Your argument defends an ideology; mine defends the truth. – Mason Cooley
Furry Girl has been in the news lately; her project to fund the first-ever sex worker rights billboard in the United States has succeeded, and it will be going up in Los Angeles in the next two weeks. That has received a small amount of attention in local mainstream media, but as usual something negative has received a lot more, and more widespread, attention. It started when “feminist” porn starlet Madison Young gave birth a few weeks ago, and decided to create an exhibition entitled “Becoming MILF” around the event (for those unfamiliar with the acronym, it means “Mother I’d Like to Fuck”). As Tracy Clark-Flory’s August 16th Salon article puts it:
…The idea was that she would explore how she now embodies a contradiction, the dichotomy to end all dichotomies — that of the Madonna and the whore. At the show’s opening, she served up self-made breast milkshakes and displayed a baby quilt made of burp cloths and “porn star panties.” Surely it goes without saying that this sort of art doesn’t appeal to everyone, or most, but it’s brought about criticism from the unlikeliest of sources: a fellow pornographer.
Furry Girl strongly criticized Young’s behavior on Twitter, calling her a “revolting person” and pointing out that her display would appeal to “baby fetishists” and “pedos”. But most importantly she wrote, “It’s funny to see how many feminist kinksters don’t think consent matters when it comes to creating erotic art w/ a baby.” Apparently Young and her supporters (whom Furry Girl calls “the sexy mommy mob”) angrily “tweeted” back and, well, the fur started to fly. Bloggers blogged, Twitterers tweeted and pundits issued forth punditry; Flory wrote her article and Jezebel commented on it…and as usual everyone missed the point.
Furry Girl and I are usually on the same page. That’s not to say we agree about everything; she’s a vegan and I’m an omnivore, some of the things she finds sexy are definite turn-offs for me, and while she revels in her “furriness” I obsessively pluck or epilate every single hair that dares to appear anyplace other than my scalp, eyebrows, eyelashes or mons veneris. But when it comes to issues of sex work, liberty, feminism and common sense, we rarely disagree: One especially important point in which we both believe is that sex work activists need to stop trying to look weird and wild and kinky and instead reach out to the mainstream Americans who support criminalization precisely because they believe we’re weird and wild and kinky. IMHO we need to stress the ways in which whores are like other women, not the ways in which we’re different; as FG puts it, “I want sex work issues to stop being marketed as though they are of interest only to kinky hipsters, leftists, and sex radicals.” So when a friend called my attention to this Tuesday night, I decided to see what Furry Girl herself had to say about it. I didn’t have long to wait, as she commented on the affair Wednesday morning:
I am utterly baffled that I have to explain these things, but the sexy mommy mob is still hysterical after my comments on Twitter last week that feminist darling Madison Young is creepy-as-fuck for how she uses her baby as a non-consenting prop for her sexual politics and porn marketing…since people are asking me for a “statement,” and the sexy mommy mob is intent on growing this “story” into some kind of national outrage, I might as well clearly explain my position in one place…
The big take-home point that some people are missing: It’s all about context. I am against breast feeding in places where people go to masturbate…It’s hard to plead “there is absolutely nothing sexual about these photos/videos” when they are posted in sexualized spaces and/or crafted to look sexy…if she would never want to encourage people to jerk off to photos of her baby, she should stop posting them in a place where she typically posts porn…This issue is also about consent. The baby is not consenting to being used as a marketing gimmick for her mother’s porn persona…I am against people using their children as props to serve an agenda…
I never said that no woman should be allowed to breast feed. I am not against breast feeding in public or private, I am against doing it in sexualized contexts. I would feel the same way if someone whipped out a baby at a swinger’s club, so it’s not just about the internet or porn. I never said that sex workers…should not be allowed to have children, or that mothers can’t be sexy. I have a number of kinky and sex working friends who are parents, and I know some sexy moms. They, however, possess good sense and boundaries and don’t force their offspring to be a part of their exhibitionism and work…I never said that no one should be allowed to photograph their kids or photograph breast feeding. I didn’t comb through the Flickr pages of strangers until I found a random mother to criticize. I’m specifically talking about a porn star who is using her baby as an attention-getting prop in sexualized contexts…
