What Society Thinks of Adult Performers – Should We Care?
Recently my close friend, writer, exotic dancer and feminist Alysabeth Clements was profiled along with author Lily Burana for the Colorado Springs Gazette. Burana was in town to promote her new book, “I Love a Man in Uniform,” which detailed her journey from exotic dancer (Burana wrote the critically acclaimed stripper anthem “Strip City”) to her present role as “army wife.” In one of life’s funny coincidences, Clements had also recently married a Special Forces officer and she, too, had to forge a new identity as dutiful wife to a wartime solider. The article was short but entertaining, and touched upon some of the issues more thoroughly explored in Burana’s book.
The Gazette website allows comments to be posted under each article, and readers responded immediately to this one. Basically, they were outraged. How dare these two floozies marry into the army! They were bound to do nothing but make army wives — all women, really! – look bad. How dare they flaunt their history of moral bankruptcy – of whoredom – in association with the upstanding men and women who serve our Great Nation. “Real” army wives have enough to deal with, without ex-strippers coming around to distract their men and make a mockery of the sacred institution of marriage.
I know Colorado Springs is a relatively small town and technically part of the “bible belt,” so I wasn’t entirely surprised to see the intensity of outrage (and, as one might expect, the most vocal of the outraged readers were women.) But I was surprised, when Alysabeth and I began posting in response to some of these comments, to find the readers were too angry to even attempt a rational discussion. In fact, the more measured and reasonable our responses, the more vicious and insulting their attacks.
The question became: what to do? Burana never came to the board to comment or defend the attack on herself and Alysabeth – she took, arguably, “the high road.” Alysabeth sent the link to a few of our fellow “adult industry activists” and the response was “I don’t want to look at this because it will just make me mad, but thanks.” Was this the right approach for all of us to take? To simply ignore it?
Do self-proclaimed activists and public figures generally choose to “ignore” discussions about the topics they’ve used to gain fame and notoriety? Is an online discussion in a small town’s local paper simply not important enough to take part in? What if the discussion had been taking place on the New York Times forum? Why did I suspect that our comrades would show up to defend Alysabeth and other sex workers then?
I realize, though, that many people use the adult industry as a fast and easy way to get attention when what they really want is “respectable” success. They dangle their old platform heels in front of the masses to pique public interest for their “mainstream” projects – but really, if given the chance, they’d denounce their sex worker roots in a second to be taken seriously by the “real world.” They certainly don’t want to get down in the muck and take part in any discussions about sex workers, or keep holding the flag for our cause. Not unless it will help bring attention to their new (post sex-work) careers, that is.
Alysabeth and I don’t feel that way. No fist-clenching venom-spewer is too big or small to engage in discussion. We don’t mind getting down and dirty with someone who works at a fast food restaurant in Bumfuck, Nowhere because at the end of the day, that’s what we do. Any fame, notoriety or public attention gained from that is really beside the point.
But we still had a dilemma. The attacks kept coming, and no one on the Gazette forum seemed interested in debate or discussion. They attacked Alysabeth’s appearance, and said brilliant things like “Go dance around a pole, pole dancer! HA HA HA!!” Alysabeth continued to ask questions, explain her position, respectfully challenge the narrow viewpoint taken by the readership of her home town, but they could still only respond with insults and hard hits below the belt.
I generally agree with Alysabeth (who has single-handedly informed much of my sex work ideology), that the Gandhi route of passive resistance, of turning the other cheek, is best when dealing with angry ignorance. That is, I agree with it in theory. As with political socialism, while I admire the humanity of the approach I realize it may conflict with human nature a bit too much to be entirely successful all of the time. And I felt like this was one of those times.
So after several attempts to respectfully, logically and rationally discuss the issues at hand, I decided to take a different approach. It wasn’t so much a decision, though, as a deeply felt need: I realized I didn’t want to convince these people of anything. I was filled with anger at myself that I was submitting to the position of the party who had all the explaining to do; that it was somehow silently understood by all that Alysabeth and I should be the ones to remain calm, reasonable and patient, while the “respectable” folks attacked us in every possible way.
