Women’s Space » Blog Archive » What Exploitation?

Feed on: Posts; Comments

« Request for Support for (the Amazing) Julia Penelope

Battering Victim, Forced Into Prostitution by Batterer, Faces Death by Stoning in Iran, Appeals Exhausted, Please Help »

What Exploitation?

Jul 28th, 2008 by admin

Nine Deuce Lays Down the Smake, h/t to Witchy.

Spread the word! These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.

Posted in Feminism

63 Responses to “What Exploitation?”

on 28 Jul 2008 at 3:21 pm1 Satsuma

If men could only see how they look to women! Great little cartoon to illustrate the point. Pro-porn feminists take note!
on 28 Jul 2008 at 10:19 pm2 admin

The men in this cartoon are of all races — they are white and they are of color. This is a dark room, as strip clubs are always dark. The lights are on the pole dancer, the men are in the dark. Look at the men’s features. Most are white, some are of color, reflecting what goes on in strip clubs every day and every night.

In the front row, three of the men, including big toothy grin, are clearly white. One is black mnaybe. In the second row, three are white, and two are of color (possibly). Behind the first two rows, the men are in the dark. Their race cannot be determined.

Stop the lies. You are not fooling anyone, least of all me.

Heart
on 28 Jul 2008 at 10:52 pm3 admin

The men in the cartoon are not men of color only. They are white men and men of color both.   Men of color patronize strip bars just like white men do.   Strippers are also white and of color.

The cartoon is not racist.

All men have sex privilege over all women, of whatever race. Men of color objectify  both women of color and white women, just as white men do. Men of color patronize prostitutes, use pornography, just as white men do, and the women prostituted are women of color and white women.

That is what is true.

No more foolishness or stupidity from the two of you. Don’t comment here anymore, you are not here in good faith. I’ve encountered your type before many times, one too many times in fact — you are sexist, misogynist liberals who, when push comes to shove, do not give one good goddamn for women. You will sell your sisters out in a heartbeat.

ENOUGH.
on 28 Jul 2008 at 10:58 pm4 admin

Correction. I think one of the two of you is male, all the more reason for you to stay the hell away from here.
on 28 Jul 2008 at 11:08 pm5 admin

Yes, I remember you. I remember when you went sideways, too. It’s hard to stand for women, first, only and last. You will get attacked for it, lied about, mistreated, harassed, stalked. Your blogs and websites will be “raeped” and will end up destroyed. You will be hounded off of the internet and will have to go into hiding, like bb. You will have to fight the lies every moment of your life. You will go down and die fighting the lies and after you are dead, the lies will continue ad infinitum, ad nauseum. You will be called a racist (when you aren’t), a transphobe (when you aren’t), and whatever other thing someone might make up about you. It’s all part of the deal.

I believe that as is often true, your intentions are good, I don’t fault you for believing what you believe or for being where you are right now, we’re all on our own path, our own journey. But if what you see when you look at that cartoon is “racism” — when clearly, most of the men in the cartoon are white men sitting in the dark (and jacking off) — and not the objectification and prostituting of a woman, well, it’s not women you’re most concerned about. I think what you’re most concerned about is (1) not being thought of as a racist; (2) throwing your hat in with those who have lied their asses off in the attempt to paint radfems as “racists.” You know what? It’s a lie. You can believe it if you want to in, you can (attempt to) save your own ass by joining with the liars, but I will have nothing to do with that.

And none of it fools me, you can bet on it. None of it.

Heart
on 28 Jul 2008 at 11:18 pm6 admin

Another thing. It would never work for a woman of color to be cast as the woman in this cartoon is cast. Never. It’s far and away white women who are, as Twisty says, the ironic empowerfulled hotties. Says them.

Think about it.
on 28 Jul 2008 at 11:25 pm7 Nine Deuce

Amen. I had to take the fucking thing down to keep people from derailing my thread, but I agree with you on this.
on 28 Jul 2008 at 11:56 pm8 admin

Hey, Nine Deuce. Here’s the other thing: if stripping is so empowerful, then why would there be an issue about the way the men in the cartoon are depicted? Or about who the men are? They’re just men, availing themselves of the ironic empowerfulled hotties, you know, she’s taking it to the bank, they’re getting what they paid for, they’re being good consumers in a capitalist society, shouldn’t it be all good, for people who think stripping is empowerfulling?

Anyway, go you. A standing O for your courage.

Heart
on 29 Jul 2008 at 12:11 am9 admin

One more time for emphasis. ALL men — all, regardless of race, all — have sex privilege over all women, of whatever race. The end. If you don’t get that, then you have yet to deeply consider what happens to women in this world. And if you don’t get that, don’t comment again here. If I want to hear male apologist stuff I can go anywhere. My blog is about the oppression of the people of women, of all races, who are oppressed by men, of all races. My whiteness has not protected me from men of any racial group so far as misogyny and sexism go. You know that, you know my story. And you know what, that you are ignoring it tells me everything I ever need to know about you at the moment. Go away. I don’t want to hear from you or anyone like you ever again.

Heart
on 29 Jul 2008 at 12:13 am10 Sis

I kill myself laughing at BelleDame et al’s frantic desperation. No logic can throw the truth, but still they go their usual pathetic route.

Losing hard? Throw the racism hat in the ring. It’ so convenient, and soooo disturbing.

But at their friend AmPimp’s?

Not_so_much.
on 29 Jul 2008 at 1:56 am11 panoptical

Um… has anyone looked at their hair? They all have white people hair. I mean, seriously. Except for the bald guy, they’ve all got straight, light-colored hair.

