Sex Positive – Bitch Flicks

Unity Through Differentiation: The Radical Sex Positivity of ‘Sense8’

The net effect, woven throughout the series, is a sex positivity that both embraces differentiation and recognizes the universal experiences that can work to close gaps of gender, orientation, and race that routinely stymie the discourse.

This guest post by Emma Houxbois appears as part of our theme week on Sex Positivity.

Sex positivity, as a movement and concept in general, is open to a great deal of interpretation and criticism because of the multitude of forms that it’s taken over the years. Nowhere is that more apparent than in the heated debates that formed what are alternately described as “the feminist sex wars” and “lesbian sex wars” in establishing where the boundaries between legitimate self expression and exploitation lie in areas like commercial pornography and BDSM lie.

Discussions of power, privilege, and control typically remain central to the topic of sex positivity, and they’re vitally important when considering film in particular, a medium where female expressions of desire are more often than not conceived of and executed by men. While these discussions are vital, they can also stand to be expanded into what sex positivity can look like when it moves beyond the idea of liberating self-expression to recognizing and understanding other people’s desires.

Prior to the debut of Sense 8, Lana and Andy Wachowski were not typically considered to be filmmakers with a particularly sex positive agenda, but the roots of their broad and inclusive conceptions of sexuality in their Netflix series (co-created with J. Michael Straczynski) go all the way back to their debut Bound, a heist flick that starred Gina Gershon and Jennifer Tilly as lovers. At the time, the Wachowskis reached out to erotica writer and famed proponent of sex positive femininity Susie Bright to offer her a cameo in the film as thanks for her work’s influence in creating the film. Bright, who fell in love with the script, countered with a readily accepted offer to be their consultant on film and provide direction on how to film the sex scenes between Gershon and Tilly.

It’s an under-discussed part of the Wachowskis’ career that Bound, through arrangements made by Bright, had its debut at the San Francisco Gay and Lesbian Film Festival at the Castro theater, establishing a queer context to their work years before Lana came out as transgender. However it’s easy to see a recapturing of the spirit of their collaboration with Bright in Sense8, as they expand from the lesbian romance of Bound to expand into a multitude of simultaneous expressions of sexuality.

Key to much of the conversation around the series and its depiction of sex is how central, and explicit, the relationship between Nomi, a trans woman, (played by Jamie Clayton) and her girlfriend Amanita (played by Freema Agyeman) is. In and of itself it’s a tremendous victory for trans representation that scores the unheard of trifecta of a trans woman character being played by an actual trans actress, recognizes that trans women experience same gender desire, and doesn’t construct her sexuality around deception of any kind. The Wachowskis clearly communicate their triumph in this with the close up shot of a well-lubricated rainbow dildo dropping to the floor at the close of their first sex scene together, but Sense8 sets out to accomplish far more than just a sex toy mic drop.

In addition to Nomi and Amanita’s relationship, the series develops the romance between closeted Mexican actor Lito Rodriguez (played by Miguel Angel Silvestre) who is among the seven other characters Nomi shares an empathic bond with, and his boyfriend Hernando, as well as blossoming heterosexual romances between other members of the group. Nomi and Lito’s relationships are given the bulk of the development as the series progresses, but the Wachowskis use that focus as an opportunity to build a conception of sex that celebrates differentiation while also tapping into the universal aspects of sex and intimacy that everyone experiences regardless of gender or orientation.

This is primarily and most noticeably achieved in a sequence in the sixth episode where enough of the emotional energy of the sensates is focused on sex to trigger a full blown orgy between several of them, including Nomi, Lito, and two of the straight male characters. The focus and direction of the sequence, which was described by Silvestre as Lana Wachowski yelling directions from the sideline, which sounds much like what Bright believed her role in Bound’s production would be interpreted as. (“I think they imagined that meant I stood over Gina and Jennifer with a riding crop, snapping, “Deeper , Harder, A Little to the Left!”) But the scene does also communicate the same language and visuals that Bright intended for Bound:

“There were two main ideas on my mind. One, unlike most Hollywood lesbian scenarios, this movie shouldn’t insinuate oral sex– that’s not the kind of characters we were looking at. BOUND is about getting inside someone very fast, trusting them with everything-these women had to be fucking each other. Penetration was the act we wanted to imply. Yet obviously we weren’t going to get away with gynecological or hardcore shots in a movie that was headed for America’s shopping malls.”

