‘Cause those stupid lying whores just cannot be trusted…’

Posted: October 29, 2009 in Pornography

watchmen_comedian HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Oh shit.  This is fucking priceless.

I was soooo right.  Anti-porn Radical Feminism is the biggest fucking joke ever.

I mean, check this, you know, from a rad fem anti porner who gets to decide when rape is rape and all and so cares about the women and stuff…

“LOL porn actors and pornographers do not get to define the issues, or set the parameters in any discussion of rape or porn, on my blog. this is not a democracy. and its not a debate.

people who literally depend on the sex industry to survive (and others who exploit it to get rich) are not able to be honest about the negative aspects of the industry. they are not going to bite the hands that feed them. i get that, but their denials and justifications and rationaliations will not be published in this space.”  FactCheckMe

I bet dollars to donuts that the words of someone who works in porn (i.e. me) that were left in comment form there (the second one I made) will not see the light of day? 

Hee. Hehehehehe.  So fucking afraid they are of not being “the only voice”.  So afraid of dissent, or gee, even the words of Other Women that do not fall in line with their own.  So presumptive and terrified of challenge….so, ahem, authoritarian and paternalistic.  Whoops! 

Oh boo hoo, but yet they care about those poor, poor women in porn…except when it suits them not to, then they can actively ignore their lived experiences and words and all.  After all, they must be….liars. 

Now, seriously (or not, these jerks are just too fucking priceless and funny, in a sky is falling stupid way) considering just how wonderful these lovely paragons of sisterhood and woman pride and all treat porn performers who do not sing the right tune, explain to me just why the fuck I should give a rats ass if porn affects them negatively?  I mean, if I do not rate as a human with the same human rights and voice that they seem to think they deserve, why the fuck should I care if they get treated like humans themselves?  What, because I am supposed to be the bigger person here or something?  Guess what?  I’m not.  You treat me like shit, censor my lived experiences, call me a liar, rationalize everything because I am saying shit you do not want to hear because it fucks with your crusade?  Well then, sister, I do not give a fuck what happens to you.  You act like that I am past caring if your boyfriend who watches porn is stupid enough to assume that means anything goes and pressures you to have anal sex.  Yeah, I still think he is an ass…but gee, you could be lying about all that pressure, it might not be your authentic voice, you might be feeling pressure from the rad fem thought collective to talk about just how bad something is (when it isn’t) or make up horrible tales so you can stay in with the group.  You might be deluded and all. 

FFS…oh gee, we care so much about women and pornography….but fuck, you can’t listen to or believe the women who are in it unless they have a horror story.

You people are a fucking joke.

The only reason I bother is because some people are still dumb enough to listen to you.   

  1. Here, here! Wonderful rant… when I was in porn I was sick of being placed into the “poor lil porno star” box. We’re always victims and it makes me wanna puke! It’s ridiculous! Why can’t these feminazis occupy themselves with learning about the conditions of the industry and improving upon those conditions than trying to deny performers their voice and opinions? For shame!

  2. Vladimir says:

    Why do you even bother? You’ll never convince them otherwise, I;d say the best strategy is just to make sure there’s a forum for other voices, so people can hear both sides.

  3. machina says:

    So people should be prosecuted for rape, even when the plaintiff has consented to the act and maintains that it was consentual after the act, to protect society from someone who should be prosecuted for rape, even when the plaintiff has consented to the act and maintains that it was consentual after the act, to protect society from someone who should be prosecuted for rape, even when the plaintiff has consented to the act and maintains that it was consentual after the act, to protect society from someone who should be prosecuted for rape, even when the plaintiff…


  4. hexy says:

    Yeah. we’re totally unable to speak out about bad experiences in the industry, because of fear of repercussions. When we’re commenting under pseudonyms. On the internet. Often on the blogs of people in other countries.


    “The sex industry” really is a powerful bogeyman to these people, isn’t it?

    I’ve certainly spoken about shitty experiences in sex work before, and will again. I’m just not going to talk about the shitty experiences I haven’t experienced, and they don’t care about my experiences with exploitative employers, or the horrible impact of whore stigma. They only want to hear about my negative experiences if I’m willing to declare that all my clients are raping me all the time.

  5. hexy says:

    Ugh, just read the thread. Probably won’t be posted, but I commented:

    I have no idea if this will be published or not, but it’s worth a try.

    I have, personally, withdrawn consent in the midst of a sex work scene, and in the midst of explicit photoshoots (never worked in video), on a number of occasions. I stopped the activity, left the room (when relevant), and informed the director/manager/receptionist what was going on. In the sex work instance refunded part or all of the clients money and either showed them out or put them in a waiting room while I checked if any of my co workers wanted to see them. In the photoshoot instance, I renegotiated to be paid only for the work I had done.