Rather than feeling “enlightened” and “evolved” by remaining on the high road, it suddenly felt illogical and masochistic. There was no real reason for Alysabeth and I to assume a passive role in the face of abuse. Was there?
I came out swinging. I insulted them back. I told the wives to “shut up and go cook someone dinner.” I offered to help give them lessons in the art of fellatio so they’d be better equipped to “nab a husband – your number one goal!” I made fun of them and called them names equal to the names they had called Alysabeth, Burana and me.
They were instantly outraged. “Your trashy roots are showing now! How sad!” one wrote.
“I’m speaking to you in the only language you understand,” I responded.
Meanwhile, Beth’s approach had yielded at least one impressive result. A reader who called herself “armywife” softened her tone and wrote that while she still didn’t view stripping as a legitimate career or (god forbid) art form, that Alysabeth was clearly “above the bar” in terms of her value as a person (that is, in relation to the other scumbags that can be found prancing around a pole.)
To me, that’s a lot like telling someone of a different race that “I don’t like the rest of your kind, but you don’t act like THEY do, so I’ll let you slide.” For this we should put a “win” on our score card? Why?
Increasingly, I feel like giving such people a big middle finger and telling them, “Go on, continue being my enemy. I don’t WANT morons like you on my side.” I’ve started to wonder if we aren’t inviting abuse by NOT showing our immediate outrage and willingness to do battle if pushed against the wall. I noticed, in this case, that it wasn’t until I came out swinging that her attackers softened to Alysabeth, and felt a sudden appreciation for her more gentle approach (as contrasted by my aggression.) Good cop/bad cop, indeed. And in this case, the “bad cop” role felt oh SO right.
Alysabeth and I are having a great time discussing this situation, and the many implications of both respective philosophies. Surprisingly, I’m finding it sometimes feels pretty good to go the “knee-breaker” route. Maybe our side needs a few more knee-breakers, and a few less apologists.
What do you think?
May 25th, 2009 at 12:31 am
I’ll tell you what I think.
I think the people who posted were mainly looking for an anonymous place to act like assholes. They pounced, judged, blamed, cursed, called names, acted with no dignity or self-respect and accused the women in the article of being all the things they were doing themselves.
I posted three times on that thread. Each time I presented my point of view. Each time I didn’t call anyone names, didn’t provoke anyone with my thoughts, didn’t seek to engage in grade school behavior. I presented points of view that differed greatly from those presented in the majority of posters. I argued for justice, respect, courtesy, open-mindedness. I asked them to grow the fuck up without using those words.
What happened? Nothing. I think one woman replied to something I posted, but my postings didn’t strike fire in the other posters on the board. I think the reason I didn’t get engagement from these woman is because I was being reasonable, rational, respectful and not acting the way they did. They knew they couldn’t tempt me to act like they were acting. Childish.
Perhaps the reason they didn’t reply was they thought my thoughts were ridiculous, unimportant, banal. Perhaps the reason they didn’t engage with me is because they could tell I was not easily swayed and I wasn’t looking for a fight. Maybe they felt I was rational and correct. I doubt it, but who knows.
I think what they really wanted an online pissing match. To box it out online. It’s cowardly, in my opinion. I am confident they would not have discussed anything with any of us in person. Their argument just doesn’t hold water. Their argument is based in religion, patriarchy and old, tired principles which rob women of the ownership of their sexuality. In their world, everything they own belongs to men. Any man. Their very self respect is contingent upon a stranger’s opinion of them. It’s very sad.
These types of forums are not places ignorant people go to for enlightenment. They are places where ignorant people feel comfortable behaving in a way they would never have the courage to behave publicly. It’s wonderful to have such a freedom to openly express oneself, and it’s sad to see what some people do with it.
