Answering the pro-pornography “therapists.”

Purple Sage examines the ill-informed pro-pornography ramblings of Marty Klein, and gives the radical feminist answers to common questions about pornography in relationships.

If your husband is engaging in immoral behavior that upsets you and if he won’t stop even when you tell him why it upsets you, then it’s not a good relationship. That’s an abusive relationship.

The field of sex therapy has always been a field dominated by men and male ideas about sex. Men have created the idea of the sexual “inhibition” which needs to be cured in women, which is a fancy way of saying that women shouldn’t be allowed to say no. Men have ignored the clitoris, have prioritized penis-in-vagina sex even when women don’t get any pleasure from it and they’ve named women “frigid” for not engaging in the kind of sex that men want them to have. Sex therapists will not help you to improve your sex life, they will just help your husband to keep his dominant position over you and continue engaging in harmful behaviours. A sex therapist who tells you to accept your husband’s porn use is nothing more than a male supremacist with a fancy title. Do not listen to him.

Here’s how to actually improve your sex life. First, make your husband read Pornland by Gail Dines and then explain to you, face-to-face, in his own words, what he learned from the book. I suggest proceeding one chapter at a time, to make sure he thoroughly understands all the issues. Discuss with him why he feels he needs to use porn, and correct any misconceptions he may have. For example, he might believe that you are forbidding him from masturbating. Men are so dumb that they have no idea that one can touch one’s genitals without looking at a computer screen. He may need this explained to him.

If he refuses to understand what’s wrong with porn, and if he begins dismissing your feelings or gas-lighting you, get a lawyer, and start planning to move out. If he never repents, finalize your divorce.

A Psychological Defense Of Antinatalism

The story of the Susanna and the Elders painting, by Artemisia Gentileschi

This is a story well worth reading.

Pedophilia should not be tolerated.

I think pedophiles are opportunistic abusive men. I do not think they are “sexually attracted” to children. I think many pedophiles believe they are, and I think quite a number of people now believe it’s tied up in sexual orientation, but I think those are muddled, false notions that obscure the fact that an adult sexualizing and taking sexual action with a child is always committing rape.

There are so many ways to debunk the myth of the “minor attracted person” I hardly know where to begin. One very important thing to remember is that there are plenty of pedophiles who continue to have “normal” sexual relationships with adults. How many stories have we heard of fathers molesting their children while married to their mothers? How many women start dating boyfriends only to have that boyfriend abuse their child? How many people are shocked by the family man who’s a principal, preacher, football coach, of their community being exposed to sexually abusing children when they seemed so “normal” and have wives and kids themselves? These men continue to move through life in “normal” ways (and I will add a caveat here since no one can seem to read through the lines, yes women have sexually abused children. It is RAPE to sexually abuse a child as an adult woman. I have no love for women who do that. OK, back to men, the 99% of offenders).

Sexuality is a biological FUNCTION. It exists so that species can procreate. However, sexuality also exists as a basis for our pleasure and romantic interactions when speaking of humans. That’s where sexualy orientation comes in, and why you can be straight (opposite sex attracted), bisexaul (both sex attracted), or gay (same sex attracted). Also, yes I believe asexualiy, as in having no attraction (romantic and sexual) is possible and probably exists in small numbers. So there you go, sexuality is based on how adults want to fuck and love other adults, because there’s some need in us to want to partner and create more community. Child sexuality is more of a precursor to adult sexuality. Children have romantic urges, and throughout puberty begin to develop sexual urges, but there is a wide scope in which sexuality falls under. Teenagers wanting to kiss and date is not proof that “all teens have sex” which is another myth that just blows my mind.

So where on earth does an adult being sexualy attracted to children fall into that basic simple biological urge? WHAT attracts adults to children? Is it at all comparable to how adults are attracted to other adults?

The “what” that attracts adults to children is rape. The desire for them is the rape. Rapists 1) like to rape 2) want to rape. The lack of consent, the abuse, the pain, the grooming, the lies, the force, the power is the point of rape. Rape is not “accidental” or “grey” sex. Rape is using your body as a weapon, making sexuality violent. So pedophiles who are “attracted” to children are actually attracted to rape. Because they are rapists. And rape is not a sexuality.