I hate what stuff like this does to the credibility of sex workers and pornographers as a whole. People like me try to tell regular folk that porn and sex work is about consenting adults, not weird stuff with kids and/or the non-consenting. To the sexy mommy mob, Madison is the greatest hero of her generation, but what about the other 99.999999% of America, the majority we need to get on our side in order to make any advancements for sex workers? If you seal yourself in the safe bubble of San Francisco, surrounded by adoring fans, then of course you’re not going to care how you might be damaging the movement for acceptance of sex workers and porn. I’m surprised that people like Gail Dines and Melissa Farley haven’t seized upon Madison’s baby fetish as yet another way to attack all of us. This is exactly the sort of thing they live to hold up as a non-representative example of how we’re all horrible people…Donna Hughes threw a fit a year ago when a small sexuality conference apparently allowed in a high school senior…If letting a consenting 17-year-old hear about sexuality is enough for the antis to launch a campaign that says kink bloggers are basically child molesters, I wonder what they would think of a porn star sexualizing the breast feeding of a baby? But of course, if the antis get wind of the controversy that Madison and her fans are so desperately trying to publicize, she will not be the one addressing the hard questions. She has her feminist porn “revolution” to worry about, and the rest of us – especially her baby girl – can go eat cake.
I don’t follow Twitter and therefore didn’t see the original comments, but from what I’ve read they’re a bit stronger than the sort of things I would’ve said. That’s not at all unusual, however; as I pointed out in my column of June 4th, “I’m the Princess of Paranoia and 99.9% of the human race words its essays with far less caution than I employ in the composition of my grocery list.” That having been said, Furry Girl’s explanatory essay is very clear and eminently sensible. And as usual, I find myself in complete agreement with her.
One Year Ago Today
“Presents” is a column about the thoughtful extras clients often give in addition to the fee.
I’m surprised that people like Gail Dines and Melissa Farley haven’t seized upon Madison’s baby fetish as yet another way to attack all of us.
That’s a good point. I’m sure they’re too busy rescuing, housing, clothing, and personally funding and job training sex trafficked women and children. Oh wait…
One especially important point in which we both believe is that sex work activists need to stop trying to look weird and wild and kinky and instead reach out to the mainstream Americans who support criminalization precisely because they believe we’re weird and wild and kinky.
Amen! I heard this was a sore point at the previous Desiree Alliance conference, which Amanda brought up in one of her articles and a couple other people I know who went also mentioned that tension between sex workers who have a mainstream look and those who don’t, with the latter group raising the fuss.
i never liked madison youngs porn,but this takes the cake,its absolutely disgusting and i really hope the child doesnt grow up to have issues.and of course this is going to be used against us,noone thinks we are normal women and not just in america.we are continuously being blamed for the sexualisation of children and noone thinks we can become good mothers or teachers(how many teachers have gotten fired for sex worker past or mothers lost custody?)and now this?
This is why we can’t have nice things. 🙁
Is there no end to the banal cat fighting over things so mundane. Maggie, you put your finger on a major issue,that being that the overwhelming production of written material reflects no thinking about content and the many issues of impact. When the economy is going down faster than a 20 dollar SW, who can worry about a billboard in California or how a burp cloth was made of whatever. And I thought about saying that too
Maybe I missed something (which is likely … since I have a tiny brain) … anyways …
But, I thought the major point was that Madison Young’s fiascos feed the fire of the opposition and pull “normal” people away from the idea that sex workers are “main stream”?
I have to admit … I’m turned off by Madison Young’s actions here and … after googling her image, I’m turned off by her. I didn’t even know who she was, guess my pron stash is outdated … come to think of it, it is. Looks like the newest stuff I have is “Pink Lagoon” circa 1987 … oh well – guess it qualifies as “hair fetish” by today’s standards … 😛
So yeah, she turns me off … but I’m not a normal person anymore – I won’t ascribe her actions to the sex worker population at large.
