Linking here to my livejournal, where I keep an archive of all my writings except perhaps this blog.
If you came from deviantart to read my smut, you're on the right track! deviantArt apparently has some pretty strict rules about what sort of porn is allowed in there, even though I HAVE read some pretty steamy pieces. Maybe the mods were asleep. I don't know. I'm definitely not going to report anybody, I think that sort of censorship is pretty stupid.
This double-non-direct linking to sexy writing should be enough for deviantart to keep being fooled into thinking I'm an upstanding citizen. I have yet to be reported for doing anything over there, so let's see how long that lasts!
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
Friday, November 4, 2011
A mature talk about Pornography
Personally I find that there is very little that one could truly label universally "disgusting". Every single person has his/her own different things that turn them on and it's foolish to expect there to be an universal standard.
So when it comes to works of erotica in deviantArt or any other art site, I think the only thing we should demand is for the work to come with a warning label so people who are not into that sort of thing can avoid it. That's I would not object to seeing a woman's vajay-jay (ASIDE: I honestly have a hard time using a word for this. "Pussy" is too informal and "labia" is too medical. I refuse to use the word "vagina" because it does NOT refer to a woman's genitalia, especially not her outer genitalia. Vagina is the birth canal, so you would need a flashlight to see it, it's not something anybody could catch a glimpse of if her panties fall down. While searching for an appropriate replacement, I found this website http://www.ineedanotherwordforvagina.com/words/all/ which somehow helped even less.) dripping wet on the front page. Someone drew it so other people could appreciate it, I don't have a problem with that.
The only sort of pornography I think should REALLY be banned from deviantart or anywhere else is anything truly non-consensual. That includes paedophilia and bestiality, since neither children nor animals can consent to sex in any possible scenario.
But even then there are several degrees of gray areas. Do we judge paedophilia based in your country's local laws about age of consent? Personally I don't think a sexual drawing of a 17-year-old is paedophilic in any way, but it is banned by deviantart standards regardless.
I also don't think a drawing of two 12-year-old girls kissing is automatically wrong, because in context it can be completely innocent.
Even paintings or pictures of naked children don't have to be pornographic
Take a look at these two from the Victorian era and tell me they are "wrong" somehow
http://ilanapayes.files.wordpress.com/2007/05/julia-margaret-cameron-kids.jpg
http://www.arthistoryarchive.com/arthistory/canadian/images/PaulPeel-After-the-Bath-1890.jpg
When it comes to animals, I'm pretty sure you've heard of "furries". Well, like paedophilia, there are also several degrees to measure it by. Human beings find it sexually arousing when other people are "exotic". This can mean that they are another race, or from another country or simply are different. There are styles of furry art that are simply taking a human being and making it exotic by adding fur or feather and simple animalistic features. However, at the bottom the base is still human, which is why I say the majority of furries are not actually sexually attracted to animals.
For example, take a look at this image
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8i9-nmyHYv4/Tl1wCs2JKZI/AAAAAAAAANc/1BCpinVwg-8/s1600/01.jpg
This creation is more human than rabbit. Every single characteristic designed to make her desirable; her breasts, her hips, her small thong, her basic anatomy; are completely human. None of her animal features are sexualized.
I developed a level of tolerance for fetishes that don't attract me. If it's scat, waterworks, midget, etc. porn; I'm not interested. But I'm not going to rain on the parade of people that DO like it by complaining and trying to get it banned. As long as it's consensual, I just won't look at it.
NEXT TIME (hopefully): a feminist look at porn. Does it really hurt women? In what context does this happen?
So when it comes to works of erotica in deviantArt or any other art site, I think the only thing we should demand is for the work to come with a warning label so people who are not into that sort of thing can avoid it. That's I would not object to seeing a woman's vajay-jay (ASIDE: I honestly have a hard time using a word for this. "Pussy" is too informal and "labia" is too medical. I refuse to use the word "vagina" because it does NOT refer to a woman's genitalia, especially not her outer genitalia. Vagina is the birth canal, so you would need a flashlight to see it, it's not something anybody could catch a glimpse of if her panties fall down. While searching for an appropriate replacement, I found this website http://www.ineedanotherwordforvagina.com/words/all/ which somehow helped even less.) dripping wet on the front page. Someone drew it so other people could appreciate it, I don't have a problem with that.
