feminine-genius

Anti-pollution campaign

Archbishop Chaput has long proven himself to be the friend of women, by denouncing what degrades her. That is why he was one of the first and most public supporters of the Theology of the Body, and that is why he continually speaks against one of the biggest enemies of authentic femininity: pornography:

The sexual confusion at the top of U.S. society now has an echo in every corner of American life. Sexually transmitted disease, child sexual abuse, adult Internet predators, divorce, cohabitation and nearly every other indicator of a dysfunctional society stand at epidemic levels. But very few people want to name the biggest single environmental crisis we face: a multi-billion dollar pornography industry that pours garbage into our homes every day through the Web and other media.

The fact that porn is in the family newspaper in the form of advertisements, that women's bodies are used to grab attention to sell cars, soap, and computer software, and that children receive a daily barrage of flesh while surfing the internet, shopping the mall, or by watching most television shows is what he means.

Forty years ago, when steel mills pumped hundreds of tons of toxic waste each week into the Great Lakes — literally “killing” Lake Erie and damaging the health of tens of thousands of families — citizens got organized. They forced the mills to clean up or shut down. We need to do the same today. Citizens need to stop the pornography industry now — not out of some kind of Victorian prudery, but because pornography poisons the human heart, imagination and soul just as those steel mills once poisoned our air and water, only worse.

Pornography is never “innocent entertainment,” no matter how private it might seem. It turns human beings into objects. It coarsens our appetites. It darkens our ability to see real human beauty. It creates impossible expectations about sexual intimacy. It kills enduring romance and friendship between the sexes. And ultimately it’s a lie and a cheat. Pornography is a cheap, quick, empty copy of the real thing — the real joy of sexual intimacy shared by a man and woman who have joined their lives in a loving marriage.

How many women have bought into the lies? How many men have cheated themselves of the joys of purity? How many children have been robbed of innocence that malformed them for life?

Thank you for speaking out, Archbishop Chaput, Bishop Finn, and and Archbishop Naumann. Pornography is, as you say, poison -- one that has to controlled at ground level, hard as it is. Our spiritual health depends on it.

UPDATE: Canadianna has a perfect example from a recent exchange of letters with a youth program that used the phrase "pimp up your crib" as a promotion for redoing bedrooms. The tv rep wrote:

We are sorry to hear that some of the dialogue in a current promotion for The Big Rip is disappointing for you. We can assure you that we take our responsibility as a broadcaster very seriously and regularly make internal judgments regarding appropriate content. As primarily as children’s network, we are acutely aware of our obligation to use appropriate language while staying relevant and appealing to our audience. In this context, the phrase in question is intended as slang for ‘decorate’ or ‘upgrade’ and has slipped into common usage without being considered profane or irreverent.

The fact that it's "common usage" for children should indicate that there's work to be done to reverse the trend. Nope. Just cash in on the lingo and nail it in. Canadianna notes:

Language evolves, but that doesn't mean we must always bring things down to the basest level, especially when kids are involved. When instructing children, we should be attempting to elevate their minds, rather than corrupt. An ugly word like 'pimp' doesn't deserve to be part of the childhood lexicon. Although it has slipped into common usage to mean 'redecorate', it retains its repulsive edge. While it might be acceptable for teens, and fully suitable for adults in whatever context they might want to use it, its traditional meaning is unfortunate enough that it should be kept out of programming and advertising directed toward children.

"Woe to those who scandalise the little ones..."

UPDATE II: Prolife Blogs takes note that the ever-present ACLU has come to the defense of smut peddlers once again:

A federal district judge has recently ruled that the Children's Online Protection Act is an unconstitutional suppression of free speech. The law requires porn site operators to verify that patrons are 18 years old before giving them access to pornography. The lawsuit, brought by the ACLU on behalf of several sexual health sites and salon.com, states that this is a burdensome requirement and has a chilling effect on free speech.

Children are indeed burdensome -- anything worth investing in bears a weight that is commensurate with its value. Forming children is harder than leaving them to form themselves, but the difference would ultimately be in the outcome. Very, very sad.