I am still a bit encouraged because, Gay acceptance has kind of come about in spite of some “strangeness” from the gay community – or rather stuff that wouldn’t be considered that “main stream”. So there’s prolly some hope here for sex workers too.
But – on the whole, you’re only going to get acceptance for sex workers who are legal (Pron folks, Strippers, etc) … because until prostitution is made legal, it’s kind of hard to grant them any “rights” … strictly speaking.
That’s interesting. I’m not totally sure how I feel about it. I’ll admit I haven’t “followed” the whole drama and just saw one picture. I haven’t read the Salon or Jezebel piece but did read Furry girl’s post and also Maggie Mayhem’s post on the subject (http://goo.gl/9BNDG), which was linked on Tits and Sass.
I personally don’t really view it as a pornographic image and I can’t say my first reaction is to find the image offensive, inappropriate and definitely not “inviting all the pedos”… It’s a picture of a fully dressed woman, though not in her “sweatpants”, sure, but my friends who are moms don’t spend 24/7 in their crusty sweatpants either (and I’m pretty sure they would probably not want to be caught dead wearing them for a photo shoot), who we may or may not know also happens to work in porn and she’s holding and breastfeeding her baby.
OK so she is a sex worker. But is this picture part of her porn work? From what I have read, it’s not and I don’t see how it would be assumed to be part of her work in porn..?. So are we saying any other form of picture or video or whatever other artistic expression that includes her and her baby breastfeeding, is just inappropriate and automatically porn? Does that apply to in person/public as well? Just porn? Really?
What if the picture depicted her holding her crying baby,, rocking or burping her baby instead of breastfeeding? Would that still cause the same reaction? Or is it because the baby is naked and it wouldn’t seem offensive to people if the baby wasn’t naked? What if she was wearing sweatpants and no makeup? Or is it a combination of the naked baby, the dress & makeup, breastfeeding AND the fact that she does porn? What if she was not in porn and say, a nurse, and took the same picture? Would that still be offensive? I’m just really trying to understand what specifically about the image provokes the strong reaction it did.
I guess you see the picture as sexualizing the baby and that’s what you find offensive? Personally that wasn’t my impression at all when I first saw it and while I can understand how it could provoke some people to people to feel uncomfortable about the mix when focusing on the I guess I don’t share the same perspective on what its meaning is and, like I said, I can understand it might make some people uncomfortable I still don’t really think the strong reaction and language were warranted.
I think that a strong reaction like that means it obviously struck a nerve and perhaps that is something Furry girl and others who feel this strongly have to reflect on – because IMO part of it might not have anything to do with the picture or Madison Young. Sometimes we react in certain ways because of our own internal conflicts. We assume the external event/person/situation which made us react this way is responsible but often, there’s more to it that and it’s interesting to try and find out *why* we reacted and felt that way.
I don’t buy the whole “omg you’re exposing your child to pedos” line of thinking. Personally that strikes me as quite hysterical. I don’t view the image as sexual. While Madison is attractive and even sexy, I don’t see how this sexualizes the baby she’s holding or the fact that she’s breastfeeding..? Is breast feeding something that is hard to separate from sexuality? Our society does have a pretty neurotic way of associating breasts to sexuality, even in the context of breast feeding and I suspect this probably plays a large part in explaining such strong reactions and assumptions that the image inappropriately places a baby in a sexual context?
Do you see naked babies or toddlers wearing only diapers or bottoms in public places such as the beach or outdoor pools as inappropriate and a way to dangerously exposing kids to pedophiles? I know some people do, which to me seems completely absurd..so maybe that’s where our perspectives differ and what explains our different reactions to the image?
