Craigslist fiasco reveals Malestream Media's Blindspot: Misogyny

yep...
My dh visits a very subversive and offensive message board...I don't blame him...some of it is hilarious.

But their fave thing is to post some of the ads from Craigslist and then rip em apart.

Funny reading...but a sad symbol of how pathetic our little world really is.

I very much agree with Tish that it's BDSM involves a complicated set of desires. I also think Therapydoc is right when she says that masochism or sadism isn't always necessarily limited to a "safe" arena. But I think, like so many other complications of the soul, outrage about this issue is no way to achieve understanding. And public humiliation is never going to get anyone anywhere.

Lisa from That's Empress to You ( http://thatsempresstoyou.typepad.com/ )

Why in the world do we freak out about Geneva conventions on torture for people who want to kill us but think its no big deal for it to be going on in smaller scale privately???
That is the height of hypocrisy for men & women.

Have you ever noticed how abused women go from one bad realtionship to another? I call them (affectionately of course)asshole magnets. Its like the brood of vipers smells the victim from miles away.
I'm sure there are plenty of male sociopaths who would gladly hurt a woman without a conscience about it. That sociopath knows no other world. If you claim you welcome pain thats just a common mental occurance for them -your pain is their life. Only this time they might not worry so much about what their parole officer might think.

Are the women sociopath numbers as great as the male counterparts? I guess a user is user no matter what gender.

The privacy issue is moot for me. First of all every post is logged by IP address. There is very little privacy in the online world. The minute you email a picture of your johnson to a message board party, your privacy ended there.
Me thinks a user of people overlooks such a thing because the main issue is someone to use. Not whether a foggy photo of their member will make the evening news.

And here I thought pleasurable stuff like sex was to be free from fear or aggression. The mere fact that it is free from fear & aggression is what makes it pleasurable.
Imagine you go to get an icecream parfait with everything you want on it (YUM!)but in order to get it
1) someone bites your lips til you bleed ,
2) part of your hair is yanked out
3) and you must go thru some skin twisting with mild brusing to obtain said parfait.

Does that give you an appetite for more icecream?
Does it makes you feel more intimate with the server?
Are you now really satisfied?

No. Not me. Plain & simple it just doesnt make sense.
Just give me the good stuff -thank you. And love me anyway long after I look fat in these jeans- post icecream. Now thats real pleasure.

Beauty B.
beautybulletin ( http://beautybulletin.blogspot.com )

I'm really asking to be educated here, honest, I'm not judging.

Somewhere in the back of my clinical head there's this axiom that a little violence doesn't suffice, that a person who gives into enjoying a little (like a little cutting) wll give into a lot more, will want a lot more, and will end up playing Russian Roulette (not literally), but will do something too risky and die.

If you could see some of the scars I see on cutters, you'd be sick, thick, ugly scars across legs and arms, disfigurement.

I'm sure we're talking about differing motives for pain, but the endgame, perhaps, is the same.

Am I way off the mark? Or is there no generalizing? (I'll bet not). This is fabulous stuff. Thanks, Melinda, for bringing it up.

Lessons from a Family Therapist ( http://everyoneneedstherapy.blogspot.com )

This came through my google news alerts today, as have several other articles on the Craigslist 'scandal'. Each, of course, has their own take. The technology blogs are looking at privacy issues. The BDSM groups are looking at someone who claims to be part of the community turning against it. I'm not surprised to hear the issues of gender and sexuality also spring forth.

I disagree with Heart, however, because her only mention of S&M is in the context of a male top and female bottom. That is by no means the only arrangement for such activities. Had Fortuny copied a post by a woman looking to meet men to inflict pain upon, he would of gotten a multitude of responses as well, just as graphic. Likely even from some of the same men. And there is no mentional of non-heterosexual arrangements. Is it still violence against women when all or no participants are women?

I am, of course, biased. I'm a member of several BDSM organizations. I support groups like the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom (NCSF). I also participate in consensual S&M almost exclusively as a bottom, and my primary partner is male. He also switches, and i also play with other women.