Ah, technology!

Matthew Lickona has a clever fisk of a NYT piece on what high definition technology is doing to the porn industry. Remember that, in their own words, the "art" is all about interpersonal relationships, well, sort of:

The technology makes the experience more intimate, he said. “People look to adult movies for personal contact, and yet they’re still not getting it. HD lets them see a little bit more of the girl.”

You really have to savour the whole thing. The seriousness with which they take themselves, their audience, and the potential shows their abominable cluelessness. If lives weren't crushed in the process, it would be worth a hearty chuckle.

Behold the man!

Women everywhere should be deeply grateful to Bishop Paul Loverde of Arlington, VA for his pastoral letter on pornography called Bought with a Price. After defending the sacraments in their dioceses, this is the best of what bishops can do for their flocks -- discern a problem, analyse it in light of faith, exhort the faithful to join in tackling the problem, and allow by their action those outside the Church to consider how (and why) Catholicism promotes the dignity and integrity of the human person in this way.

Just a snippet from the second section:

The gravity of this sin becomes clearer when one considers the tremendous damage the use of pornography causes to society. It damages first of all the family, the basic cell of society and the Church, because it tears at the marital bond. Since it immerses all who are involved in the illusion of a fantasy world (CCC 2354), a man's use of pornography turns his attention and affection away from his wife. It creates in his mind unrealistic and often immoral expectations for their intimate life. He begins to approach her only as a means to his own gratification and no longer as his "suitable partner." Priests and counselors know very well how grave a threat pornography poses to marriage and how many families have already suffered sad division due to its effects.

Pornography's availability and intrusion injure the common good by producing a consumerist and licentious view of sexuality, particularly of women. Inculcating and guarding the precious virtue of chastity becomes increasingly difficult when pornography infects a majority of media outlets. Society's interest in preparing young men and women for marriage also suffers when the media presents as a mercantile plaything the holy act of intimacy that is proper to the sacred bond of marriage.

Perhaps worst of all, however, is the damage that pornography does to man's "template" for the supernatural. Our natural vision in this world is the model for supernatural vision in the next. Once we have distorted or damaged that template, how will we understand the reality? Our Lord has given us the gift of sight with the intention that we ultimately may see Him. The sinful use of this faculty both warps our understanding of it and - worse still - cripples our ability to realize its fulfillment in heaven. What man should use for receiving the true vision of God and the beauty of His creation, he uses instead to consume false images of others in pornography. How can we understand the supernatural sight God desires for us - i.e. the contemplation of God in the beatific vision - once our natural sight has been damaged and distorted?

This is just the beginning of a great work in defense of all peoples, but which reaches out with fatherly concern primarily to the women entrusted to his care.

From the bottom of my heart, thank you Bishop Loverde!

The Porn Generation

Dr. Judith Reisman, whom I have long admired for her heroic tenacity in slogging through the dank cesspool of sexual perversion for the sake of quantification, has written an excellent piece for Human Events.

I was talking with a sweet young 14-year-old girl the other day. She was depressed. “All the boys I’ve been friends with at school, really friends with, they’re now acting so inappropriately.” 

No, she wasn’t hurt by anyone. But, she says, “I have to slap them and it’s really upsetting.  I know they’re watching pornography,” she adds.

“That’s where they get all that stuff from. And it hurts, also because they are ruining their own lives.” She chokes back the tears. 

Don’t expect Dr. Phil or any other television maven to reveal pornography for what it is—a major erototoxic virus infecting most exposed.  The virus was released into society December 1953 when Hugh Hefner used it to emasculate Joe College.

Rendered impotent without fantasy sex, millions of men over time—crossing every political, racial, religious, educational and socioeconomic boundaries—lost the virility and virtue needed to protect their wives and children from the current porn deluge [bold added. It may be why they dropped the ball elsewhere, as well. gsk]. 

And when men are emasculated, popping Viagra while lusting after tragic centerfold paper and celluloid and computer dollies, women turn away from home and embrace “work” that may be empty but is reliable.