“My idea, stolen from the ‘Kathy’ footage, was that we show a woman’s legs, straining and squeezing, and that we see that her lover’s forearm between her thighs. We dwell on that arm for a moment, moving back and forth in a fucking rhythm, looking sure, steady and unrelenting. Then, instead of following her arm all the way up to her lover’s pussy, we would cut to her stomach, fluttering like a little butterfly in that spasm we all recognize as orgasm. I loved the idea of eroticizing a woman’s belly like that. A lot of men making sex movies try to show a woman’s sexual pleasure by focusing the lens on her cleavage. Maybe that’s what they’re looking at, but hey, there’s a lot more going on!

“The other key idea was to eroticize the women’s hands whenever they were flirting or making love with each other. ‘A lesbian’s hands are her cock, they’re the hard-on of the movie, that’s what you want to follow,’ I said, like some veteran pornographer. When I see Corky’s hands on screen, I want to imagine how they would feel inside me. They’re the metaphorical substitute for the genital shots that you won’t be showing.”

Eroticizing the hands is the technique most keenly felt that follows through from Bound, but toward a somewhat different purpose in Sense8. Bright was looking for a way to get the idea of the kind of sex she imagined being most relevant to the plot and character beats of Bound across without being able to use explicit detail. She wanted to communicate genuine queer female desire to an audience who had never seen it presented in a manner equal to the depiction of straight sex in mainstream film. In Sense8, the first thing that focusing on eroticizing hands and grasping does is communicate the universality of desire across characters who identify as gay, lesbian, and straight. It depicts a physical element of sex that everyone, no matter their gender or orientation, can easily grasp and identify with. What it also does, just as Bright sought to evoke penetration in the sex scenes as part of the overall themes of Bound, is communicate how the individual sensates have been grasping toward each other in the series, trying to reach an understanding of their circumstances and who each other are.

Differentiation cannot be overlooked as being a major component of how the series presents and celebrates sexuality, despite the centrality of the “orgy” sequence that communicates a universality to human desire. Immediately following that sequence is a conversation in which Nomi tries to make sense of why she shares an empathic bond with the others, stating that it would seem more logical to her if the others were closer and not further from her identity and experiences. The response from Amanita’s mother is that she teaches the importance of differentiation through her classes on evolution. The implicit idea is that if differentiation is a key catalyst in biological evolution, it cannot be overlooked when considering the evolution of attitudes around sex that include queer and trans experiences.

Elsewhere in the series we see the critical importance of differentiation outside of sex, most notably as Lito and Wolfgang trade places in each others’ lives at the climax of their individual storylines. Lito, having pushed the situation with his blackmailer as far as he can by acting, falls back on Wolfgang to literally finish the fight. Then Wolfgang, having reached the limits of his skills as a thief and fighter in dealing with his rival, allows Lito to step forward and ply his trade as an actor. Each facet of the characters’ lives and experiences are as vital to the others’ towards their shared survival whether it be Sun’s martial arts skills, Capheus’ driving abilities, Lito’s acting skills, or Nomi’s computer wizardry.

Emma Houxbois is a fiercely queer trans woman whose natural habitat is the Pacific Northwest. She is currently the Comics Editor for The Rainbow Hub and co-host of Fantheon, a weekly comics podcast.

