You are viewing IC as Guest

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Charliegrrl: Censoring pro-porn feminism (94)

This post is on the BDSM Activism web board.

2 Apr 07, 5:20 PM
verte
UK(E), 8 yrs

mq1965 wrote:
Bet this won't be approved either

If you have a copy of the comment you posted, please copy it to here! I'm about to change the title of the thread so her supporters can find our responses here...

2 Apr 07, 5:25 PM
katali
5 yrs

verte wrote:

mq1965 wrote:
Bet this won't be approved either

If you have a copy of the comment you posted, please copy it to here! I'm about to change the title of the thread so her supporters can find our responses here...

I posted twice.

kat Says: Your comment is awaiting moderation. April 1st, 2007 at 9:25 pm I always thought feminism was giving women the right to live however they wanted to. Silly me, I thought it meant I could choose to do what I want, whether or not the “Feminists” approve!!! If all feminism has done is change the world's control from “a man must tell me how I am allowed to behave” to “a woman must tell me how I am allowed to behave” what improvement is there? Why should you get to draw the line on what is and is not feminism? Are you better than everyone else? If I want to be beaten, why should you criticise me? And quite frankly, given that its a fairly well known fact that an awful lot of women fantasise about rape I fail to see why you're surprised it gets discussed. “Rape play” is different to rape. Much like a toy gun is different to a real one. I think maybe you should go and listen to that workshop. You might actually learn something about how other women think! Any porn that depicts real assault is already banned under current law, there doesn't need to be a new law for it. The new law would criminalise acts which are acted, not real.

kat Says: Your comment is awaiting moderation. April 1st, 2007 at 11:19 pm where is my comment?

It has been noticed that you are only publishing viewpoints which align to yours. Scared of being challenged? possibly you know you are wrong and dont want to get into a debate you cant win?

"I want what I want when I want it, what is so immature about that?!" - Jackie, That 70's Show

2 Apr 07, 5:39 PM
verte
UK(E), 8 yrs

I have changed the title of the thread so it's the first item that comes up in google when you type 'charliegrrl'. Hopefully her followers will at least be able to see that there are many, many people who do not agree with her brand of 'feminism' and that we have been censored.

Something that bugs me beyond belief are her outright lies about my talk and others' at Feminist Fightback. As far as I and friends at the event were concerned, the only person who left the room sobbing was me!

You can find my talk here:

http://verte.livejournal.com/110310.html

I never mentioned rape play! In fact, I'm pretty damn sure none of us did. The only reason rape porn was mentioned at Fightback was because one of the anti-porn crew brought it up! If anything, the original blurb contained the word 'rape' because the discussion was dragged in that direction last time, and potential attendees do have a right to be warned that it might happen again.

Edited 2 Apr 07, 5:40 PM by verte

2 Apr 07, 6:16 PM
mq1965
UK(DA), 8 yrs

verte wrote:

mq1965 wrote:
Bet this won't be approved either

If you have a copy of the comment you posted, please copy it to here! I'm about to change the title of the thread so her supporters can find our responses here...

It's still visible through the link, but it isn't a comment as such, it is a direct question to Charliegrrl about why she isn't allowing replies that don't agree with her to appear.

2 Apr 07, 6:21 PM
verte
UK(E), 8 yrs

Unfortunately, I think comments on the blog that have not been made visible can only be viewed by the person who's posted them.

mq1965 wrote:

It's still visible through the link, but it isn't a comment as such, it is a direct question to Charliegrrl about why she isn't allowing replies that don't agree with her to appear.

2 Apr 07, 6:27 PM
mq1965
UK(DA), 8 yrs

verte wrote:
Unfortunately, I think comments on the blog that have not been made visible can only be viewed by the person who's posted them.

mq1965 wrote:

It's still visible through the link, but it isn't a comment as such, it is a direct question to Charliegrrl about why she isn't allowing replies that don't agree with her to appear.

I was assuming everyone could follow the link. Oh well, for those who can't see it (may be everyone except me and Charliegrrl!) This is what it said:

What is the point in leaving a reply when you are quite clearly only going to publish the ones that agree with you?