As far as not being too “weird” or “kinky” to be accepted by mainstream..That seems counter productive to me and brings the question of who determines what level of “weird” or “kinky” is too much, is it really fair or honest to try to be “more normal” to appeal to or offend less to the mainstream? Then we can just look at anyone too “weird” and “kinky” by these new standards of what’s acceptable Personally, while I don’t understand the idea behind this plan, I kind of see it as missing the point. I don’t think getting “mainstream” to accept sex workers isn’t about telling others to tone it down to appease,
it isn’t even *only* about sex work (though sex workers have their own unique situation and challenges), the core of the problem we face is about some irrational fear of the unknown or the “different”. And simply conforming to an arbitrarily defined line of “normal” enough to not freak mainstream out too much, in essence doing little more than moving the imaginary line that separates normal mainstream from “weird”, “kinky” I have no desire to tell people they need to be less weird or kinky (or whatever) because it makes people uncomfortable. I have no desire to force others to change what they are and what they like to what I determine is better, more normal or more acceptable – the same way mainstream expects me to be different and more “normal”…..That completely defeats the purpose to me.
I want sex workers to be seen as humans and just like any other person, mother, father, etc…in all of their different flavors, not in some little box of “normal enough” . So I find those comments a little alarming. (It’s completely different if we were talking about something that was obviously harmful to kids and unanimously agreed, for example…but I don’t think this is a case where this would apply.), as well as the reference to considering the rad fems nuts and zealots when . The example of the 17 year old: I doubt it was truly inappropriate for a 17 yr old to be present in a conference about sexuality. So Donna Hughes had a fit over it? She has a fit over a lot of things I do or believe in…that’s not ever going to stop me. Would you go along and prevent a 17 yr old who wanted to attend *only* because Donna Hughes disagreed or was going to have a fit? I certainly wouldn’t. Just like everything I do anyways, that’s her problem, not mine. Let her freak!
Sure, it may lead to having to spend time and energy arguing, explaining or justifying your actions and yes, that might be annoying. But that’s not a reason to cave and behave in a way that will save you from the fanatics’ ire.. You’ve lost before you even get started if that’s the way you’re going to do things. No?
Personally, I find that if there’s one thing the breastfeeding image *does* do, is to humanize her and force people to reflect on the internal conflict they experience at this attempt at merging these two roles within the same person. To me, the strong reactions highlight just how uncomfortable we are when faced with the reality that women ARE these two roles. We like to keep them separate and when an image forces us to acknowledge and accept they’re not separate – the reactions are proportionate to the level of discomfort we feel. That’s why I truly believe this is very much about our own personal inner conflicts and feelings about the issues it concerns, not so much about the specific image or person.
Anyway – Very sorry for writing so much … but just my 2 sents. 🙂
My issue, and as Furry Girl explained hers as well, is that these photos were released on her porn site and to an audience expecting porn. If she had started a separate site, say a Facebook page, with no porn on it and just baby pictures, home pictures, etc. I wouldn’t have any problem with it. As FG wrote, “it’s all about context.” I certainly have no internal conflict about sex and motherhood, nor do I feel any weird need to pretend women aren’t many things simultaneously, yet the images strike me as being in questionable taste. It’s very easy for people who are criticized to retreat into ad hominems and finger pointing rather than confront the fact that maybe, just maybe, they were guilty of poor judgment.
OK, I’m having a hard time establishing the facts of all this. *Did* Young release the pictures on her porn site? She herself states that she did not do so. Miss Maggie Mayhem says the same. FurryGirl doesn’t specify whether she did or not – she certainly seems to be trying to imply that, but, when I carefully read what she’s saying, it’s all a bit vague on the actual details. Neither of the two pages FurryGirl linked to from her Twitter rantings as supposedly objectionable was a porn site (one was Young’s own blog, and one was Tits and Sass).
So, is Young lying and did she indeed release the pictures on a porn site, or is that all a giant inaccuracy around which FurryGirl’s rant has been built? I have to say that, at this point, I’m suspecting the latter, but, if you do definitely know that Young released the pictures on a porn site, I’m willing to rethink.
I’m having just as difficult a time as you are. I’ve never known Furry Girl to get her facts wrong before, so I didn’t try to research it myself because, frankly, I don’t ever click on links that I suspect go to porn sites because I have no desire to have my browser hijacked or to have spyware dumped into my hard drive. If Young released the pictures in any space that is normally reserved for porn then I have to agree with her assessment (though, as I said, I think her language was unnecessarily inflammatory). But if Young created some separate an non-sexualized space for the pics, then it’s a whore of a different color.
