�鶹��ý

A false argument

It was a nice piece of sophistry displayed by Simon Butler in opposing a burqa ban [Letters GLW #857]. So if I oppose the occupation of Afghanistan by US Imperialism I am no better than those Taliban and Al-Qaeda “terrorists”. Guilt by association is fraught with problems Simon. It’s a false argument.

Maybe we can get a cogent definition of “freedom”. This may help us all understand this matter as socialists. Simon’s definition appears more like a bourgeois form of “licence”, akin to our political leaders’ current idea of the nature of the “market”. “Do what you like when you like, how you like!”

One’s “freedom” is balanced by the “freedoms” of others. It is a dialectical concept not a bourgeois abstraction such as used rhetorically by people like George W.

If you take Simon’s simplistic road we may end up tolerating alienated young males who insist on wearing white pointy-head shrouds with two holes for the eyes. After all it’s all about “the right to choose” isn’t it?

Apparently this “right” is a “pillar” of the socialist left!

So do we support female and male circumcision? Let’s not interfere with parental "freedom" [ ie. licence].

It’s intellectually lazy and politically untenable to deal with this matter as some comrades have. They are digging themselves a big hole and disappearing from sight.

Let’s support women’s equality according to the standards of a secular open society, not according to the meaningless buzz-word: "freedom”.

Dave Bell
Orange, NSW

In Defence of Queer Porn

In their article “Pleasure and Porn”, Jess Moore and Tim Dobson write: “Queer porn — while challenging heterosexism — often adopts stereotypes about femininity and masculinity, and is overwhelmingly about male pleasure.”

I wouldn’t exactly say that Moore and Dobson are flat-out wrong about this. I think what they say is partly true about mainstream commercial gay male porn. However, queer porn is very diverse and I think Moore and Dobson over-generalise in a way that I imagine would rub a lot of people in the queer community up the wrong way.

Queer porn is politically quite different from straight porn. It has to be seen in the context of a society that suppresses queer sexuality. Porn is an important part of queer culture because it teaches queer people to enjoy their sexuality.

I’ll refer you to the film Trannyfags by Morty Diamond. This was one of the first porn films made by and for transgender men. In an interview with Bite magazine, Diamond said about the film, “I just wanted it to be that sort of celebration. Look trannyfags are hot, they’re gay men and they’re fucking hot. I just wanted to put that out there.” Seen in the context of a society that presents transgender men’s bodies as freakish, Trannyfags is empowering and important.

I’ll also refer you to Slit, Sydney’s magazine of “dyke sex, culture, politics and porn”.

This magazine was partly inspired by the surge of independent media that happened in the Nicaraguan revolution. It showcases the exuberant sexuality, artistic genius, sense of humour and formidable intellect of Australia’s dyke scene. It portrays women of all shapes and sizes as sexy and it is a source of pride for a generation of trendy Australian dykes.

Rather than limiting the kind of sex we have, queer porn such as Trannyfags and Slit is designed to open your mind about the possibilities of sex. It should not be lumped in with the bulk of straight porn. Rather, it should be held up as a model for the straight world to show the potential that porn holds.

Ainslie O’Connor
Canberra