Amy Goodman vs the Erotophobes

Hey boys and girls, remember when we found out that Democracy Now's Amy Good man was going to do an article in Hustler, and I speculated how long it would take for thre Erotopobes on the left to snack on her?It's feeding time......Meet Kirsten Anderberg, editor of The Loose Cannon and Eat The Press. Whatever they are:
QUOTE
Amy Goodman in Hustler July 2005: This is Indy Media???Amy GoodMAN, Spread Your Legs For Us!By Kirsten Anderberg (www.kirstenanderberg.com) Amy GoodMAN is running an article in the July Hustler Magazine. And I call for Amy to spread her legs, herself, like the women she is exploiting for her profit. If Amy is willing to put her articles between women in degrading crotch shots, then it is time Amy herself, was subjugated in similar manner so she, herself, can be reduced to what every other woman in Hustler is reduced to, "pussy." I mean, come on, what are women besides "pussy?" Right? Right, Amy? Oh wait, Amy is the elite feminist who does not have to show her crotch in Hustler? I call Amy GoodMAN out right here and now, as an independent woman/feminist journalist. Amy, it is time you got in submissive poses with your crotch out for the public if you are planning on profiting from writing "indy media" inside Hustler. Otherwise you are a full-blown capitalist pimp. I cannot express my disgust at "feminists" trying to ally themselves with the porn industry as some sort of "sexual liberation." The porn industry has ZERO to do with sexual liberation for women, and is about the exploitation of women's bodies for profit, SOLELY. There is absolutely NOTHING comparable that men are subjected to publicly like porn on women in America. Shaven to look prepubescent, pumped up with plastic breasts, women are posed in ridiculous postures, starved to look thin enough to not be threatening, and I am sorry, but this is all about packaging women as meat in capitalist fashion for men. For a thousand plus year, women's feet were deformed by foot binding in China, and the men eroticized the hell out of these crippled women who could not walk on three inch soles. No different here in this century. If we keep women injected with big balloons of silicone on their chest, shaving every bit of their adult hair, and smeared with every kind of makeup imaginable, on diets, walking on stilted shoes, forever trying to become LESS, men LOVE it. It makes them feel in control. I have long said porn is not erotica. Porn is a system that is set up to institutionalize who women are here to serve. You will notice it is not MEN'S genitalia plastered all over the porn industry. Only gay male porn is centered on penis', mainstream porn is predominantly female exploitation. But as you will notice, whether it is gay porn for men, or mainstream women-exploit porn, it is still predominantly MEN who support and buy the stuff. The reason, in my opinion, is not that women do not like erotica or sex, but that there is little erotica made for women, rather than ABOUT women as the subjugated meat for men. Men have even asurped gay female porn to be about them! By men using women to women sex as male porn, it has made men think they can just INTERJECT themselves upon any lesbian couple, in their minds, at least. I noticed that when I was in a fem lesbian relationship, we were constantly hassled by gross men saying sexual things to us in public. When I hang with butch dykes, men shut up. Interesting, eh? The precious male genitalia must not be seen like women's genitals are. If men's genitals were paraded around as casually as Hustler and Playboy parade women's gentials and breasts, all these men would have huge body inferiority complexes like the women do. women and their breasts. Men would be getting silicon penis implants and would be worrying constantly about not measuring up. Men do not want to have to live like that, so they instead consume, produce and profit off of women's bodies. I saw a cable special on Hugh Heffner's "crib" not long ago. They showed all these rooms in his mansion filled with dyed blonde, big chested, thin, young women milling about with little dogs in their arms for companionship. When these women were asked what they DO, not a one said, "I am using this time living at the Heffner mansion to finish up my college education." They all were doing things like manicuring their nails, and working on their hair "for Hugh," who is the age of their grandfather. It makes me sick that people still glamorize this behavior. Remember the old children's rhyme "Peter Peter Pumpkin Eater, Had a wife and couldn't keep her, Put her in a pumpkin shell, and There he kept her very well?" That is what I see Hugh Heffner doing. Putting women in pumpkin shells so he can have access to them. I see women who want to profit off of porn trying to play porn off as completely harmless. Yet I hear the things they say about other feminists. These women and men in the porn industry actually use things like calling intelligent feminists who critique this mass exploitation of women "ugly" as their argument to shut us up! That is a third grade argument. We can't all hole up supported by Hugh in a pumpkin shell. Some of us actually DO things, besides our nails and hair! And looking "good" for men is low on our list of priorities. I mean, Amy GoodMAN surely is not looking like the women she has her article saddled between. What is up with that? Why doesn't Amy have to dye her hair and plaster HER face with makeup like the other women in Hustler? For that matter, have we seen the naked crotch of Hugh Heffner's daughter who now runs the empire supposedly? And why not? What makes some women think they have a right to make a profit from women doing things they, themselves, would never subjugate themselves to doing? I call out EVERY woman involved with the production and sales of Hustler and Playboy, whether it be Amy GoodMAN or Hugh Heffner's daughter, to SHOW YOUR CROTCH NAKED IN PUBLIC NOW LIKE THE WOMEN YOU EXPLOIT FOR PROFIT. If Amy GoodMAN is not willing to be subjugated in a like manner to the women around her in Hustler, then she needs to look at why she is writing in Hustler to begin with. http://users.resist.ca/~kirstena/pageamygoodman.html