I hope I don’t sound racist, but - black people don’t have straight hair. Have the people objecting to this cartoon ever actually seen a black person?
on 29 Jul 2008 at 4:20 am12 Mary Sunshine

V-e-r-r-r-y interesting.

Thanks, Heart.

Go you.
on 29 Jul 2008 at 7:57 am13 anuna

To me, only two of the men looked as if they were probably of color, and one maybe. I just assumed the rest of them were white, and the idea that they were all supposed to be non-white would never have occurred to me. I think if a bunch of different people looked at this cartoon, you’d get a wide variety of different estimates on the racial proportions of the audience. Maybe that shows that race is partly in the eye of the beholder.

Maybe the deleted commenters’ real problem is that the men are portrayed in a very unattractive way. This makes them look, to the racist viewer, less “white.” Because the white man is defined as the epitome of perfection, especially the white northern European man. They are idealized with very pale smooth skin, straight noses, clear (blue) eyes, symmetrical proportions, and controlled, upright, athletic carriage. Whereas men of color are defined as all that is unattractive, so that every negative quality can be projected onto them. Thus, any time a man looks bulbous, hairy, sneaky, crude, greasy, sloppy, slouching, misproportioned and out of control, he has, in the eyes of the racist, been pushed down the scale toward something “less white.” It’s all part of the continuum of racism, isn’t it? So perhaps the real problem is the racist assumptions of those who perceived racism in negative commentary about pornophiliac men. Otherwise they wouldn’t have assumed that just because the men are unattractive, they must not be white.
on 29 Jul 2008 at 8:11 am14 JENNIFER DREW

Thanks Heart for exposing this tissue of lies. Once again the ‘race card’ has been selectively used to promote men’s interests/men’s power and centrally men’s presumed right of sexual entitlement and sexual access to all women, irrespective of colour, ethnicity or race.

Will repeat what you said Heart ‘All men irrespective of race, ethnicity or colour have sex privilege over women irrespective of women’s race, ethnicity or colour.’ This is why male domination and male power is so hard to challenge, let alone change.
on 29 Jul 2008 at 10:03 am15 admin

Anuna: It’s all part of the continuum of racism, isn’t it? So perhaps the real problem is the racist assumptions of those who perceived racism in negative commentary about pornophiliac men. Otherwise they wouldn’t have assumed that just because the men are unattractive, they must not be white.

Nail hammer bang. Wow, Anuna. I swear, the smartest women on the internet are right here on my blog. Thanks for this. The racists, in fact, are those who are equating being unattractive, rude, buffoonish, sexist, misogynist, porn-addicted, hanging-out-at-the-strip-club with being not-white. The nonracist see what is actually there: white men being unattractive, rude, buffoonish, sexist, misogynist, porn-addicted and hanging out at the strip club.

I think Satsuma is right too: this is how men often look to women. It’s not at all a pretty picture, no knights on shining armor, not good guys, not progressive, not caring, not compassionate, not egalitarian. Opportunistic. More than happy to agree that stripping is empowering, so long as it ensures an endless supply of women’s bodies available for their use and abuse. Why do they care what women say about it, hell yeah, call it “empowering,” call it “liberating,” call it “feminist,” call it whatever you want.

Jennifer, amazing the resistance to this very basic, Feminism 86, Bonehead Feminism truth: men have sex privilege over women. As though this is some revelation. Yes, there are many other kinds of privilege, there are matrices of oppression, there are interesections, there are many things to consider. That does not change the fact that men have sex privilege compared with women. Period.
on 29 Jul 2008 at 10:12 am16 admin

Anuna: Thus, any time a man looks bulbous, hairy, sneaky, crude, greasy, sloppy, slouching, misproportioned and out of control, he has, in the eyes of the racist, been pushed down the scale toward something “less white.” It’s all part of the continuum of racism, isn’t it? So perhaps the real problem is the racist assumptions of those who perceived racism in negative commentary about pornophiliac men. Otherwise they wouldn’t have assumed that just because the men are unattractive, they must not be white.

Again, this is SO GOOD. Dang.
on 29 Jul 2008 at 10:42 am17 Sis

Excellent point. Indeed. The men there have white guy hair. Right Heart, this isn’t a photograph, it’s visual language. An artist will use various visual cues to get her point across.
We can’t all be artists, but we can learn to understand the language. Don’t they have art theory courses in those pomo colleges?
on 29 Jul 2008 at 10:45 am18 admin

Except for the probably-bald guy, possibly the guy next to him, and maybe one other guy, the hair is definitely white guy hair, in many cases exaggeratedly white guy hair.

How interesting this whole thing is in a really tiresome sort of way.
on 29 Jul 2008 at 11:29 am19 Rebecca

I think this cartoon is alright.
The pro-porners are so desperate to defend men’s rights to exploit women and girls. The racist card is used to silence, and avoid the fact that men from all backgrounds think it is ok to view women and girls as f-k objects.
When I worked in a club, the men that that choose to view me as a sex objects came from many countries and backgrounds.
But they all treated me and the other girls working there the same. We were nothing real-life porn to them all.
When I look at those men in the cartoon, I remember the staring of those men.
on 29 Jul 2008 at 11:32 am20 Gayle

I don’t read the pervy dudes blogs so I don’t know if they talk about it or not, but have any of them ever come out against racist porn?
on 29 Jul 2008 at 12:15 pm21 Jeyoani

When I first saw this cartoon my first thought (as a black/mixed woman) was also “What is this? The men are all black ! ”

A *millisecond* later I saw “no, there are two black guys. They’re just all in the dark. You have to look and take longer than one millisecond to “see” a picture. Which is a good allegory for this entire subject.