As for being nice or not nice in these types of interactions, my personal stand is to state my opinion as calmly and rationally and respectfully as I can. I do not seek to change their mind (which I really do want to do) but I present my stance, and if they are not equally tolerant and respectful, I disengage. Bad behavior between people in my opinion does not create enlightenment.
But that’s my opinion after 26 years of therapy and 12 years of 12 step recovery. I believe in it, I practice it to the best of my ability. I believe that behaving the way an aggressor behaves creates two aggressors. Period.
That’s not to say I wouldn’t defend myself or a loved one in a physical attack or get enraged in a moment of weakness if provoked and terribly hurt. But in my right mind, two wrongs never make a right.
Just my two cents.
May 25th, 2009 at 5:39 am
I’m sure I’m not the first one to tell you… but you are stupid… and I barely made it through whatever the hell you want to call this stream of bullshit.
May 25th, 2009 at 11:18 am
I hate to tell you this…. but YOU ARE STUPID! I SERIOULY thought there was NO WAY that you would write some of the things you stated here so I looked up the article. And needless to say, I WAS SHOCKED at the way you acted. NO WONDER that some of the people Beth invited to the forum did not participate, as well as Burana. I DON’T BLAME THEM!!! You made all of us in the industry look like complete ASSHOLES! What I don’t understand is that you don’t see that? You don’t see that you hurt us more than helped? You need to check yourself… and STOP WRITING as you aren’t good at it AT ALL.
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:19 pm
I’d really love to work for Sweetheart Video. Could you point me in the right direction? Love, Noname Jane
June 9th, 2009 at 2:44 am
Bear a couple of things in mind. While the temptation to “do battle” in these small forums is tempting from a grass-roots perspective, it a futile effort, and not one that indicative of the overall war. You and your cohort are fighting FOR something, attempting to establish discourse and educate and, hopefully, learn something yourselves. The more you deal with little voices who are simply crying out for attention while maintaining their indignation at your inferior value, the more you’ll find yourselves arguing like them, jading you toward those that would RESPECTFULLY disagree with you, and the more intractable you will find yourselves with your own opinions.
If you find that your inner imp needs some satisfaction, I guess I would deadpan sarcastic agreement with the nitwits, extending it in ludicrous ways, although I would probably do so from a different identity.
Just remember these forums from large to small are havens for destructive thrashing, not real conversation. It’s sad, but it also means they are very boring without endorsement by those with something real to say.
June 9th, 2009 at 11:54 pm
I remember a comment that Chris Rock said once about the hypocrisy of the United States. He said, in an interview, that there is probably not one American who has not heard of Jenna Jameson. And a lot of them are her fans. Yet, if she walked down any street, most people (fans) would not acknowledge her. Worse, they may even run across the street to avoid her. If one says that the US was founded on the principles of tolerance, but it fails to live up to that creed time and time again, there is a good reason for it: the US was founded by enlightened people, but it’s populated by Scottish Calvinist bigots. And since everyone gets a vote, the enlightened and tolerant lose out every time. The US is hypocrisy in action. It’s like when that abortion doctor was recently murdered. I happened on an column, written by a noted Bible-thumper, who declared that the act was wrong and it should be condemned by all. But, in the next paragraph, the writer implied that the doctor was, in effect, responsible for his own fate because he denied the innocent unborn their right to life. And, in a seemingly chuckling remark, concerning that the doctor was murdered while attending services at his own church, the writer declared that the doctor could find no sanctuary for his actions, even in his place of worship. Hypocrisy in action, indeed.
June 16th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
It’s frustrating to try to explain yourself to people who aren’t inclined to listen, but I still believe walking the high road is still the only answer. It’s emotionally satisfying to return insult for insult, but … what does it accomplish? Does anything change as a result? No. In fact, responding in anger only confirms and strengthens their prejudices.