Never heard of this madison young, but that bitch should have her kids taken away. Unfit mother of the decade. sick sick.
Mademoiselle B linked to Maggie Mayhem’s post on the subject, but I’d just like to highlight because I think it provides a really important other perspective on the debate:
http://missmaggiemayhem.com/2011/08/18/sex-workers-breastfeeding/
Unfortunately, Commenter99’s post only proves Maggie Mayhem’s point.
But Maggie, there’s an enormous difference between saying someone used poor judgement and making very public accusations and personal insults that amount to verbal abuse in my books. There’s a respectful way to tell someone you don’t agree with something they’ve done but FG didn’t even try to do this.
I wasn’t implying you had any issues and I’m glad you don’t but that doesn’t mean there aren’t some people who reacted in such a way that might just want to consider whether or not they do.
Also, I didn’t realize the picture was posted on her porn site..? I took a quick look and didn’t see that and that wasn’t my understanding but regardless, as I said – I can understand where the concern comes from even if I feel somewhat differently about it, I just think FG’s reaction was pretty extreme and rude.
.
———————————————
“Dear baby fetishists: I don’t care how many of you fap to breast feeding, it doesn’t change the fact that you’re kinda pedos. Love, me.”
“I wonder if the SF perverts will get into posting photos of dogs licking honey off their genitals next. Hey, it’s totally feminist, right?”
“That’s funny coming from a semi-pedophile like you. Infants aren’t butt plugs or a kink accessory.”
“You are a revolting person. Your child will need so much therapy when she grows up and finds out how she was treated by you.
“I am so happy I don’t live in San Francisco. I would hate to have to pretend that borderline pedophilia is transgressive and revolutionary.”
———————————————
.
Those are some pretty harsh comments! Regardless of how one felt, that wasn’t necessary and there are ways to disagree or share an opinion without going overboard and being excessively and very publicly insulting about someone’s parenting ..It doesn’t accomplish anything other than just being hurtful, that’s all I’m saying.
Actually, just went back to the read the Maggie Mayhem article and read it again. It says:
“Images of the infant in question do not appear on any of Madison Young’s adult websites.”
I totally agree that FG went too far, and I even said so, but over the past several decades I’ve grown used to nearly everyone phrasing things far more emotionally and carelessly than I would’ve. Would Furry Girl’s criticisms have benefited from greater restraint? Absolutely. Would the responses of Madison Young and her crowd also have benefited from some restraint? Absolutely. But that doesn’t invalidate Furry Girl’s underlying point, it merely means the way she expressed it was careless and rude. Dressing lies and attacks (a la Melissa Farley) up in academic language doesn’t make them any more true, and hiding truthful statements in rudeness doesn’t make them less true.
>One especially important point in which we both believe is that sex work activists need to stop trying to look weird and wild and kinky
But that’s the fun bit. One of the great freedoms of sex work for me was that I didn’t have to conform to the dull world. I lived “like a gypsy queen in a fairy tale” (Steely Dan) and loved it.
The thing is this- Once you’ve done sex work, from then on, everything you do is suspect and wrong, according to many. I’ve a straight office job now, my physical condition made sex work increasing tough for me. But if my past were exposed? They’d probably get rid of me. It happened to a friend once. We are always going to be judged negatively on our sex work.
Sometimes, I just want to scream “Fair enough, if you won’t accept me in your mainstream world, I’ll show you weird and wild!”
But come on, Comixchik; you know as well as I do that the majority of whores aren’t any weirder and wilder than anyone else; most of the ones I’ve known are just as boring and mundane as anyone else. I honestly don’t think sex workers as a group are any weirder than the general population, but the weird, attention-seeking ones are presented as representative of us even though they aren’t.
I have this kind of problem with the Gay Rights crowd; I want to know when they are going to tell the professional freaks that turn up for Pride events to put on a shirt over those pierced nipples, and take off the dog collar and leash. Playing “Shock the squares” is loads of fun, but at some point you want to get the squares to give you something, if only a little space, and if you’ve persuaded them that you are all tacky adolescents with poor impulse control, that could be a problem. There’s a little concept called “Getting along with the neighbors” that needs to be taken into account.
