Semantics,Pneumatics, Erotics, and Dirt.

I claim to be one thing continually in my life.

Loyal.

Loyal as dirt.

I am a dirt person.

I come from dirt people.

Not earthy , though I am that to, but dirt.

Not dirty cause the thing about dirt people is we know dirt, how it comes how it is , what it needs .

We have no illusions about it being anything but shit and rocks and the very stuff like is made off.

Earth is what you call it when you ain't never had to beg it for a living.

Earth is what you call it when you believe dirt even though it gives you life is a bad thing.

Dirt is loyal and I

I am dirt people.

Kactus has a fabulous post

( via BFP who has even more on how this shit is getting more and more awful)

about the power of Community and the fucking blindness of privilege to the needs and loves and desires of people who they for some reason can talk about all the time but can not see.

The dirt people.

When ever the dirt people come up we become semantics.

It is assumed that our " lack" of something makes our desires our lives are not informed enough, intelligent enough or cultured enough to be real.

It must be a semantic problem.

Cause we don't know how good _______ will be.

We don't know how good the new fangled solar ready houses might be.

We don't know how much this brand new science will help the world even if it depends on wiping some of us off the planet.

We would get it if we "knew better".

Don't we know that the condo that will suddenly be built on our community garden after 20 years of malicious avoidance of our communities will revitalize it?

God for bid if it's the only way the kids got to know Ms.Johnson, or if the Bells met at teh first harvest.

We are punished for our lack of greed, we are punished for our love of dirt.

We are punished for loving each other , and our soil and our bones and our history

And should we mount protest

We're jealous you know.

We must be like Gollum hoarding our rings from some great good

Even though we can't see it.

And our destruction is necessary for it, not our discomfort but our DESTRUCTION

but somehow fighting for our lives and homes is a semantic thing.

How dare we cling to dirt.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Part of why I started with that is that I must entire into a conversation, that I really don't want to.

You have to understand a lil bit what community means

and dirt means.

I am truly trying to take the words of Prof Black Women About not engaging the hegemon to heart.

So when I say I don't want to address this please believe I don't .

But this

This is my Sylvia.

And my Firefly.

But frankly this is my Sylvia.

But it started with my Sudy.

The post by Tekanji is incandescent in ways but I frankly disagree with it's premise.

This is NOT unrepresentative of the movement as it is experienced by many people. It is NOT a question of bad thought or language semantics.

It is a conditioned and well oiled part of the movement that a drive to universality and BIGNESS will always be privileged and encouraged at the expense of other women.

One of the things that is recurring in my on and offline feminist discussions is this meme of " WELL ITS TIME FOR XYZED to step ASIDE"

I am this clos eto naming it the Scarlett Johannson effect . Due to her famous quotes about age and the necessity of young women.

NOw I may attribute it to my historical background and my general not being the " target audience" but

I find this in a single word: crap

In multiple words

Ageist omnipotent megomaniacal CRAP.

Good heavens , it is ageism internalized as if simply not going HERE TAKE WHAT I'VE WORKED MY LIFE FOR, is simply some kind of envy of the sweet bud of youth rather than the actual consideration of , their own lives.

And since I OFTEN see this and hear this with NO SPECIFICS i find it really hard to not be upset when I hear it.

Real movement problems and fights are not just about people stepping aside, or simply trying to quickly codify and crystallize our past as if tit doesn't affect us as we live today.

There are no clean breaks

and if there is a need for clarification and building , can we stop acting as if dealing with the dirt that was necessary to get to where we are now is some kind of morass that needs to be fixed.

I am not like Tekanji I am not 100% behind the intent of the book but then again I am a WOC and we know how well white feminist intent has done us these past centuries right?

That being said I really have nothing I'm willing to discuss about it , good luck godspeed , have fun.

