Using Kitty Genovese - "Where is all this coming from?"

Where it's coming from is the reaction to a post I did exactly one week ago in which I documented just a tiny fraction of the kind of pathological self-hatred of gay boys and men, setting up a hierarchy of "alpha men, gay men" really Nietzschian "supermen" types who, by their superior strength, sociopathy, and, very occasionally, superior intelligence, are encouraged to seduce and oppress, abduct, rape, torture, humiliate, degrade, insult, and generally abused what are presented as inferior boys and men for the sexual gratification as self-aggrandizement of said "alpha men" all of it as found in gay porn available for free consumption by anyone on the web.   And you will find every aspect of fascistic and Nazi role playing, white supremacist psychosis and whatever other depraved aspect of human thought or history that can be mixed into the stinking mess and sold with sadistic porn images, gifs and videos, as gay porn.  I will repost that original piece below this.

I am a gay man who has the radical idea that every gay man, every person who falls under the LGBT acronym,  every straight woman who doesn't, in fact every single person in the world, deserves entirely better treatment than that.  And when I say "ENTIRELY BETTER" I mean in every single way.  I think everyone deserves to have sexual relationships of the highest kind which will be an equal experience of love, affection, committed caring and honest fidelity.  I think that Lesbians and gay men deserve to have truly equal same-sex marriages, equal to the best of straight marriages of equally practiced and experienced love, affection, committed caring and honest fidelity.  I don't think fighting for the right to reproduce the worst kind of straight marriage would be worth the effort of anyone.   But that and entirely worse is being sold through porn in its idiotically enabled and ever worse form, encouraging the worst that any sick mind can encourage in other sick minds and those who can be enticed by that kind of fantasy to practice ever more degraded, ever less loving and affectionate, ever more hating and indifferent, uncaring, dishonest sexual acts by them.

You can't have both, the best, most moral sexual relationships, an expression of equality, of respecting equal rights, the dignity of each other embodying the moral obligation to treat everyone that way can't co-exist with the regime of the kind of pornography I'm talking about.  They are mutually exclusive, both ways of thinking, both ways of acting cannot exist in the same mind without damage to the better of them, both programs of behavior cannot be encouraged in the same society without damage to the better, never mind the best of it which we might aspire to.  Individuals might be able to sustain such a duality in appearance but it will be at a cost to their front of virtue maintained while their worst part is undamaged and will come to corrupt even what appears to the world to be good.  The same is true for a society, perhaps even more so through the powers of magnification.

When Jimmy Carter was mocked for his statement that he "had sinned in his heart", making reference to what Jesus said about the consequences of seeing other people as merely sexual objects instead of the full human beings, the full living beings they are, it showed how far the American society was on the road to this kind of thing. 

The lie told by the professional porn promoters in the media, the legal profession, such "social scientists" as they could pay to push their lies is that porn and the industrialization of sex for profit was not only not harmful but an alleged benefit to society, is a lie. It is a lie which, through the basest of coercion and corruption has become the required, de rigeur framing of this issue in what passes as respectable thought these days.

Of course feminism, in even its earliest phases, knew that was a lie due to the experience of women who had to fight against sexual objectification as the most basic aspect of their struggle for equality, just as black people had to most directly address the forms of objectification that were the substance of their inequality.  The aspects of the inequality of gay men was more directly done primarily through our sexual natures and, so, the mixture of that with the huge burden of internalized self-loathing and hatred which burden us could easily create this kind of pathology.   Lesbians, being women as well as defined by their sexuality had to deal with both forms of oppression and that informed their struggle for equality.  Gay men, being men, are, perhaps, more prone to have the same expectations of unequal relationship that can be the worst aspect of many straight sexual relationships.   The kind of thing I am dealing with here plays off of those vicissitudes of gay male identity as men who are attracted to men but men who have been, in so many cases, raised with all of the same screwed up expectations of inequality and unequal benefits from sex that are taught in the wider society and the media. No two groups are discriminated against in exactly the same way, each struggle for equality will have its own aspects peculiar to that group as well as features which are common to all.

It's all a lot more complex than the simplistic, reductionist program of making general absolute statements and facile arguments can admit to.  Journalism and its advocacy seldom practices the kind of depth that you need to get past the slogans, the lies, the deceptions, the inadequate and dishonest framing of this issue just as it seldom got real feminism, creating a phony substitute for it for easy and quick sale.  The results are the backlash against real equality for women and the increasingly pathological sex lives people are encouraged to have because objectification is easier and more profitable than relationships of equal love, affection, support and commitment.  And the sale of the cheap imitation, the gaudy knock-off results in what I've been writing about for the past week.