I think that Gays should have the option to marry. I also think that too few Gays grasp how many grouchy old ladies think their grandchildren are illegitimate because their daughter wasn’t married in the right kind of church (or synagog, for that matter. I gather that serious jews are just as idiotic about Reform vs Orthodox as christians get over Methodist vs Baptist (and don’t get me started on Church of Christ Redeemer vs Roman Catholic)), and that they therefore expect public acceptance to be one hell of a lot easier than it is. Keep the freakazoids at home, or covered up, unless you want to enjoy the same level of general esteem that the public accords Star Trek Fans who wear their uniforms on the street, m’kay? Freakazoids are a lot of fun to party with, but they add nothing to serious social debate.
I can see your point, except…
Gay rights are coming right along. The men in speedos kissing each other at gay pride events hasn’t stopped it from happening. And besides: it’s a gay pride event. It isn’t like they showed up at McDonald’s that way.
I can see suggesting that anime fans don’t do the fan community any favors by going to school or the office wearing a plug suit and blue wig, but surely it’s a bit much to tell them they shouldn’t cosplay at a convention because somebody might think it’s weird?
>But come on, Comixchik; you know as well as I do that the majority of whores aren’t any weirder and wilder than anyone else; most of the ones I’ve known are just as boring and mundane as anyone else.
So true. Actually, most of the whores I’ve known were very well organized.
I spent my teenage years in a hippie, back to the land anything goes type situation, and always found it hard to get the knack of conforming. And I did, especially in the beginning, enjoy shocking people and being wild.
I can’t find the “offending” material, and so can’t judge it. Also, both Furrygirl and Madison Young seem to have basically gotten into an online cat fight characterized by all the maturity I’ve come to expect from online fights. Thus, each has invalidated herself (which is not the same as saying that she has [or has not] invalidated her message). I doubt either has much idea what the other’s point even is.
So I don’t really have an opinion on this. In fact, I don’t think I care.
Sailor Barsoom – From having gone back and read everything that both Furrygirl and Young posted on that night, I would say that Furrygirl has tried her damnedest to make this into a cat fight and that Young, far from ‘invalidating herself’, has replied rationally and with dignity in the face of extreme provocation. As for Young not having much idea what Furrygirl’s point is, I’d say Furrygirl has only herself to blame for that. When you rant and yell insults in place of explaining yourself rationally, you do tend to leave people without much idea of what your point really is.
I didn’t read everything. It’s entirely possible that I read three or six posts from an exasperated Madison Young which, for that tiny sliver of this whole thing, made her look bad. I won’t deny that it’s possible.
Laura found the “offending” pic and showed it to me. It doesn’t seem like a big deal on its own, but if it was mixed in with porn pics I can see that it might be. There seems to be some confusion as to whether it was or not.
The whole thing reminds me of fights, not the physical kind, that I’ve gotten into with some women before. It reminds me of why I’d rather argue with a man than with certain women. If I’m arguing with a man, the worst that can happen is that it turns physical and either I end up hurting him or he ends up hurting me (probably both). And that very possibility constrains us; we don’t use escalating streams of fighting words with each other unless we feel strongly enough about it to go to Fist City.
But a woman might not feel the need to show such restraint. More than once I’ve encountered a woman shrieking things at me that, if a man said them there’d be a fight all right. I’d take a swing even if I knew he could kick my ass. But there she is, screaming these things, more than once, and other things just as bad. And why? Because she knows I’m not going to hit her. If she thought there was a chance in ever-burning Hell that I was going to smack her one, she wouldn’t say it, just as a man wouldn’t say it unless he was prepared to give and take a beating over it.
And that of course makes it all the more frustrating, all the more infuriating. She’s insulting me and all my kin, but she fucking DOES think well of me in at least one way: she knows I’m not a woman-beater. And she’s taking advantage of it. She’s taking the one bit of goodness that I know she knows I’ve got, and she’s using it against me. Bitch.
