<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The First Amendment is only sort of cool.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rageagainstthemanchine.com/2008/05/01/thefirstamendment/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rageagainstthemanchine.com/2008/05/01/thefirstamendment/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 05 Feb 2012 04:59:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Immir</title>
		<link>http://rageagainstthemanchine.com/2008/05/01/thefirstamendment/#comment-14068</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Immir]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Mar 2010 11:32:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rageagainstthemanchine.wordpress.com/?p=130#comment-14068</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You know, if men started get butt-raped suddenly overnight, to the same degree as women (what is it, something like 1 in 4 women?), and they found a strong link between man-on-man porn &amp; guys getting raped.... you can fucking BET they would do something about it by dinner time.

And what is this, &quot;we can&#039;t do anything about it, we can&#039;t censor art&quot; or whatever? Child porn is illegal. Why can&#039;t women be afforded the same protection?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You know, if men started get butt-raped suddenly overnight, to the same degree as women (what is it, something like 1 in 4 women?), and they found a strong link between man-on-man porn &amp; guys getting raped&#8230;. you can fucking BET they would do something about it by dinner time.</p>
<p>And what is this, &#8220;we can&#8217;t do anything about it, we can&#8217;t censor art&#8221; or whatever? Child porn is illegal. Why can&#8217;t women be afforded the same protection?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Miss Andrist</title>
		<link>http://rageagainstthemanchine.com/2008/05/01/thefirstamendment/#comment-12617</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Miss Andrist]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 19:09:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rageagainstthemanchine.wordpress.com/?p=130#comment-12617</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The &quot;freedom of speech&quot; does NOT protect all speech, nor is it limitless. The First Amendment does not extend to slander, libel, perjury, defamation, or acts of treason. It does not cover plans to overthrow the government, assassinate a president, or commit an act of terrorism. The first amendment grants The People the right to assemble for redress of grievances, but every city in the country requires demonstrators to obtain a permit to gather and demonstrate or march. The &quot;freedom of speech&quot; has NEVER been exhaustive, and was never intended to be. And in most states, hate speech and propaganda is expressly limited in protection under freedom of speech.

Only when it&#039;s non-males does the freedom of speech suddenly become exhaustive. Only when women demand to be depicted and described as equal to men is the First Amendment brought to bear. Any excuse to keep from having to acknowledge that their motivations are purely selfish and self-serving, any excuse to maintain the privileges that tell them they are superior by virtue of the peen. Men use women as a mirror that magnifies their reflection to double its actual proportion - porn is the most obvious example of that.

The women in porn are not made up. They are real living breathing human beings. That people refuse to recognize that demonstrates inarguably porn&#039;s ability to warp perception of what reality is, and to blind to the real humanity of women.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The &#8220;freedom of speech&#8221; does NOT protect all speech, nor is it limitless. The First Amendment does not extend to slander, libel, perjury, defamation, or acts of treason. It does not cover plans to overthrow the government, assassinate a president, or commit an act of terrorism. The first amendment grants The People the right to assemble for redress of grievances, but every city in the country requires demonstrators to obtain a permit to gather and demonstrate or march. The &#8220;freedom of speech&#8221; has NEVER been exhaustive, and was never intended to be. And in most states, hate speech and propaganda is expressly limited in protection under freedom of speech.</p>
<p>Only when it&#8217;s non-males does the freedom of speech suddenly become exhaustive. Only when women demand to be depicted and described as equal to men is the First Amendment brought to bear. Any excuse to keep from having to acknowledge that their motivations are purely selfish and self-serving, any excuse to maintain the privileges that tell them they are superior by virtue of the peen. Men use women as a mirror that magnifies their reflection to double its actual proportion &#8211; porn is the most obvious example of that.</p>
<p>The women in porn are not made up. They are real living breathing human beings. That people refuse to recognize that demonstrates inarguably porn&#8217;s ability to warp perception of what reality is, and to blind to the real humanity of women.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alina</title>
		<link>http://rageagainstthemanchine.com/2008/05/01/thefirstamendment/#comment-12319</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Alina]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 03:36:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rageagainstthemanchine.wordpress.com/?p=130#comment-12319</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The porn industry has no moral consciousness--if someone wants to watch it will be made.  I don&#039;t mind limitations on certain &quot;freedoms.&quot;  Nazi propaganda is banned in certain European countries and yet freedom of speech is still intact.  Sometimes I wonder who exactly this limitless freedom of speech protects.

