Taslima Nasree continues her crusade to turn the freethoughtblogs into an anti-porn propaganda rag with her latest installment on the sex industry “Let’s Eroticize Equality.” This piece is complete with all the usual assertions about pornography and it’s alleged “effects” on society with none of the empty calories that come from PROOF!
She misleadingly opens her piece with the line,
I am against pornography because it has many harmful effects, encouragement of sex trafficking, desensitization, pedophilia, dehumanization, sexual exploitation, sexual dysfunction, inability to maintain healthy sexual relationships.
I say misleading because you would think after a statement like this she would proceed to prove her assertions with solid evidence. The freethoughtblogs is supposed to be a blogging site for freethinkers and SKEPTICS…isn’t it? Maybe Ms. Nasree is simply confused. Allow me to point out the definition of the word “skeptic” for her:
Skeptic1.a person who questions the validity or authenticity of something purporting to be factual.2.a person who maintains a doubting attitude, as toward values, plans, statements, or the character of others.3.a person who doubts the truth of a religion, especially Christianity, or of important elements of it.
Pornography is exclusively for men’s pleasure. Women are used as sex objects. I know some women will say, ‘we love to be sex objects’. Millions of misogynists are out there to support the idea of the objectification of women. I do not have to support this.
I am living proof of the flaw in her claim that, “Pornography is exclusively for men’s pleasure.” I am a woman and I enjoy some porn.
Notice how she poisons the well against any woman in porn who may disagree with her in statement, “I know some women will say, ‘we love to be sex objects’.” REALLY Tas? (I would say Ms. Nasreen but with her blatant disrespect of the women in the sex industry she is making it clear that she neither gives respect to nor expects respect from the sex workers she claims she wants to help.) My guess is that women in the sex industry would have a number of issues with your assertions but to you all it comes down to is that they “love to be sex objects” right? No sex worker could possibly be SKEPTICAL of your claims. NOOOOOOO….! Skepticism is for smart people ISN’T , right TAZ?
“Millions of misogynists are out there to support the idea of the objectification of women.” Oh, I get it. ANY woman who disagrees with your assertion that porn is exclusively for men simply HATES women. As if this isn’t the most tired and over used tactic employed by “antis” such as you. You make and unsupported blanket statement and anyone who doesn’t agree with you is a “misogynist.” People like you use this bullshit tactic so much that the word “misogynist” seems to lose it’s meaning as if that is helpful to women.
And how does she wrap this up into a nice neat bow? “I do not have to support this.” You hear that out there in skeptic land? Taz is better then you and she does not HAVE TO support her claims. Who do any of you think you are to actually expect her to support what she is claiming. You just shut up and nod your head when Mz. Taz tell u what to think, k.
She continues to go on to argue some false dichotomy between pornography and erotica as if there is no grey area in between. All in all, it’s simply her saying “this is what I don’t find offensive and acceptable and if you don’t agree with me you like being an object or you just hate women blah blah blah…”
She also throws around statements like, “Gloria Steinem says…” as if just because St. Steinem says it it must be true. And, “researchers say” without linking to the research. She does link to some opinion pieces complete with the anecdotal evidence that may fool a non-skeptic but by this point she’s just not even trying.
Of course she fails to even mention the porn sites that cater to the more romantic (yet equally explicit ) like New Sensations Romance or The Porn for Women. She closes it out with “Leave it. Let’s listen to a song “ where she links to some kumbaya song undoubtedly to make appeals to the emotions of the masses complete.