I think it’s a great comic. And accurate, except I sort of don’t like the way the dancer is drawn - it’s not just what she is saying- she’s drawn a little mean imo - sort of like “ha ha what an idiot the beautiful blonde is….” >:(

She looks like an annoying superhero. The cartoon doesn’t play to her humanity. I think that in strip clubs it is the men, not the women, who tend to look more like caricatures.

But back to really *seeing* this cartoon, and the game of “how many black men can you see in this picture? (heeheehee :D)

I think part of this is the whole craziness in our society where the presence of two blacks/browns=20 whites and even somehow LESSENS the number of whites present. Two families of color will make an entire (white) neighborhood suddenly “diverse”. But two white families in a black/brown neighborhood generally makes the white familes so -called “white trash”, it doesn’t make the neighborhood “diverse”. There are two black guys in the picture, so, shoot! It’s a whole *ROOM* full of black guys! Just black guys, they’re *all * black guys! Every other race has disappeared! LOl
It’s funny

The other thing:

I think it is only misogyny which would *keep* people seeing more black guys in a cartoon which only has two black guys. It’s just an excuse to not face up to or at least honestly engage the assertions in the cartoon. I was initially defensive because I saw phantom black men in the room. But it took me just less than a second to realize I was seeing something that wasn’t there. But perhaps something we are conditioned to see like women above are talking about. White is *white*/bright/pretty, and black is dingy and ick so they must all be black men. It is not feminists or women at any rate who portray black men in the media any which way, it’s racist patriarchy (the mass media-makers) that has given us the endless representations of black men as unfailingly beastial regarding women and sex. Radfems don’t and wouldn’t do that. Womankind would have created a vastly different media body than the one we presently have and glean from that’s for frikkin sure! White women, black women, brown women, Jewish/Christian/Muslim/Buddhist/Animist–I don’t care, any assortment of any women!–No matter the type women I believe women would have absolutely created a less racist and definitely less misogynist, of course, media than the one we have - and black men wouldn’t have been given the menacing, childish and sex-crazed default look they have been given (in the patriarchal media).

Now me with my pre-conditioned by racist patriarchy eyes saw something not there in that cartoon but saw it because of something I am used to seeing and have been seeing all my life.
on 29 Jul 2008 at 12:25 pm22 admin

Omg, Jeyoani. Like I say, my commenters are the most brilliant women on the internet. You are.

What an amazing comment. Just, the whole thing, so true!
on 29 Jul 2008 at 12:38 pm23 admin

Gayle, I sure avoid the pervy dudes, but my experience is, the pro-porn side doesn’t like to talk about racism in porn. They avoid the discussion like the plague. The one time I remember that the pervy dudes were ALL OVER racism was — get this — when there was a flap some years back because some white porn stars would not do interracial porn. Some of the pervy dudes then organized, or attempted to organize, a boycott, if I’m recalling correctly. They were all about laying down the smake on those bithes then, the intellectual giants.

But so far as just your usual racist, misogynist porn, links to which are spammed by the hundreds daily by my blog to fester in my spam queue, the likes of which appears over at Amptoons? The pervy dudes don’t seem to want to go there. Freedom of speech and First Amendment rights and all, you know, some people are going to have to make some sacrifices, just not us white guys.
on 29 Jul 2008 at 2:26 pm24 Satsuma

Wow, I didn’t even think about this stuff when I first saw that cartoon. The men with big grinning teeth showing are so obviously a characature of white businessmen who frequent these clubs. Read Carly Fiorina’s autobiography on her early years in business, and the strip club she was dragged to.

I don’t see race as an issue with pornography and pornification of women. I see it as hate and degrading literature aimed at sleazing men, stealing their money, and waging a war on women. This stuff is a rape training manual, and porn was used in Boznia to rev up the troops there so that they could commit over 100,000 rapes on women! They caught the creep who orchestrated these attrocities.

Read Tami’s essay on rap and sexism, and see how a black woman points out that the black civil rights establishment doesn’t give a damn about women, and you’ll see this as a true issue that unites the outrage of all women worldwide.

Men will think of anything to justify the content of this stuff, or will make false anti-racist comments. In the darkened room, the majority of the leering creey men are white. Being trained to assume whiteness and to be over observant of blackness (racist training that is hard to get out of your system), the men in no way, for the majority front row guys, looked black! The contrast in light and dark is an homage to Caravaggio and chirascuro… the men in darkness literally a metaphor for men cast into darkness and evil, and the spotlight a highlight on the objectified woman.

If there is a 10th circle of hell, the pornographers will be in it. We need a radical feminist Dante for our times here!

Wow, eye opening commentary! Just when you think you’ve read it all!!! What will those creepy porn loving men come up with next?
on 29 Jul 2008 at 2:48 pm25 JENNIFER DREW

Jeyonani you are so right. The nazis in Germany claimed that only one race was superior and it was the Aryan race. In order to belong to a superior race, individuals’ biological appearances had to be white with blond hair and blues. Not only that their facial appearance had to conform to a certain definition.

So it is with the men depicted in this cartoon, because they are not all stereotypically physically attractive but instead are blatantly displaying their sexual voraciousness the assumption is made they cannot be white males.