The only sort of pornography I think should REALLY be banned from deviantart or anywhere else is anything truly non-consensual. That includes paedophilia and bestiality, since neither children nor animals can consent to sex in any possible scenario.
But even then there are several degrees of gray areas. Do we judge paedophilia based in your country's local laws about age of consent? Personally I don't think a sexual drawing of a 17-year-old is paedophilic in any way, but it is banned by deviantart standards regardless.
I also don't think a drawing of two 12-year-old girls kissing is automatically wrong, because in context it can be completely innocent.
Even paintings or pictures of naked children don't have to be pornographic
Take a look at these two from the Victorian era and tell me they are "wrong" somehow
http://ilanapayes.files.wordpress.com/2007/05/julia-margaret-cameron-kids.jpg
http://www.arthistoryarchive.com/arthistory/canadian/images/PaulPeel-After-the-Bath-1890.jpg
When it comes to animals, I'm pretty sure you've heard of "furries". Well, like paedophilia, there are also several degrees to measure it by. Human beings find it sexually arousing when other people are "exotic". This can mean that they are another race, or from another country or simply are different. There are styles of furry art that are simply taking a human being and making it exotic by adding fur or feather and simple animalistic features. However, at the bottom the base is still human, which is why I say the majority of furries are not actually sexually attracted to animals.
For example, take a look at this image
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8i9-nmyHYv4/Tl1wCs2JKZI/AAAAAAAAANc/1BCpinVwg-8/s1600/01.jpg
This creation is more human than rabbit. Every single characteristic designed to make her desirable; her breasts, her hips, her small thong, her basic anatomy; are completely human. None of her animal features are sexualized.
I developed a level of tolerance for fetishes that don't attract me. If it's scat, waterworks, midget, etc. porn; I'm not interested. But I'm not going to rain on the parade of people that DO like it by complaining and trying to get it banned. As long as it's consensual, I just won't look at it.
NEXT TIME (hopefully): a feminist look at porn. Does it really hurt women? In what context does this happen?
Monday, October 31, 2011
Filmes
I just got this list of controversial movies. Now I only have to find out if they are controversial because they are worth watching (like Freaks) or they are controversial because they are insanely disturbing in the wrong way (like Human Centipede).
Children of Paradise
Tears of Kali
Death Wish
Lolita
Men Behind the Sun
the Tin Drum
Surrender, Dorothy
Ichi the Killer
Irreversible from Noe
El Topo
Trier's Antichrist
Bad Boy Bubby
Taxidermia
No Dog Day Afternoon
Man Bites Dog
Schizopolis
Meet the Feebles
Old Boy
August Underground
Martyrs
Gummo
Kairo
Movies I know are disturbing but I want to watch:
Eraserhead
Straw Dogs
Kids (Larry Clark)
Patton (Francis Ford Coppola)
The Rape of Richard Beck (Karen Arthur)
Basically 98% of this list
Children of Paradise
Tears of Kali
Death Wish
Lolita
Men Behind the Sun
the Tin Drum
Surrender, Dorothy
Ichi the Killer
Irreversible from Noe
El Topo
Trier's Antichrist
Bad Boy Bubby
Taxidermia
No Dog Day Afternoon
Man Bites Dog
Schizopolis
Meet the Feebles
Old Boy
August Underground
Martyrs
Gummo
Kairo
Movies I know are disturbing but I want to watch:
Eraserhead
Straw Dogs
Kids (Larry Clark)
Patton (Francis Ford Coppola)
The Rape of Richard Beck (Karen Arthur)
Basically 98% of this list
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
I am Pro-choice
Those who know me well already are aware that I'm a very avid supporter of abortion.
It's a position I'm willing to defend and in more than one occasion I have gotten into some pretty serious arguments about the subject.
That said, my opinion is not set in stone and it has happened that my view on abortion is slightly changed after I debate with someone.
I think it's a really interesting topic to discuss and one worth thinking about, especially if you're at the age when you can vote to make abortion legal or illegal; restricted or not. Even more especially if you're sexually mature and sexually active, because there's a chance you will land yourself in a situation where you have to take a stance on abortion.
