The porn industry now wants to follow in this jokers footsteps by having their own version of Hustler “Live”/”onsite” – following the exact same model. Lure immature/mindless/drunk girls into sex-ploitation via reward system. Our public streets and pubs are not porn houses. Whats next? The Church?

THE US GOVERNMENT NEEDS TAKE ITS RESPONSIBILITY
TO ITS OWN POPULATION FAR MORE SERIOUSLY THAN THIS

It enforces seat belt laws for consumers own protection. But it wont put the lid on jokers who take essentially children who are jumping into adulthood in an assenine way.

This portable porn van
is a new model that can be exploited without end.

I AM SHOCKED THAT THE US GOVERNMENT
IS SO SILENT WHEN IT COMES TO PROTECTING
ITS WEAKEST MEMBERS OF ITS OWN POPULATION.

THis is a grave insult.

A lot of jerkoffs like this GGW guy exist out there who have yet to make their debut. It is positively shocking how club owners are willing to exploit the mindless for a profit. THERE ARE RULES.

AND THE US GOVERNMENT IS NEGLECTING
ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT RESPONSIBILITIES.
THE RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT AND PRESERVE ITS OWN.

I’ll grant you pianist, cellist, violinist, flautist, watercolourist, dentist, etc, with their artsy/professional whiff; but we still have to account for composer, banker, lawyer, writer (isn’t “writer” higher-status than “journalist”? and is “novelist” swankier than “author”?) so I call it a somewhat weak status marker.

I figure most folks know that ‘rape’ in its Latinate origin (rapere) is ‘to seize (by force), to carry off’, which is why the raptors are so called (they swoop down on their prey, seize it violently, and carry it off), and the crime of rape was originally modelled under law as the carrying off (willing or unwilling) of a woman from her father’s or husband’s household. or indeed of any kind of theft (rapine), although it seems to me it leans slightly towards the theft of “living property” (chattel) as in “reiving and raiding”.

thus old Pope’s long poem “The Rape of the Lock” over which generations of schoolboys have sniggered only to be disappointed, is not about some bizarre antics with a door lock but the theft of a lock of hair, and the Rape of the Sabine Women (Roman nationalist mythology) was the theme for more than one famous painting which depict the wailing and struggling women being seized and carried off, not (as we would say today) literally raped. the meaning of the word has shifted over the centuries to focus particularly on penetration rather than kidnapping (though this more modern sense of rape was I think always implicit in the “theft” of women).

but we digress… making me a digressionist, I suppose, or just a plain proletarian digresser. apologies for the momentary trivia fit. it’s been a depressing few days and my brain needed to play for a few minutes in the sandbox of etymology where words do not suffer and bleed.

One of the abominable things that struck me while doing this exercise was how the -IST always seems to indicate the application of some kind of skill or artistic affinity (though not so much with “racist”)

murder-ER
molest-ER
embezzl-ER

The -ER has more of a “just does it” ambiance, dont’chya think? It feels unconscious, where -IST denotes premeditation and practice.

“Rapism” is definitely a good way to pin the tail on our culture rather than making each act of rape some kind of isolated and aberrant individual act.

Sorry…just random, De inspired musings.

Randy

but anyway. when we say someone is a ‘racist’ there is an ambiguity at work: we may mean that this person actually commits acts of racist violence, or that they merely cherish ideas which support or justify acts of racist violence… police who beat and shoot dead young Black men without cause, or racists like Mel Gibson and Mike Richards who — we think, we don’t know for sure — don’t actually batter or murder Jews or people of colour, but spout the language of those who do. we admit there is an ideology called “racism” and that “racists” are those who subscribe to that ideology whether they act it out or not. and we admit a continuum and a cultural pervasiveness of this ideology.

despite the shallow similarity of the two words however, even folk-etymology does not back-form an ideology called “rapism” [but isn't that what we mean when we say "a rape culture"?] and allow the ambiguity that a man may have “rapist” (as an adjective, here) ideas, without personally acting on them in his own flesh? or at least, not in someone else’s flesh? (for of course he may act on his own flesh while masturbating to rapist fantasies, many of which are also racist fantasies as we well know).