Likewise Anuna you have got it in one. Here in the UK our media indulges itself in racist stereotypes because whenever an accused rapist is not white Anglo-Saxon but instead from an East European country, immediately the media portrays him as a deviant monster. But, if an accused male rapist is white and English he is depicted as an innocent victim who has been falsely accused.   May be this is not making sense. - This cartoon is adroitly showing how men do behave and react when they are in such clubs and know their fellow males are all experiencing similar feelings. Not a pretty sight - seeing the reality of male contempt and dehumanisation of women. Which is why such males depicted cannot possibly be ‘white’ since only non-white males according to racist ideology have such feelings. White males are supposedly superior.

So claiming this cartoon is ‘racist’ is a deliberate attempt to deflect attention away from the systematic dehumanisation of women of all groups, just so that men can continue to believe it is their innate right and privilege to continue sexually exploiting and abusing women of all groups.   The belief that men as a group are entitled to sexually degrade and sexually exploit women as a group is so embedded it has become invisible.   which is why there are howls of ‘racism, racism’ whenever someone declares or shows the reality of male sexual privilege over women.
on 29 Jul 2008 at 4:58 pm26 Jeyoani

Thanks Hearrt! Yes it’s an interesting thing b/c otoh there are those who are used to bad depictions of whatever they themseves are-namely:all women and all non-whites.   (And then there is the whole white continuum like you talk about Jennifer Drew which breaks it down even more incrementally with the poorer whites and less Nordic-looking and whites from less powerful nations in general being thrown under the bus as becomes necessary.)

But what is tricky is then there are exploiters of this true vulnerability womakind and non-whites feel (anti-woman liberals I speak of here, mostly). So once again racist patriarchy is dividing and conquering masquerading as enlightened over the “racism” in the cartoon (playing on black fears) and by doing this, wholly dismissing all of womankind, as usual, in the process.

Of course non-whites and womankind get cast as over-sensitive or as annoying whiners–but it’s never without reason that womankind and non-whites are over-sensitive!   Usually we are all rather undersensitive I’d say.  It’s too internalized for most to notice.

It’s interesting because many women here (not sure of the races of everyone) saw the men in the caertoon for what they were –white, mostly. Otoh that is definitely great. But I bet alot of blacks like me would see black, at least for the first second. And maybe Hispanics woudl see Hispanics?     Depressing!  Shows how media gets to who they need to get to.  Of course in an imperialistic world the message “black is bad” is most important to impart to *black people* before any other group. Just as: “women are lesser/helpless/goodforthesextrade” is most important to impart to women.
This cartoonist’s message is then held a bit hostage by a psychological backdrop blacks cast onto due to the conditioning of patriarchal media.  (*The cartoonist* has nothing to do with *that* though!)

Patriarchal media has its target audience with everything.  To blacks:  ” I am ugly this I know for patriarchy told me so ….” and to white men: “ I am honorable this I know for patriarchy told me so…”
on 29 Jul 2008 at 6:03 pm27 Satsuma

Jeyoani says:
“Of course non-whites and womankind get cast as over-sensitive or as annoying whiners–but it’s never without reason that womankind and non-whites are over-sensitive! Usually we are all rather undersensitive I’d say. It’s too internalized for most to notice.”

What struck me most about this almost incidental comment was this part: “Usually we are all rather undersensitive I’d say. It’s too internalized for most to notice.”

Undersensitive indeed. I believe when women are undersensitive, they actually don’t see the hated of women on a conscious level, they feel it unconsciously. This is the source of my uneasy feelings when I meet some men. Instantly, my instinct is to stay away.

On further exploration of these feelings, I’d do some research–the men might have had sexual harassment complaints brought against them at other companies, or they were heavy porn and prostitution consumers. One man mentioned that he had been to Cuba often. Much teasing by the other men. I didn’t get that what he was alluding to was taking gay sex prostitution tours several times a year. He grew very uncomfortable when I started asking pointed questions about the culture of Cuba. All the men had attempted to hide his true travel reasons from me, and when I figured out why the discussion seemed off and weird, it was already a day later! Not sensitive enough Jeyoani!

So it’s hard for women to be in tune with what this patriarchy is up to, because as fish, we only know water. This cartoon reveals many things to the viewer. I wonder what some of my guy friends would say about it, since feminist cartoons are so rare. Cartoons that depict the evil of patriarchal men are also visually rare, so this was a great insight.

I love discussing cartoons sometimes, and this one really carried the day, so that we could all see it anew.

We can become more sensitive to our surroundings, and more aware of the offenses against women AS THEY ARE happening. In the moment, we can take action, and know that we are dealing with blatant sexism. Feminists have to confront some really awful stuff to present the truth. When Andrea Dworkin talked about the effect that looking at mysogynistic porn images had on her, or listening to the stories of sexually exploited women– going into a dark world to reveal the truth behind the candied images that patriarchy cranks out– prostitute with a heart of gold, women throwing multi-million dollars jewels in the ocean, the glamour of strip clubs, and the glamour of male defined abusive sex practices.

It’s all stuff a lot of women tune out. They tune out and accept the pawing of sexist men at a company party, hating being there, but somehow trapped and unable to flee. Even something as basic as escaping a really blabby boring man can be tough. Keeping these awful men and their stupid counter arguments off this site is a big help to feminist discourse. We really have no reason to talk to men at all about this, but we do need as much time as women to talk to each other without the gaze of men, or their incessent interrupting of our conversations. Men just can’t shut up and listen, so the Internet makes it possible to silence them!

It is all degrees of awareness, and being sensitive and learning from it, growing and becoming very aware is the noble job of every feminist!
on 29 Jul 2008 at 7:42 pm28 L.M.