Do you think there is any possibility of moving forward when you won't enter into debate with anyone and consider alternative views? By declining to even acknowledge their existence you avoid having to justify your views in any meaningful way.

I know this won't be published, it's not meant to be. It's a question for you alone, and for your conscience and integrity

2 Apr 07, 6:46 PM
katali
5 yrs

mq1965 wrote:
I was assuming everyone could follow the link.

When I follow the link I just get my unpublished comments

"I want what I want when I want it, what is so immature about that?!" - Jackie, That 70's Show

2 Apr 07, 6:56 PM
Miss_Torment
UK(NE), 5 yrs
£

What is the point in leaving a reply when you are quite clearly only going to publish the ones that agree with you?

Do you think there is any possibility of moving forward when you won't enter into debate with anyone and consider alternative views? By declining to even acknowledge their existence you avoid having to justify your views in any meaningful way.

I know this won't be published, it's not meant to be. It's a question for you alone, and for your conscience and integrity

[/quote]

I think it's unlikely to change her mind, she is so closed regarding her opinions that *nothing is likely to change her mind, as noted by other posters she is quite fanatical in her zeal to create a hue and cry over the issue of rape play.

I do agree also with another poster who stated that there is a sensitivity around the issue of BDSM in the sense that those who aren't a part of it rarely understand it.

Since joining the scene myself I have become far more senstive to the image of S& M in the media, and rarely has it ever been positive - unless it's to flog a car using a dominatrix (still this was tongue in cheek if I remember rightly).

Lady S

EDIT - *used the totally opposite word here originally

Edited 2 Apr 07, 7:00 PM by Miss_Torment

2 Apr 07, 7:00 PM
redcat
9 yrs

verte wrote:

If you have a copy of the comment you posted, please copy it to here! I'm about to change the title of the thread so her supporters can find our responses here...

still says its awaiting moderation...but looks like that wait will be a looooong one so may as well post here too.

redcat wrote:
There is a world outside of your narrow view of feminism… a world that doesn't infantalise women and presume they don't know their own minds.

SOME women fantasise about rape…. its a common enough fantasy to feature in Nancy Fridays books.

REAL rape…. is wrong…it is unconsensual.

rape play…rape fantasies are fine…. one cannot help the fantasies one has ..the thing one can have some real control over is not taking those fantasies into the real world and harming people.

The criminal justice bill is not about criminalising the making of violent porn… it criminalises LOOKING at it. Making extreme porn is already illegal…as is distributing it and publishing. The sites the government are citing are mostly American….all legal and all made with strict legal guidelines and consensual actors/actresses. All adults who know their own minds.

You just can't liken this stuff to child porn as children can never consent to sex.

Two things for you to find….. try and find evidence of a real snuff movie and try and find a definite link between looking at violent porn and going out and committing a violent sexual crime.

hint: neither of them exist.

Showing just how ignorant of the governments plans just makes any arguement you have into an instant non-starter.

Get your facts straight…. broaden your minds and don't keep insisting your view of feminism is the only acceptable one.

….and for the record… i am a masochist and do have rape fantasies…. i also understand the difference between fantasy and reality and consent and non-consent.

Your bigotry doesn't do feminism any favours.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/objectification_in...
"My head is full of pebbles and buttons and beads and bits of coloured glass picked up 'most everywhere." (apologies to) James Joyce

2 Apr 07, 7:20 PM
Rosalee
UK, 6 yrs

Backdooruk wrote:

Syphax wrote:
I don't think she's quite got the point of feminism.

I agree. However I'm not going to bother to post to here blog: It's clear from the entry that she isn't prepared to read or listen to opposing points of views. It's a symptom of fanaticism, not particularly feminist fanaticism but any political fanaticism: People get to worked up about their idealism to see that what they are doing is harming real people, not the idealized fantasy people they believe they are talking for.

- Chris

I'm afraid this is more or less how I feel about her too. I think it might make more sense to write posts for a different blog - maybe Theda's 'I'm a feminist and...'? There they stand far more chance of actually appearing and maybe convincing some of those feminists who don't understand us but are willing to listen.