TW For Slut Shaming, References To Rape

[teleens_journal]

Parents, Don't Dress Your Girls Like Tramps, writes columnist LZ Granderson at CNN.com.

HIghlights:

• LZ Granderson: Some parents dress their young girls in provocative outfits
• Retailers have encouraged this behavior by marketing inappropriate clothing
• He says it's OK to blame retailers, but it's parents who are ultimately responsible
• Children need

Comments

[teleens_journal]

I'm all for the idea of not wanting to sexualize and objectify women of any age, but there's a fine line between stopping the objectification of women and shaming them for choosing to do as they wish with their bodies.

I'm a stripper and I love my job. I'm also very good friends with a professional escort who loves her job. But then I come across articles who call me anti-feminist and her a rape victim when we're both doing what we're doing of our own free will. (That's not to say that women aren't forced into sexual slavery every day - I have strong feelings about freeing them, but I am not a slave, neither is my friend and I resent anyone saying that we are.)

And before anyone argues that our culture's objectification of women is what allows both of us to have jobs in the first place, I have to go back to my friend's job being the oldest profession. Long before we were civilized, we bartered sex. As women grew to be possessions instead of equal partners in survival, we lost the freedom to choose to sell our bodies if we wished to.

Our culture now shames women for selling something that it's okay to give away for free. I believe it's because men feel that they have an inherent right to a woman's body once he feels sexually attracted to her and that any attraction he feels is automatically the fault of the woman.

All of that being said, anyone who looks at a prepubescent child and thinks 'sexy' ought to be looked at very closely. By the police. I don't care what this little girl was wearing - sexy is NOT an adjective to describe her.

[maynardsong]

But you've just hit on another problem I have with the way this culture sees sex, with a model of the woman being the gatekeeper and the man being the aggressor. With sex being something to either "give for free" or "sell". I'm all for destigmatizing sex work, and I realize that bartering sex is something really old. But there's also something to be said about such a view of sex, and there's no point in pretending that sex work generally does a thing to dismantle that view of sex. And I also think that's what's behind the argument that the objectification of women is what allows both of you to have jobs in the first place. Also, I think it sheds some light on why Chippendale's becomes creepy - for once, instead of giving or selling, women are the ones buying and consuming. And that leads to the women doing all sorts of things they wouldn't normally do.

[midoskeek]

How is it being the world's oldest profession a good argument? Are you saying cave men were not patriarchal?

[teleens_journal]

This is what I was thinking of - thank you, :). And while I've not done an in-depth study of anthropology, I believe I'd read that some early societies were matriarchal as well...

[apis_cerana]

Prostitution has always been practiced under Patriarchy...it's kind of odd that your justification for it existing is that it's the "oldest profession" (which I kind of doubt tbh).
Women should, of course, be able to do whatever they want to do with their bodies. However, I don't think that their choices (as in their *actions*) are automatically feminist. IMO stripping and prostitution could never be a feminist act because they are contributing to society's objectification of women (though not necessarily being degrading at the same time).

[pinkminx]

Yeah, agreeing with both of your points.

I don't know how prostitution would even work in a non-patriarchal society. Maybe we'd have something like it, and maybe we wouldn't. It'd be very different from what we have now, though.

[maynardsong]

There would be more gender balance, I think, for a start, IF we had it.

[maynardsong]

Well, it COULD be a reaction to the patriarchy, and that aspect of it could be feminist.
Are you saying in different words than mine, that sex work perpetuates the conception of sex as something that men get/obtain/gain and women either gain or sell? Of men as aggressors and women as gatekeepers? Of sex being inherently desirable to men but only a means to an end for women? Because that's my objection to teleensjournal 's comment. Are we putting the same thought in different words?

OT: I like your comments.

[apis_cerana]

Sure, it could have feminist intentions, but stripping and sex work can never be empowering in a patriarchal society.

I agree with what you're saying, and those ideas are definitely a part of why I objected to her comment.

However, I tried to simplify my argument further because her main point was that there's a fine line between slut-shaming and stopping the objectification of women, which I completely disagree with. People who try to stop the objectification of women are coming at it from a totally different place than slut-shamers.

Slut-shamers believe in the idea that women should never have sex with multiple partners or dress provocatively because they will be dirty whores!1 and not the pure, good women they should be. Which is as misogynist as it gets.

