#4 Politics
“‘Anaconda’ is a bold, sex-positive statement about a woman’s ability to own her own body and sexuality”
“a boundary-breaker, a nasty bitch, a self-proclaimed queen, a self-determined and self-made artist”
“a track that both reclaimed the gaze-inspired “Baby Got Back” and also for reversing the narrative of human sexuality in which women’s bodies are worthy of appreciation only when they please men”
“defiance of the ideal beauty standards that hold women down and the male gaze that controls their bodies”
“it is sexually charged and there is an abundance of ass shaking and scantily clad-ness, but it's all done under a lack of male gaze”
“Minaj is the one in control, and she’s acting on her own sexual desires. She’s simply expressing her sexual desire. Her lap dance is an act of seduction, not of submission”
“Minaj tears down the age-old objectifying standards that Mix-a-Lot best epitomized with his Grammy Award-winning song Back in 1992… was widely panned for objectifying black female bodies, with the women in the video gyrating and spanking each others' rear ends as if they existed solely for a man's pleasure”
“Minaj’s own choices often call that gaze into question”
“Minaj’s perspective has always been multi-dimensional; she comes forward as an immigrant, as a black women, as a female rapper, as a sexual being, as an artist, as a storyteller, as a survivor, as a bad bitch”
“perspective of someone who refuses to be defined by any categories she doesn’t claim for herself or constrained by the desires of other people” “She's showing that it's not only men who should be allowed to show themselves as sexual beings, in and out of their music”
“will shake her ass in your face all she wants, but unless you have her express permission, you best not be touching”
“She makes a number of mentions of all the "skinny bitches" basically telling them to step aside. I'm sure she likes some skinny bitches-she and Rihanna are friends, after all—but this is an ode to her "fat ass big bitches in the club." You may disagree with her choice of language, but I dunno guys, I just can't be mad at that”
“She owns and defines her own sexuality, time and time again” “She’s never been shy about her own sexuality, nor has she been subtle or polite about it”
“She raps about racing ahead in the game, imagines up her own strings of accolades, and rolls with a rap family notorious for dirty rhymes, foul mouths, and disregard for authority and hegemony”
“The integral spirit of defiance that exists within Minaj’s self-imagery is undeniable”
“subvert beauty norms using her own body”
“women can do whatever the hell they want as long as they do so on their own terms”
Friday night alone watching Fargo and eating fatty food “Fatty food; a path to happiness”, I feel enlightened, momentarily. I want to touch you very hard – mass murderer. Is it wrong to enjoy violence this much? Who cares, I’m tired I have low self-esteem and i9t’s making me fixate – on blood, and guns and lust after mass murderers. Sick kid. I’ll write another poem instead of writing that essay about how neoliberalism is fucking the world. Heinous idiot. I am fucked if I think all human beings are actually heinous idiots. Friday night, fatty foods and unenlightened pessimism. Riri says shine bright like a combo deal!! Tony Robins save me plzzzz, I have become that sad annoying adult who ruins the family meal. - Anon
bronwyn tilney, Auckland student
Written by Matthew Joyce and Kari Schmidt Illustration by Loulou Callister-Baker
The relationships between pornography, freedom of speech and morality are complicated and daunting. Theory aside, perhaps the ‘harm principle’ is the best place to begin a discussion of what our approach to these topics should be. This principle, perhaps one of Liberalism’s fundamental doctrines, states that (in the words of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789): ‘Liberty consists in the freedom to do everything which injures no one else . . .’ In other words, the only limits on the exercise of A’s rights are that they do not step on (and injure) B’s toes. Applied to pornographic material, or any other ‘speech’, this principle would entail that distaste alone could not be a valid basis for prohibition or criticism. For there to be a valid basis for criticism, there must be some other kind of harm. Often the discussion of pornography and harm can be avoided altogether if the concepts of ‘agency’ and ‘free speech’ are presented as trump cards. It is easy to say that if those involved are consenting or acting
freely in some sense, and if pornography is ‘speech’ then there is simply nothing further to discuss. This radical, almost ‘Ayn Randian’ kind of individualism seems to do away with feminist, religious or ethics-based criticisms of pornography altogether without considering what they have to say. Despite prevalent notions of individualism however, feminists have had interesting things to say about pornography and harm. For instance, some feminists have highlighted the connection between pornography and language. Rae Langton for example draws on the linguistic philosopher J.L. Austin and argues that there is a connection between pornography and ‘illocutionary disablement’. In this context the ‘Illocutionary disablement’ is ‘the construction of a set of linguistic background conditions in which a woman’s saying “no” to sex cannot be heard or understood as a “no,” because conventions are in place that take “no” to mean “yes.”’ (Andrew Koppelman, ‘Another Solipsism: Rae Langton on Sexual Fantasy’, Washington
University Jurisprudence Review, 2013 Vol. 5, Issue 2). Langton argues that these background conventions (the idea that women sometimes say ‘no’ when they mean ‘yes’) are reinforced by (especially violent) pornography where women are shown to enjoy violence. In this way, violent pornography could enable situations where the power of speech is literally taken away from victims— where their ability to say ‘no’ literally has no meaning. Continuing with the pornography/language connection, Langton has joined other feminists Catherine MacKinnon and Melinda Vadas in arguing that pornography should be directly compared with hate speech in that it constitutes harm toward (generally) women, in the same way that hate speech constitutes harm toward their targets. The claim is not simply that both cause harm. Behind this claim is the assumption that words can ‘do’ things as well as simply carry meaning. For instance, MacKinnon asks: ‘Which is saying “kill” to a trained guard dog, a word, or an act?’ It is both, for words can also be acts. The argument is that the degradation (the harm) is already done when the degrading speech/act is performed. (see also Rae Langton, 1993, ‘Speech Acts and Unspeakable Acts’, Philosophy and Public Affairs, 22 (4)). Another feminist author, A.W. Eaton, criticises what she describes as ‘inegalitarian’ depictions of sex, where ‘inegalitarian’ means “sexually explicit representations that as a whole eroticize relations (acts, scenarios, or postures) characterized by gender inequity” (A.W. Eaton, 2007. ‘A sensible antiporn feminism’ Ethics, 117, p 676). For Eaton, the source of harm is the persuasive power of some types of pornography— its ability to endorse violence. Eaton notes that ‘anti-porn’ feminists are often caricatured as ‘imperious and censorial finger-waggers who mean to