    This is not an unusual experience for a sex worker. Sometimes, scenes don’t work. Sometimes, you don’t feel comfortable. Sometimes, the client crosses a line, deliberately or accidentally. In these instances, as consent IS a dynamic and ongoing thing that must be able to be withdrawn for the scene to be considered consensual, I withdrew my consent and stopped the scene.

    If a woman is coerced into a situation she cannot withdraw consent from, whether or not she’s being paid and/or videotaped, that IS rape. But it’s not rape because it’s sex work, or because it’s porn, it’s rape because it’s just plain rape.

  6. Megan says:

    I like how she’s all like “let’s look at things ‘objectively'” in her original post, and then goes all batshit with the insults and ad hominem attacks when people try to disagree with her in an objective way. It would be really amusing, except for her categorical denial of my ability to give consent. What a fucking tool.

  7. bane says:

    the “free-for-all” nature of even mainstream porn is especially problematic, when it escalates, always, to include acts that most people would not willingly participate in, such as gang-bangs, and “rage-in-the-cage” styled death-matches where the woman is presented as being “versus” the man.

    Uh, I thought that was the sort of thing that’s in the damn contract, who and what you’ll be doing?

    • If I’m interpreting what I’ve read here correctly, it’s actually *not* in the contract, but it sure as hell is discussed and planned out before anything actually *happens*. (In fact, that happens before the contract part. If I’m right.)

      You know, I might have seen that “vs.” type language on some box copy, but I’ve never seen anything that made sex look like a “death match”. I can’t really imagine it going over too well with most porn viewers actually. Has anyone here actually *seen* porn that looks like that?

  8. Ernest Greene says:

    Winter Lights

    Exactly correct. Negotiations never reach the paperwork phase unless all the elements have been agreed to in advance. There may be, in fact will be, minor changes in the reality of production, but nothing “escalates” in a free-for-all atmosphere. In the atmosphere of commerical porn production, nothing is free and none of it’s for all. If these things aren’t worked out in advance, productions can and occassionally do unravel on the set owing to failures in prior communication (this being the thing that gets production managers fired). If it turns out that some irreconcilable difference of opinion exists between what was agreed to and what is actually expected, performers walk and have to be replaced.

    A good day in porn, where nothing goes wrong, no equipment breaks down and everyone works and plays nice together, takes about ten hours. Of those hours, a given performer may only work two, but the crew and production staff have to work the whole show. This means if a replacement player has to be found through an agency search, at least an hour will be added to that day. And the replacement may not be as well-suited to the part as the performer originally cast for other reasons, which can damage the overall value of the finished production. This, in turn, hurts the producer, the director and all the other peformers who, instead of being associated with a successful project, find themselves stuck in just another generic porn product that does low numbers and brings in no new work for anyone whose name is on it.

    It’s a bad, beginner’s mistake to allow anything to chance in structuring a video. Nothing good happens by accident on a set. The more elements are clearly worked through in advance, the better the prospects for a smooth shoot and a quality product at the other end.

    I know how much certain people love to think it’s all about all that ugly rape and torture shit they spend so much time inspecting with lip-smacking attention to microscopic detai., and I’m not talking about the fans here, but first and foremost, porn is a business. It’s not an evil cult bent on doing harm to the women who work in it. It’s bent on making money for everyone involved, including the performers. It makes no money to create drama and dissension in the production process, much less to expose everyone involved to needless liability.

    That’s where so many of the arguments so dear to the antis break down. When you press them for rational motives behind the things they accuse us of doing, they are, for a change, mercifully silent. I had this very situation arise in a face-to-face with a hostile questioner after a public forum. She absolutely insisted that there were trafficked women working in mainstream porn. She hadn’t met any performers at all herself, or ever been on a set, or could name a specific incident reported anywhere in the Los Angeles area by any kind of media even alleging that trafficked women had been used in the making of porn here, but she was ever so certain they were on sets all over The Valley.

    The question for which she had no answer was why? Why would anyone take the risk of shooting someone who had been dragged to a set involuntarily when on any given day there may be a hundred excellent players available through safe, easy, legal channels. She tentatively suggested that perhaps it was cheaper to do so, but even if you believed such a repugnant thing to be someone’s motivation, it wouldn’t be true. Traffickers don’t work for free, as those who really do employ their services, mostly big agribusiness operations up in The Central Valley, know very well. They bring in a whole bunch of laborers who get paid very little and pocket a hefty fee for themselves in the process. To get a single porn player, or even a couple of them, from some coyote who works on a by-the-head price, would be much more expensive than simply going through an agent who takes a flat fee.

