Paging Dr. Sheldon...

If you happen to be reading this, Mr. Porn Historian, an inquiry for you.

Over at the new blog I am currently involved in, Blog for Pro-Porn Activism, we are currently in the middle of yet another dissecting of our dear and close male "feminist" guilttripper Robert Jensen. In the course of that, our fearless founder Renegade Evolution happened upon an old essay he did, titled You Are What You Eat: The Pervasive Porn Industry And What It Says About Your Desires (original post here), where, as part of his usual claptrap about the evils of porn, he included an off-the-cuff "review" of two videos: Blow Bang #4, which is an wall-to-wall feature; and Delusional, a Vivid couples' "feature' film.

I happen to remember that we had discussed this article about two or so years ago, and that you had posted a nice rebuttal to Jensen's "review" here at the forum (perhaps, it was AVN's official review or your own)....but I can't seem to find it anywhere in the forum archives.

If you can, is there any way that you can retrieve that review, so that I can post it at the BPPA blog as a rebuttal? Or...can you find the original thread here that included that review??

Any help would be greatly appreciated.


Anthony

Nostalgic for the good old days of....2004, eh, Kennerson?

Okey-dokey!

__________________________________________________ ______________

Sheldon 09-22-2004 06:18 PM


OK, sorry for the delay. I hope y’all think what follows below was worth the wait.

Oddly enough, no review of Delusional appears on AVN’s website, so I’ve compensated by writing my own review in AVN mode, as I did for real from 1990 –1997:

DELUSIONAL(2000). Vivid Film. Director: Robby D. Script: Robby D. & Tiffany Enright. Starring Cheyenne Silver, with Ryan Conner, Kiri, Dale DaBone, Joey Ray and Bobby Vitale. 69 Min.

Titled for the three delusions running rampant in this feature, the film opens with office colleagues Cheyenne and Dale bemoaning their nowhere social lives. Dale offhandedly wonders if he’s gay since he hasn’t dated in six months and urges Cheyenne not to give up on men after she caught her husband (Joey Ray) boffing a hooker (Kiri) in their own home. Now living alone, Cheyenne has a on-line chat partner named “Alex” who strikes her as her dream man – kind, gentle and loyal. After one nightly chat, she tabs over to her Enter button and her joy bell rings. Later, she has a nightmare involving her getting laid by her now ex-husband in some noisy dive.

The next day, she meets “Alex”, who turns out not to be a man (Delusion #1) but a babe with a flamboyantly blonde hairdo, Ryan Conner. Both taken aback and curious, and wishing to avoid her nightmare scenario, Cheyenne gives Sapphic sex a shot. After auditing Ryan’s initiating cooz course, her lips smooch and smack before saving Ryan’s privates for last. Cheyenne wakes up the next morning alone, Ryan having left her a note with a flower. Later, she tells Ryan at a restaurant that she’s uncomfortable having a relationship with a woman because of what others might say. Ryan yells at her, but abruptly smiles and lures her into the back for a torrid threesome with Bobby Vitale. Cheyenne conspicuously keeps her high heels on, as if to say, “I want to be bad!” Ryan yells at Bobby for spurting on them (which she spurred him on to do) and Cheyenne is put off by Ryan’s increasingly hostile possessiveness.

Having said that he’s been saving himself for her, Dale finally gets his chance to be with Cheyenne when she takes him home with her. Wearing earrings and modest tattoos, he looks like a pirate out of a Harlequin Romance novel. Their foreplay is sweet, despite Cheyenne’s dreadful acting here and throughout this feature. After a brief but intense exchange of oral sex, she says, “I want to feel you inside me” and intercourse ensues (as they say on "Law and Order: SVU"). Equal time is given to missionary and cowgirl, with Cheyenne fingering her pooper chute throughout. Finally getting the hint, he asks, “Do you want me to stick it in your ass?” Relieved, she replies, “Yes, I want you to stick it in my ass!” Shakespeare would be proud.

Watching this from outside, Ryan is fed up. Armed with a liquor bottle and a gun, she storms in, claiming Cheyenne as her lover (Delusion #2) and threatening to ventilate Dale. Cheyenne knocks her out with the bottle, but she escapes while the couple call the cops. Cut to “6 Months Later…”, when someone knocks on Cheyenne and Dale’s door, leaving behind Ryan’s telltale flower. [The feature then fades out with 'scary' music.]

Delusion #3 is our heroine’s pop-culture cluelessness. As Michael Douglas learned in "Fatal Attraction", any assertive blonde named Alex with a fancy hairdo is asylum bait. I guess Cheyenne didn’t see that movie, since she came Glenn Close to buying the farm.

The feature includes outtakes and bloopers. Market to those who like their sex scenes safe, short and to the point; and away from those offended by the blatant homophobia of lesbian psycho characters.

************************************************** ******************

Comparing the actual contents of the film with Robert Jensen’s own commentary, what do we find?

Jensen Delusion #1: as a self-proclaimed politically aware gay man, why does he NEVER mention the "lesbian Fatal Attraction" subplot? This would be an easy way to bash a mainstream, couples-oriented porn studio.

Jensen Delusion #2: it used to be that women would talk about "saving themselves" for the right man - now it is a male protagonist (Dale Dabone) who talks that way. Why does Jensen not see this reversal of stereotypes and how it undercuts his notion of the man "using and controlling" women?