If any ladies here want to know how to tell if you’re going too far, just stop, take a deep breath, let it out slowly, and ask yourself, “If I were a man, would I have a mouthful of knuckles about now?” If the answer is “yes,” then back off. He probably won’t hit you (most men are not woman-beaters), but he’ll almost certainly lose respect for you.
OK, I’ve gone off on a rant and must sound like Peter or something, but there it is. I know that many, probably most women don’t act like that, or do so rarely. The ones who do garner attention disproportionate to their numbers, squeaky wheels and oil, all of that.
Sailor Barsoom – Sadly, I think you’re right about that. Furrygirl’s disgusting behaviour on Twitter reflects badly not just on sex workers but on women, unfortunately.
It’s interesting, I’ve been seeing more of this issue than I expected. Kendra Holliday, author of weblog The Beautiful Kind has run into a multitude of issues after being outed a couple of years ago in St. Louis. A few weeks ago she wrote a blog that I think firmly plants her in the “sexy mommy mob” (which is a FANTASTIC psuedonym – FG is pretty damn clever, I’ll have to check her out now-thanks MM) and I’ve not seen, nor feel the need to see Madison Young’s photos. I have heard her speak to the issue and from what she said the photos were intended to hammer home the fact the injustice of the Madonna/Whore complex.
I wonder if that fact that Madison Young spends an inordinate amount of time being photographed in extremely vulnerable situations doesn’t cloud her judgement a little when it comes to perceived “boundaries” regarding reactions to her photos.
I know I’m treading some dangerous ground by making statements that teeter on the edge of saying – “What do you expect from a BDSM model?” and that’s NOT where I’m going, but my line is a little close.
Since I’ve not seen the pictures, nor where they appeared I could be barking up the wrong tree. But if Young sees NO issue regarding posting pictures of an infant on a site that features BDSM pornography maybe she needs someone to remind her that you can have more than one website at one time. It seems to me that’s all FG was trying to do.
Furrygirl is a cutie. I’m not really into the furriness itself (mutants and aliens are different), but she’s cute enough to make up for it. It’s the smile is what it is. I mean yeah, she’s got a fine figure and a pretty face, but it’s that smile that makes the difference.
Ummmm so we are pandering to the Melissa Farley and the Gail Dines now are we? Please, those people will never be won over no matter how ‘normal’ we try to be.
BTW, the only reason anybody knows anything about this is because furry girl has made such a huge issue of it. Even the commenter here never eve heard of Madison Young, much less this mess, before Furry girl and every blogger in town jumped on it. If the haters hate on us because of it, Ill blame Furry Girl for making such a huge issue of it in the first place. If she was actually concerned about what the haters think, she would not have made such a public spectacle.
What about the famous Demi Moore’s naked pregnant shot? How bout all the celebrities and their glamour shots with babies. Oh thats ok, cos they aint sex workers. Only non sex workers can be sexy and mothers in the same photo.
You want sex workers to be seen as ‘normal’? well breast feeding your baby is pretty normal!!!!!
I for one think the ONE photo of Madison Young feeding her baby fully clothed is stunning and moving and as a mother and a sex worker i can relate to it. If people view it as sexualisation of her baby, then there is something sick in their heads. Peadophiles look at babies in swimmers at the beach and masterbate, should we lock up their parents?? I mean… fancy letting your kid run around on the beach topless!!
Yes context – we are talking about an art exhibition – where are the people masturbating?? The image is all over the internet now mainly because of fury girl.
Fury girl has alienated a hell of a lot of us in her over the top nasty attacks and i think that is a hell of a lot worse than upsetting Melissa Farley or Gail Dines.
OK. I’ve now read Furrygirl’s original Twitter comments, Young’s responses, Maggie Mayhem’s blog post about the issue (linked to by Wendy, above), and another very good post I found about it at http://purrversatility.blogspot.com/2011/08/you-threw-rattle-out-of-pram-furrygirl.html. At the end of all that, here are my thoughts.