But the comments and the commentary as it affects tow women I consider blogfam DO have things that I will be addressing because

Once again the passive " civil" erasure of non mainstream voices and the subsequent appropriation of their ideas is happening in full force and to people I LOVE.

or as I'm falling up points out beautifully :

But that's part of the problem: this critique (that the actions of the mainstream/economically privileged white feminist movement appropriate, exploit, ignore, and erase the actions and experiences of those who are not economically privileged white women) keeps on getting made. And then it gets appropriated and exploited (see the repeated abuse of Audre Lorde's "master's tools" line), ignored and erased

My first problem:

Amanda Marcotte:

You’re really arguing more with the rhetorical posturing than the idea behind the book. I don’t think they’re trying to promote feminist in-fighting or denying radical feminist theory at all. The idea was hatched after reading message board after message board where guys were like, “If I do this, is it rape? If I do that?”, basically seeking affirmation that some amount of coercion is acceptable within limits. Their idea was, basically, coercion is *part* of sex, because women’s role is gatekeeper and men’s role is to try to wear down a woman’s role. This idea is why people can’t tell the difference between rape and sex, because we use “consent” (whether arrived at through enthusiasm or through merely giving into heavy pressure converging on force) as the model of when sex should happen, not “enthusiasm”. If these men were conditioned to look for sex to happen only if a woman is like, “Yes, god, yes please now!” instead of, “Fine, if you must and that’s the only way I’ll get you to leave my house, stick it in but please be quick about it,” then they would not run the risk of raping someone through pursuing pressure-and-coercion methods of getting laid.

(bolded emphasis mine)

No. Just no. First off I love how female centered pleasure involves teaching men and instructing men instead of opening dialogue with women. I also love and by love I mean do not comprehend in the slightest the fucking reinvention of consent. Wait i was raised ( by these old wrong headed feminist) that informed consent means when I am FREELY able to say yes or no and not feeling pressured. The presumption of heterosexual rape culture aside.

YOU DON'T ACCIDENTALLY RAPE SOMEONE.

you ignore their discomfort , and place them in situations where no is not a respectable option. It's not something that happens. But you see you can't market a book that revolutionizes and " brings men in" if you hold on to that old tired rhetoric of " If s/h/z/e says no or is in a situation where s/h/z/e CAN'T say no in comfort without fear. YOU ARE RAPING YOUR PARTNER. You can't tell these poor wounded darlings that and sell them a book at the same time, that's mean to them!

Except many men i know of VARIED politics have used and though I hate it for its own reasons this logic

" If she says no stop , if she can't say no stop,someone else will say yes . It's the law of averages"

SO Hmmm it seems that even in misogynistic user posturing guys whose only goal is to get laid can comprehend the if THERE IS ANY DOUBT STOP thing , but these poor little babies need to be lead and given step by step instructions?


Sylvia/M and Fire Fly ask the questions I wanted to but then here's where I get annoyed and start to get machete hunting

Jaclyn writes:

Tekanji-

Thanks for a great post. As a co-editor of the anthology (and, of course, the call) I don’t think it’s picking nits — you’re not the first person to point out the unintentional oppositionality in our phrasing, and I regret it. We in no way want to create or re-inscribe false divisions between feminists. What we more meant is that the concept of “sex has nothing to do with rape” has gotten twisted to the point where it’s difficult in some quarters of rape prevention to talk about changing the sexual culture as a means to eradicate rape culture, and we’re seeking to take that silence on in this anthology.

I do disagree (as Fire Fly asserted) that we’re privileging one form of rape (and victim) over another — in a culture where there’s no shame in women liking sex, where sex is no longer considered by reasonable, good-acting people of any gender, or by the larger culture, to be a commodity that women are responsible for controlling and men are responsible for “getting,” rapists of any kind or gender — strangers, dates, family, spouses, whatever — will be much easier to identify and prosecute. Imagine if the law assumed you could easily tell if a woman was having a good time! If juries had no more reason to expect a woman to lie because she “had regrets”! There will always be rapists, because there will always be sociopaths. But there doesn’t have to be a culture of rape, and that’s what we’re trying to address in this book.

A couple more things:

1) Tekanji, dare I hope you might still find time to submit?

2) Donna darko, I couldn’t agree with you more about the intersections. We’re looking for submissions that address undoing the systems of rape culture (if you read the list of suggested topics in the call you’ll get more of a sense of that), and we can’t do that without addressing intersectionality. We want to address who benefits economically from rape culture, how race, class and sexuality are used as wedges to sustain it, all that. I hope Donna and other folks reading this blog who are interested in those issues will submit!

( bold emphasis mine again)

*face palm*

What quarters?

More importantly what culture? I love how this assumption of culture runs RAMPANT and unchallenged. My culture does not have an assumption of women gatekeepers or non engagement of female pleasure ( shit we dedicate entire genres to female pleasure) , we have a rape sustaining culture, we have homophobia ( oh dear god we have homophobia), we have misogyny but a society taht doesn't believe STRONGLY in women's pleasure.