‘Starlet’ and ‘Tangerine’: A Look At the Sex Work Industry Through the Lens of Chris Bergoch and Sean Baker

Sean Baker and Chris Bergoch are spreading an important truth with their films: that sex does not have to be definitive. ‘Tangerine’ and ‘Starlet’ are two monumentally groundbreaking films, and they should be required viewing for all.

This guest post by BJ Colangelo appears as part of our theme week on Sex Positivity.

When I was 19 years old, I was living in a shoddy dorm room in the middle of nowhere and absolutely desperate for cash. There were enough strangers on the Internet sending me requests for “topless video blogs” about horror films already, and so began my short-lived stint as a personal session cam girl. What I did or didn’t do is frankly, no one else’s business but my own, but this “dirty little secret” of mine is still something I struggle with every day regarding whether or not I tell people how I managed to pay for all of my books despite being a broke college student. Had I not written this paragraph, there would be plenty of people I know that would have never guessed this is something I had done in the past. Unfortunately, there are those that have known me for years but will see this short-lived moment in my life, this minute aspect of my personality, and choose to solely define me for it. Sex workers, porn stars, and cam girls are often defined exclusively by their professions.

This is where Chris Bergoch and Sean Baker’s stunning films Starlet and Tangerine come into play.

Tangerine has been generating quite the buzz around the indie circuit. The film follows Sin-Dee Rella (Kitana Kiki Rodriguez) and Alexandra (Mya Taylor), two transgender female prostitutes in Los Angeles on the day of Sin-Dee’s release from prison as she discovers their pimp (and Sin-Dee’s boyfriend) Chester (James Ransome) has been cheating on her with a cis-gender prostitute named Dinah. The majority of the characters featured in this film are either sex workers or consumers, and never once is the audience meant to see them as anything less than people. A married cab driver with a desire for pleasuring transgender prostitutes is never meant to be seen as a monster, and the women who provide him his pleasure are always seen as women just doing their job. There is no shame in the game for anyone rolling the dice, and if anything, the people we are to see as villainous are simply those that refuse to accept that they’ve already lost the game before ever trying to play.

We are given access to see an authentic look at the world of sex workers, one that isn’t littered with Showgirl glitter or Taxi Driver moral dilemma. It’s an honest and sincere look at people who work in the sex industry for reasons other than rehashed storylines from Law & Order: SVU. Tangerine is centered on sex workers, but this isn’t a movie about sex working. Sure, we see our actresses turn a few tricks, but that’s like saying Clerks is about the convenience store industry. Just because we’re watching these women do their job, does not mean that they are their job. Being a sex worker doesn’t define their characters, it just happens to be what they hold for a job. Sin-Dee is shown as an excellent negotiator and furiously funny, and Alexandra is presented as levelheaded and a gifted vocalist. Being a sex worker is something they do, but it isn’t everything they are.

Before Tangerine, Bergoch and Baker made another indie flick called Starlet, a tale of a young girl named Jane (she also answers to Tess) who finds an unlikely friendship with an elderly woman named Sadie. For nearly an hour of the film, we watch this non-traditional friendship blossom between the young, vibrant, and leggy Jane (played by Dree Hemingway) and the bitter old Sadie (first-time actress Besedka Johnson), before we are made aware of what Jane does for a living, and why she also answers to “Tess.” Jane, as well as her roommates Melissa and Mikey, all work in the porn industry. There’s no emotionally depressing reveal and it’s never used a shock tactic. In fact, the porn industry is presented as any other business one could work within.

Jane’s work in pornography is such a non-vital aspect of her personality, she could have easily been a waitress and this film would have still had the same effect. This isn’t a story of a “whore with a heart of gold” nor is it a film showing a redemption arc for a “troubled girl who made poor choices.” No. Jane works in pornography, and she’s also befriending an older woman simply because she enjoys her company. Yes, Jane works in the porn industry, but she’s also an avid garage sale enthusiast. Starlet isn’t trying to make a “porn stars are people too!” sort of film, it’s a genuinely interesting film about the way we relate with other people, and one of the characters just happens to work in pornography. Jane is not defined by her profession, and she isn’t demonized for it either.