police every corner of our erotic imaginations’ (p. 675). However, by clarifying what is meant by the terms ‘pornography’, ‘cause’ and ‘harm', she intends to show that there are powerful arguments for opposing some types of pornography. Importantly, she would not oppose pornography made by women for women. The argument is limited to pornography that eroticises violence or gender inequality. Nor does she argue that at all inegalitarian pornography leads to rape, or that eliminating it will eliminate gender equality. It is that as a medium, it is exceptionally effective at promoting an idea: 'as any advertiser will tell you, making something sexy is among the most effective means of endorsement' (p. 682). As Shen-yi Liao and Sara Protasi put it, ‘In other words, according to Eaton, pornography prescribes consumers to imaginatively find inegalitarian sex desirable—that is, worthy of desire in the fictional world; and in doing so, pornography also cultivates consumers to genuinely find similarly inegalitarian sex desirable—that is,
worthy of desire in the real world’. (Shen-yi Liao & Sara Protasi, ‘The Fictional Character of Pornography’, in: Pornographic Art and the Aesthetics of Pornography, edited by Hans Maes (New York: Palgrave MacMillan), p 8). Liao and Protasi acknowledge however that there is often a gap between fictionality
and reality— i.e., not all pornography is ‘response-realistic’. That is to say, not all pornography invites consumers to ‘import their actual attitudes into imaginative engagement, nor do they ask consumers to export their imaginative attitudes back out to reality.’ (p 1). Clearly then, content that is hyper fictional will have less persuasive power on a consumer. Thus they note that because it is clear to consumers that certain ‘fetish pornography genres, such as BDSM’ rely heavily on imagination and not real-world assumptions, consumers do not normally ‘export’ those assumptions into the real world. They note that Eaton’s argument is ‘best restricted to mainstream [inegalitarian] pornography, where response realism (with respect to sexual matters) is essential to its success.’ (Shen-yi Liao & Sara Protasi pp 11, 12). An example of where they would presumably uphold Eaton’s criticism might be violent pornography where for instance ‘gonzo’ filming was employed, which allows the viewer to believe that the fantasy being portrayed is actually happening somewhere, a fantasy that the viewer can join. In that case, the danger that a consumer adopts and ‘exports’ the type of behaviour is greater because of the plausibility or intended ‘realworld’ quality of the fantasy. (For a more detailed review of literature on direct and indirect harms identified by social science studies, see Elizabeth Harmer Dionne, ‘Pornography, Morality, And Harm: Why Miller Should Survive Lawrence’, Geo. Mason Law Rev. 2008 Vol. 15, Issue 3 p. 621 onwards).
be willing participants. Pornographic ‘speech’, like any speech, in a sense becomes a kind of ‘public property’— when we tell stories, the words (or images) used in some sense speak beyond us and without us. They take on a life of their own, as a kind of artefact. We cannot completely control how others will read or relate to the content. Ultimately, none of this suggests that there can’t be or shouldn’t be opportunities for sexual expression – even extreme expression in the form of BDSM, for example. It’s a question of context. In an environment of true equality, extreme sexual acts can be a genuine expression of freedom – where adults are truly consenting. The problem is that so much of mainstream pornography is now heavily entrenched in a system that depicts violence, that it is extremely difficult to dismiss feminist critiques of pornography out of hand. The very language of pornography evidences this – the use of words such as ‘bitch’, ‘whore’ and ‘slut’, for instance, which bleeds into sexual relationships between individuals outside of porn contexts. The reality is that language is the means through which we navigate existence, it’s how we define social norms, it’s how we come to conceptualise ourselves and our relationships with others. Language is meaningful and the harm it can cause, though not overt or in the same category of physical abuse, is still significant. What this does suggest is that we ought not to let the question of harm be sidestepped. It is more honest to engage with feminist and other critiques of pornography rather than reducing concepts like ‘agency’ and ‘freedom of speech’ to ideological buzzwords.
Importantly, these criticisms can be made whether or not the individuals involved may Matthew and Kari have studied law and work in that field. Matthew is based in Christchurch and Kari in Dunedin. www.karipetroschmidt.blogspot.com
Loulou Callister-Baker is a student, writer, illustrator and blogger from Otago University
absofrockinlutely.blogspot.co.nz
Despite significant gains for women in the last century, there are still significant inequities and barriers facing women in Aotearoa New Zealand today. We still earn less, and continue to do most of society’s unpaid work at home, and in the community. Rape, sexual abuse and domestic violence are still common throughout our country and women are disproportionately affected by it. Women are also more likely to live in poverty and be the sole parent in the increasing number of sole parent families. With this in mind, how should we, as women in tertiary education, evaluate political parties in the 2014 General Election? The following guide presents a summary of selected issues facing women in tertiary education, and in New Zealand society. It is intended to assist you to think about the issues which will affect you in the coming three years, and beyond. Parties were asked a series of questions on their policies as they relate to tertiary women. The following responses outline what each party has said they would do in regards to these policies if they were elected in the upcoming 2014 General Election period from 3rd September. Full version can be found here:
issuu.com/stockingsnz/docs/2014_twfg_guide_to_voting