Laurelin in the Rain

April 25, 2006

Feminists v. fundies

Filed under: Feminism, Political/ Personal, Sexuality, Violence — Laurelin @ 11:33 am

[10/05/06 Edit: The transcript of the speech I am referring to is now available at Witchy-Woo's place]

Welcome to the post I promised about the difference between feminist and religious fundamentalist arguments against pornstitution!

At the Dworkin conference, a speaker from Feminists Against Censorship suggested that radical feminist arguments against pornography 'play into the hands' of religious fundamentalists. The suggestion seems to be that feminists should not attack pornography because religious nutcases attack pornography. We should ignore the harm pornography does to women because it is trivial compared to looking like you agree with the right. Hmmm.

What exactly is meant by 'playing into the hands' of religious fundamentalists? Are they all going to suddenly jump up and down in glee yelling 'Yay! Feminists who oppose our oppression of women and promote women's independence from male authority and religious domination hate pornography too! Well gosh, they must be on our side really. Take that, secular leftists!'? Are we suddenly going to be overtaken by the desire to submit to restrictive and misogynistic doctrine of fundamentalists? I rather doubt it, given that feminists vehemenously oppose what religious fundamentalists stand for: patriarchy.

If I was feeling malicious (and I am), I would suggest that this 'playing into the hands' crap orginates as the cry of those leftist men who regard the consumption of porn as their natural right, and the women's liberation movement as a mere subset of leftist politics. To them let me just say, women are dying because of pornography and prostitution. Women are raped and abused in the practice of pornography and prostitution. You want us on your side? Then fight pornstitution. Help us. Fight the degradation and abuse of women, examine your own assumptions and privileges, get the rapists off those women's bodies. We can't wait for your revolution. And we won't let you off the hook because your pride is damaged by the ridiculous fear that the right wing are laughing at you. Deal with it.

Okay, I went off on a bit of a tangent there.

I also want to point out that the opposition of feminists, and the opposition of religious fundamentalists to pornography and prostitution could not be more different. Radical feminists, indeed, argue that pornography owes its existence to the religious view of women's bodies, and therefore sexual activity as dirty and wrong. Pornography gets its thrill from degrading women, and therefore skips along happily with the oppressive mores of religious fundamentalism. If sexual activity was seen as healthy and normal, those who today consume pornography would have no need for it.

Radical feminists further speak of how the women in the pornstitution industry end up there, point out the lack of real choices, how sexual abuse and poverty feature in the lives of the majority of women in the industry. I have yet to see religious fundamentalists discuss these issues, and I will happy to be pointed to somewhere where they do.

Religious fundamentalists oppose pornography because they assert that sex (which they define solely as penis-in-vagina intercourse) is dirty and improper unless it takes place in a certain context. That context is of course marriage under male domination, in which the wife is the sexual property of her husband; her adultery will likely be treated with much more severe punishment than that of her husband. They oppose pornography because they believe it literally does depict the 'whore'- who is the polar opposite to the devoted and chaste wife and mother. They oppose pornography because, like pornstitution's defenders and popular culture as a whole, they confuse pornography with sex.

Radical feminists oppose pornography because of the damage that it does to the women involved in it, and women in the society as a whole in which pornography is normalised. They recognise that women will not be free until there is no rape, no pornography, no defining a woman purely by her sexual function, no misogyny, no objectifying of women, no poverty. They recognise the damage pornography does to the attitudes of men towards women and of women towards women, expressed in contempt for rape survivors, disregard of the unrelenting violence women face everyday and the assumption that the male and female sexualities as depicted in pornographic media are true representations, and not social constructs linked to a hierarchical society in which men rule over women.

Radical feminists cannot give up their opposition to pornstitution because it upsets the left. Any understanding of women's oppression in the world requires an understanding of the oppression of women in one's own culture. We will not help our sisters under the rule of religious fundamentalists by ignoring misogyny in our own culture, nor by acting as if our culture is something to be envied. We will help them by listening to what they have to say, and aiding them in their struggles.

We must not abandon any group of women, as the moment we do, feminism means nothing.

18 Comments »

  1. Excellent post! You’ve hit on a variety of topics, all of them relevent. The rallying cry of, “Don’t agree with the Christian Right on anything at all” is an old tactic that is used to shut feminists up. The fact of the matter is that while fundies and radical may agree on the issue of pornography their reasoning is diametrically opposed. Clamoring on about how you can’t agree with the fundies because to do so would somehow play into their hands is ridiculous as well as being a gigantic red herring throw out for the specific purpose of shutting up anti-pornstitution stances.

    Comment by bitingbeaver — April 25, 2006 @ 12:26 pm

  2. right on. dont know if youve seen alyxs new post which you inspired her to write, on madsheilamusings
    x

    Comment by v — April 25, 2006 @ 12:45 pm

  3. Excellent post – so many left-wing women feel as if they can’t speak out against porn because they don’t want to be associated with the christian right. We can’t let the fundies hijack the argument.

    Comment by Lucy — April 25, 2006 @ 2:41 pm

  4. What a wonderful post! I think your posts need to be collected and published in book form.

    You (once again) got right to the heart of it. Leftists afraid of seeming like the religious right and feminists afraid of seeming uptight are all beside the point. Look at the consequences, look at the damage done to women, and get over those other things. They’re superficial.

