Author Topic: This sucks...  (Read 3083 times)

Mr. Molecule

  • Porrean (+50)
  • *
  • Posts: 88
    • View Profile
Re: This sucks...
« Reply #30 on: June 21, 2007, 04:05:07 am »
If anyone needs half naked(or is it half clothed?) women

Reframing the great philosophical debates of our times. :wink:

Look, DOA itself isn't the problem. There'll always be fringe applications of any medium (film, novels, etc.) dedicated to sex. Sex sells, after all. And heck, SEX isn't the problem. It's the incredibly juvenile attitude the game industry, in general, takes towards sex that's the problem. In no other medium are women so objectified and are there so few realistic depictions of women. I'm including comics here. Yeah, it's bad.

..for a better worded version of what I mean, see points 4 & 5 of this article.

Kanadyets: Not only is your example tasteless, it's wrong. It's so wrong it hurts. Strippers aren't powerful. They're being exploited both by the customer and their management. They are, in general, desperate women who aren't really in control of their lives. While it's true that accepting and understanding sex and in trn displaying what you've got can certainly be empowering, it's reallysomething you have to do on your own terms. Not those of a sleazy strip club owner.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2007, 04:06:53 am by Mr. Molecule »

Lord J Esq

  • Moon Stone J
  • Hero of Time (+5000)
  • *
  • Posts: 5462
  • ^_^ "Ayla teach at college level!!"
    • View Profile
Re: This sucks...
« Reply #31 on: June 21, 2007, 04:11:40 am »
Feminist thinking is divided on the question of sex employment, Molecule. There are plenty of voices from many perspectives, and the discussion is by no means settled. Accordingly, you're simply wrong to have made the blanket statement that "strippers aren't powerful."

Kanadyets

  • Guardian (+100)
  • *
  • Posts: 107
  • Need you not a swordsman?!
    • View Profile
Re: This sucks...
« Reply #32 on: June 21, 2007, 05:19:54 am »

Wow, thanks for the save, Lord J.

As for the example, Mr. Molecule, I never produced one.  I just posed the question, and you took it where you felt you needed to go.  Further, since you say that these women (and bear in mind that there are also men who take their clothes off for money) "are, in general, desperate women", we can therefore conclude that while you perceive this to be the norm, it is not the case 100% of the time.  That being said, you must therefore, in some degree, acknowledge that there are some people out there who are in complete control and have made the decision to pursue this particular profession with sound mind and strict judgement.  With this in mind, it's not reasonable for you to make sweeping generalizations in order to prove your point.

I'm not saying that there's no one out there being exploited (although I think people will interpret exploitation more loosely than I, whereas I will hold people accountable for their decisions at all times, no matter the circumstances...but that's another issue) but it's not a given.  Further, do whom do you think has greater respect for the hypothetical sex professionals involved?  The one who will defer to another's right to make their own decision, or the one who presumes these people are so weak and subject to circumstance that they would sell their proverbial souls?

Mr. Molecule

  • Porrean (+50)
  • *
  • Posts: 88
    • View Profile
Re: This sucks...
« Reply #33 on: June 21, 2007, 06:07:02 am »
Feminist thinking is divided on the question of sex employment, Molecule. There are plenty of voices from many perspectives, and the discussion is by no means settled. Accordingly, you're simply wrong to have made the blanket statement that "strippers aren't powerful."
Sorry, I didn't realize it was necessary to say, "While there are many contesting opinions on this issue, mine is that--" before I stated my opinion on a contested issue. My bad. But yeah, I guess I did come off a bit strong, sorry about that.

Things that bother me about the idea that sex=power:
1. Historically it hardly ever works. When was the last time that female sexuality resulted in anything but opression for women on any sort of large scale?
2. It's fundamentally sexist, as it implies that men will do anything for sex. Or conversely, that women are sluts who will give up purity for what they want.
3. It's hardly ever indicative of a heathly understanding of sex. In Spider Robinson's (science fiction) book Callahan'sLady, about the one honorably run brothel in New York City, the whole point is that sex is seen as something two adults do for fun, and nothing more. The main character, a young prostitute used to using sex as a tool, (& thus, she thinks, a source of power) has to be re-educated in what sex means before she can really get anywhere in life. Yes, it's fiction, but I think it makes a good point.

Also, strippers provide a service. Do we really think of other service providers, like waiters and taxi drivers, being more powerful than the people they provide the service for? People who have disposable income to spend on luxury services, while the service providers usually barelymade enough to scrape by on?