BTW, I&#039;m super-Catholic and I love your blog!  With the exception of your stance on religion (obviously) I agree with you on everything.   All this porn and lady-hating needs to stop!!  Glad to finally find a feminist of the non-Christina Aguilara variety.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The porn industry has no moral consciousness&#8211;if someone wants to watch it will be made.  I don&#8217;t mind limitations on certain &#8220;freedoms.&#8221;  Nazi propaganda is banned in certain European countries and yet freedom of speech is still intact.  Sometimes I wonder who exactly this limitless freedom of speech protects.</p>
<p>BTW, I&#8217;m super-Catholic and I love your blog!  With the exception of your stance on religion (obviously) I agree with you on everything.   All this porn and lady-hating needs to stop!!  Glad to finally find a feminist of the non-Christina Aguilara variety.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Imaginary</title>
		<link>http://rageagainstthemanchine.com/2008/05/01/thefirstamendment/#comment-10723</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Imaginary]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 12:44:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rageagainstthemanchine.wordpress.com/?p=130#comment-10723</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why don’t people realize that fantasy and reality are influencing each other? There has been countless studies and testimonials that show that looking at child porn encourages pedophiles (I’ve read about many who’ve said that they wouldn’t have thought they could get away with it until they saw the market for child porn), why doesn’t this seem to apply to other rape porn? What about when the “character” (I use the term sooo loosely, but you know what I mean) is a child; 16 or so? I can’t count the number of times I’ve flipped through the Pay Per View films only to come across things like “Underage Whorebags” or “I’m 16 and I like to Dye my hair with cum”. 

Why is it that a fantasy BOOK influences someone to do something, like be nice to a neighbor of give to the poor, or a film like Blood Diamond gets people to stop buying diamonds, but it is somehow inconceivable that watching a womyn degraded and raped is influencing people? Why the fuck won’t these people just wake up?!?!

We have to do something. Just talking about it doesn’t seem to be working. Men have all the power and asking or demanding them for it isn&#039;t working. I need to break something.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why don’t people realize that fantasy and reality are influencing each other? There has been countless studies and testimonials that show that looking at child porn encourages pedophiles (I’ve read about many who’ve said that they wouldn’t have thought they could get away with it until they saw the market for child porn), why doesn’t this seem to apply to other rape porn? What about when the “character” (I use the term sooo loosely, but you know what I mean) is a child; 16 or so? I can’t count the number of times I’ve flipped through the Pay Per View films only to come across things like “Underage Whorebags” or “I’m 16 and I like to Dye my hair with cum”. </p>
<p>Why is it that a fantasy BOOK influences someone to do something, like be nice to a neighbor of give to the poor, or a film like Blood Diamond gets people to stop buying diamonds, but it is somehow inconceivable that watching a womyn degraded and raped is influencing people? Why the fuck won’t these people just wake up?!?!</p>
<p>We have to do something. Just talking about it doesn’t seem to be working. Men have all the power and asking or demanding them for it isn&#8217;t working. I need to break something.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fourteenth Carnival of Radical Feminists &#171; Carnival of Radical Feminists</title>
		<link>http://rageagainstthemanchine.com/2008/05/01/thefirstamendment/#comment-2910</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Fourteenth Carnival of Radical Feminists &#171; Carnival of Radical Feminists]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 Aug 2008 01:07:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rageagainstthemanchine.wordpress.com/?p=130#comment-2910</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Nine Deuce at Rage Against The Man-chine, her essay The First Amendment is only sort of cool explores the contradictory logic of using a free speech defense or &#8220;community interest&#8221; [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Nine Deuce at Rage Against The Man-chine, her essay The First Amendment is only sort of cool explores the contradictory logic of using a free speech defense or &#8220;community interest&#8221; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jennifer-Ruth</title>
		<link>http://rageagainstthemanchine.com/2008/05/01/thefirstamendment/#comment-1713</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jennifer-Ruth]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 08:43:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rageagainstthemanchine.wordpress.com/?p=130#comment-1713</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;the conditioning power of orgasm is much more likely to lead to illegal acts, and hence create harm in society, than the viewing of violent media, which carries no equivalent reinforcement mechanism.&quot;

Thank you for this. For a long time I have found it difficult to articulate why the depiction of sexual violence is so much worse than &quot;general&quot; violence. You have hit the nail on the head - there is genuine positive re-enforcement for sexual violence. That is why we have to treat the videos and images of it with different rules. 