In any case, I pride myself in having done my research regarding child development, abortion procedure, abortion alternatives and the psychological impact of abortion (though the latter I'd love to know more about, I want to watch Lindsay Ellis' film!). I think I have a firm ground to stand on when I defend abortion, but I have always been willing to listen to the opinions of those who disagree with me.
That being said, I absolutely cannot stand pig-headed pro-lifers, in particular the religious ones.
See if you're going to defend a position that affects people who are NOT part of your religion; then you have to give me an argument good enough for non-believer. If your argument centers around this, then you're not only not doing a good job of defending your position, but you're giving it a reputation of being supported by stupid people.
I have found a website that sums up everything I hate about poorly-defended pro-life arguments.
It's called Ten Retarded Reasons Why Abortion Scares Me, or at least it should be.
It has everything. Bullshit statistics about breast cancer? Check. Fear-mongering regarding botched abortions? Check. The use of religion as if a logical fact rather than a belief a limited number of people subscribe to? Check. Blame-pushing towards certified gynaecologists? Obfuscating explanation on why abortion somehow destroys the concept of family? Slut-shaming about sex in general? Triple check!
Added bonus: there's also a bit of homophobia thrown in, because apparently I didn't have enough reasons to think the whole list was naive, nonsensical and moronic.
Another thing that really rubs me the wrong way about pro-lifers is that 98% of them seem to come from USA and apparently think that theirs is the only country in the world with legalised abortion or the only one that matters.
Images like this one don't make me sympathetic to your cause, it just makes me think you have an awfully narrow world view. Also, you don't know anything about abortion, or even biology in general (and judging by the label, not even geography).
Abortion is available on request on at least 54 countries in the world, most of them in Europe. If we're going to discuss scientific facts and morality, then the argument applies to countries that allow abortions all over the globe, not just yours. Abortion is a global issue, just like women's rights.
And yet, I don't think all pro-lifers are stupid. People like this lady actually bring forth powerful arguments for their cause that make one think, even if you don't agree with them fully.
I honestly wish most pro-lifers would take a step back and think of how they portray themselves. I honestly think they have a moral point of view that is worth exploring, but most of the time you don't want to because of the way they express themselves.
I leave you with this ethics dilemma I found; to give something more to think about.
Rank the following examples on a scale of 1-10 as less or more morally justified (0 being clearly unethical, 10 being clearly ethical). Or, if you think abortion can’t be justified under any circumstance, rank the cases on the scale of 1-10 as more or less morally repugnant (0 being incredibly abhorrent, 10 being wrong, but not as wrong, relative to the other examples).
1) A pregnant woman will die if she doesn’t abort her 10-week-old fetus. The child suffers from some terrible condition, and will very likely die a painful death soon after birth, if he or she survives delivery.
2) A pregnant woman is considering aborting her 4-month-old fetus because she’s afraid that her abusive husband will leave her if she doesn’t. “You’re getting too fat,” he tells her. “Get rid of that thing or I’m leaving you.”
3) A pregnant woman thought she wanted a baby, but now that she’s 8 and 1/2 months pregnant, isn’t so sure. She’s questioning motherhood because she just won a Caribbean cruise on The Price is Right, and the boat leaves next week. “This baby’s awful inconvenient,” she thinks. “I can just abort this one, go on the cruise, and then get pregnant again when I get back.”
khk
It's a position I'm willing to defend and in more than one occasion I have gotten into some pretty serious arguments about the subject.
That said, my opinion is not set in stone and it has happened that my view on abortion is slightly changed after I debate with someone.
I think it's a really interesting topic to discuss and one worth thinking about, especially if you're at the age when you can vote to make abortion legal or illegal; restricted or not. Even more especially if you're sexually mature and sexually active, because there's a chance you will land yourself in a situation where you have to take a stance on abortion.
In any case, I pride myself in having done my research regarding child development, abortion procedure, abortion alternatives and the psychological impact of abortion (though the latter I'd love to know more about, I want to watch Lindsay Ellis' film!). I think I have a firm ground to stand on when I defend abortion, but I have always been willing to listen to the opinions of those who disagree with me.
That being said, I absolutely cannot stand pig-headed pro-lifers, in particular the religious ones.
