Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Anne in NYC
Published Letters: 404 Editor's Choice: 38
Can you imagine? This idea is worse then doing nothing at all.
I think those condoms the city recently started passing out (the ones with the subway logo on them) is a much more helpful idea.
While I can imagine Keith Richard’s being perfect for the movie I can’t imagine him being at all useful promoting it: I can’t be the only person who can’t understand a word out of the guy’s mouth.
And I doubt Disney really wanted him talking to ‘Entertainment Tonight’ in relation to this film – can you imagine what Richard’s might say to Billy Bush? Yikes!
So they came up with an odd story and it got a boat load of press and now Richard’s no longer has to promote the film. It seems like a win-win across the board.
“The racism was bad, don't get me wrong, but the expression "nappy-headed" just says that Imus didn't like their hair (specifically because their hair looked like black women's hair -- but it still boils down to "you're ugly"). But for no reason whatsoever he called them "hoes". The word means "whores". He compared athletes to prostitutes because they didn't give him wood.”
A couple of weeks ago one of Salon’s Broadsheet contributors suggested that fat girls (pre-teens) are ‘hoes.’ There was never any sort of acknowledgement from the author of that post or from Broadsheet that I saw. It was totally swept under the rug.
I agree that the racism was the most shocking part of what Imus said. It’s right that it was the first thing everyone picked up on and it’s hearting that the consensus is Imus is a has-been jerk looking for cheap publicity. But it’s really gross to me that if Imus had left ‘nappy-headed’ out of his nasty little exchange no one would have cared or noticed.
Anyone think Imus would have dared insult a male basketball team with racial and sexual slurs?
My early teenage introduction to it was late night skin-a-Max and classic soft-core magazines. What a giant snooze. It’s like the NASCAR of pornography and in my experience it attracts all the wrong sort of men (and generally speaking men only).
But I was still interested enough that when I turned 18 my boyfriend and I ventured in the ‘back room’ of our local video store to explore a warehouse of porn organized by it’s various styles and fetishes (the internet was still in its infancy). It turns out I like the 1970s stuff when the plumber stops by to ‘snake the housewife’s drain:’ I find it to be comical and almost sweet without loosing the hotness. I also like hairy guys. I don’t care what any of you say: Ron Jeremy was hot when he was young. I’ve got lots of other likes too – but most of what’s out there is trash. It’s like books, movies, TV, magazines or anything else in the media: not everything is going to be to your individual tastes.
I also don’t find it isolating at all. I often watch it in bed with my husband (yeah for laptops and wireless internet). It’s the sort of space and time that being objectified is safe and fun and desirable. There is an adult toy shop in NYC that’s funny and cool that I go to – you can get in an adult conversation with another adult and they set you up with what you’re interested in.
I guess my point is there is a huge difference between some sad, lonely person spending 6 hours a day Googling “asian teen sluts” and what (in my experience) is your average porn viewer. I can share a bottle of wine over dinner and its fine in the same way that I can queue up my favorite ‘pool guy’ porno in bed, and listen to some derogatory language from a loved one, and its fine. I’m still a productive, social, happy member of society and I’m still a feminist.
Finally – I myself would be very hesitant of getting involved with a man who thought porn was just inherently dirty and gave me a hard time about it. That’s the kind of sexual oil & vinegar that I just won’t deal with. Call me dirty or abnormal and I’m out the door. If the LW’s boyfriend was my friend I’d tell him as much - I don't think it's a good match.
And just to be clear: yes, I am a woman.
“Interesting letter, but supposing for a moment that we consider the admittedly unlikely scenario and that you are in a relationship with me, or a man like me, who simply finds porn uninteresting--not dirty, but not worth bothering with. What then?”
I don’t think we’d be a good match. Because when I use porn it’s rarely by myself. If you can’t be bothered what turns me on I’m going to be annoyed doing things that don’t necessarily get me off but you enjoy. And that would be a bad dynamic. No hard feelings. Most people aren’t good matches. We can still be friends :)
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Salon headlines in your mailbox