I’m an Asian-American woman, and all of the men look white to me. They don’t look like typical cartoon portrayals of nonwhite men, no exaggerated slanty eyes, dark curly hair and facial hair, stereotypical “Black” hair or stereotypically wide or smallish or convex noses. I guess some of them might be Latino, but it’s just as likely for them to be white.

If anything, I’d say there’s more classism than racism involved in the portrayal of the men (although that is arguable and may be beyond the scope of the cartoon, which is to criticize men for exploiting women and calling it empowerment). Most of them are in laborer/trucker type outfits. But we know that rich men in business suits like David Vitter and cool and hip young men like Joe Francis also exploit women.
on 29 Jul 2008 at 10:59 pm29 admin

So true, LM, re class. I think of Elliot Spitzer who paid how many thousands and thousands of dollars on prostituted women, or the DESPICABLE ex-husband, thank god he’s history, of Christie Brinkley. Brinkley’s ex was laying down $3K per month for internet porn (while also paying an 18-year-old girlfriend, he’s 49, $300,000 as some sort of payoff, the guy’s completely out of control). Anyway, this guy plunks down thousands (of Christie Brinkley’s money and I really need to blog about this, in particular, leftists’ reaction; they sympathized with the ex, who walked off with 2.1 million of Brinkley’s money, after *she adopted his son from a former relationship and sought and was given custody,” as though $3K monthly for internet porn was nothing). Spitzer called the exclusive “escort service” and paid thousands and thousands of bucks. Poor men buy lap dances. On the other hand, it’s probably true that professionals would hesitate to go to strip bars, especially in business clothes. Still, that’s a good insight re class issues.

The contrast in light and dark is an homage to Caravaggio and chirascuro… the men in darkness literally a metaphor for men cast into darkness and evil, and the spotlight a highlight on the objectified woman.

Thanks for this, Satsuma, I’m so on it. :)

Even something as basic as escaping a really blabby boring man can be tough. Keeping these awful men and their stupid counter arguments off this site is a big help to feminist discourse. We really have no reason to talk to men at all about this, but we do need as much time as women to talk to each other without the gaze of men, or their incessent interrupting of our conversations. Men just can’t shut up and listen, so the Internet makes it possible to silence them!

Yes, it does, something I love love love about the internet. I can protect this space and we can have these really amazing discussions we want and need to have and nobody is going to stop us or intimidate us or cause us to go silent.

LM, I have spent a lot of time scrutinizing all the faces in the cartoon, and in the end, I agree with you, they seem like white guys, possibly a couple black or Latino guys, maybe. I don’t see any possibly Asian guys.

I want to say because I think it’s important that I agree with Jeyoani that the depiction of the woman is mean-spirited. It’s the kind of mean-spiritedness that is approved by pretty much everyone, right wingers, left wingers, progressives, some versions of feminists. It’s always good times to trash beautiful blonde women, to mock and humiliate them (not just blondes, but blondes especially, as I say, I need to blog about the Christie Brinkley situation). It’s always good times to depict them as stupid bimbos.

I am very sure prostituted women, strippers, work hard to be okay with what they do, and I can’t fault them for that, we all do that. The people I most fault are men who prostitute women or endorse the prostitution of women and feminists like Susie Bright. I’m not even up to saying more than that, but I know the women here know what I’m saying.

xo

Heart
on 29 Jul 2008 at 11:00 pm30 admin

What I think the cartoonist really captured here is the way men bond over exploiting the bodies of women. She really got that right.

Heart
on 29 Jul 2008 at 11:06 pm31 admin

P.S. And I agree with you, Satsuma, Tami rocks!
on 30 Jul 2008 at 1:32 am32 Rebecca

Hello all, I sorry to saying more about this cartoon, it seemed of triggered many images of my past of “performing” for men. I was mostly a prostituted girl and woman, but I experienced for so long that look the men have in the cartoon.
I think it so important to know that men who choose to use the sex trade come from all backgrounds.
I was exploited by rich men, middle-class men and poor men. I was exploited by European men, African men and American men. I was exploited by men who pretended guilt, and by men who torture for many hours.
The sad truth for me, was I raped and torture so much by so many men, that they became a mass. I know they were individuals, but all that is very clear to is that staring men have when they go into the mind-set as and before they choose to view women and girls as sex objects to harm.
I think the cartoon more alludes to porn cartoons of “Playboy” and “Hustler” which is too close to home for the pro-porners. I do not see them campaigning against the hate-speech of those magazines.
on 30 Jul 2008 at 7:54 am33 admin

but I experienced for so long that look the men have in the cartoon. I think it so important to know that men who choose to use the sex trade come from all backgrounds. I was exploited by rich men, middle-class men and poor men. I was exploited by European men, African men and American men. I was exploited by men who pretended guilt, and by men who torture for many hours. The sad truth for me, was I raped and torture so much by so many men, that they became a mass. I know they were individuals, but all that is very clear to is that staring men have when they go into the mind-set as and before they choose to view women and girls as sex objects to harm.

Rebecca, yeah, the staring that tells you nobody who cares about you is “home” anymore if they ever were, that tells you you are in danger. It’s like first there is what is depicted in that cartoon, then there is the bloodless, hollow staring, and then follows the contempt and the ugliness when the guy has used you up and is on his way. I think most heterosexual women have experienced this.

I love your courage, Rebecca. You’ve been through hell and have lived to tell the truth about it and nobody tells it like you do.