Sean Baker and Chris Bergoch are spreading an important truth with their films: that sex does not have to be definitive. Tangerine and Starlet are two monumentally groundbreaking films, and they should be required viewing for all.

BJ Colangelo is the woman behind the keyboard for Day of the Woman: A blog for the feminine side of fear and a contributing writer for Icons of Fright. She’s been published in books, magazines, numerous online publications, all while frantically applying for day jobs. She’s a recovering former child beauty queen and a die-hard horror fanatic. You can follow her on Twitter at @BJColangelo.

Let’s Talk About Sex (Positivity for Women) in Animated Comedies

However, there are animated shows that do present female sex positivity and appear to subvert the current patriarchal control of female sexuality in media. ‘Archer’ and ‘Bob’s Burgers’ are both refreshing examples of portrayals of positive female sexuality.

This guest post by Belle Artiquez appears as part of our theme week on Sex Positivity.

Satirical cartoons have been on the rise for about a decade now with a growing, dedicated fan base and I’m not surprised–anything can happen in animated worlds, the bonds between reality, plausibility and total fiction are non-existent. We’ve all seen it as children watching cartoons like Mickey Mouse or Tom and Jerry; these characters can be hit by a literal ton of bricks over the head and still survive without a scratch (maybe a bump though). Anything goes in the animated world. What we know and what we are willing to believe are things that simply don’t matter in these worlds.

Although animated satire and comedy live outside these rules of logic, they are still somehow typically governed by the laws of patriarchal sexuality (see: Family Guy). In essence, anything can happen, unless it’s connected to female sexuality, then and only then will the animation be controlled by what we actually already know and deal with in reality, which is that female sexuality is not accepted in the same regard as male sexuality.

However, there are animated shows that do present female sex positivity and appear to subvert the current patriarchal control of female sexuality in media. Archer and Bob’s Burgers are both refreshing examples of portrayals of positive female sexuality.

Archer may seem equally (if not more) as aggressively offensive as a show like Family Guy; every character has his/her flaws and disgraceful behaviour, but Archer doesn’t have the same approach or effect at all. Sterling Archer, the main protagonist and suave but cheesy 007 archetypal agent, is exactly what we expect of a spy with buckets of money and a handsome face; he treats everybody like crap and goes through women like he would bourbon–swiftly and with very little thought to his actions. He doesn’t respect women, but at the same time he doesn’t really respect anybody because he assumes he’s better than everyone around him. So while this one character portrays a kind of sex negativity when it comes to women (and men), he’s presented as a total jack-ass, so what he does and how he treats people is meant to enhance that. He also had an extremely oppressive and traumatizing upbringing, due to the fact that Malory was a spy herself and left him with Woodhouse, a butler, for the majority of his childhood before shipping him off to private school and forgetting to pick him up on Christmas (Eve!). So Malory fits the Bad Mother archetype too–we see that on numerous occasions–but this is not in any way connected to her sexual behaviour.

Basically just another Monday afternoon in the Archer residence; he rarely doesn’t have women on his mind

Malory Archer, the controlling, alcoholic and completely insincere boss, cares very little about anything other than money has had many flings with men in separate spy agencies and even has a long standing sexual relationship with the leader of the KGB; however, none of this she considers anybodies’ business but her own, and what a good message to send. She sees no problem with any of her relationships because they are personal, and her sexuality is displayed in a way that it is natural; she may a mother and a grandmother, but why should that stop her from enjoying a sex life the same as everyone else? Her body is seen in a positive light. Even with her wrinkles, she is accepted.

Malory’s still got it, and the show is confident in its portrayal of an older woman’s sexuality

Then we have Pam Poovey, an overweight but confident, bisexual, and often outrageous woman. She says “sploosh” whenever anybody says anything slightly sexual, and is never afraid to ask for what she wants, she is open to anything and although she is overweight, this is never portrayed as a negative quality. Her naked body can be seen in many episodes, and both she and the creators are unafraid to show this in a way that is not done for pure laughs. She is accepting of her body and so are her lovers. If anything, people seem to have more of a problem with her vulgarity than her weight, as she is extremely sexually assertive and pretty outrageous.