Okay, the reason I stated my opinion so strongly in my initial response is that to say "sex workers can be powerful," while theoretically correct, ignores the massive, widespread exploitation and abuse of women in sex worker positions. Any women working as a stripper in a bar frequented only by "drooling idiots" is likely to be exploited. Overly sexualised women in video games are definately exploited, or rather feminine sexuality is being exploited, because these women aren't real. I'm not even saying sex employment is by definition is a bad thing. I'm saying that the way it's implemented now, with the workers being construed as dirty harlots and the patrons being construed as drooling idiots, with the idea of a women's power to idiot-ify a man and a man's power to objectify a women maintaining center stage, it's no real way to give power to women. It's no real way to be.

..okay, that was in reply to Lord J. And Kanadyets typed up a whole thing while I was wrestling with this... here goes:

Sorry about the sweepingness of my generalizations. I meant to imply that exploitation was the norm, not that it occured in every instance. And yes, you did posit an example. In debating circles we call that a rhetorical question. The answer isn't given, but it's bloody well implied.

Of course people should be held accountable for their decisions. Here, it's you who seem to be assuming that I beleive sex workers to be "selling their proverbial souls." Never have I said anything to imply that stripping or other forms of sex work are inherently wrong. The only bad decision the sex workerwould be making is staying in a bad situation. And maybe it's the only way for them to get money they know, so it's not so much a decisions. That's where the exploitation and abuse tend to come in.

Burning Zeppelin

  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3137
    • View Profile
    • Delicate Cutters
Re: This sucks...
« Reply #34 on: June 21, 2007, 06:31:38 am »
Sexuality is actually one of the only female powers that has been seen in history. A sexy woman can get whatever she wants.

And many sex workers are powerful. Maybe not in China or India, but in far more developed countries, a stripper can feel proud of herself and enjoy her work.

Kanadyets

  • Guardian (+100)
  • *
  • Posts: 107
  • Need you not a swordsman?!
    • View Profile
Re: This sucks...
« Reply #35 on: June 21, 2007, 06:49:40 am »

I would differentiate between the stripper and the cabbie based on the luxuriousness of the service being provided, if you'll forgive the term.  I suppose this is nebulous as it requires all parties involved (us, of course) do establish a hierarchy of value regarding the services in question.  With that in mind, I do feel confident enough to put forward the suggestion that we can agree that the ability to get from place to place or to eat (and I know there are alternatives, but I'm working with your examples for the sake of argument) are of greater importance than the desire to view an attractive woman in little to no clothing, dancing suggestively.  Additionally, to compare costs, the stripper is a far more extravagant expense.  As such, the stripper commands the situation moreso than the cabbie or the waiter.

I could pursue a different tack as well.  While transportation and food and drink by their nature require an expense, sexual gratification does not.

Lastly, I would agree with you that the whole experience is rather distasteful.  That being said, the strongest statement I can issue in that vein is that simply, it's just not for me.  What other people choose to do in the same circumstances, however, is their business.  Just because I don't want to be involved in it doesn't mean that I have the right to criticize it as a lower form of existance.  This is starting to tie into the other thread we had going about comparative value of human beings.  By my choices, I am making a statement of what I believe to be superior.  Inherent in that statement is the acknowledgement of inferior activites, choices, etc.  Nevertheless, I can act only on my own behalf, and while others might engage in something I would look down upon in my own circumstances, it's not for me to judge the rest as living improperly.

It's an unfortunate part of the reality in which we live.  People will do things we don't like.  For me, it's simply hands off.  I would ask the same of anyone else when it came to my affairs.

Lord J Esq

  • Moon Stone J
  • Hero of Time (+5000)
  • *
  • Posts: 5462
  • ^_^ "Ayla teach at college level!!"
    • View Profile
Re: This sucks...
« Reply #36 on: June 21, 2007, 07:07:00 am »
Feminist thinking is divided on the question of sex employment, Molecule. There are plenty of voices from many perspectives, and the discussion is by no means settled. Accordingly, you're simply wrong to have made the blanket statement that "strippers aren't powerful."
Sorry, I didn't realize it was necessary to say, "While there are many contesting opinions on this issue, mine is that--" before I stated my opinion on a contested issue. My bad. But yeah, I guess I did come off a bit strong, sorry about that.