See if you're going to defend a position that affects people who are NOT part of your religion; then you have to give me an argument good enough for non-believer. If your argument centers around this, then you're not only not doing a good job of defending your position, but you're giving it a reputation of being supported by stupid people.
I have found a website that sums up everything I hate about poorly-defended pro-life arguments.
It's called Ten Retarded Reasons Why Abortion Scares Me, or at least it should be.
It has everything. Bullshit statistics about breast cancer? Check. Fear-mongering regarding botched abortions? Check. The use of religion as if a logical fact rather than a belief a limited number of people subscribe to? Check. Blame-pushing towards certified gynaecologists? Obfuscating explanation on why abortion somehow destroys the concept of family? Slut-shaming about sex in general? Triple check!
Added bonus: there's also a bit of homophobia thrown in, because apparently I didn't have enough reasons to think the whole list was naive, nonsensical and moronic.
Another thing that really rubs me the wrong way about pro-lifers is that 98% of them seem to come from USA and apparently think that theirs is the only country in the world with legalised abortion or the only one that matters.
Images like this one don't make me sympathetic to your cause, it just makes me think you have an awfully narrow world view. Also, you don't know anything about abortion, or even biology in general (and judging by the label, not even geography).
Abortion is available on request on at least 54 countries in the world, most of them in Europe. If we're going to discuss scientific facts and morality, then the argument applies to countries that allow abortions all over the globe, not just yours. Abortion is a global issue, just like women's rights.
And yet, I don't think all pro-lifers are stupid. People like this lady actually bring forth powerful arguments for their cause that make one think, even if you don't agree with them fully.
I honestly wish most pro-lifers would take a step back and think of how they portray themselves. I honestly think they have a moral point of view that is worth exploring, but most of the time you don't want to because of the way they express themselves.
I leave you with this ethics dilemma I found; to give something more to think about.
Rank the following examples on a scale of 1-10 as less or more morally justified (0 being clearly unethical, 10 being clearly ethical). Or, if you think abortion can’t be justified under any circumstance, rank the cases on the scale of 1-10 as more or less morally repugnant (0 being incredibly abhorrent, 10 being wrong, but not as wrong, relative to the other examples).
1) A pregnant woman will die if she doesn’t abort her 10-week-old fetus. The child suffers from some terrible condition, and will very likely die a painful death soon after birth, if he or she survives delivery.
2) A pregnant woman is considering aborting her 4-month-old fetus because she’s afraid that her abusive husband will leave her if she doesn’t. “You’re getting too fat,” he tells her. “Get rid of that thing or I’m leaving you.”
3) A pregnant woman thought she wanted a baby, but now that she’s 8 and 1/2 months pregnant, isn’t so sure. She’s questioning motherhood because she just won a Caribbean cruise on The Price is Right, and the boat leaves next week. “This baby’s awful inconvenient,” she thinks. “I can just abort this one, go on the cruise, and then get pregnant again when I get back.”
khkUPDATE
Found two blogs with interesting views:
This one is my someone pro-choice
I really had a lost of respect for the second one until the ending, where she says this
"If personhood depends on mental capacity, then I should have more rights than you."
So ALL pro-lifers are automatically more intelligent than pro-choicers by default? Nice job alienating your audience, lady :/
Sunday, October 16, 2011
WHAT
So last night I had the weirdest dream I can remember. I don't know if it was because it was beer-induced or because I didn't sleep all week, or my brain is just fucking with me.
The annoying part about dreams is that you have to write about them as soon as you get up, otherwise you'll forget. So right now I will type what I do remember.
I was sitting with my friend Eli and arguing with him for the longest part of the dream. I don't know if were in the pub or the university or the table, but eventually I left with some friends and when I got outside it was a steep and heavily-vegetated field, probably where I took most of my ecology labs (which reminds me...I have a midterm for that soon, shit). As we were going down this hill I was having a lot of trouble getting my footing, so I looked down and saw a giant Pikachu.
I turned to point this out to my friend Jen, who loves Pikachu a lot; but when I looked again it turned out to be a person in a Pikachu costume and this person was taking it off.
And underneath this costume was the most hideous person I had ever seen. If you have ever seen Excalibur from Soul Eater, picture that, except it being a real person; it even had a top hat (underneath the Pikachu costume??).