Children cannot consent. Many people who are “tolerant” of pedophilia will bend over backwards trying to argue how children might be able to, or can consent, or have free will or whatever bullshit. But the truth is no child can ask for the sexaul acts of adults without being given the idea, and that idea comes from grooming. No child can consent to, for example, fellatio because most children aren’t aware of what that is. And children don’t usually find the act appealing when learning. They have to be told that adults do it, that pleasure can come from it, that it can be a loving action. And they are usually told this by rapist adults looking to rape them. Because the rapist knows it’s rape and knows that the child will believe them. The adult is aware of his higher understanding, and he knows the child knows nothing compared to him. And he likes that because that means he can commit rape, which he wants to do. That’s what makes him a rapist.

People who claim to be “non-offending maps” or whatever the fuck reveal the truth of this by claiming to be non-offending to begin with. Like, if it was just a disorder, just an illness, why would you need to try to be non-offending? How disgusting that is to say to CSA survivors and the mentally ill. How terrible it is to set up a defense for these men. I was non-offending but then the illness got me and I offended, it wasn’t me it was my illness, I just couldn’t help it. OH WELL THEN. They are minor attracted but then “don’t offend,” so then what makes them minor attracted? Are you admitting to fantasizing about raping children? And I’m supposed to believe that’s fine? I would never touch a child, but I will masturbate to the thought of violating one and then leave the house and exist in the world? FUCK THEM. They don’t accidentally offend, and they don’t not offend.

So, why do they exist? They exist because of male supremacy. Like any rape, they are exerting the power they have to rape. Children suffer under patriarchy and industrialization. They are things to own, status bringers, future soldiers and laborers. The father is the head of the household and can do whatever he wants. Children and women are at the mercy of men. So what do men do, to celebrate and keep it that way? They rape them. That’s why rape exists.

Is misogyny a disorder? Is marital rape a sexuality? NOPE.

Rapist want to rape. Pedophiles are rapists who want to rape children. Any attraction they feel is the attraction to power they have over children because of the supremacy they live in. And that’s that.

Worshipping motherhood is not good for feminism.

IceMountainFire criticizes a defense of matriarchy because of its reliance on motherhood as women’s only freedom.

The future exists independently from humans. The universes existed before we evolved, and they will after we are all gone. It is unfathomably narcissistic to believe that motherhood is needed for anything or anyone but humans themselves.

Pregnancy is also not an achievement. Brain-dead women give birth. Female children can give birth. Women with cancer and AIDS can give birth. Women in concentration camps get pregnant. Women in meno-pause can give birth to unexpected babies against all statistical odds. Artificially pregnant women beyond meno-pause can give birth. Nothing easier than to make female humans breed, even in the most adverse circumstances. The lengths barren women go with IVF and adoption completely pale against the huge efforts het women have to take NOT to get pregnant.

Nontheless, for Heide Göttner-Abendroth and others like her, motherhood is the most important thing in an individual woman’s life and in the universe as a whole…

There is nothing in a matriarchy that inherently is against gender roles. In fact, matriarchies seem to encourage gender roles on all levels. This of course is at odds with modern feminist perspectives, and has to be circumnavigated somehow.

Defining Libertarianism in one tweet.

How to care about children’s consent.

Happiness is Here discusses a very important anti-childist issue: how to accept children’s consent, instead of ignoring it or coercing it.

A very important part of consent is the ability to say ‘no’. But so often children do not have their ‘no’ respected. Whether they don’t feel like getting dressed, going to the park with friends today, eating the dinner you prepared for them, or going to bed on your schedule, their ‘no’ is seen as insignificant. A parent is presumed to have the right to organise their child’s life. Though things like sleep and eating are clearly related to bodily autonomy, most people don’t extend children’s rights to these areas.

“Much of the control exerted on children is done in the name of caregiving. We control because we know that children’s well-being is our responsibility and we have accepted without question that control is an integral part of fulfilling this responsibility. Let’s begin to question that assumption.” –Teresa Graham Brett

When children tell us ‘no’, much of the time they are either forced to do things anyway, coerced, or shamed. When we guilt or shame children for their opinions and choices in other areas, when we exert power of them instead of cooperating, how can we then expect them to feel they are in control of their own bodies?

When children say ‘no’, it can not be met with guilt or force. We need them to know that their ‘no’ matters. Always.

Noam Chomsky: Critique of Madisonian Democracy