Things that bother me about the idea that sex=power:
1. Historically it hardly ever works. When was the last time that female sexuality resulted in anything but opression for women on any sort of large scale?
2. It's fundamentally sexist, as it implies that men will do anything for sex. Or conversely, that women are sluts who will give up purity for what they want.
3. It's hardly ever indicative of a heathly understanding of sex. In Spider Robinson's (science fiction) book Callahan'sLady, about the one honorably run brothel in New York City, the whole point is that sex is seen as something two adults do for fun, and nothing more. The main character, a young prostitute used to using sex as a tool, (& thus, she thinks, a source of power) has to be re-educated in what sex means before she can really get anywhere in life. Yes, it's fiction, but I think it makes a good point.

Also, strippers provide a service. Do we really think of other service providers, like waiters and taxi drivers, being more powerful than the people they provide the service for? People who have disposable income to spend on luxury services, while the service providers usually barelymade enough to scrape by on?

Okay, the reason I stated my opinion so strongly in my initial response is that to say "sex workers can be powerful," while theoretically correct, ignores the massive, widespread exploitation and abuse of women in sex worker positions. Any women working as a stripper in a bar frequented only by "drooling idiots" is likely to be exploited. Overly sexualised women in video games are definately exploited, or rather feminine sexuality is being exploited, because these women aren't real. I'm not even saying sex employment is by definition is a bad thing. I'm saying that the way it's implemented now, with the workers being construed as dirty harlots and the patrons being construed as drooling idiots, with the idea of a women's power to idiot-ify a man and a man's power to objectify a women maintaining center stage, it's no real way to give power to women. It's no real way to be.

..okay, that was in reply to Lord J. And Kanadyets typed up a whole thing while I was wrestling with this... here goes:

Sorry about the sweepingness of my generalizations. I meant to imply that exploitation was the norm, not that it occured in every instance. And yes, you did posit an example. In debating circles we call that a rhetorical question. The answer isn't given, but it's bloody well implied.

Of course people should be held accountable for their decisions. Here, it's you who seem to be assuming that I beleive sex workers to be "selling their proverbial souls." Never have I said anything to imply that stripping or other forms of sex work are inherently wrong. The only bad decision the sex workerwould be making is staying in a bad situation. And maybe it's the only way for them to get money they know, so it's not so much a decisions. That's where the exploitation and abuse tend to come in.

Or, to make a long story short, you're pointing out that there's still rampant misogyny in the world. Right you are. It's gruesome. As to women who work in the sex business, the thing that makes their work different today than at most other times in history is that our society has become less criminal. These women are much less likely than in the past to be attacked, and, if they are, they have more recourses than ever before. Notwithstanding the awful plight of women in the sex trade under duress, women who voluntarily work in the adult industries are able to cash in on their sexuality--for which there is always demand. You ask why it is we don't think of other service workers like cabbies as "powerful." The answer is that it depends on how you see it. There is power in being able to hold a steady job--the power of fiscal independence, not to be understated. And for many women who want money--for whatever reasons--this is one recourse available to them. That's the power. We call it powerful explicitly because women up until the twentieth century had been forced into almost complete subservience on the grounds of their sexuality. To use that same sexuality as a means of emancipation is noteworthy.


Sexuality is actually one of the only female powers that has been seen in history. A sexy woman can get whatever she wants.

Good grief, man. Do I really have to sock it to ya at three in the morning? Look...sex is not "one of the only female powers that has been seen in history." Women are very powerful creatures, by any measure. This is a trademark of all human beings. Women's fatal flaw was being relatively weaker and slower, and perhaps less aggressive in general, than men. That's what led to their downfall and subjugation. But their powers have always been there. The fact that women have been able to expand into almost every domain previously reserved by men, for men, in such a small number of years, and have proven themselves just as competent on the whole, is reason enough to send you smarting back to your dark space in the slime under the rocks.

Sexuality was merely the lens through which male-dominated society defined and perceived women. We place altogether too much emphasis on it, for, as men have been allowed to prove for millennia, there is much more to the human condition--and human power--than sex.

Kanadyets

  • Guardian (+100)
  • *
  • Posts: 107
  • Need you not a swordsman?!
    • View Profile
Re: This sucks...
« Reply #37 on: June 21, 2007, 07:12:01 am »

Wow, not bad for 3am.  My hat goes off to you.  It's just past 4 here, and my efforts are severely lacking (see above).