She recommends reading a difficult work, Porn Generation: How Social Liberalism Is Corrupting Our Future by Benjamin Shapiro (age 21!) -- difficult because of the dark subject matter -- in order to map the present (who our kids are rubbing elbows with at school) as well as the future, noting:

The baby boomers and “grown-up flower children” became the mass media and education authorities who have corrupted society, writes Shapiro... [He] argues, with strong support, that discarding traditional morality gave our children over to social liberals, who control our culture through music, film, television and other mass media so that the normal is now considered deviant.  He says the effects upon his generation are “disastrous.” 

I do not think Shapiro exaggerates. “Like it or not, the porn generation is the future of this country,” says Shapiro.  Think of that and consider what decisions will be made by future judges, juries, legislators, prosecutors and Presidents who are pornography addicts.

Grace can do all things, can make all things new, but women have an essential part in this. We cannot participate in the commercialised and demeaning way that images of women are used -- nor can we laugh off the fashions and trends that put our girls "on the market."

For decades, women have turned over the air-brushed and fleshy images staring at them in the check out lanes at the market. What else? Grass roots worked for Eleanor Schafly -- we need a quiet revolution to remove women from all corners of the Titillation Market. Leave men to their computer-generated bodies if necessary (not much we can do about that for now), but we want the real girls out! Ideas welcome.

Pizza Porn, and the like

Research on a current headline ("Britney Spears, Beyoncé, Blasted by Body Shop Founder for 'Pimp Culture'") led me to this group, CWASU. On their "who we are" page, was found this refreshing intro:

When CWASU was founded an orthodoxy - that feminist research was research with, by and for women, and that only qualitative methods were adequate for feminist research - was widely accepted. Over the years we have broken with virtually all of these assumptions, and moved to a position where we see our feminism as providing the theoretical backdrop to our work, and methods as tools through which we explore specific research questions (see Kelly, Regan and Burton 1992; Kelly, Burton and Regan 1994 for more detailed discussion of some of these issues).

These folks have not left feminism behind, but when reality kicked them in the head, like good researchers they shifted their premise. (How marvelous to not be so entrenched that facts be damned!)

Thus we arrive at the current Deep Thought -- When "cool" undermines "good," challenge "cool." How simple is that!

Such is the theme of the latest piece from Anita Roddick, who knows that the sex slave trade, prostitution, and pornography are extremely harmful to women and children. Then she considers them in relation to the popular culture:

Did you notice the shift in the style and content of music videos a few years ago? That was because pornographers began to direct and produce them. As a result not only do ‘porn stars’ have to simulate sex, but so do Beyonce and Britney, two of the most popular icons for young women and girls today. Some hip hop artists have even made their own porn movies to reflect the sexual material in their songs - the less raunchy ones just present themselves as pimps, blinged out and surrounded by scantily clad women – just like in the recent Selfridges Christmas advertising campaign. The gains in this collaboration have primarily been for the porn industry, which has gained new young audiences and markets.

What we have now is what I call ‘Pimp and Ho chic’, with all aspects of the sex industry presented as hip and cool. Pole dancing as exercise, lap dancing clubs as places to see celebrities, Pimp of the Year Award, Pimp and Ho fancy dress Balls, websites promoting ‘pimp’ culture, and the every day use of the words ‘b**ch’ and ‘ho’ to refer to women, including girlfriends, are just some of the examples I have come across.

Pamela Paul’s recent book ‘Pornified’ asks whether porn has become a safe haven for men where they can still feel they are dominant. The compulsive consumers among the 80 young men interviewed described their girlfriends as boring, and sex with images as more satisfying. What do women and girls gain (or more accurately loose) when liberation and empowerment are reduced to sexual display, consumerism and commodification? How did porn get to be hip, pimps to be cool and feminism become a dirty word?

Obviously, those who are not completely out of the feminist woods cannot see that birth control and abortion turn sex (and thereby women) into just another consumer good that needs to be well-packaged and cutting edge. On the bright side, these researchers are beginning to connect the dots and should be commended. The point about the mainstreaming of porn is essential.