Oh Kirst, Kirst....where do I begin...?Well...let start with Amy GoodMAN. MAN. Right off the bat we know how you feel about the male of the species. Is this the best you can do in terms of challenging Amy's aurguments or even the fact that the article appeared in Hustler?
QUOTE
. If Amy is willing to put her articles between women in degrading crotch shots, then it is time Amy herself, was subjugated in similar manner so she, herself, can be reduced to what every other woman in Hustler is reduced to, "pussy."
I am not here to defend Larry Flynt, but if you take a pretty close look, I don;t see degraded women, I see women who are proud of thier sexuality and open about it...not degraded. Want degraded women?...check out "The Price is Right," where women of all shapes and sizes go nuts for a refrigerator given away by a walking cadaver (sorry Bob....it's time to retire).
QUOTE
I cannot express my disgust at "feminists" trying to ally themselves with the porn industry as some sort of "sexual liberation." The porn industry has ZERO to do with sexual liberation for women, and is about the exploitation of women's bodies for profit, SOLELY. There is absolutely NOTHING comparable that men are subjected to publicly like porn on women in America. Shaven to look prepubescent, pumped up with plastic breasts, women are posed in ridiculous postures, starved to look thin enough to not be threatening, and I am sorry, but this is all about packaging women as meat in capitalist fashion for men. For a thousand plus year, women's feet were deformed by foot binding in China, and the men eroticized the hell out of these crippled women who could not walk on three inch soles. No different here in this century. If we keep women injected with big balloons of silicone on their chest, shaving every bit of their adult hair, and smeared with every kind of makeup imaginable, on diets, walking on stilted shoes, forever trying to become LESS, men LOVE it. It makes them feel in control.
Wrong, Kirst....it's the WOMEN who are in control, you idiot! BECAUSE women knwo what men supposedly want, women can wrap men around thier little fingers and get them to do anything they want. Or does the name "Lysistrata" mean anything to you?
QUOTE
You will notice it is not MEN'S genitalia plastered all over the porn industry. Only gay male porn is centered on penis', mainstream porn is predominantly female exploitation.
Again, I don;t know what porn she's been looking at...men;s genitalia are prominant in most porn....in fact, thank God for Larry that you can SEE a penis in his rags. You know there are many porno videos that do not show the man's face...but show the woman's face and body in all its glory. Maybe you should be asking about MALE degradation?
QUOTE
The precious male genitalia must not be seen like women's genitals are. If men's genitals were paraded around as casually as Hustler and Playboy parade women's gentials and breasts, all these men would have huge body inferiority complexes like the women do. women and their breasts. Men would be getting silicon penis implants and would be worrying constantly about not measuring up. Men do not want to have to live like that, so they instead consume, produce and profit off of women's bodies.
Now I KNOW this woman does not know what she is talking about. Thanks to porn, men are CONSTANTLY worried about whether thier whing-whang is 9 or 10 inches, or some impossible length and girth. Here in LA, penile implants are as common as breast implants? What planet are you on, Kirst? You never heard of the joke about how every man is 8 inches, no matter how small he is. This is taking me to places I do not want to go. Nor would you want me...so....
QUOTE
I see women who want to profit off of porn trying to play porn off as completely harmless. Yet I hear the things they say about other feminists. These women and men in the porn industry actually use things like calling intelligent feminists who critique this mass exploitation of women "ugly" as their argument to shut us up! That is a third grade argument. We can't all hole up supported by Hugh in a pumpkin shell. Some of us actually DO things, besides our nails and hair!
Like what? Do you care for three kids, one of them mentally challenged, as well as a mom who is in the beginning stages of Alshiemers (sp?) as one adult actress I know is? Have you dedicated your life, or part of it, to making sure that adult actresses do not die of STD's like Sharon Mitchell? And even though it was more of a side show, Mary Carey in running for Governor showed more desire to actually effect change than you have being angry at anything with an X chromosome (and I know what some of you are going to say about Carey....which, when you think about it, is EXACTLY the point!).And in all of your screed you never once said anything about the CONTENT of Amy's article. WHat did she say? What points do you differ with? NO, you are pissed simply because her name is attached to an article in magzaine read by millions of WOMEN **AND** MEN. People who may not have had that much contact with progressive views anywhere else.And like you said, there are some who would easily take what you say and make disparaging remarks about your looks, of which I have no knowlege of, or your gender prefecernce, which I don't know of either. I will not go that route, for many of us who either work in adult, or enjoy its fruits, have a higher standard. But smearing uninformed invective with that broad brush, take takes TRUE ugliness, of which, Ms Anderberg, you posess copious amounts of.