I also think you’re wrong to believe that you’re “inviting abuse” by trying to enter into reasoned dialogue — and you’re certainly not being “passive” by doing so. The passive path is to say, “No comment”. When you decided to engage them in the first place by responding, I have to guess your intention was to actively defend your point of view, and you can do that most effectively by giving calm, reasoned, explanatory answers to their abusive posts.
It’s odd and uncomfortable to be put in the position of persuading others to accept you as a fellow human, but that’s exactly what you have to do. These are people who are stuck — their antipathy is so deeply ingrained by their upbringing and feels so intuitively “right” to them that they haven’t ever really thought about the constituent issues in any real sense. Your viewpoint presents such a stark contrast to theirs that they really *don’t* see you as a real person. They’re striking out at the dim caricature of you that their prejudices have formed in their minds.
The thing is, they’re not bad people. They’re just not thinking. You represent a serious challenge to their world view; they’re not accustomed to having to make an intellectual defense of what they perceive to be an incontrovertible truth, so their first inclination is to simply dismiss you as beneath argument. Don’t let them! Force them to explain themselves by being as sweet and reasonable as you can manage.
Your challenge is to break through the caricature and to make them see you as a real person, possessing the same strengths and frailties they do. Make them know that when they attack you without mercy, they’re not attacking some alien being — they’re hurting one of their own. They really are decent people at the root, and once they come to the realization that they’ve been hurtful to another real person, most of them will recoil in horror from their own actions. Honestly, they really will.
Then you can talk. They still won’t be inclined to immediately agree with you, of course (partly because they’re not entirely wrong), but they may begin to think about what you say. Isn’t that a good start?
It does feel good to break the knees of those who’ve been kicking you, but it doesn’t get you anything but more enemies. You need more apologists (people willing to argue in defense of their world view), not less.
August 8th, 2009 at 1:34 pm
I am very sorry you had to be subject to this. The Internet is an extremely Janus-faced thing. You will find more powerlifters on message boards than exist in real life, and the anonymity of the internet allows people to say things they lack the testicular fortitude to say in real life.
There is no doubt that the adult industry and those who work in it are among the most persecuted people in America. The right AND the left have no qualms about hurling stones at sex workers. Recently, Chris Hedges, most famous for his book on corporate Christianity “American Fascists,” came out with another book, wherein he attacks the industry using the usual Melissa Farley party line. Of course, he is wildly inaccurate on many of the details (inter alia, he thinks Max Hardcore, JM Productions and Extreme Associates are representative samples of the industry; he thinks that “Karen Stagliano is Tricia Devereaux’s stage name.”) Most egregiously, however, his main source for his information on the industry is someone who is an avowed follower of Jerry Falwell, someone who thinks homosexuality is a “sin.” The kicker is that Hedges has repeatedly attacked Falwell et al, but, when it comes to the adult industry, he is more than willing the bury the hatchet with corporate Christianity…in the back of the industry.
This is the measure of the massive constellation of gangs out to harm the industry.
As far as industry workers marrying servicemen is concerned, here are a couple of points:
1) in “Generation Kill,” Evan Wright reported that the adult industry is tremendously popular with servicemen in Iraq.
2) In his book “INAT,” Canadian correspondant (and former Canadian Army NCO) Scott Raymond Taylor reports that soldiers have been using adult entertainment to relieve the stress and escape the horrors of war ever since there have been wars to begin with.
3) Colonel David Hackworth, America’s most decorated living soldier until his tragic death in 2005, ran a brothel for his soldiers in Vietnam.
4) The French Foreign Legion, widely regarded as one of the best military organisations on the planet, has traditionally had brothels for Legionnaires. The brothel workers also doubled as nurses in a hard spot.
The bottom line is that whoever attacks the adult industry is, at the same time, plunging a knife into the backs of our serving soldiers.
February 18th, 2010 at 5:09 pm
I was browsing some adult link sites and came across yours. Just wanted to send my compliments your way for having such an informative adult site. Thanks.