Friday, August 19, 2016

Hate Mail - Tell Us Which Of These Things Being Sold With Sex On Porn Sites This Month Are Compatible With Democratic Morals

Filthy 卐 Brutal 卐 White

Reblog if you want it Unsafe Insane and Non-Consensual 

via Degradation and Destruction 

Drugged, raped, and pozzed [to be intentionally infected with HIV]

Yeah, we make snuff movies glad you could come over tonight.

Rape me like a faggot 

Superior white men

This site is dedicated to the restoration of the rights of the straight white man that have been stolen by faggots over time

Live your fantasies [That one comes right after encouraging raping and killing a young "man" who looks about 12]

Those are accompanied with porn photos, gifs, videos, that are intended to sell the messaging with sex.

And that's just on one site.  Tell me why letting this stuff be posted online, where any psychopath can get their worst inclinations encouraged with sexual imagery is good for democracy or how any prosecutor or judge couldn't figure out that it's encouraging fascism, racism, violent domination, harm, rape and murder.  Or  why you are afraid that coming to that would endanger the right to encourage the opposites of those?  .

The lie that we aren't capable of regulating those decisions by courts and so we MUST allow this kind of stuff, and, believe it or not, far worse, to be considered to have the right to be distributed to the susceptible, is so willfully stupid that you have to be even more willfully stupid to pretend you really believe that.   Somehow, the Franklin Roosevelt administration, with all of its enormous advances, the advances in civil rights during the 1950s and early 60s happened in a country where the distribution and sale of that stuff would have been illegal and gotten you a prison term, and yet democracy was advancing during that period.   It's in the period when the Supreme Court permitted its distribution without restriction that has seen the destruction of civil rights progress, the corruption of democracy, the putsch that stole the presidency and the elevation of a TV created fascist strong-man to be within one woman from the presidency and the ability to appoint justices to the Supreme Court who will obliterate democracy.

You people are total fools if you can't see the problem.  I don't want to be part of any "left" that pushes lies like that.

Post script:  I didn't realize until yesterday the relevance of that song, Small Circle of Friends to what I was talking about.  Thinking about that Phil Ochs song that begins with an evocation of the infamous murder of Kitty Genovese  but, in its iconic treatment focusing on the supposed urban anonymous indifference of those who heard her being killed, as first read about in the New York Times.  Ochs and the media, then and now, ignore the facts of what led the man who killed her to believe he should do what he did, that that was permissible, that he had a large stash of straight pornography presenting women as objects for the use of men found with him when he was arrested for breaking, entering and theft.   The extent to which him having that stash of porn tipped off the police that he might have been involved in the sexual murder of several women, including Kitty Genovese, is certainly worth thinking about.  They certainly made the connection.  I would imagine they were used to seeing rapists, sex murderes having stashes of porn and that having one might be an indication of what to suspect.  That its relevance went over the head of Ochs, to the extent that he, later in the song presents a porn publisher's prosecution as another instance of injustice on par with the others in the song.  That isn't a surprise, the lefty media had been pushing that line for more than a few decades, already.   Those guys, who, no doubt, believed themselves to be more sophisticated than police detectives, didn't seem to get a glaringly relevant aspect of the case and what information it carried.  How its relevance could be denied and that denial could be pretended to be credible also carries a lot of information but about how willfully dishonest the media, mostly men but with a few women, are about this.

It would take several more years before the second-wave feminists pointed out that presenting people as objects in pornography had real consequences, for the women so used and for the general society as men, so informed and encouraged, treated women like objects for their use.  The men of the media retaliated rather fast painting that insight of feminism in about the worst and most dishonest of lights, including the entertainment industry.   Feminism would have made it harder to crank out the same kind of crap they'd relied on to make money for a long time, its writers, directors, producers, would have had to have learned entirely new ways of writing and, worse, they'd have had to have thought about a situation that, still, largely, is for the benefit of men.  It certainly was harder and more complex than would fit into a preachy protest song of the period. 

They used Kitty Genovese for their own purposes and still do without caring much about what it was that led the man who killed her to do what he did, what he did to other women, what is done to millions of other women and children and men who can be subjected to someone with a physical advantage and the idea that they are entitled to use them and dispose of them as they like.    It's easier to make up stuff about the neighbors and concentrate on that, instead. They don't even bother with the other women, just the one the New York Times used.