Furrygirl certainly seems to have tried to give us the *impression* that Young posted those pictures on a porn site. However, if you look carefully at exactly what she’s saying, she’s a little vague on the actual details. She refers to Madison posting the photos in ‘sexualised spaces’ and ‘sex-themed websites’. One of these ‘sex-themed’ websites, according to Furrygirl’s blog post, is her Twitter stream – which is not exactly a porn site. (I do have to say I was amused by the claim that people shouldn’t breastfeed ‘in places where people go to masturbate’. Uh, don’t think you thought that one all the way through, Furrygirl – wouldn’t that mean that thousands of mothers have done something awful by breastfeeding in their own bedrooms?)
In her original rant on Twitter, Furrygirl links to a photo that was actually posted on Tits and Sass, and a video that was posted on Madison’s own blog, the Sexy Mamas’ Social Club (http://sexymamassocialclub.blogspot.com/2011/08/hot-for-teacher-and-great-latch-on.html). Now, if you’re keeping your descriptions as vague as ‘sexualised spaces’ or ‘sex-themed websites’ I guess both of them qualify – but neither of them is a porn site. Furrygirl describes the latter as a video of Young breastfeeding ‘to announce a sex event’ and puts it forward as an example of Young advocating ‘erotic breastfeeding’ (http://twitter.com/#!/furrygirl/status/102161180285603841/photo/1). The ‘sex event’ in question was, in fact, a sexual health class that covered topics including breast cancer and rape.
So, no back-up from Furrygirl for the implied claim that Young posted the pictures on a porn site, and some outright misrepresentation. Against that, Young specifically states that she did *not* post the pictures on a porn site, and Miss Maggie Mayhem and Kitty Stryker both back her up on this in their blog posts.
Weighing all that up… I’m gonna go with believing Young (and Maggie Mayhem, and Kitty). I don’t think Madison ever posted those pictures on a porn site. I think that Furrygirl is trying to give the impression she did. And I think that’s pretty darned scummy.
As for the way Furrygirl initially acted on Twitter, that’s inexcusable. That was *not* just a case of expressing a point in a way that was careless and rude – that was using a stream of profanity and insults *in place of* making a point. Reading the whole thing through reminded me of nothing so much as an obnoxious ranty drunk trying like hell to pick a fight. Now she’s professing herself to be ‘utterly baffled’ that you can’t just randomly yell ‘Pedophile!’ and ‘Breastfeeding fetishist!’ at people and have everyone nod their heads and say ‘Wow, good point, I completely agree with you’. If she’d raised her actual points calmly in the first place, I’m sure she and Young could have had a decent and maybe even productive discussion about it; as it is, she was waaaaaaay out of line. As awful as it is, I’m now left with the suspicion that Furrygirl’s insinuations about Young having posted the pictures on ‘porn sites’ were her nasty little way of trying to distract attention from how badly she herself acted over the whole business.
I also was bugged by the claim that Young’s daughter was ‘going to need so much therapy when she grows up’ – not just because it’s an incredibly unpleasant thing to say to a parent, but because I didn’t like the way Furrygirl was appropriating Young’s daughter’s feelings in that comment. Er, excuse me? Young’s daughter can decide for herself when she grows up how she feels about things and whether or not she needs any kind of therapy for any reason, and it’s not down to us to make assumptions about it. Seriously – if I were Young’s daughter now grown up and looking back on the whole storm twenty years on, I’d be much more annoyed by Furrygirl making assumptions about my feelings than I would about the breastfeeding photos.
And finally… I find it ironic that Furrygirl has complained about Young’s actions reflecting badly on the sex workers’ community, when she herself has acted so unpleasantly. It’s sad, because I can see from her blog post that there’s a lot more to her and that she’s perfectly capable of discussing an issue sensibly and even raising some thought-provoking points (though I still think it was really low of her to make those insinuations about porn sites). But you wouldn’t have known it from reading her Twitter stream on that fateful night. And unfortunately, anyone reading that who has a stereotype of sex workers as nasty creatures without brains or decency will have just had it pretty resoundingly reinforced.
@ Dr Sarah – Exactly!