Heart
on 30 Jul 2008 at 10:14 am34 buggle

“I want to say because I think it’s important that I agree with Jeyoani that the depiction of the woman is mean-spirited.”

I’m glad you mentioned this Heart, because I agree.

As for the racism, as a white woman I didn’t even notice at first glance (ah white privilege). Then I looked back and was like yikes, what? Then I looked more closely and understood. But, I can see why people would be upset about this cartoon.

However, being upset about a cartoon does not justify ripping any woman to shreds. Nothing justifies ripping a woman to shreds. I’m really sick of seeing threads devoted to “lets mock and insult Heart!” Disgusting.
on 30 Jul 2008 at 10:19 am35 admin

Thanks, buggle. All radical feminists will be mocked, insulted and trashed by pro-pornography people, pro-prostitution people, misogynists and sexists. All of us will be attacked. Andrea Dworkin is still being regularly attacked and she left this earth years ago by now. I know it’s all part of the deal and in general, I ignore it. I know good people are not fooled by it.

If anybody takes things too far, though, I will take action against them, guaranteed. I’ve done it before, I’ll do it again.

Heart
on 30 Jul 2008 at 10:52 am36 Rebecca

Thanks Heart, I am quite confused that this cartoon is being used as a battering ram to attack women who confront the sex trade.
I suppose it is bad to show men who choose to buy into the sex trade as a general mass. But it just a reaity of how many women in the sex trade see those men.
As the men choose to see women and girls in the sex trade as non-humans - I quite “enjoy ” the men losing their individuality in the cartoon.
Cartoons are not always meant to funny, but to make the viewer see things from different angle.
I find some of the attacks quite triggering. For I have live with abusers who deflect from the oppression in the sex trade. I do not see the cartoon as racist - unless as others have said only white men are good-looking or only white men used the sex trade.
This has made me very angry and upset, for it another attempt to make the “ugliness” in the men that use the sex trade unimportant.
It is personal to me - so I have written more on my blog.
on 30 Jul 2008 at 11:26 am37 admin

Rebecca, it’s like what Jeyoani said. Anybody who insists, after possibly a millisecond, that there is “racism” in that cartoon is acting out of misogyny. Hmm, I’ll get what she said:

It’s just an excuse to not face up to or at least honestly engage the assertions in the cartoon.

And you’re right, Rebecca, this is a political cartoon. It is satire.

I don’t think it’s bad to show johns as a general mass; many men never patronize prostitutes, so the cartoon is not about “men” or the mass of men, it’s about johns. I think the reason this cartoon is so powerful is, it is johns from a woman’s perspective and it depicts an experience of men that most women can relate to.

I’m so sorry the attacks are triggering to you and completely understand why they would be. The issues of abuse, rape, torture of prostitutes, the experiences of prostituted women, are made to be unimportant. The discussion gets hijacked to yet another round of What About the Men, when you are so right, the prostituting of women is ALL about the ugliness of the men who do it, and there is no reason to apologize for calling that exactly what it is.

I made a post to direct people to your blog. Thanks for all you do, Rebecca, I know how it costs you.

xo

Heart
on 30 Jul 2008 at 11:30 am38 Sis

The contrast in light and dark is an homage to Caravaggio and chirascuro… the men in darkness literally a metaphor for men cast into darkness and evil, and the spotlight a highlight on the objectified woman.

##

Yes it is very BASIC technique, used by any artist trained in the classical tradition.

And yes, the cartoonists in Playboy and Hustler, some, and even in The New Yorker, use that technique. The artist is TELLING us something with the technique and modes she has chosen to use. My analogy is look at Toni Morrison’s writing how she told us what she told us. Song of Soloman, Jazz, Beloved. Her technique sizzles.

Rebecca thank you for your eloquent testimony. I don’t get anything when I try to link on your name, to your blog.
on 30 Jul 2008 at 11:38 am39 admin

Thanks, Sis! So true and something I sure wouldn’t have thought of.

I made a separate post for Rebecca’s new post. I hope everyone will read it.
on 30 Jul 2008 at 11:40 am40 admin

Yeah, re Playboy and Hustler, the tables are turned and men experience some of what it is to be a woman depicted as women are depicted in cartoons in those hate rags.
on 30 Jul 2008 at 11:44 am41 Sis

But how do I get into Rebeca’s blog?
on 30 Jul 2008 at 11:46 am42 admin

Sis, click on the link in the new post at the top here, or on “Rebecca Mott” on the blogroll. Or, huh, I’ll just get the link:

http://rmott62.wordpress.com/2008/07/30/the-men-that-used-me/
on 30 Jul 2008 at 11:49 am43 Sis

And just to undercut the “elitist” yelps that will come about: I am an aboriginal woman, raised in poverty and hardship of which you have no comprehension. But nurtured to read by a parent with a grade six education. What I know, I know from naive learning. Not until I was 45 did I have formal education beyond that. (It was redundant).
on 30 Jul 2008 at 12:07 pm44 Sis

Ha. What did we call in it consciousness raising groups?

“Cop out”

“It’s just an excuse to not face up to or at least honestly engage the assertions in the cartoon.”
on 30 Jul 2008 at 12:52 pm45 admin

Note to P, I’ve responded to your comment via the e-mail address you included. If that’s not a good e-mail address, if you comment again and include a different one, I’ll resend. Thanks.
on 30 Jul 2008 at 2:29 pm46 Level Best

“the prostituting of women is ALL about the ugliness of the men who do it, and there is no reason to apologize for calling that exactly what it is.” and “It’s just an excuse to not face up to or at least honestly engage the assertions in the cartoon.”