I honestly don't know how to describe this person (not even the gender!); it's skin was grayish green, it had a unnatural long mouth with tiny teeth like an alligator, but it was oddly lumpy and fleshy. I don't even remember it if had eyes, but it was horrible.
When this creature turned I screamed involuntarily. Then I felt really bad because I thought for some reason this was a human being with feelings and I had just been really insensitive. I woke up at this point but fell asleep almost immediately and when I was dreaming again this creature was bearing down on my and I was doing my best to run scared shitless up the hill while trying not to be insensitive to other people's deformities.
I think I screamed more than once before I woke up for good.
WTF IS GOING ON IN MY BRAIN
I'll be the last to know, probably.
I think the oddest part of this dream was how much I was screaming, because I'm not a screamer in real life (I yell a lot, but that different).
The annoying part about dreams is that you have to write about them as soon as you get up, otherwise you'll forget. So right now I will type what I do remember.
I was sitting with my friend Eli and arguing with him for the longest part of the dream. I don't know if were in the pub or the university or the table, but eventually I left with some friends and when I got outside it was a steep and heavily-vegetated field, probably where I took most of my ecology labs (which reminds me...I have a midterm for that soon, shit). As we were going down this hill I was having a lot of trouble getting my footing, so I looked down and saw a giant Pikachu.
I turned to point this out to my friend Jen, who loves Pikachu a lot; but when I looked again it turned out to be a person in a Pikachu costume and this person was taking it off.
And underneath this costume was the most hideous person I had ever seen. If you have ever seen Excalibur from Soul Eater, picture that, except it being a real person; it even had a top hat (underneath the Pikachu costume??).
I honestly don't know how to describe this person (not even the gender!); it's skin was grayish green, it had a unnatural long mouth with tiny teeth like an alligator, but it was oddly lumpy and fleshy. I don't even remember it if had eyes, but it was horrible.
When this creature turned I screamed involuntarily. Then I felt really bad because I thought for some reason this was a human being with feelings and I had just been really insensitive. I woke up at this point but fell asleep almost immediately and when I was dreaming again this creature was bearing down on my and I was doing my best to run scared shitless up the hill while trying not to be insensitive to other people's deformities.
I think I screamed more than once before I woke up for good.
WTF IS GOING ON IN MY BRAIN
I'll be the last to know, probably.
I think the oddest part of this dream was how much I was screaming, because I'm not a screamer in real life (I yell a lot, but that different).
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
Quote
To quote the writer Anne Lamott: “It is a moral necessity that we not be forced to bring children into the world for whom we cannot be responsible and adoring and present. We must not inflict life on children who will be resented; we must not inflict unwanted children on society.”
Having sex is not an automatic consent or choice to become pregnant or become a parent.
Women should not have to be nuns in order to avoid unwanted pregnancy.
Having sex is not a contract to become a parent. If it were, it would always result in pregnancy and women would always choose to carry to term. Plenty of people have sex every day without wanting or hoping to conceive. This is about women’s bodily autonomy. As long as the fetus is a dependent part of the woman’s body, it is HER CHOICE what medical and life decisions she makes regarding her own body.
There are also plenty of women who have had kids that are terrible parents and their children suffer for it. But this society has a paternalistic fixation that a zygote supersedes an already born, adult woman. Unless you want to outlaw sex outside of marriage (and let’s not get into how wrongheaded it is to have a child in order to save a relationship), women will conceive without wanting to, or wanting to continue the pregnancy.
Having sex is not an automatic consent or choice to become pregnant or become a parent.
Women should not have to be nuns in order to avoid unwanted pregnancy.
Having sex is not a contract to become a parent. If it were, it would always result in pregnancy and women would always choose to carry to term. Plenty of people have sex every day without wanting or hoping to conceive. This is about women’s bodily autonomy. As long as the fetus is a dependent part of the woman’s body, it is HER CHOICE what medical and life decisions she makes regarding her own body.
There are also plenty of women who have had kids that are terrible parents and their children suffer for it. But this society has a paternalistic fixation that a zygote supersedes an already born, adult woman. Unless you want to outlaw sex outside of marriage (and let’s not get into how wrongheaded it is to have a child in order to save a relationship), women will conceive without wanting to, or wanting to continue the pregnancy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)