Jensen Delusion #3: Dale is comfortable enough with his masculinity that he has no problem speculating in front of Cheyenne that he might be gay - also overlooked by Jensen.

Jensen Delusion #4: the, ahem, climactic sex scene between Cheyenee and Dale is totally directed by Cheyenne. Basically, he's a puppy who does whatever she tells him to do. Not only is she NOT begging, but he's just grateful to be a satellite orbiting her sun. Who's "using" and "controlling" here? And, as I said previously, asking permission is contrary to the assumption of entitlement underlying Jensen's notions of "control" and "using".

Jensen Delusion #5: since Jensen bashes "Delusional" precisely where it is progressive, and ignores it, in part, where it is reactionary, you have to wonder what sort of journalism he is passing on to his students. Is this what is meant by, "Those who can't...teach"?

************************************************** ******************

Now, anyone up to viewing "Blow Bang #4" to see how Jensen screwed THAT one up??? I'm done!

..just attempting to put down another Jensen revolt.

Thanks, Sheldon, for the reset.

...over at the Pro-Porn Activism blog, along with some comments of my own.

Blog of Pro-Porn Activism: Why Bob Jensen is a big damn lie: the Delusional edition

I've also added some commentary of my own in addenda.

Please feel free to check the blog out....Ren and the gang does some excellent commentary.

(And if Nina and/or Ernest and/or anyone else wants to make a contribution there, that would be most welcome, too.)


Anthony

Anthony and Sheldon,

I've now had a chance to visit the pro-porn activism site under discussion, and while its intentions are admirable and its content often valuable and always interesting, I'm concerned that it may be subject to the law of unintended consequences.

First of all, I think I should share with you and other forum participants here a disturbing phenomenon I can clearly observe from the panels available to me as an administrator. Over the past few months, we've experienced a high volume of anonymous traffic, much of it originating from geographically centralized IPs in a certain part of the Upper Mid-West, clearly seeking out printable versions of threads dealing with anti-porn feminism. By following the links from your new site, I'm sorry to say I think I know where some of that traffic is ending up. Various items from nina.com have been exhibited and/or quoted (obviously without notice to or permission from us) by presenters at anti-porn feminist events held on college campuses during that time period. The images and information used are extremely specific and, predictably, used to demonize Nina and by implication, other women who share her views.

What worries me is that your new site, just like this one, has the inadvertent effect of channeling traffic to the othewise obscure corners of the Internet inhabited by what is basically a small and isolated group of fanatics of whom the larger public to which we appeal takes little or no notice.

The question we must ask ourselves is this: in attempting to rebut their essentially preposterous arguments at great length and in excruciating detail, are we not giving them the very attention they crave and otherwise could not hope to attract? I already know how I feel about this, which is one reason why I've stopped posting on these subjects on this site. I don't see any reason to encourage them to come here to or arm them with out-of-context snippets of commentaries they can recontextualize for their own despicable purposes.

This is not to say that those arguments don't need answering or to discourage the establishment of forums for that use, but rather to raise the practical question of how best to neutralize whatever political threat to freedom of expression, their bette noir, they may represent.

For my own part, I've elected to engage in a the Japanese practice of "mokusatsu" - literally to kill by silence. I don't want them using our words against us and I don't want people from here upping their Alexa scores simply out of morbid curiousity.

Obviously, as genuine advocates of free speech, I would never ask any contributor to stop posting on this topic, but for my own part, speaking strategically, I've decided to let them carry on their vendetta with no help, direct or indirect, from me.

Just a thought to consider.

Ernest

As one of the main contriibutors of the BPPA blog, I can't speak for Renegade Evolution (who is the owner and chief founder of the BPPA blog) or any one of the other main contributors...but I feel the need to respond to your points.

The main reason why so many antiporn sites are listed there is the stated policy that is agreed on by all the participants there uses the principle of "Know your enemies"; and that the viewpoints of the other side should be openly discussed and sourced whenever possible, with all transparency and clarity.

I understand and appreciate the fact that due to past circumstances and the history of previous attacks on you and Nina, you would feel as you do about attracting unwanted attention to those sites. Nevertheless, I still believe that exposing and repudiating their myopia and their positions is crucial to building an effective opposition to their policies, and that merely allowing them to promote their views unfettered only encourages them that much further. They may indeed be a tiny minority and an isolated voice, but they do have some degree of outreach that goes far beyond their small numbers...and I don't believe that they should be simply ignored or dismissed.

Obviously, we will be much more careful about seeking your approval before posting or linking anything here in this forum; and if you prefer that we not use anything from this forum to refute their arguments or actions, just say the word and we will respect your wishes. (Here, I do speak for the rest of the members of the BPPA as well as for myself regarding my own blogs and sites.)

I will say that my own personal philosophy regarding dealing with these antipornfeminists is perhaps the exact opposite of what you prefer; I'd rather directly and openly confront all the contradictions and inaccuracies of their arguments, since I feel no need to hold back anything; nor am I hampered by any need to protect my past histories or actions on my part.

But, I do respect highly your position and your situation, Ernest, and will honor your request....and will take your suggestions into consideration along with the rest of the crew.

And I will forward this privately to the rest of the BPPA members for their consideration, too.


Anthony