Not us, in fact many societies and cultures don't.

And that very fact has been used to render us UNRAPEABLE.

this mythos of our purported pleasure seeking, the culture artifacts of our sensuality have rendered damn near incapable of being seen as anything BUT seductresses,geishas, hot blooded black ass.

In fact it's not uncommon that a white woman is often portrayed as becoming colored when in touch with her sexuality.

( and oddly enough we've written extensively about feminine pleasure and sexuality and consent and gratification as many as ehhh 80 some odd years a go )

But guess what has worked.

A CONSENT MODEL THAT PRIORITIZES OUR WILLINGNESS AND ABILITY TO FREELY GRANT IT

or as Nadia says here:

and when talking about types of rape, it’s not as simple as ‘white women’s experiences’ vs. ‘women of color’s experience,’ (which i hope this discussion will not later be recalled as, not saying that anyone here is reducing it to this). i think your question immedietly points to all those who’s experiences with sexual assault fall outside the narrow definitions put forth in the call for submissions as well as the comments. why doesn’t “rape culture” here include rapes perpetrated by soldiers or cops, or perpetrated against prisoners, detainees, sex workers, undocumented immigrants….?

yes, often females are socialized to abide by the “no means maybe” rule of expressing desire (this has been my experience in middle class midwest american suburbs). rapes that result from social codes encouraging men to push and coerce women into sex do not make up a rape culture all by themselves. the commodification of women’s bodies and sex that occurs in these rapes is not the only way that women’s bodies are commodified.

why is it necessary to narrow the definition of rape? so that privileged women can eliminate “rape culture” as it exists in their realitys and claim it as a feminist victory, while ignoring rape culture as it exists in so many other contexts? same shit, different day!

It's that pesky universality you see, when you believe that age race and class are "wedges across markets"rather than lived experiences and are willing to be that loose with defining peoples lives. Why wouldn't it strike you as perfectly okay to say culture and mean one thing and ASSUME everyone understands it, it's also great to concentrate on economic benefits, because really if we did a REAL social , cultural , colonial analysis it doesn't come out looking so clear cut does it?

Tranforming a Rape Culture brought attention to the g’dam u-g-l-y truth that rape is brought forth from messed up ideals from our own society. WE did this. It’s not just men, it’s all of us with out stinking hands and poor excuses. It’s in everything we touch and ignore.

Edited to add that's Sudy making all kinds of sense.

Or as Alexis says at Firefly's:

am also confused about how that framing reflects on our forecloses some of their bullet points, and I think I may just disagree about the economic politics of sex here…because a “desegmented market” that allows people to organize across races/classes whatever is still a “market”

Many people not really gonna be or WANT to be included if we're back in a market place.

Plus my wife says( she is both cute and smart):

This ignores teh fact that there are women who are flat out attacked and raped who experience physical pleasure and orgasms. It is dangerous to be unclear in training men to think sex is okay if a woman has pleasure even if she is clearly not in an orgasmic mindstate.

Yeah that whole thing. That people who are raped often HAVE SEXUAL responses. Indicate sexual pleasure and part of their recovery is reclaiming asexual response after they felt IT BETRAYED THEM BY HAVING PLEASURE.


Why am I so detailed cause I'm coming up on the why I am FUCKING PISSED.

All of this all of these points are asked, are discussed in some form PRE THIS POST.

And maybe people are right cause it's my Sylvia and my Firefly and my donna I'm not a good person to speak on it ( like that's ever stopped me)

But I don't at all appreciate the ease in which these dense nuanced points are allowed to be characterized as "scare quotes"

I'm pretty much done with the frigging presumption that a catering to a white hegemonic privileged discourse is a lot of people.

Cause news flash Roy it AIN'T.

It's a specific subset and frankly the " victim victim" bullshit of reframing a rape survivor by only her identity just sliding.

DISGUSTS ME.

Please lets focus on how a violent act defines a woman. And still think we are "changing rape culture"

Hello concern trolling

Hello privilege blindness and a healthy doubt are you sure of what your saying lil brown girl.

No .

Not to my fam.

SO you know what there should be a discussion on women's sexuality. There SHOULD be an honest ENGAGING VARIED dialogue on how women interact how we create movements and how we construct sex.

I hope this book actually achieves that . But with this framing this addressing of the issues and the scary rehash already of the discussion dynamics.

It won't , and whatever happens happens

But I am dirt people and it always comes back to us.