The invisible men project

[ArmyOfPenguins]

I think it's important that the buyers' choices in prostitution are highlighted and shared. This project was linked to on FB. Thoughts? I think it's a great idea.

the-invisible-men.tumblr.com/

I did ask upthread if SG had been the one described as giving sex for something in return. It was ignored.

you're welcome whenthered.

i think it was florafox (sorry am on phone and it is tricky to scroll up too far) who suggested a thread about the contents of MacKinnon's chapter on coercian and consent. i would be really interested in such a discussion.

as we can see this thread has been turned back into examining the women's choices in order to invisibleise those of the men. the notion that once a woman 'consents' the man's choices become unexaminable and in an ethical vacuum, is not only misogynistic but also a notion that does not stand up to female perspective scrutiny.

and of course claiming that consent on the part of a woman relieves a man of all responsibilty for his action (which is the male perspective being argued on this thread) must be examined WRT context.

of course the context is male dominated society in which men define what it is to be a woman and in which women have been placed (by men) as being firmly and irrevocably in the low status position in a binary sexual hierarchy.
consent, rape, coercian and the value of bodily integrity have been defined and enshrined in law by men. female sexuality and identity has been defined by men.

all of these factors must be part of a discussion such as this one if it is to be honest towards, and fruitful for women.

WhentheRed: Hi, I had decided to back off when FloraFox accused me of "derailing the thread" which is basically trolling under a politer guise. It is clear, as minnehaha is also finding with SinisterSal that some people just can't hold a conversation and so resort to personal attacks (ironically something I was incorrectly accused of). In addition, regular and fully integrated mumsnetters here are like many people in that some words, despite being used correctly, are taken as a personal insult. For example, my friend was recently told by her doctor that she is "obese", she stormed out of the surgery and was upset because he had "insulted her". She was ready for making an official complaint and it took me ages to convince her that unfortunately, in her case, obese is the correct term. I have used words like "deluded" (self-deluded in context) not as an insult but to describe how a person can become so wrapped up in their own thoughts that they wander off from what is real and begin to rationalise in their own minds, things which logically are simply not true. It was considered as a personal attack, which wasn't my intention.

However, as you seem to be held in higher regard here and have asked a question of me........ But first please clarify what do you mean by "dealt with"? Please expand on your question.

Beachcomber: You constantly refer to a "male dominated society", but where is it? I go to the town centre and I see men and women everywhere in what seems to be an equally accessible place. I have hobbies, I go on holidays indeed, I can think of hundreds of areas (as in: A division of experience) or places (physical) where men and women are treated exactly the same. I'm not saying male dominance doesn't exist, I'm also not saying that female dominance doesn't exist but where? And remember, we had a female Prime Minister for eleven years.

give me strength.

i'm not going to answer your above questions - there is a whole internet out there where you will find answers to feminism 101 enquiries. you really should be doing some googling if you wish to partake in a feminist discussion about consent/rape/male centric definition of the world but don't actually understand what feminists mean when they describe society as male dominated.

Sorry, one more thing (well two actually)

Beachcomber: the notion that once a woman 'consents' the man's choices become unexaminable and in an ethical vacuum, is not only misogynistic but also a notion that does not stand up to female perspective scrutiny.

Is this argument based on single individual events or do you assume that every man, in every situation, throughout the world (whether confined to prostitution or not) would consider initial consent to be an indefinite green light?

"That is absolute tosh. It is a psychologically proven fact that when porn, loosely dressed women or any sexually explicit images are regularly presented to sexually active males it triggers more activity and desire within them. Why do you think ordinary men joke about when they were young and how they would sneak their mum's Sears/Grattan/Littlewoods catalogue lingerie section into their rooms BEFORE they had even had one experience with any girl?? How the hell is that demand driven? It's not, and what you are ALL missing is the simple fact that heterosexual men are wired to find women sexually attractive so desire is a natural act. In a civilized society, hopefully, most men use that energy to pursue other avenues but if you place temptation in the way it will be answered with action in some men. Even religion blames women and labels some quite innocent women as harlots which is of course ridiculous."

This is nonsensical. So you are saying that because women dress in lingerie for women in womens magazine catalogues that they are driving the market for men wanking off on their images? You do understand that those women aren't posing for men. Men are creating the demand by taking those images and wanking off to them. You could only think that women are contributing to the market if you think women's bodies are men's property and there for the men's 'pleasure'.

You also seem to have a very low opinion of men. But what you are describing is exactly what I am saying - men are driving the demand for prostitution. Although you are describing it in terms of uncontrollable urges. I am saying it is a sense of entitlement which is very evident in all your posts, sgheuks.

And saying "even" religion blames women is really not helping your argument. Of course religion blames women. All religions are male dominated, misogynistic institutions!

Calling women harlots is misogynistic. Please don't. Your posts just keep betraying you sgheuks and further add to the arguments we are making about punters.

what feminists mean when they describe

So you have your own language now? My apologies, I wasn't aware of that.

In that case I shall withdraw, there is no point in a discussion where your feminist definition of "male dominated society" is entirely different to everyone else's definition of "male dominated society".

What is your definition of a male-dominated society then?

scallopsrgreat: For goodness sake I didn't call anyone a harlot, religion and history did, I was referring to that history.

And it doesn't matter who the catalogue models are posing for, the images do what they do and have an effect on those who view them. If it's a young boy post puberty then yes, masturbation will be a common outcome. But that was pre-Internet and I shudder to imagine what the online world is doing to young boys (and girls) these days.