We are a normal looking couple. Both he and I hold master's degrees. We're successful. Heart mentions how normal the men looked. What did she expect? In our local organization there are truck drivers, insurance agents, accountants, engineers, stay at home moms, IT professionals, and more. She uses that information to assume there is no common thread between the men, but there is - their sexual interests.

The mindset that either party could do this as part of something beyond their gender is not mentioned. I don't believe this is for all women, just me. My SO also looks at it as an individual rather than all men. Heart assumes all the men who read it responded, looking to torture a woman, because that's what men want. Unless there was a counter to say how many men looked at it, and how many responded, there is little to say its all men. And gender bashing is one of the things that hurts feminism the most.

There is a lot to think about here. Great post.

Kalyn Denny
Kalyn's Kitchen ( http://kalynskitchen.blogspot.com )

Melinda,

there's alot more going on in the subtext of this story than just Fortnoy being an ass and all those guy respondants advocating violence against women...

Unfortunately, Heart did not want to discuss S/M in her post's comments--and, in part, Fortnoy's idiocy plays into a direct misunderstanding of s/m and a kind of "baiting" people who have been exposed to information they do not have the capacity to fully understand...

Case in point: in August, Esquire magazine published a rather descriptive article of a "session" between a maledom and a femsub. This was considered "erotic" as many depictions of sadomasochism are in our current society. The Esquire article was also considered by some in the s/m community as a positive movement towards "mainstreaming" or better understanding what they view as an "alternative sexual lifestyle."

Or is it just a romanticising of violence against women?

Or, even more troubling, was it the description of some of the darkest and reviled fantasies that exist in the female psyche?

Yes, women have sadomasochistic fantasies, too...and for very complex reasons, of which I will not get into here...

Fortnoy, though, went out on the net and decided to play with people's darkest fantasies. He falsely portrayed a woman who may have wanted certain kinds of dark fantasies. He did it with little idea of what would happen, or with the kind of people he might attract.

Some of the people he attracted (and I've read Heart's post) may be the kinds of guys who *may* have been playing to the woman's fantasy. This is what *some* dominant men will do to try to woo a submissive. They will *play* or talk the fantasy, but if they are experienced dominants they will know not to engage in an actual experience of violence. They will a carefully stage a sexual experience leading to catharsis for both parties.

There is, however, no way to tell what's truly going on other than that there were assholes on both end of the equation.

Yet there is one thing that Heart says that I completely agree with: that there is no analysis as to why sadomasochistic fantasies are on the rise. However, having delved into this arena quite a bit, I can answer that one reason is that it is a very delicate psychological area to do any sort of research or analysis--lots of folks have tried, but when even the Kinsey institute can't get funding for simple straight sex research, there's hardly any reason to belive kinky sex could get funding.

So, if money magically appeared and analysis is done, will there be analysis also of men who desire to have pain infliced on them? Will there be any analysis of how sadomasochism functions within the gay community? Will there be any analysis on how various forms of what could be considered sadomasochism actually lead to a level of intimacy between two individuals that they might never experience with another individual? Will there be any analysis as to why certain pop culture personalities needed to dredge up this imagery from the subcultures that kept it protected for many years and parade it around for moneymaking purposes (yes, I'm talking about Madonna here)?

What Fornoy did amounts to a fratboy prank that opened up a can of exotic worms that very few people are capable of understanding. That he took it a step further and decided to publicly reveal the men's names was absolutely wrong.

That he pretended to be a woman that may have distinct reasons for desiring a certain kind of sadomasochistic activity is, without any understanding of the darker side of women's fantasies is, IMHO, absolutely unconscionable.

Tish Grier
Editor, Corante Media Hub ( http://media.corante.com )
Blogging at: The Constant Observer ( http://spap-oop.blogspot.com ) and
Love&Hope&Sex&Dreams ( http://loverhopesexdreams.blogspot.com )