polybi

MJ Walks. A few thoughts

A few disjointed thoughts.

As joe said, an to paraphrase AL Pacino in "....and Justice For All" (great flick, bi the way), the prosecution "forgot to bring a case.'

What they brought was a larcenous piece of trailer trash who thought she scam a few million out of Jackson. Herv erratic behovior on the stand did not help. Her spening spree on Jackos plastic helped less.

What I think mighht have happned, as sick as it sounds, was that she sent her kid in to seeif he could coax MJ into flagrante delicto. Whether MJ took the jailbait or not is not certain, but I think the mom does have some explaining to do...preferably in front of a judge.

One of the things that really turned my stomach was not the possiblity of Jackson's guilt...I could live with that. It was the Angry Mob truly wishing that Jackson would go crazy on a guilty verdict....jump out of a window or have the cops shoot him or something. As sick as Micheal could be, society is probably as sick.

Finally, if I were MJ, I would tradmark the name "Jesus Juice." I would, but the Landover Baptist Church alrrady has dibs.

oh well.

The Downing Street Memo

It all started with a memo printed in the Times of London. It was a memo that, in brief, said that the pretext for our invasion of Iraq....the presence of weapons of mass destruction or WMD's....was a bald face lie.

Here is a link to the actual memo:

http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/memoplain.html

SInce then, the Euro press has been buzzing about the contents of the memo....it almost led to the downfall of Tony Blair in a recent election. But the American press has been strangely silent.

Search the news sites for CBS, NBC, and the usually reliable ABC, and you find nothing. FoxNews..nothing.

Or maybe not. It took an appreance by actor Tim Robbins on MSNBC's HardBall to get a mention about it...brief as it was:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7994512/