I don't have a low opinion of men or women, I do have a low opinion of generalising where it's detrimental to an entire gender for no good reason. We are wired a certain way, sex is a huge part of almost everyone's life whether straight, gay or other. There is only one requirement which, when exercised regularly will rise above all this, respect. If there was more of that the world would be a better place.

Ps. Yes you're right, religion reference, my bad. :)

yeah right i mean who are these uppity women who think they have the right to analyse their own oppression and have like Words and Terms and Concepts.

funnily enough i am reading a chapter called "the politics of intelligence" from Dworkin's "right-wing women" at this very moment. it couldn't be more pertinent.

Because we had one female prime minister in the 80's, suddenly a millennia of women's oppression is wiped out? The slate is clean now? No it isn't and this is borne out by the statistics showing that men still own the vast majority of the world's wealth, and still have the abundance of political power.

This is what people mean by you de-railing, sg. If you don't understand/refuse to even acknowledge the basic tenets of feminism, then you are out of your depth before we even start discussing concepts such as consent.

You have, on several occasions referred to women in a derogatory way - speaking of women making themselves 'sexually available to men' is not treating women as equal human beings of the same status to men. Do you talk of men in power 'making themselves sexually available' to beautiful young women using the power of their masculine wallets? No.

scallopsrgreat: A society in which men have most of the power and influence. In this case I'm referring to western society although I'm UK based.

Okay please don't ask anything else, if anyone wants to discuss anything I'll give you my email address, I really don't want to upset this thread and I'm aware that at least one beach lover wants me to quit so I shall.

Best regards to all,
sghueks

sg. This society is male centric. This society is still one where men have most of the power and influence.

So what sg is saying is that men just can't help themselves with with regards to objectifying women's bodies and because of that women are contributing/creating to the market of prostitution . Demand and supply is pretty basic stuff.

You chose to use the word harlot, sg. And that is quite telling.

And you are right respect is key. However, your descriptions of men and women isn't very respectful. The punters description of women isn't very respectful. Not seeing a lot of respect going on at all.

Strangely enough your definition of male dominated society is the same as feminism's. Who'd have thunk? (rhetorical question, no need to answer)

"if you place temptation in the way....."

OMFG.

i missed that first time round as i tend to skim read prolific posts by men intent on setting the laydeez right.

Yep women-blaming shit.

I'm not going to be selectively misquoted and just leave it there so I would ask that you respect when someone leaves a discussion and not continue to attribute incorrect statements or attitudes to that person. That "laydeez" is talking behind someone's back, I don't know if your unique feminist language translates but it doesn't reflect well on you.

runningforthebusinheels: Without an in-depth research I would argue that you're right, but only just. Angela Merkel, Margaret Thatcher, Hillary Clinton and many others not so obvious are evidence of female equality but what some seem unable to fathom is that when in power, these women make many of the same decisions a man would make. In addition, many men make decisions based on female advice and there are countless examples of this. Your "male centric" 21st century, western civilised world is an illusion in my opinion.

However, that we live in a none feminist society is true and that's what you're really not happy about.

Also scallopsrgreat, I messaged you but as you didn't repy, why do you insist on generalising over an entire global gender, again?

To correct your sentence...... So what sg is saying is that a number of men just can't help themselves! Not all!

Also why do you insist on stating something and miss quoting me on something which is not true? I did not choose to use the word "harlot" from my own point of view as a description.

"Even religion blames women and labels some quite innocent women as harlots which is of course ridiculous."

Religion labels them harlots, not me. I included the word harlot as a correct historical/religious term and not a current one or one I would ever use.

Beachcomber "if you place temptation in the way..... it will be answered with action in some men."

The whole sentence reads a lot differently that your selected quote. It is a true fact and I am not blaming women or men for that I am saying it is what nature intended. As is your right, you can spend the rest of your feminist life analysing and trying to rewire nature all you want but it won't work, but that is your right.

Good luck.

Ps. Your version of 'male-dominated phallus-centric consent' does not a rapist make. A selfish man with no respect or conscience does, even by your own analytical definition.

It's funny, sg, but you keep saying you agree with me, but then go on to write long posts which clearly demonstrate that you do not.

i didn't misquote you.

the second half of the sentence is no better than the first. the only reason i left it out is because i am posting from my phone and it is a pain in the arse to copy and paste. the whole sentence was right here on the page for everyone to read.

mmm i feel a couple of threads coming on once i am home and have access to a pc. i really would like to discuss the mackinnon chapter on rape. also i have an idea for a thread about natural.order versus natural state.

Beachcomber: "i didn't misquote you."

I didn't say you did. If you can't even get that right how can you expect to discuss anything with any level of accuracy?

the second half of the sentence is no better than the first.

It's not meant to be, the entire sentence, or if we must break this down to silly levels the context certainly is much better. "and what you are ALL missing is the simple fact that heterosexual men are wired to find women sexually attractive so desire is a natural act. In a civilized society, hopefully, most men use that energy to pursue other avenues but if you place temptation in the way it will be answered with action in some men."

How is that blaming women?

pmsl at the nasty feminints who are nasty because they dare comment on something a man possted on a public forum.

funny though it is, it is a shame that a potentially interesting and searching discussion about feminist analysis has been crapped all over with lots of boring misogyny.

Ignoring the massive derailment, can I just pop in belatedly to say thanks to Beachcomber for what was also a lightbulb moment for me, in regard to the distinction between a feminist perspective: rape is sex a woman doesn't want; vs a patriarchal perspective: rape is sex without consent. I'd really like a discussion of the MacKinnon chapter, if I can find time to read it, so please do start a thread on it.