Value, Esteem, and the Body Thing

iamthereforeiam — Tue, 10 Jul 2007 22:11:14 GMT

ABSTRACT Dirty words, dirty bodies and dirty lifestyles: a how-to to avoid the doing-the-do in the twenty-first century without becoming a product. Academic writing inclusive of world languages, alternate wordage, and extensive documentation of selling sex: pornography in the non-sex industry. Free love, afro-Americans, and the milk of the Dark Continent: the leftovers of the banquet of flesh in the years of war. Bargaining for nudity: the price for taking clothes off. Having a good time: Machiavellian means, Machiavellian ends and the ends justifying the means: adult logic with faulty premises in the adult business. Aggression, aggrieved, and agriculture: farming a substitute for morality in the post-plow age. The mind, the body: singing an electric song without prejudice: no-one is gay. CONCLUSION OF INTRODUCTION Finger-pointing or finger-fucking? Those are the choices of the intelligent black-or-dark-skinned-African-outside-of-Africa. Conception is outrageous, and anal penetration hurts. So reports the majority of black sex workers (who wish to remain anonymous). Regardless of punctuation, the point isn't even spelling alternatings. No, it is instead the ability of anyone to speak to any thing as an issue, and then identify the problems. But what are the opportunities? Homosexuality remains an option, as health care increasingly provides support to the lifestyles of the homosexual couple. The black male homosexual couple still struggles with the concern for child rearing, while the female black homosexual couple still struggles with the fascination with white penetration: two (or more) black-or-dark-skinned-African-women-outside-Africa with one white male remains a fantasy, a dream, a hope of countless black-or-dark-skinned-African-women-outside-Africa even after countless repetitions of the end of the "master/slave paradigm." Elaborate illnesses or no, the fear of AIDS, chlamydia, gonorrhea, and syphilis remain only marginal as women increasingly have enough money to survive on their own. But the difference between women of color who got their money from the sex industry and those who earned their money through business endeavors remains the highlight of the African population, in Africa and outside Africa. EXAMINATION OF EVIDENCE point-by-point: A) • In the US, pornography in the workplace is now considered to be responsible for creating a hostile environment in which women are forced to work. Hence, pornography in this context has been defined as a form of sexual harassment and made illegal as such. response: the United States has always been a place of Puritan Work ethic. One puts one's profits back into the business. Pornography has always been unwelcome in the United States of America. The workplace does not welcome pornography because it goes against the Puritan Work ethic. The hostility comes from the wasting of time, as "time is money." Women are not forced to work. Women are forced to perform sexual acts. If they are forced to perform sexual acts in the workplace, then the idea of "sexual harasment" arises in defense of both male and female, in support of "getting things done." "Doin the Do" in the workplace does not mean intercourse. On the contrary, the "Do" in the workforce is working. But when one considers context, photocopying one's butt is illegal because it is a waste of resources. Paper, electricity, cleaning products all must be used to respond to the ass who was on the photocopier. But the illegal nature of pornography comes from the such: what is the viewing of pornography? A photo of a naked person, or a clothed person, engaged or suggesting a sexual activity (contradictive to the work mission statement) remains inappropriate in the workplace because the person involved is a victim only in the sense of now being guilty of interrupting work. • It seems reasonable to consider porn in settings other than the workplace as sexual harassment as well, eg, in church, in courts, in doctors' offices, and even in the home. response: Porn, no matter how you spell it, is always inappropriate in church, in courts, in doctor's offices, and in settings wherein one works. • Pornography as a form of sexual abuse response: Sexual abuse remains the hot topic. Abuse, while impossible to prove, can be the "icing" on the cake of a separation. But note that the family and its values refuse pornography, prostitution, and even stripping. The black woman who strips for money on the side is only viewed as a work of art, but still she is presented outside the house. Therefore, the abuse is not sexual, but it still is abuse of the house. • Some feminists in the US consider pornography to be a form of violence against women. While there is a great deal of non-violent pornography, porn promotes violence in some male consumers. In addition, the manufacture of porn requires the degradation of women. Many of the rapes portrayed in porn are actual rapes. The same applies to painful forms of bondage and torture. Pornography is not `just fantasy' for the women who are used to make it. response: "Feminism" does not exist. It is a concept, a response, a reply to the increasing pornography industry as well as the sex industry. Violence is as difficult to define as feminism. Feminism is a violent response to the attack against the values of femininity. Male consumers of porn respond to the decrease in sexual activity in the house. The increase in homosexual black males remains a primary source of the consumption of porn, and the violence of the black-or-dark-skinned-African outside of Africa can clearly be seen as a response to not being in Africa. The United States includes degradation as a crime, if it includes the unwilling attack on the morals of a woman, specifically, if a woman is interested in sex, but does not want to participate, she does not have to. Most clearly, rape is a visual as well as a physical activity painful to each participant, but no one knows how any other feels. • Pornography as a means of gender subordination response: Subordination is merely a reminder that we are none the Supreme Being. [Diana Russell, Frene Ginwala for the African National Congress] B) • it is disempowering. response: as per the subordination, the elaborate activity of the entire African National Congress, and the blogosphere would highlight African women as subjected to degrading subordination. Cultures of traditional male-oriented aside, the female is never the Supreme Being. The idea of the "dis" or the "disrespect" inclusive of empowerment is essential to be viewed in light of the term "cool" of the pan-African movement: power is not strength, truth is not information, generosity is sharing. Cool empowerment would be offering a shady tree to a woman on a hot day, and simply sitting there. Maybe checking to see if she is thirsty. Water is not power, and so gender is not power. Water might forcefully push someone downstream, and gender might forcefully push someone down in the workforce. But a man who is disempowered in the workplace remains insulted by a woman, just as a woman in the workplace with no men can be insulted at her disempowerment when there is no man present. Disempowering sexual activity is more than an inconvenient pregnancy: it is an elaborate stoppage of family, house, and honor. ** As with other “choice” debates (abortion is the biggie), “choice” rests its foundation on the beliefs that 1. the person making the choice is valued by society and 2. the choice the made is valued by society. In the abortion debates, people like Dorthy Roberts (and lots of other RWOC theorists) argue that “choice” is harmful to women of color (and other marginalized women) because it continues the agenda against women of color such that women of color are systematically violated for making the “wrong” choice. For example, the choice to have a baby is certainly available to all women in the U.S., but it is generally only poor white women, disabled women and women of color that must contend with back to work programs, sterilization without consent, losing children through child protective services, imprisonment, etc. Also, many times, under the guise of “feminist choice’ white feminists employ violent and harmful policies of reproductive control over women of color–for example, the unquestioned support of Planned Parenthood (a corporation with a proven track record of systematic “population control” policies.) response: choice as opposed to quality is an ancient meditation. Debate likewise is an ancient meditation. If we make it more contemporary, we see that it is not an industry (sexual or otherwise) that offers choice, but rather an industry that takes away choice. Choice flows away from those who participate in pornography, sexual advertising, and subcultures supporting abortion. [ brownfemipower for the blogosphere] C) • <>(Dobie 2001, 202) response: Money, sex, and food can all be separated. • Slut, ho, chickenhead, hood rat, floozy—these are all different names for the same woman: the Freak. Similar to the sexually insa- tiable Jezebel, Freaks are essentially viewed as having no sexual inhibitions or hang-ups. Sex in any place, any position, and with any person (or number of people) characterize the Freak. response: Dirty words are only academic in the context of a dictionary: what does a word mean, universally? At the University, a "freak" is less welcome in the classroom than a "geek." But a geek is never welcome, either, because academics, in any place, in any position, with ANY person just doesn't fly. And if a honey is fly, it's more important to consider the bee and the source of the honey than to consider the maggots who try to turn men into faggots. [Dionne P. Stephens for Women’s Studies Institute, Georgia State University] CONCLUSION But what is the price for taking clothes off? Having a "good" time. But what is good about Machiavellian means, Machiavellian ends and the ends justifying the means? Not much; it is all adult logic with faulty premises in the adult business. To conclude: on the topic of aggression, the aggrieved, and agriculture: what is the substitute for morality in the post-plow age? The mind, the body: singing an electric song without prejudice.