    Comment by spotted elephant — April 25, 2006 @ 6:18 pm

  5. Hey Laurelin. The most disappointing thing for me is that some of this mud slinging is done by women who call themselves feminists (FAC speaker in question made claims of the anti-porn movement being allied with the religious right). What exactly does a woman have to call herself these days, that does actually mean: ‘fighting for the liberation of women from oppression?’

    B (separatist-political-lesbian-radical feminist).

    Comment by feministfirst — April 25, 2006 @ 6:48 pm

  6. Ooooooh I soooo love you! You make it so obvious!

    Left wing?….right wing?….what is soooooo obvious is that it’s patriarchy that’s wrong. However whoever feels about female sexuality – aren’t they all men who presume to define us?

    Rock on, sister.

    Comment by witchy-woo — April 25, 2006 @ 11:50 pm

  7. You’re right of course! Feminism is the opposite of religion – they aim to achieve totally different things altogether.

    I was bamboozled from the start by the FAC representative’s comment. The association had never crossed my mind, and if someone had said that to me I may have laughed out loud at their nonsense :o )

    It is just mudslinging.

    Comment by tp — April 26, 2006 @ 6:25 pm

  8. I don’t think I’ve told you today that I love you. But I do. You kick so much ass. Great post.

    Comment by Burrow — April 27, 2006 @ 4:40 am

  9. “Radical feminists cannot give up their opposition to pornstitution because it upsets the left.”

    How true. Ever notice how so many “leftists” may talk a good game, but their philosophy still boils down to, “if you don’t think like me, you’re wrong.” I suppose I’m much more left than right, but many leftists irriate the pants off me.

    Do you know what I love about your blog, L? You go a week or so without posting, then come out with great posts like this one! I’m always happy when I see you’ve put a put a post up :)

    Comment by Kaka Mak — April 27, 2006 @ 9:10 am

  10. “I was bamboozled from the start by the FAC representative’s comment.”

    Me too. I thought it was just a piece of anti-radical feminist propaganda. As if she’d been reading too many anti-feminist trolls on the internet and had decided to repeat their rubbishy arguments in an academic setting. The problem being that in academia people are too polite to tell you you are being an idiot. Although she certainly tried to take offense.

    Comment by delphyne — April 27, 2006 @ 3:37 pm

  11. Not to be pushy, but Delphyne? I’ve been wishing you had a blog.

    Comment by spotted elephant — April 27, 2006 @ 5:21 pm

  12. If you have ever looked at the FAC website, it’s full of errors of logic; foolish, simple ones like, “Many people like pornography”. As if the number of people that LIKE something give it credibility – or worse- an ethical foundation.

    Comment by Txfeminist — April 28, 2006 @ 2:15 am

  13. Hell, we’re first up against the wall come the fundie revolution.

    Funny that Feminists Against Censorship show up whenever porn gets discussed, whether or not there’s anything said about banning it. Funny that on their website, all their publications are pro-porn; didn’t see one that was actually about censorship beyond porn. Funny how we radical feminists all of a sudden got the power to CENSOR things.

    I shall wave my magic CENSOR wand – I hereby CENSOR sexual assault… *bing* The world is a better place now, can you feel it?

    Comment by Occasional Expositor — April 28, 2006 @ 5:19 am

  14. Yay, another great post. I agree, Fundies tend to subscribe to the ‘whore’ ‘virginal’ stereotype. Have you ever noticed how there are no such words for men?? Perhaps it is taken for granted by the right that men have no “control” over their urges…whilst women are seen as the “temptation” for men. It makes my blood boil!! In many ways it could be seen as another justification for rape and violence against women…the men were “tempted” and so on!!! I gave up on religion long ago and I’m glad I did (I found it boring anyway since I can’t hear what’s going on) :)

    Comment by Lizzie — April 28, 2006 @ 11:56 am

  15. Great post! I’ve trying to figure out my own reasons lately for being against porn, and your argument is very good. Thank you for giving me fuel for my fire :)

    Comment by Maggie — April 28, 2006 @ 8:08 pm

  16. [...] mai citeam ceva despre problema asemanarii pozitiei feminismului anti-porn cu una fundamentalist religioasa de dreapta… (”What exactly is meant by ‘playing into the hands’ of religious fundamentalists? Are they all going to suddenly jump up and down in glee yelling ‘Yay! Feminists who oppose our oppression of women and promote women’s independence from male authority and religious domination hate pornography too! Well gosh, they must be on our side really. Take that, secular leftists!’? Are we suddenly going to be overtaken by the desire to submit to restrictive and misogynistic doctrine of fundamentalists? I rather doubt it, given that feminists vehemenously oppose what religious fundamentalists stand for: patriarchy.”). [...]

    Pingback by ladyfest romania » are women human? — May 7, 2006 @ 10:19 am

  17. [...] Laurelin in the rain [...]

    Pingback by sonitus.org » Blog Archive » Feminists v. fundies — May 9, 2006 @ 8:34 am

  18. [...] pro prostitution speeches- I personally side with the radical feminist stance on this issue as expressed by Finn Mackay here. Here is my take on pornography and freedom of expression. Differing opinions on prostitution are discussed by the socialist feminists Volsunga (here and here) and Alecto. [...]

    Pingback by Laurelin in the Rain » Ask Laurelin: searches that led them to me — June 13, 2006 @ 11:04 am


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Blog at WordPress.com.