    And unlike trafficked laboerers, paid workers are far less likely to attract the attention of hostile authorities who can raid your otherwise-legitimate operation, confiscate everything you’ve got, including equipment and already-shot footage, and throw your ass in jail.

    Such a thing simply makes no sense. The evil, fiendish, diabolically clever porn barons who run everything behind the scenes (supposedly) would have to be smart enough to see what anyone with half a brain would recognize in an instant. Unwilling performers would be a very bad bet. They’d be dangerous to have around and their unwillingness would be extremely visible on camera. No one can make anyone act well enough to sell the quality of sex scene that contemporary viewers expect to see.

    But of course, these are matters of logic, and logic is of small interest to those in the trade of selling lies to soft-headed believers. Facts are their enemies, so they deny them with preposterous inventions of their own.

    Much is actually known about the process of making porn, not all of it written by people who necessarily approve of it. But even the most skeptical of objective reporting on the subject finds no evidence of the despicable practices a small crowd of fanatics on both left and right resolutely insist are the norm.

    So when the facts don’t fit the ideology, the facts just have to go.

  9. Now, all this is all fine and all….but what amuses me more than anything else is the fact that Ms. “FactCheckMe” decides to drop a moratorium on anyone who actually dares to…well….fact check HER.

    As if, it’s not enough to actually read and respond to critics; she can’t even be arsed to even look at them??

    Gee…even I, known for my smackdowns with the GenderBorg, will at the very least allow them some space to rant, if only so that the reader can see the lunacy to be deposed.

    Is Ms. “FactCheckMe” so afraid of hearing a contrarian that just might upset the microcode running in her brain that she has to feel the need to black them out even before they get to her blog??

    And this is beyond the general issue of why porn performers and fans should have no say in interpreting their own experiences and lives, but GenderBorg hacks like her and Rebecca Mott and Shelley Lubben should be the universal voices for ALL women in porn.

    Oh….and what Ernest said.


  10. Oh, goody..I just read the full post there….ugh.

    So, this person says that she got to her present antiporn position through logical research BEFORE actually seeing some “rape porn”/”death matches” (I assume that she avoided the ones where the WOMAN actually wins and the MAN is killed). OK, fine..so what about the porn where NO one is killed or raped or even harmed? You know..the 98% of all explicit sexual material produced in this genre?? No wonder she wants to censor the opposition.

    And please….”death match” porn?? “Steel cage matches”?? Really?? Was she watching WWE Smackdown! or RAW is WAR and mistook that for porn?? Outside of Tylene Buck and the former Chyna, I know of very few porn starlets who are currently in wrestling, nor do I know of any wrestlers doing porn these days. And I don’t think that Triple H and John Cena will be doing any sex in their cage matches anytime soon. (Sorry, Ren.) And if there was any sex scenes in “Fight Club”, I must have missed them, too.

    These…..women…are starting to make the Teabaggers look educated by comparison.


  11. Ernest Greene says:

    Actually, there is some wrestling porn out there, like kink.com’s ulitmate surrender, and it couldn’t be more playful and harmless. I’ve got several friends who do it, and so far, they all seem very much alive.

    I think she’s trying to speak metaphorically. Instead, as usual, she ends up speaking sophomorically, which is more her speed.

  12. Ernest Greene says:

    And here’s the latest:

    the trans-infiltration of feminism is something that has bothered me greatly. in fact, i am starting to think that this is one of the reasons that feminists have started acting so misogynistic to one another.

    I’m sure you can imagine what follows, which is more trashing of transpeople.

    True colors flying in the breeze here, and they aren’t pretty. How many kinds of bigot can one person be? Stay tuned to that channel and you’ll find out eventually.

    • drakyn says:

      Why the fuck do radfems always have to bring their transphobia into everything?
      *sigh* I see she thinks that trans women can’t be raped (because they’re ~actually~ men you see, and of -course- men can’t be raped either), she also seems to think that [cis] women can’t be rapists. *looks at the language she uses* wow, that whole comment is full of fail and bigotry, in all kinds of ways. How lovely.
      Yet somehow I am not at all surprised.

      • If you’re going by “ability to get pregnant”, women who are sterile might also fall into that category. (Though she doesn’t actually say “can’t be raped”, just “thoroughly vicitmized by rape”. Isn’t any kind of rape bad enough, do we have to start ranking them?)

        • drakyn says:

          True. You can also add post-menopause cis women, cis women where their [cis male] rapists used condoms or were sterile….
          And I supposed men like myself -can- be “thoroughly victimized by rape” because we can get pregnant; of course transphobe she is, she probably thinks we’re ~really~ women. -_-

          And yeah, imo ALL rape is horrible–and it doesn’t need to be ranked by bs levels of horribleness.

