Yuku free message boards

I love that he calls it "The" Hustler. That, more than anything, convinces me that he really had no idea what it was. I guess he'll probably be checking these publications more closely from now on. Anyway, I'm glad that he so clearly and without apology says these things, as if to think something different is totally ridiculous. He is respected by a lot of liberal dudes (and women) who might not listen if it were a woman saying the same things, unfortunately.

In 2005, Chomsky did an interview with Hustler. This video is saying that his interview in that magazine caused many to believe that he endorses porn. They ask him about why he did that interview and he explains that he got a request from "The Hustler," with lists of people they have interviewed, people he respected, and topics of interest to them, topics he typically covers, so he did the interview, and it did not seem out of the ordinary. He had never heard of "The Hustler" before that, and didn't know it was a porn magazine. Then they ask him how he feels about porn, and he very straightforwardly says that it is the degradation and humiliation of women, and people who get off on that have a problem, and he doesn't want to contribute to it or be associated with it. They give the argument about how the women are paid and agree to do it and he responds that that is not materially different from saying that women in sweatshops agree to be paid for that work, and that it is still inhumane. They then ask how to improve conditions for women in porn and he says the way to do that would be to eliminate it, and makes another analogy, saying that if, for instance, someone were to approach a poor child and say I'll pay you if you let me abuse you, that the argument that the child would lose a way to make money if you stopped child abuse is a bad argument. He says that we don't want better child abuse, and likewise don't want better porn conditions. Instead, we should improve conditions for women and make it so this abuse isn't done, by creating a system where women have options so that they would not need to resort to doing it. Also, I don't remember the exact wording, but the implication by way of his analogy was that, like child abuse, porn should not be allowed.

THE Hustler!

I think this is a good example of how to ... I can't decide if it's how to use male privilege for good rather than evil, or how to reject it, or a bit of both. But the fact that he says it so bluntly, in a matter of fact, "I said it so it must be true" sort of male-way, that's accepted for men to do, is good to see. For women, it's often more difficult to say things like this without feeling pressure to hedge, apologize, offer caveats, etc. It's gratifying to see a man use that automatically-granted male authority to say something useful. I don't know if I'm effectively conveying what I'm trying to say here. What I mean is, not all privileges are equal. Some are granted, but no one should have them, while others are granted, and are rights that everyone should have, and therefore I don't think those should be abandoned by those who are granted them. In this case, he is using his privilege of being taken seriously for good - and that's something we should all have the ability to do. I look forward to the day where a woman's words will have the same weight. Meanwhile, while we are still being shouted down, I would like to see more men do the right thing, and say it loudly and proudly and without apology the way Chomsky has done here. I'm very happy that he's said these things, and at least as equally happy with the way he's said them, I just wish that it weren't so rare that we're all terribly impressed by it.

Yes, that's what I meant - thanks windy.

Privileges everyone should have (rights): The ability to be taken seriously, your life to have value, etc.
Privileges no one should have: Domination of other people/classes, society condoning your objectification of people/classes, etc.

So, he seems to be rejecting the notion that he has the right to objectify women (good!) but not rejecting the notion that his words are to be taken seriously (also good, especially if he recognizes and rejects the privilege of NOT taking women seriously).

Is that helpful, or worse?