Thousands of children are tortured and raped repeatedly in private run juvenile prisons...let's keep this in mind.


Women, need to realize, that the fastest growing population of the Prison SEX RAPE SLAVERY businesses is in fact, WOMEN. That includes, WOMEN JAILED FOR SELF DEFENSE WHICH IN THIS NATION, SISTER, WE DON'T HAVE A RIGHT TOO, we are not MEN nor ANIMAL, women get 50 to Life for Self Defense, against rape, abuse, repeated abuse and torture. Even for not dying while getting beat near to death, a man can kill or torture a child, and the WOMAN-MOTHER will be the one who gets the longer time in prison [if he even gets charged], AND IF the woman gets sentenced with mental health--she can expect to be Lobotomized by force.



The Feminists who Sold Us Out Again...Next thing, Rape will be Normalized Too!

Please Forward to Whomever Should Know

For the past 20 years, New York State NOW has had an active Task Force, addressing the harms to women and girls from the Pornography industry, and the broader sex industry including the use of women and girls in Trafficking & Prostitution.

The NYS NOW Council has just voted (on 2/20/2010) that the Task Force should drop the word “Pornography” from its Title, and remove all reference to “pornography” from its work. In response, we have resigned as Task Force Leaders.

The following feminists are on record stating that Pornography issues SHOULD be discussed by feminists:
Carolyn Maloney, Gloria Steinem, Alice Walker, Catharine MacKinnon, Norma Ramos, Dorchen Leidholdt, Jane Manning, Phyllis Frank, Robin Morgan, Sonia Ossario, Carol Urban, Phyllis Chesler, Julie Kirshner, Audre Lorde, Shirley Ranz, Molly Yard, Ellie Smeal, Rachellle Suissa, Susan Brownmiller, Marge Piercy, Taina Bien-Amie, Letty Pogrebin, Lois Reckitt, Charlotte Watson, Judy Murphy, Sherry Rogers, Diana Russell, Ariel Levy, Maya Angelou, Rachel Lloyd, Laura Lederer, Meg Baldwin, Evelina Giobbe, Kathleen Barry, Pauline Bart, Gail Dines, Ann Jones, Melissa Farley, Janice Raymond, Twiss Butler, Charlotte Bunch, Peggy Reeves Sanday, Rose Garrity, Clarice Pollack, Kate Millet, Jennifer Robinson, Nancy Henley, Louise Armstrong, Donna Hughes, Christine Stark, Bob Jensen, Ann Simonton, Samantha Berg, Sandra Hunicutt, Susan Hunter, Robert Brannon, Rebecca Wisnant, Sally Roesch Wagner...

For your information, these are some of the statements/arguments, about why to drop use of the word “pornography, that were posted by State NOW Leaders just before the vote:

“We should not have a task force with porn in the title.” “I used to free-lance as the girl-singer in on of the last burlesque shows in Manhattan. Believe me the strippers, some of whom were also prostitutes, were far freer than the women whose husbands they entertained.” “All I’m asking is that we take the puritanical, limiting “pornography” header off our title.” “Objections to "pornography" can portray our organization as prudes, who are upset with the sight of a naked body.” “Our organization should not be in the business of endangering the First Amendment.” “The Right Wing considers lesbians and gays, abortion and birth control, along with AIDS education "pornographic." We need to not play into this.” “Even the courts cannot define pornography and we all define porn differently.” “the fundamentalists are burning Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet as “kiddy-porn”

For the feminist - historical record, the following NYS leaders led this campaign to remove pornography as an issue that NOW’s is concerned with: Marilyn Fitterman, Sandy Rapp, Lori Gardner, Barbara Kirkpatrick, Gaby Moreno, & and NYS NOW President Marcia Pappas (

As the former leaders of the State Task Group, we will continue to study and discuss the harms that occur to women and girls from pornography, the sex industry, and being used in trafficking and prostitution, in conjunction with other feminist organizations that share this concern.

We regret that NYS NOW does not. For those interested, some of our work is attached. Phyllis B. Frank & Dr. Robert Brannon, former Co-Chairs, Task Force on Trafficking, Pornography, and Prostitution

Greenconsciousness Notes:

People would understand if the Task Force would teach what the alternative to porn is actually.Meaning a deep discussion of the nature of the product which they do teach and the alternative (which they do not teach). Porn is the only sex educator. They cornered the market.

If life drawing of nude models were done in grade school starting with kindergarten, young children would not be so needy of porn to learn and understand what their own bodies look like, as well as the body of the opposite sex.

Dolls should be atomically correct and always used for sex education. No doll should be made without genitalia. NOW should sell such dolls while making the point that education is the alternative to porn. Young children should be taught the names of the parts of the body using the dolls and life pictures.

As they turn 7-12 years old children should be given sex ed complete with videos showing masturbation and intercourse in a straightforward way without the porn aspect. Such videos exist and can be shown in sex segregated classrooms. Parents can attend these lectures - mothers in their daughters classroom - fathers with their sons or in a separate class for single parents. But since there are so many sex offenders among the parents it is best not to mix adult genders with children in sex ed classes.

The answer to the porn lie is not repression which never works and not porn or sexual preference advocacy which is slyly done by some teachers (both homo and heterosexual advocacy should be discouraged).