    • Megan says:

      Yeah, it’s just sad when people like factcheckme appeal to feminism as an excuse for their bigotry.

  13. Ernest Greene says:

    And I still have my lawyer standing by for tha filing of that rape charge, and the litigation to follow.

    See, here’s a thing us ignorant, thuggish, trogllodyte pornographers understand: free speech doesn’t mean speech with no consequences. It’s that fire in a crowded theater thing. If your irresponsible exercise of that freedom leads to damages, the damaged party can pursue legal remedies. You get to have your say, and then that person and that person’s counsel get to have theirs.

    Which is why flinging around accusations of felonious behavior without proof can be dangerous to a one’s bank account.

  14. Eli says:

    I think it’s unfair to judge a whole movement by the raving of its crazies; I’m sure there must be one or two reasonable radfem-identified people with legitimate concerns out there, somewhere. After all, some end up leaving the movement, so they can’t all be crazy… ;P

    • Dw3t-Hthr says:

      Well, at some point people are going to say “This is just not on.”

      Sure, there are radfem types who aren’t pernicious agitators who despise my very existence and think that I need to be brainwashed into accord with their agenda at the price of my family, my sexuality, and whatever else, who want to do the same to Ren over her job, and so on. But they’re not the ones driving the bus, making the news, getting laws passed, or even simply dominating the discussion.

      I mean, I know that there are conservative charismatic Christians who don’t earnestly believe that Halloween candy has been infested with demons by witches, but if I run into a conservative charismatic Christian who wants to talk to me about trick-or-treating I can pretty much predict what they’re gonna want to say to me.

      • Eli says:

        Oh, I agree. But it’s a problem; the craziest voices are often the loudest in any movement, but that doesn’t make them representative. Yet one can hardly address the “reasonable” points, if those aren’t the ones made loudly and publicly… I continue to ponder what could be done to change this dynamic, but I don’t know either. Aside perhaps from making an effort to keep repeating clearly what one really stands for, so the crazies at least don’t get to set the terms of the debate completely…

        • Dw3t-Hthr says:

          At the same time, if pulic action – especially legal action – is not representative of a movement, I’m left with, y’know, what the fuck is going on?

          All of this stuff that might get dismissed as crazy bullshit by some looks a lot to me like … pretty much the same justifications for anti-porn laws or whatever else. Which means I can’t blow it off as “oh, the craziest voices are the loudest”, because damnit, that’s what’s running the asylum.

          • Eli says:

            I don’t disagree. It’s like… politics in general? For example, I’m European. I prefer to think that most Americans are decent people, not evil invaders and torturers. But “public action” in the past couple of years has been to invade and to torture. So like you say; what the fuck is going on? I don’t know the answer, and I wish there was a way to remedy this discrepancy, to somehow reach the (supposedly) reasonable majority which – I speculate – is perhaps just a little stupid and easily manipulated by fears rather than evil.

            (That last bit may sound snobbish, but seriously; if you remember, the discourse back then was on the intellectual level of “you cheese-eating surrender monkey!”, so what else is one to conclude?)

  15. jannetwaise says:

    i’ve been a long time lurker at your blog. i figured this was as good a night to delurk as any and this post rings so true to me. i’ve heard this irl from feminist friends of mine. my story isn’t the “real” story. it’s not what “most” sex workers feel. and i’m so “privileged” that my voice needs to be silenced to give way to the “majority” of voices which aren’t heard (that is, the sex workers who don’t have a public voice — so, since they don’t speak, we will speak for them, yeah?).

    this brought me to tears about a week ago and has prompted me to start my own blog. fuck that shit. me being silenced does NOTHING to help other sex workers voice their stories. me being shamed for being a “privileged” sex worker [like there is such a thing when each and every person knows that a “prostitute” is a person who is corrupt or unworthy — see merriam webster] who considers my job a [duh] choice, does NOTHING to reduce the shame of women who don’t have a choice.

    and as far as sex workers being “honest” about their experiences?? how the fuck am i supposed to be honest when i need to be constantly on defense? when i’m being attacked from all sides, both feminists and misogynists and puritans and every-goddamn-body else, no, i will not be honest. i will cover my ass. when i feel respected and safe, then i will start telling my truth to your face. when i know that what i say can and will be used against me, i will keep my words to myself lest they turn into ammunition against me.

    ren, thank you for your honesty. thank you for your truth. you are truly inspirational to this small town sex worker.

  16. Real gfs says:

    I’ve read several just right stuff here. Definitely price bookmarking for revisiting. I surprise how a lot attempt you place to make this sort of wonderful informative web site.

  17. alex says:

    How about we start boycotting websites that filter comments. How are you suppose to get the facts when the information is controlled. Ironic that her blog is called “FactCheckMe.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s