This is a great essay and I will definitely be referring back to it. It really cleared up a few of the thoughts I had about the issue of violent porn.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;the conditioning power of orgasm is much more likely to lead to illegal acts, and hence create harm in society, than the viewing of violent media, which carries no equivalent reinforcement mechanism.&#8221;</p>
<p>Thank you for this. For a long time I have found it difficult to articulate why the depiction of sexual violence is so much worse than &#8220;general&#8221; violence. You have hit the nail on the head &#8211; there is genuine positive re-enforcement for sexual violence. That is why we have to treat the videos and images of it with different rules. </p>
<p>This is a great essay and I will definitely be referring back to it. It really cleared up a few of the thoughts I had about the issue of violent porn.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carnival of Feminists No 59 - Philobiblon</title>
		<link>http://rageagainstthemanchine.com/2008/05/01/thefirstamendment/#comment-1693</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Carnival of Feminists No 59 - Philobiblon]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2008 23:49:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rageagainstthemanchine.wordpress.com/?p=130#comment-1693</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Nine Deuce concludes that The First Amendment is only sort of cool. [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Nine Deuce concludes that The First Amendment is only sort of cool. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Feminism at its Finest: May 2008 &#124; Menstrual Poetry</title>
		<link>http://rageagainstthemanchine.com/2008/05/01/thefirstamendment/#comment-1131</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Feminism at its Finest: May 2008 &#124; Menstrual Poetry]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Jun 2008 12:55:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rageagainstthemanchine.wordpress.com/?p=130#comment-1131</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Deuce presents The First Amendment is only sort of cool. posted at Rage Against the [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Deuce presents The First Amendment is only sort of cool. posted at Rage Against the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nine Deuce</title>
		<link>http://rageagainstthemanchine.com/2008/05/01/thefirstamendment/#comment-699</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nine Deuce]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2008 19:10:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rageagainstthemanchine.wordpress.com/?p=130#comment-699</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Oh, also, Lara - I&#039;m with you 100% on the consent issue in mainstream porn. I addressed it in my series on mainstream porn to some extent, but I just didn&#039;t want to get too far into it in this post, which I wanted to use to address a narrow issue (that is nonetheless on the same continuum).]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, also, Lara &#8211; I&#8217;m with you 100% on the consent issue in mainstream porn. I addressed it in my series on mainstream porn to some extent, but I just didn&#8217;t want to get too far into it in this post, which I wanted to use to address a narrow issue (that is nonetheless on the same continuum).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Izzy</title>
		<link>http://rageagainstthemanchine.com/2008/05/01/thefirstamendment/#comment-698</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Izzy]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2008 14:28:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rageagainstthemanchine.wordpress.com/?p=130#comment-698</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m also a big fan of that IBTP post.

Nine Deuce, once again you put into words an argument that I can&#039;t. &quot;People don&#039;t actually believe that stuff&quot; is one of the most frequent pro-porn arguments I hear. (Second only, of course to &quot;Some women enjoy it.&quot; Ugh.)

This reminds me of a debate I got into a few months ago. The dude I was arguing with said that porn was ok if women were made to appear like little girls (pigtails, small and skinny, no body hair) as long as no actual kids were involved. I still refuse to believe that guys who watch porn excessively can disassociate &quot;actresses&quot; on the screen and actual women and girls. Not to mention that infantilizing the &quot;actresses&quot; is completely demeaning.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m also a big fan of that IBTP post.</p>
<p>Nine Deuce, once again you put into words an argument that I can&#8217;t. &#8220;People don&#8217;t actually believe that stuff&#8221; is one of the most frequent pro-porn arguments I hear. (Second only, of course to &#8220;Some women enjoy it.&#8221; Ugh.)</p>
<p>This reminds me of a debate I got into a few months ago. The dude I was arguing with said that porn was ok if women were made to appear like little girls (pigtails, small and skinny, no body hair) as long as no actual kids were involved. I still refuse to believe that guys who watch porn excessively can disassociate &#8220;actresses&#8221; on the screen and actual women and girls. Not to mention that infantilizing the &#8220;actresses&#8221; is completely demeaning.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