Example: how about the ridiculous pizza commercial shown widely on the Olympic games that has Nicole Simpson slithering into a restaurant to give some "delight on a tray" to a slobbering adolescent boy (with smiling parents looking on). "Where's the remote!!" bellows the husband-unit each time, thankfully.

"But Daaaaaaaaad, it's Jessica Simpson!" pipe the idiot children, as though the seas ought to part. That's the point exactly.

From Penthouse to the streets

Smut purveyer Bob Guccione lost his pleasure palace and has had to move in with extended family. After he took flight to avoid eviction, his lawyers surveyed the place and had this comment:

"Opening the door of that house is like walking into the late-'70s," Schafhauser said. "Gold-plated chandeliers, mirrors on the ceiling, the whole deal. You can tell at one time it was really lavish, but it needs a lot of work. There are ceiling leaks and paint peeling off the walls and many of the toilets don't flush properly."

(Obviously the "love" in his "love shack" was far from the caritas preached by Benedict. Bob's was all eros -- tacky, self-absorbed, and shallow.) Thus, we witness the sad epic of the glamour-guy on top of a porn empire and surrounded by bodacious babes, who is now battling throat cancer, financial woes, and is virtually homeless.

I wish it were because the market for flesh is declining, but it only means that girlie magazines have taken a back seat to internet porn. He did his share to whet the appetite, and now the unsatiable hunger has plowed him under.

Keeping prostitutes safe

In the "idiotically mixed messages" department of life, Britain has changed regulations so that where two or three women are gathered together in the name of selling sex, they will not be categorised as a brothel. But take note,

"This should not be seen as some sort of approval," he said. "It is not. We are not legalising brothels."

Heavens no! They are only enabling prostitution in a way that will edge out the middle man, known as the pimp. Since larger operations often turn violent and hurt women, smaller operations will simply allow them to be straightforward entrepreneurs and remain safe -- as long as they don't disturb the neighbours. In that case, they will be charged with the same "anti-social behaviour" laws that the lads downstairs risk when their kegger gets out of hand or their music blares too loudly.

Admit it, folks. When a culture cannot bring itself to condemn abortion, fornication, adultery, sodomy, or most of pederasty, then how can it strain at gnats and put the kabosh on women who are just trying to pay the rent?

The reason that women would be allowed to work together without being prosecuted was for their safety rather than a deliberate attempt to liberalise the law.

Miss Mactaggart said: "Where women are working for themselves and are less likely to be managed or pimped on a large scale, in the interim it is probably more sensible not to use the very serious penalties we have against people who run brothels. Very small scale operations can operate in a way that is not disruptive to neighbours.

You do your thing, and I'll do mine -- just pull the shades and don't interrupt my favourite programme. What harm is there in that?

Just another business on the block

The porn industry is growing -- both in profits and respectability. It's moved from shocker to yawner, well -- except for the rapt audience.

Selling sex is one of the oldest businesses in the world, and right now, business has never been better. One of the biggest cultural changes in the United States over the past 25 years has been the widespread acceptance of sexually explicit material - pornography.

In the space of a generation, a product that once was available in the back alleys of big cities has gone corporate, delivered now directly into homes and hotel rooms by some of the biggest companies in the United States.

It is estimated that Americans now spend somewhere around $10 billion a year on adult entertainment, which is as much as they spend attending professional sporting events, buying music or going out to the movies.

The industry also has its own major stars, like Jenna Jameson, a teen beauty queen, turned showgirl, turned porn actress. With the approval of her family, she reportedly earned more than a million dollars last year performing sex for money.

“The way I look at it is, this is kind of an art to me. I'm performing. I'm not doing it for the gratification of another man,” says Jameson. “I'm doing it because this is my job and I'm entertaining the masses. So it's just like being Julia Roberts, but just a little bit further, one step further.”

It would be a self-perpetuating industry, with the addictiveness inherent in it. Thus, a voyeur is a dedicated consumer for years, unless he finds healing. This is the destructiveness of capitalism without a soul. Remember the "widgets" of Econ 101, the supply and the demand? Sadly, there are many forms of meat on the market with no moral distinctions. You buy, we sell, and families be damned.