I agree with both statements. You, Heart, and Nine Deuce dared to go where a lot of bloggers would not go in showing this cartoon, and you’re both getting verbally shredded as a result. But you know what? You men, if the cartoon doesn’t apply to you, chill out, and if it DOES, for shame! I knew that cruel, smiling look of men that meant sexual assault before I was in grade school and to run from it (if circumstances permitted). What does that say, fellows? Nothing good about men who lust and assault and nothing bad about men who don’t assault.

What is the excuse of women who are defaming Heart and Nine Deuce on blogs? The race issue is a put-up one.
on 30 Jul 2008 at 3:33 pm47 Rebecca

I just wanted to that I find Sis’s comments very moving. It is definitely a cop out.
on 30 Jul 2008 at 8:14 pm48 anonymous

The things these posts trigger.

I remember finding pornographic imagery when dusting under the piano. It was my job to do such light chores. I was between six and seven. There’s a reason I know for sure my age, but it’s not necessary to say. The looks on the men’s faces in those images were JUST LIKE in this cartoon! Ugly, distorted, slavering, exaggerated, glowering features. I was gasping and afraid and I put the cards back where my mop had found them.

There were several more frightening and incomprehensible events in the next few months. Sometime before my 7th birthday, the owner of those cards raped me. I’ve remembered that, always. But I forgot about the cards.
on 31 Jul 2008 at 12:32 am49 AnotherAnonymous

Fierce love and deep respect, Anonymous. I found my father’s Playboy magazines in the cubby of my bedroom when I was 7 or 8 years old in the 50s. I had so many responses. Why did my father have these? These women were not like my mother. Did my mother have magazines like these? Why were these magazines hidden? Why were they hidden in my cubby in the upstairs bedroom? The women were certainly beautiful. In fact, I felt attracted to them. What did that mean? Is this the kind of woman I should try to be? Could I be like the women in these magazines? Should I tell my mom?

My father never raped me. He never physically hurt me. The discovery of those Playboy magazine, though, set me on a certain, destructive path which ensured I would be used, abused, raped, and hurt by men.

Again, fierce love.
on 31 Jul 2008 at 1:36 am50 Satsuma

Glad I posted about Caravaggio. It’s good sometimes to see the techique to get insights as well. Daumier might have approved of the evil looks on the men’s faces too.

I really want to bring this cartoon with me, and see what men I know have to say about it. But do I dare? is it worth it? What do you all think?

My family LOVED political cartoons, and they were such an amazing part of my life. So I loved this memory of childhood and early adulthood recast in a feminist cartoon! Oh, I wish we had more feminist cartoons like this one!!

Look how great this conversation has become! Smart brained women!! Gotta LOVE LOVE LOVE THEM!!! :-) I’m envoking a protective goddess now, so I don’t carry this creepy image into the dream world!
on 31 Jul 2008 at 10:43 am51 Maggie Hays

The men in this cartoon are of all races — they are white and they are of color. This is a dark room, as strip clubs are always dark. The lights are on the pole dancer, the men are in the dark. Look at the men’s features. Most are white, some are of color, reflecting what goes on in strip clubs every day and every night.

The men in the cartoon are not men of color only. They are white men and men of color both. Men of color patronize strip bars just like white men do. Strippers are also white and of color.
The cartoon is not racist.
Yep, I agree that accusing Nine of being “racist” for posting that cartoon was totally unfair.
The cartoon simply made a point about sexism, degradation, misogyny and objectification that “sex poz” men of all sorts did not like. That’s why they used the “racist” excuse in order to annoy Nine. Pathetic!

Nine is a feminist, and feminism is against all forms of sexism and racism. Come on, the menz, get a grip!

Thanks Heart for posting this.
on 31 Jul 2008 at 10:59 am52 anonymous

Fierce love right back at you.

Sleepless night.
on 31 Jul 2008 at 11:21 am53 Sis

I’m disturbed though, that once again, this was derailed by people who just don’t see misogyny and sexism. Yes, Nine and Heart pulled it back. But if only we could keep the focus on these discussions to sexism. There was no racism there. None. So it didn’t even need to enter the discussion.

The fact that they are so blind to this, well, we’ve known it all along. We need to pay more attention to the Norma Hotaling’s of our world, than this messed up groups sorry asses.
on 31 Jul 2008 at 1:03 pm54 Mary Sunshine

Sis,

I agree.

The most valuable thing we can do, I think, is to leave a trail of breadcrumbs for the actual potential feminists to follow.

A few links, or something.

Then bug out for the sake of our own time & energy.
on 31 Jul 2008 at 6:33 pm55 pisaquari

Hey Mary–
I’ve been eating the bread crumbs for about four years now.
They are delicious.
on 01 Aug 2008 at 4:04 am56 Mary Sunshine

Hey, (( Pisaquari !! ))

And, you’ve been busy baking up a storm over there on your blog. I regularly stop in for a nice fresh buttered slice.
on 01 Aug 2008 at 10:37 am57 Satsuma

I know I shouldn’t put a silly here, but the breadcrumb thing reminded me of the bedtime story I tell my little puppy each night to help him go into his crate. He flogs down outside the crate, and I put little “dog treat” crumbs in a path to the crate and a few inside it. Then I tell the story about a puppy who goes to a magic forest to find a delicious gingerbread house.