TIM ROBBINS: I think there should be more discussion about the Downing Street memo and less about “Newsweek.” I think that that story seemed to be buried. And there seems to be a lot of questions that the Downing Street memo raises.
CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST OF "HARDBALL": Tell me about that.
ROBBINS: Well, it suggests that the administration knew full well T. hey were being duplicitous and were operating with weak intelligence.
MATTHEWS: Well, they—well, they did tell us at the time, Tim, that the best argument for getting the Europeans to join us in the war was using the WMD argument, but it wasn‘t their primary purpose. The primary purpose apparently was democratization in the Middle East, nation building.
ROBBINS: And I think they didn‘t mention that until much later, Chris. I think that the original—original reason was that he was an imminent threat.
And not that it has NOT been covered. The Christian Science Monitor offers an article that explores why the story has been a "dud" here in the USA: http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0517/dailyUpdate.html
Now the question is, if we sent thousands of America's Sons and Daughters to thier deaths and maiming on false pretenses, is that an impeachable offense by the President?
Enter US Representaive John Conyers of Michigan.
According to his bio, Conyers, Jr., a Detroit Democrat, was re-elected in November 2002 to his nineteenth term in the U. S. House of Representatives. Conyers has been spearheading an effort to get 100,000 signitures on a open letter to President Bush asking him to respond to particulars in that memo. So far, over 59,000 have visited the website, and many people have signed on to that letter. Including me.
This is that letter:
http://www.johnconyers.campaignoffice.com/index.asp?Type=SUPERFORMS&SEC={BBD20340-D3E5-447E-9094-37D7458E305B}
And these are the questions asked by Conyers in that letter:
As a result of these concerns, we would ask that you respond to the following questions: 1)Do you or anyone in your administration dispute the accuracy of the leaked document?
2) Were arrangements being made, including the recruitment of allies, before you sought Congressional authorization to go to war? Did you or anyone in your Administration obtain Britain's commitment to invade prior to this time?
3) Was there an effort to create an ultimatum about weapons inspectors in order to help with the justification for the war as the minutes indicate?
4) At what point in time did you and Prime Minister Blair first agree it was necessary to invade Iraq?
5) Was there a coordinated effort with the U.S. intelligence community and/or British officials to "fix" the intelligence and facts around the policy as the leaked document states?
Conyers and 89 other Congresspeople submitted those same questions to Bush last month. They have yet to recive an answer.
In my opinion, attacking a country on knowlingly false charges is, if nothing else, and impeachable offense, bordering on treason. It is an immesnse misuse of Presidential powers, and the President must explain his actions or atone for his alleged crimes.
The press will not cover it because, they will say, this does not matter to the average American. They have a point. They would rather stare endlessly at freakshows like "American I-Dull" than gain information about why thier childern are dying in the desert. No conspiracy here, just the media responding to the dumbth of the general audience.
Well, THIS is why you should care, America. Look at the FACTS as opposed to Bush's ACTIONS:
http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/whycare.html
What can we do? According to the website set up by Conyers, http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/, plenty.
Congressman John Conyers is calling on American citizens to sign on to a letter to the President that demands a response to questions originally posed by Conyers and 88 other members of Congress in a similar letter dated May 5, 2005. Conyers has committed to personally delivering the letter to the White House when it garners 100,000 citizen signatures. http://www.johnconyers.campaignoffice.com/index.asp?Type=SUPERFORMS&SEC={BBD20340-D3E5-447E-9094-37D7458E305B}
Contact your representatives in Congress and urge them to join the 89 members who already have called on the President to explain the memo. http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/letters/bushsecretmemoltr5505.pdf
Awaken the mainstream news media. More than a month after this document was published, the news media in the US has produced barely a trickle of reports on it (mostly coverage about the lack of coverage). Most of the news giants have ignored it entirely; some have belittled its significance while actually rebuffing citizens’ requests for serious news reporting. We are confident, however, that a campaign to inundate these journalists with earnest requests will succeed in focusing their attention (just as the Washington Post finally produced some reports after a recent deluge of letters).
Thus our campaign: Every weekday in June, in cooperation with other activists and bloggers, we will publicize contact information for three distinct media outlets. We ask that you:
• Write a brief letter requesting the journalists to report on the Downing Street Memo, stating succinctly why you believe the leaked document is significant for the US.
• Send that letter as an email to each of the day’s three contacts.
• Return the next day and contact the next three targets of our media campaign.
We demand answers, Mr. President. We will wait for them. But not patiently.
polybi
Other sources:
http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/takeaction.html
http://www.therandirhodesshow.com/
http://www.mikemalloy.net/
http://www.majorityreportradio.com/weblog/index.php