apple computer, apple records

iamthereforeiam — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 03:25:49 GMT

at first glance, apple's hold on music is crucifying the industry: standardized rates, a push to make all songs free, and a general faciliation for all to make mediocre music. However, Macintosh's efforts are no different than the Garage Band movement of forty years ago. British Invasion or no, Americans hold to their music as a treasure. Not rock, not hip hop, but pop and possibly classical are the true source of our income and inspiration. Napster was an interesting effort to free the distribution of "mix tape" promotional musics, but the retail connection wasn't apparent to most. Just like with mixtapes, (R.I.P. audio cassette) the napster phenomenon encouraged individuals to hear new music and then buy it for themselves. The death of the 45 rpm single as commercial enterprise left many holding CD singles as artistic wonders, a unique celebration of a popular song, often with original art and even "b" sides. However, the iTune "single" is much more orchestrated in the business environment: co-ordinated exposure in multi-media, cross-platform distribution and rotation (including TV shows and movies) left many to wonder what could be the new hit, even as they turned away from the traditional 3-tier exposure system. TV, movies, and radio left the dominance as the internet itself became a new resource: youTube, chatgroup bands, and web payola supported the transitional musician as the digital media rights issue returned with a vengance. Who was left? A few core bands grass-rooting in the old spots: clubs, churches, campfires, and record stores. Who succeeded? It seemed like the devil's bargain all over again. So who's the new push? Family Values, the new yuppie (young upright professional instead of young upwardly mobile professional), the traditionalist. But where's their music? All we hear are pornographic celebrations of sexuality, decadence and rudeness. What's left? All the tours are the old standards for the generations with money: Steve Miller, Jimmy Buffet, Neil Young. Everyone might like James Taylor, but it's the motivational drive of bands like U2, the Beastie Boys, and Steve Burns (formerly of Blues Clues) and not the ennui and angst of bands like Nirvana, Metallica, and The Roots that get the kids moving. So who's left? Us. The independent musician. Those who hold true to their vocation. Those who realize life's not a vacation. Those of us who desparately need a vacation. Those of us who look for cause for celebration. And why are we not signed? Because people have destroyed the legacies of Dick Clark, Casey Kasem, and the actual American Bandstands. Because when a barbershop quartet, or a marching band, or a combo sit on those stages, and people light sparklers, and think about the fourth of July, they need for one moment to consider the history of tradition, to look to the stars and consider themselves part of the Universe, maybe even to thank God for their life. Because, when we look at the Universal application of America, of Freedom, of the Rights to Life, Liberty, and the Persuit of Happiness, it's not lawyers we're thinking about. It's not even Horatio Alger. It's the little guy. The little guy who cares, who didn't step on any toes on the way up, and who showed nothing but respect on the way back down. The little guy who knows that little people aren't little. They're just better, not bigger. So when we step up to be bigger than who we were yesterday, and are thankful for the business world and it's attempts to both be more open and to be more careful, and when we think about quality and not just quantity, it's no surprise there are so many independent musicians. Are we willing to sell out? to become part of a corporate machine? to lose creative control? to defer to experience and to make wise decisions based on professional opinions and even to be our own experts? I don't know. But we are willing to acknowledge brands, to participate in industry, to appreciate the producer, to listen. And that's why we are glad Universal did what they did. And kudos to Apple for trying to make something free. But as anyone knows, if one thing is free, everything else has to be free, too. And that's not much of a business model. It's a nice dream, though.

iamthereforeiams mi7 community feed

Value, Esteem, and the Body Thing

shaggy is as shaggy does

money sucks

apple computer, apple records