Folks who are against objectification of women (like myself) believe that women should have the right to do whatever we please with ourselves and our bodies, but recognizes that in current society, we are pushed to be a certain way -- we are seen as being more desirable if we are conventionally attractive and sexy, and shamed if we don't fit into the societally accepted standards of beauty. Our bodies are still seen as objects to be ogled, bought and sold, and in a society like that, we have to really think about our choices.

:) Thanks.

[maynardsong]

oy, I said "women either gain or sell" and I MEANT "give or sell"
But you probably got that.
I REALLY took issue with this part: "that it's okay to give away for free" for that reason. I'm not *giving* anything by not charging for sex. I'm just only having sex that's inherently appealing to me. I want sex that IS the end, not the means to an end. That's not "giving it away for free", that's me having a sex drive.
Also, it's NOT okay these days to "give it away for free" anyway! Or is slut-shaming dead?
Actually, the more I think about it, the more that comment bothered me.

[hearthand]

"I REALLY took issue with this part: "that it's okay to give away for free" for that reason. I'm not *giving* anything by not charging for sex. I'm just only having sex that's inherently appealing to me. I want sex that IS the end, not the means to an end. That's not "giving it away for free", that's me having a sex drive."

I agree with this.

[teleens_journal]

Prostitution has always been practiced under Patriarchy...it's kind of odd that your justification for it existing is that it's the "oldest profession" (which I kind of doubt tbh).

For as long as we've been able to barter, we've bartered sex in some way, shape or form.

IMO stripping and prostitution could never be a feminist act because they are contributing to society's objectification of women (though not necessarily being degrading at the same time).

We'll agree to disagree. While I see and respect your point regarding the objectification of women in our culture, I get highly offended at the idea that my job is inherently anti-feminist.

My profession allows uneducated single mothers to send their children to private school, it's allowing me to pay for my own tuition in school and even if it were doing neither of those things, it's still my body and what I choose to do with it is no one's business but mine.

[maynardsong]

"not feminist" != "anti-feminist"
I get that your profession has made you able to make a good living. And it is your choice, and has served you well. More power to you. There's a huge difference between appreciating that and claiming that it's somehow feminist. It might be empowering to you as an individual, but that doesn't make it feminist. Not everything a woman does is feminist, even if it works out well.

And again, what is your point with bringing up that we've "always" (really?) bartered sex? It's quite naive to ignore who's the consumer and who's the one selling the services.

[teleens_journal]

Not everything a woman does is feminist, even if it works out well.

I actually agree with this completely. I recently saw something (on the Travel Channel, of all places) that was about a coffee shop where all of the women wore provocative (read: stripper-like) outfits and the employees were able to make $2-500 in tips just for dressing up and selling coffee.

The announcer said at the end, "It's not sexist - a woman owns it," which left me thinking, "Um, no, that's not how sexism works."

I guess I just look at how the issues of sexism and sexual harassment are handled where I work and see it all as something a lot more straightforward than the way it is in the rest of society. If a man says or does something inappropriate at my job, I get to slap him or get him kicked out. The layers of paperwork and general BS that go with the corporate world just aren't there. I suppose that's why I see it as empowering.

But I agree - so long as women are only valued on a sexual basis, we'll never have anything resembling true feminism.

I really appreciate you making me think about this a little more deeply than I have in the past. Even so, I stand by the statement that I was FAR more degraded when I had to let people scream at me for a living than now, when I can tell customers who say and do things that are demeaning, degrading or whom I just generally don't care for, "You're a piece of shit and I hope you die in a fire," without getting fired.

As to why I bring up the bartering of sex - excellent question, :(.

It's quite naive to ignore who's the consumer and who's the one selling the services.

I am naive, but I'm trying very hard not to be.

I apologize for my defensiveness regarding my profession. It's caused me to derail the conversation and I shouldn't have.

[hearthand]

I use to dance in a nightclub. While the routines weren't inherently sexual in context, some of the performances could be perceived as being sexual to a drunken male (for example, freestyle dancing on the bartop is quite unique in the city I worked in)

I understand what you mean by feeling empowered by the amount of backup you have while you're performing. If anyone stepped over the line while I worked in the nightclub (interestingly, I had more hassle as a non-dancing barperson!) I could refuse service, I could fight back and feel like I was defending myself and if I gave the word I could have that person removed from the premises. That kind of empowerment (or support, perhaps?) wasn't offered to me in different jobs with the public such as when I was waitressing and had to project a face of unshakable calm and eternal tolerance.

To be fair, I often felt more violated in jobs where I had to take it on the chin than I did while working in the nightclub where I felt like I could say "Woa, stop the bus..." and not get fired or have a silent threat of disciplinary action to silence me.