“for those of us who aren’t rapists” was the phrase that elicited this little thought-detour for me: I thought, “but it’s a rapist [adjective] culture, how can any of us not be acculturated as [ideological] rapists, that is, believers in a mythos justifying rape by positing the inferiority of women?”

and is American racism really an ideology in its own right, springing from some “natural” xenophobia? or an ideology which evolved to justify the confiscation of land from indigenes and the enslavement of Africans in the Americas etc? for there is some evidence that in cases of peaceable first contact, vile racist ideologies about indigenous people did not get traction in euro/anglo popular thought until after colonisation and expropriation were well under way. privilege and exploitation require an ideology/mythos to salve the conscience; men who rape require a rapist ideology to salve their collective conscience.

rapism. I doubt it will ever catch on but it is another way to look at the actual, physical rapist that does not make him a ‘special kind of criminal male who is strangely unlike the rest of us.’ it makes the rapist — like any other terrorist — the operative arm of an ideology — a hegemonic ideology. and allows us to include those who subscribe to the ideology under the general term “rapists” — believers in the cult of rape.

“Erotic depictions include paintings, sculpture, photographs, music and writings that show scenes of a sexual nature. They have been created by nearly every civilisation, ancient and modern. Early cultures often associated the sexual act with supernatural forces and thus their religion is intertwined with such depictions. In Asian countries such as India, Japan and China, representations of sex and erotic art have specific spiritual meanings within the native religions of Hinduism, Buddhism, Shinto and Taoism. The Greeks and Romans produced much art and decoration of an erotic nature, much of it integrated with their religious beliefs and cultural practices.[1][2]

In more recent times, erotic depictions have gone from being a luxury item for the few to a propaganda tool and then an everyday commodity, and even a livelihood for some. As the technology of communication has changed, each new technique, such as printing, photography, motion pictures and computers, has been adapted to display and disseminate these depictions.[3]“

Right now I can point out about five glaring shits jumping out at me from this passage, but I would rather throw the question out there for other folks to tackle with first. Basically, this situation rakes up nearly every assumption we’ve ever shot down about gender here at FS. De, help me out here.

Oh…to be a radical feminist and a Wiki editor…

They don’t just shy away from admitting that they have done “bad deeds.” They want the deeds to not be bad, which is historically and materially the case as we know it, and so they do not want change to happen on this front.

Stan – I have had the sneaking suspiscion for a very long time that when in debates about rape with men – even so-called progressive dudes – they seem to get defensive and dismissive quite quickly specifically because the topic treads to close to some things they (and/or someone close to them) have done and they don’t want to have to admit they are guilty of the crime as well. Because, apparently to them, rapists are only dirty brown men in alleys – not your best friend, your boss, your brother or yourself.

There is a rapist checklist that floats around the feminist blogs – and I can’t tell you how many times I have seen the list posted and then seen a load of male posters show up to explain to the women why #x and #y aren’t rape. As if only they have a right to decide, and only they have the clear and logical minds to decide. While symotaneously telling women what they can and can’t do so as to avoid “inviting” rape. Because while only men have a clear enough mind to decide what is rape, they can’t be expected to not do it (it’s apparently up to us to stop it). Boys will be boys, after all.

It is reassuring then, to see a man be candid about it.

So let’s see … the producers got some frat boys drunk and took advantage of them. All I can say to those frat boys is, “Now ya know how it feels.”

I’m AWOL — out in slow dialup land. Back in a couple of days…

That this Francis guy is walking around loose is an indictment of the culture. When I return I’ll have some more to say about “crunk” and the use of alcohol to enable/excuse rape and other violence against women.