michele bachmann wants your porn. or to be more specific, she
wants to take your porn away from you, all in the name of protecting us
poor, innocent, logic-lackin’ women who can’t figure out sexuality for
ourselves. we need men to decide how that shit’s gonna go down.
i’ll back up a minute and explain the details of the latest bachmann lunacy. at the end of last week, conservative iowa group the family leader put forth a 14 bullet point pledge that any republican candidate that wants their support must sign by august 1.
the bulk of the bullet points are along the lines of “i believe gay
people are a threat and ruining society.” it’s some pretty ugly,
hateful language going on there, but i guess what else would you expect
from that type of organization.
the 9th bullet point of the pledge is written as follows:
pornography should be banned: vow 9
stipulates that the candidate must “support human protection of women
and the innocent fruit of conjugal intimacy” and protect them from
“seduction into promiscuity and all forms of pornography…and other types
of coercion or stolen innocence.”
i just love it when conservatives use flowery language when talking
about women’s sexuality. innocent fruit of conjugal
intimacy? i feel like any woman who finds that phrase appealing is
the same type of woman who fantasizes about doing it in the overly
styled and unimaginative rooms they see in a pottery barn catalog. or in
other words, the type of women who actually like porn for women.
it’s this kind of shit that really makes you wonder exactly how far
conservatives would go with banning and censoring material were they not
restricted by the constitution they claim to love so much. would
all racy romance novels vanish from bookstores and airports? would
sexy, high-end fashion shows and advertisements get shut down?
the problem with censoring “porn” is that because overt and commodified
sexuality has worked its way so far into the mainstream, censoring
becomes a very slippery and steep terrain to navigate. oh, and
also because censorship is fascism. that’s another big problem with
i don’t know what some conservatives think happens exactly when us
lady folk watch porn. if by “seduced into promiscuity and
pornography in all forms,” i don’t know if they’re trying to say that
women who are single are going to try and have a fulfilling sex life by
sleeping with the (potentially numerous) people she thinks are going to
satisfy her needs, and/or maybe throw on a porn and (gasp!) masturbate,
or if what they’re really talking about here is fears of a married,
straight, christian woman getting one glimpse of evan stone in who’s nailin’ paylin?, (a personal favorite of mine) and heading off to san fernando valley
to let loose. the first scenario sounds like a lot of girls
i know. the second sounds like a highly preposterous, though very
funny, paranoid conservative fantasy.
preposterous? paranoid? who does that remind me of? oh, yes. michele. on thursday, bachmann became the first presidential candidate to sign this ridiculous, insulting pledge. i guess i shouldn’t be surprised whatsoever that she’s pandering to iowa. after the gacy gaffe,
she’ll give iowa whatever they want. oh, except gay
marriage. i’m pretty sure she’d try to take that away from them
given the rest of the pledge she agreed to.
on a gay marriage and paranoid conservative fantasy note,
archbishop timothy dolan has now officially stated that since new york
has emerged victorious in a hard-won fight to secure equal rights for
gay people to marry, polygamy is next. i have written here before about dolan and his bigotry about anything that isn’t totally heteronormative.
it’s funny and not at all surprising that what got dolan all riled up
is the exact same article that made me incredibly happy to read
two weeks ago in the new york times magazine. mark oppenheimer’s article, “married, with infidelities,”
is a fantastic, even handed look at how our culture is shifting towards
the acceptance of nonmonogamy in its many forms, and how this will
improve our lives and save marriages and families, rather than destroy
them. my only complaint about it was that they did not mention
such great resources as opening up and the ethical slut. it’s a long article, so i won’t get into it in this post, but i encourage everyone to read it when they get a chance.
listen up, michele. if you’re not giving up your guns, i am not
giving up my porn. sex not violence. love not hate. don’t
tread on my fucking porn.