Instead sex ed should consist of definitions and accurate, straightforward, honest information complete with a discussion of the hormonal changes, adolescent lack of impulse control and disease symptoms and consequences.

Such classes should include the reproductive system of both sexes and birth control as well as trips to planned parenthood clinics.

Parents can teach morality but all citizens in a secular society should be educated about their bodies and the bodies of the opposite sex. Life drawing with discussions about the human body, pictures, videos, genitally correct dolls; everything available should be used to show the difference between actual sexuality and the commercialized versions sold by cable and films. Children should be educated about the exploitive aspects of sex role commercialization, what happens to the beauty queens of playboy and hustler?

From 13 to 17 children can learn about STDs and the state laws regarding age of consent and related statutes. I would suggest reading some sex registry cases. They might be taught how difficult a pardon is to obtain. NOW's porn task force should be sure that it is made clear their objection is to commercialized actions with exploited adult survivors - not to free expression of uncommercialized sexuality.

But more than a lack of evolving toward sexual self-sufficiency goals on the part of the porn TF is involved in the NY action to eliminate it. The vote is a political decision reflecting the prevailing ethic in the straight/gay male and transgendered community of NY. The decision to eliminate work on pornography reflects a failure in the intersectional model of feminist expression. The main criticism of intersectional feminism is that a desire to be accepting and accepted (that is, politically correct) overcomes the analysis of the question in terms of what is good for women? The look at gender roles; the reinforcement of childhood trauma; the roots of the need for more; the need itself often in opposition to the body's natural inclination to let go of a diminishing desire for sexual contact.

The personal is political. How do women experience porn; what age do they start, how does porn reflect a deepening understanding of an individual's sexuality and what reality can be taught instead, when do girls learn about their bodies and how; baby beauty pageants, etc. We look at the women in groups like SAGE to answer the loud voices of the ex strippers many of whom were not born female.

Feminist ask, how we can expand freedom and equality, not how we can restrict other born women. First, it is necessary to expose the explotation that fuels the industry. The victimized have their own definitions of free will and consent. Feminism is their voice. Porn is the voice of the user/exploiter. Feminism tries to express the reality of born women's actual experiences as opposed to the labels that others (users) put on female behavior. Who ultimately defines reality shapes the world in which all women must live.

The vote to eliminate the porn focus reflects an acceptance of a patriarchal model of sexuality based on dominance submission commercialized to sell sex as an addictive drug with chemically treated, altered, women and children as the commercialized sex fantasy objects for sale.

Here in the vote's outcome, feminist analysis lost to the politically correct demands of left males. Feminism tells the other half of the story - the story of the acted upon objects of porn's fantasy world. Feminism exposes the roots of sexual fantasy in the merging of sexual identity with intense patterns of parental interactions. This quest for the truth of the experience in this business, directs subsequent feminist political actions. The best of these are global laws increasing the focus on eliminating pimps and escort services.


lori gardner said...

One of the problems with blogs is that the reporting is one-sided. The actual vote was to replace the word "Pornography" in the Task Force title with "Objectification of Women'. Bob conveniently neglected to mention this. He has also done this by posting the snippets of the discourse and he has quoted them out of context. He has quoted people's arguments against the word pornography, but not posted other arguments for using "objectification of women."
Our concerns with pornography are (and have always been) that it objectifies or exploits women. Our belief was that it (the new name) sent a clearer message to oppose all media content that objectifies women. This could also include content that is not categorized as pornography. It would exclude content that some may consider pornography on moral grounds. We do not want to make moral judgements. We want to raise women up. We want the world to see women as whole individuals, not two dimensional sex objects. The majority of the NOW-NYS Board felt that this change better accomplished our goal.
It was also suggested to Bob Brannon that they could change the Task Force name to the "NOW-NYS Task Force against the Sexual Exploitation of Women". This title was also refused.
What is this really about? This is really about another male who thinks he should be in control of women. Do not mistake Bob's power struggle as a sign of our weakening position for women's rights. We believe in and protect the rights of all women to have autonomy and control of their own bodies. We have not faltered in our fight to ensure that women are regarded as equals and full human beings--not sex objects, baby makers and housekeepers.
lori Gardner

JaneDoeThreads said...

Thank you for clearing that up Lori, and I will be posting this to the top today--however,

why not include Both Pornography and Objectification?

It does come across as a type of apologetic, a retreat--the language of 'objectification of women' while yes, feminists may understand this, could still be construed by the pro-porn lot to exclude pornography From that, with the whole 'well women Choose that as a form of sexual empowerment' line we hear and we move ten steps backwards, not forwards.

With the increase of sex slavery-trafficking I for one, do not believe we should in Any way, soften the language, or retreat, no matter HOW prudish it may be viewed by many or how many will attempt to silence the anti-porn feminist with the 'labeling us as extreme' when in fact,

thousands upon thousands are enslaved By the sex industry, younger and younger, all over the globe, and including trafficked INTO this nation,

and those numbers are growing.

Why soften the language now? I say, NO, I say, we keep the Language up, Against Porn, Against the Normalization of All sexual exploitation--and Stop, sugar coating or 'softening' the Reality, just to be more congenial,


women and children are BLEEDING, FOR PORN.

keep the anti-Pornography Statement IN.

And be Non-Compromising About it.

In solidarity,