At first, it became kind of a Hanel and Gretle type story, but when I had the witch flying through the air he just got hyper. Telling a peaceful story got him to go right in the crate! Even dogs respond well to fairy tales that don’t involve evil or witches or scary!

Mary Sunshine’s comments about breadcrumbs inspired me
on 01 Aug 2008 at 11:06 am58 Mary Tracy9

As a (sorta) cartoonist wannabe, I’d like to say that I found the cartoon EXCELLENT. It makes its point very clear and in your face. Particularly when you read the words from the woman: “I’m exploiting myself”. That for me is what’s most telling. When you see the men around (after reading her words) you realize how the “exploiting myself” idea falls to pieces.

I’ve never seen this cartoon before, so thanks to Heart and Nine Deuce for posting it
on 01 Aug 2008 at 11:43 am59 Friction

I’m a sex worker (formerly an escort and now a pro domme) but I’ve never stripped so I can’t tell you what it feels like to work in a club. Still, I think this cartoon takes a good stab at what goes on in men’s minds when they’re seeking out porn and prostitutes. It’s a CARTOON people. Cartoons exaggerate to make some point. I’ve taken the point. And this nonsense about it being racist seems to be coming from people who want to distract us from the point: Men paying for women to be sex objects so they can get their rocks off don’t give a shit if you’re “sex positive” or not.
on 01 Aug 2008 at 2:19 pm60 admin

Men paying for women to be sex objects so they can get their rocks off don’t give a shit if you’re “sex positive” or not.

Truer words were never spoken. Such is the problem with the postmodern hell so many of the sex positive crowd choose to inhabit, where down is up and up is down and it’s all about what’s going on in my own head, as though everything we do doesn’t take place in a certain context and have ramifications for everybody else in the world. It is like the outer limits of disconnection.

I keep wondering what the world would be like if instead of sexist, misogynist cartoons being ubiquitous and inescapable, cartoons like this one were equally ubiquitous. Maybe girls and women would think, “Wow, everybody else feels like I do about the way men and boys do this horrible thing.” Maybe boys and men would think, “UGH. Do not want.”

The first time I recall recognizing what this cartoon depicts is when I was a really little girl, probably 7 or 8 in elementary school. During recess we girls would jump rope, a girl on each end of the rope. One recess we were jumping roping to a certain rhyme, part of which went like this (I can’t remember the first part):

She can do the rhumba
She can do the twist
She can throw her dress up
Higher than her hips.

And of course in those days we all wore dresses. When you jump rope, you act out what you are saying, so you make a rhumba move and then a twist move, and then you throw your dress up, then it’s the next girl’s turn. A huge line of boys assembled to watch us, all possessed of the very sort of vacant, mocking, contemptuous, vaguely violent leers the cartoon depicts so well, though in boy form. Sadly for me, a mean teacher, Mrs. Warburton, saw what was happening when *I* was jumping rope and I got hauled to the principal’s office for the first and only time of my life. The boys didn’t pay, the girls did. I did. Anyway, we’ve all, as women, seen this stuff. We recognize it. I think it’s good for men and boys to see the world from girls’ and women’s perspectives. They rarely do or have to.
on 01 Aug 2008 at 3:10 pm61 Sis

I split his lip (and cracked the hand knuckle of my longest finger) when he pinched my bum as I bent down to pick up the ball in recess softball in Grade 3. We all wore little dresses with bows at the back. Mine were usually accessorised with scraped knees accented in dried blood. Anyway, it was I who had to go to the principal’s office, I who got the strap, and I who had to take a note home. The first of many. There was the teenage gym teacher who used to finger me as he helped me over the horse. I dropped gymnastics. The field race teacher who told me soon I couldn’t run anymore because that would ruin my breasts.
on 01 Aug 2008 at 4:34 pm62 Nine Deuce

I took this comic down to keep my thread on track (or to try to — it’s now become the place du jour do discuss the philosophy of science), but it really irritated me. It wasn’t essential to my argument, but it was a perfect distillation of what I wanted to communicate, and it did so in a much clearer, harder-hitting way than my admittedly verbose prose can do. It’s one of those things that just drives the point home in its simplicity. As Friction pointed out, the woman who is being prostituted can call herself a feminist, claim she’s reclaiming her sexuality, whatever, but when the customer still sees her as a subhuman commodity, where’s the feminism and the salvation of women’s sexuality from male exploitation? Who holds the cultural and financial power to decide whether what she’s doing is empowering?

It makes me absolutely exasperated to hear people argue that I put it up because I’m a racist (or, as some have claimed, a sexist, because the comic makes the stripper look stupid). I know that we are all trying to figure out ways to have the voices of different oppressed groups heard, and I certainly do my best to check my own privileges and try to understand the viewpoints of other women, but I don’t see this one. And it isn’t because I’m “blinded” by white privilege. One has to be unwilling to acknolwedge their own privilege to be unable to see through it, and that is just not the case.

The men on my page keep bringing up Occam’s Razor to bolster their ludicrous EB/EP arguments (which have been destroyed by other commenters), saying that biology is the simplest explanation for male behavior. I think I’d like to ask them to apply Occam’s Razor to the cartoon. Is it, as they claim, a covert attempt to communicate some nebulous and unidentified set of racist and sexist notions, or does it mean what it means when taken at face value, that women who think they’re empowered by stripping are kidding themselves because the men still take a piggish attitude towards them?
on 01 Aug 2008 at 5:43 pm63 Mary Sunshine

No need to get sucked in by male voices.

The first law of Female Survival: Don’t get sucked in.

The second law of Female Survival: Chow down.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply