unless self appointed.

This is a public thread-open to all-free to say anything, unless censored by MN. I don't that it is anything to do with you to say who is welcome or not HerBeX. It is the first time I have heard of a self appointed censor.

LOL it's like our arguments are pretty water tight - who can argue with equality? But if you can attack us instead, because we're not placatory enough, weak enough, diffident enough, then you can divert the argument away.

It is only applied to feminism isn't it, this double standard of "but can't you just be more nice in how you argue?"

And what they mean is: "can't you just not say that?"

And those remarks always play into the "humourless, ranting feminists" image - they're snide and they don't add anything to the debate and no, frankly, they're not welcome here: calling yourself a feminist and then coming on to the feminist section to tell other feminists that they're not the right kind of feminist because they're not womanly and gentle enough and aren't the sort of feminists men like enough, while telling us that we're telling everyone else how to be, isn't actually going to get you very far here. People who disagree but are interested and are trying to find their way, are very welcome; people who disagree and are trying to stop us debating the issues honestly and thoroughly, are going to get short shrift. If you can manage to argue your points without doing that snide stuff, then I'll happily leave off patronising you. But if you can't, then I'll carry on too.

Oh I'm happy to admit that I deliberately patronise the arse off you Exoticfruits, because I find your arguments very dishonest.

I don't believe for a moment that you aren't aware that you're throwing in irritating idiocies just to wind people up and I quite enjoy winding you up back in return.

Your remark to Blackcurrants, that if she harangued someone like the OP's friend, when it's quite clear that B is discussing the issues on an anonymous forum not in someone's shell-like every waking moment, was a deliberate wind-up. It earned the most enormously patronising pat on the head.

I would hate to see you when you are trying!

I have exactly the same problem as SDTG in that

because it certainly feels as if people are only welcome here if they agree with you.

What affronts me is being treated as if I am stupid/a dupe of the patriarchy/unable to understand the issues and make a decision of my own, simply for expressing an opinion

I am relieved not to be the only one to feel this.

If they were a true representation of feminism you would have to count me out.

SDTG, I wasn't actually trying to patronise you, i was asking you a direct question because it occurred to me that you might not see the connection between what you said and the argument that lots of johns who abuse prostitute women use, that they are the ones being exploited by the prostitutes they are abusing. I'm not sure if you would have sympathy with that argument or not (I don't know your views), so I invited you to consider the connection.

I'm not sure why you got upset about that, it wasn't a personal attack on you it was pointing out the connection between your argument and those of prostitute-abusers. You haven't actually addressed it so I don't know if you agree that there is a connection and whether that has challenged your POV and perhaps that's why you're annoyed with me? Or maybe you are in sympathy with the viewpoint that prostitutes and lapdancers etc., are the ones who are exploiting the poor helpless men? Would you like to consider it or are you going to let your irritation with me stop you doing so? I think it's important to consider it because it's a mainstream POV that is often put forward by people who aren't aware of the power dynamics in the purchase of sexual acts and the reason that they aren't aware, is because our culture deliberately and systematically steers debate away from power relations, because every area of life is infected by unequal power between individuals and groups and delving too deep into that is deeply unsettling for those who have the power.

Oh well SGB I guess we move in very different circles then. I do think it is difficult to reconcile some aspects of feminism with some aspects of human sexuality as expressed in the context of patriarchal society. It is a tricky subject as we cannot take the context out of the equation in order to explore human sexuality without the influence of patriarchy.

(No doubt that is as clear as mud!)