The Lavender Menace, part 1

I've been frustrated for a while, and I only just now figured it out. Y'see, even though I'm a lesbian*, I'm not and never have been sexually aroused by so-called "lesbian" pornography, and I can't see why anyone would, despite claims of being aroused by two women even more than one. My mind came 'round to social gender differences, and the phenomena of young women being aroused by gay men in situations that will never include them.

I realised that it was due to social structure. Premise: men are taught to be self-centric, while women are taught to be other-centric. (I am an anomaly in women; I'm pretty much an even balance of the two, while being slightly more self-centric.) I'll explain:

"Lesbian" pornography is typified by women who are not actually lesbian; they are just waiting for a "real man" to come along and give them a bit 'o dick. As such, you can see them regularly using methods that are not at all arousing to actual lesbians; dildos (especially large ones) and all manner of phallic penetration. If this doesn't seem counterintuitive, ask yourself: why would a "lesbian" be attracted to something phallic? So begins the allure for the self-centric person; men (the viewer in particular) are found attractive even by those that would not, in real life, be attracted to their "most important" bits. The message here is: penises are irresistable, and by implication, the viewer's penis is irresistable.

The scene usually progresses to a point where a man comes in and the three of them get down to it, and by "it" I mean sex. It's generally your average threesome scene: woman gives another woman oral while that woman gives the man oral, or the women lick each other while the man fucks them, or both women are focused on the man. Typical of pornography, the man is not really interested in the women -- he's interested in fucking them, or (in the ever-increasing violent cases) hurting them, or in his own conquest in them. In other words, the man is being self-centric; he is uninterested in the women's selves in any way.

But this progression of the scene leads to a darker premise: if lesbians are only given the right dick, they will Learn To Love A Man. The implication of many scenes of this and other types of porn is that it doesn't matter if that dick is given or forced (since acting rape victims in pornography almost always begin to like it).

The even broader implication of these kinds of films is that there is no such thing as a valid female sexuality without a man involved; this may, in fact, be why there is no mention of lesbianism in the Bible... because women's sexuality was not valid, and therefore not a threat to a man.

If a woman did turn down a man in favour of another woman, this would be seen as a threat (and therefore unarousing to the viewer, who is wanting the woman to be portrayed as sex-hungry in order to get his orgasm); the woman would be defying the law of Man Fucks Woman; Subject Verb Object. The same goes for male homosexuality; this is, I believe, why there is so much uproar about it -- it violates the "golden rule" of our society.

Now, on to women. Women are raised to be primarily other-centric, whether it's children, parents, or some other family members. Women are expected to be the sharing and nurturing ones (instead of rightfully placing this expectation on every human). Thus, it comes as no surprise to me that women are aroused by a gay relationship with no hope of ever having them be part of it (unlike a man's fantasy).

I don't think it has anything to do with the fantasy being "safe" by not including them; I think it's all internalisation of society's norms. In the typified gay relationship fantasy, there are also "roles" of a "seme" (or dominant) and "uke" (or submissive), the roles that are quite clearly present and expected of women even in this "advanced" age**.

How many of you, reading this, have heard of a man faking an orgasm to please his lover? I have heard of one case. ONE. And many, many more cases of women faking orgasms (a highly counterproductive action, by the way. Gruls (misspelling purposeful), if he's so insecure that he can't bear to think he's not making you come -- or has to learn how to -- lose him!).

To put it simply; women have learned throughout their lives to get pleasure in the pleasure of others. Men generally learn this much later than women. Thus, women can find the pleasure of others arousing, while men (at least the ones that I've met) must be included in that pleasure.

More on this later.

*Technically bisexual, but lesbian politically and in practice, and slowly losing any interest in men anyways because of the stupidity and bigotry I've seen displayed by them. Judging a book by its cover? Perhaps. But how easy do you think it is to find a vegan/vegetarian, anti-porn, pagan man?

**I'm sorry, I can't call a pro-porn, anti-animal and anti-woman era "advanced", no matter its technological level.

Down With the Sickness?

There is a sickness in this society, one that runs deeper than any other illness. It primarily manifests in those most vulnerable to it -- newly disillusioned, disempowered teenagers and young adults. It's one of those things where some claim that it's empowering; in a way, I guess that recognising the sickness is empowerment, but embracing it is not. That's what the sickness is all about. Being embraced. That's how it feeds, breathes, lives.

What is the sickness? Well, it has different names. You could call it defeatism, or powerlessness, or disempowerment, or hopelessness. It is, essentially, the belief that we cannot change the world, so we might as well go along with the flow.

This belief is incredibly damaging. It is a (main?) reason why some humans refuse to go vegan, and why some of those vegans become ex-vegans. It's also a primary reason for neurotic (from "neurosis") depression in girls and women. It is why thousands of campaigns that would have changed the world haven't begun.

It starts when we're born. We are born into, and grow up in, a world of advertising where people, human and nonhuman, can be bought and sold -- even and especially as body parts. That cow is a slab of his or her flesh. That woman is a pair of breasts.

That is the starting point of this disease of "learned helplessness". What we see and hear often, we internalise. An animal lover will internalise that a cow is steak. A good, kind man will internalise that a woman's most essential feature is her body. The barrage of images is too much for us, especially us as children, to resist.

We are taught these days what is food, what is sexuality, what is love and what is "cool" through the wonders of advertising. Family and peers just regurgitate what is said on the television -- they grew up with it too. Or, if they dare to go against what the TV says, they are mostly ignored, because the TV has novel pictures and sounds that imprint in one's head in a much larger way. Eventually we start growing away from our family and towards our peers, and are left with these messages: Food is (hidden) death, sexuality is pain, love is absolute self-sacrifice and being cool means porn, McDonalds, killing, and subjugating others.

The disease shows its head when we first become aware of what is happening to us. We become angry, outraged that we were manipulated by everyone around us in order to please them. We don't realise that they were manipulated in the same way we were. And, after that anger has its time, it burns itself out amidst the furor of new, better ads.

We learn that we can't do anything to change it.

Knowing that you are able to influence others is, I believe, vital to a healthy spirit and self-esteem. If you are able to influence others, you have power; you can change the world, even if it is a little at a time. Love is a benevolent expression of that power when it's reciprocated; in the absence of love we find other ways to have power over someone -- pain is one of the strongest ones. Lust is another. That, I think, is how pornography began.

When we feel that we cannot influence others, we feel powerless, even over our own lives (others are, after all, an integral part of our feelings in one way or another). We start routinising our daily lives. One step at a time, don't make waves, it'll be alright. We feel vaguely depressed or sullen. We escape into a number of things, such as our worst enemy -- the TV and its accompanying advertising.

One of the most powerful things to realise is that, even if you don't make others change, you can change. And you can realise that, whether from you or not, others are changing around you. You're the Vegan Freak one year, and the next you find another vegan at your office (even if they do pronounce it "vay-gun"). Then you find more at a restaurant you go to. Or you go to a protest and meet others there. The possibilities are endless.

The first step is the hardest to make, but it's well worth it.

For those who have no idea why being vegan would be appealing, have a look at http://meetyourmeat.com