Carol or Cheryl, depending on whose company she is in, is equally as assertive but certainly has the most outlandish sexual fantasies. She has a thing for strangulation, and loves rough sex, but again while her coworkers are horrified by her words (as would anybody upon hearing a sexual fantasy that involves a fireman choking you to death and drooling on your popped out eyeball!), they do not shame her for these fantasies; they do not make fun of her, or tell her she’s a disgusting human being for being the way she is, they accept it. Shaming the women simply does not happen. Nobody tells them to get some self-respect; instead, all of their sexual activity is presented as normal, even though each and every character has flaws and is in her own way quite selfish. The female characters are all very sexually expressive and different in their sexuality, fantasies, and preferences. Female sexuality is thus presented in numerous positive ways throughout the show.

Pam is never embarrassed by her body, and neither are her lovers

Another show that is equally as progressive is Bob’s Burgers. Similar to Archer, it does not shame, and it respects its characters for their flaws and weirdness. Set around a family struggling to live off a burger restaurant that isn’t doing so well, each and every one of them has their own bizarreness to them, but are equally loveable at the same time. Bob is the patriarch who will do anything for his family, is the typical Dad funny and is constantly feuding with the neighbouring restaurant. Linda, the matriarch, is obsessed with musicals (possibly missing her calling in life) and will occasionally (who are we kidding, it happens all the time) burst into song. Then we have the kids; Gene, who loves his fart music and appears to have gotten this passion from his mother; Louise, who always dominates her older siblings with cunning plans and devious behaviour; and Tina, who is the voice of reason but, let’s be honest, simply loves butts. Each character has his or her own quirks personalities without being a joke.They are loved by each other which adds to the acceptance of their choices. Tina and Linda both display female sex positive vibes, but the show is overall accepting of its characters sexuality, be it straight, gay, pan, or whatever they present, which is pretty damn cool.

Linda loves her daughter’s quirks

Back to female sexuality though: Linda is a fantastic mother, one who wants her children to feel loved, to love their bodies, and to be honest about who they are. We see her have mother daughter bonding time where they simulate birth using Vagasacks, and she never shies away from questions like, “Where do babies come from?” opting for the acutely honest “From my vagina.” She also wholly respects Tina’s erotic friend fiction, and encourages her to be honest and unashamed about it. Linda is possibly the best TV mother ever.

Then there is Tina herself. Whether people find her attractive or not is insignificant, as she is only a young girl, and although she is plagued by puberty-driven sexual fantasies, she is never sexualized in any way. Tina is simultaneously uncertain of herself, becoming nervous and groaning when addressed by anybody, and confident, proud of her sexuality and femininity and unafraid to vocalise it to her family: “I’m no hero, I put my bra on one boob at a time like everyone else.” She is the hero of the show, let’s just admit that now. While most media will portray female adolescence as wholly centred around damsel in distress situations, or dreaming of wedding days and the like, Tina’s fantasies are anything but. She dreams of zombie boyfriends, not just one or two, but an entire team of them, where she gets them to touch each others butts and make out. And this zombie fetish is not a throwaway joke; it’s not a one-off that’s soon forgotten about, it’s a recurring theme. She fantasizes about being in The Walking Dead and seducing the zombies with her feminine charm and hair flick. She knows what she wants, and she is always in charge; she’s never the damsel (“I’m sick of acting like a dumb helpless girl just so a hot boy who dances his feelings will notice me”), never the frail girl, she’s the proud confident (sensual) woman. These fantasies appear to give her confidence in reality even if she’s awkward at it; she openly likes/dreams/thinks of boys’ butts which subverts gender expectations; she flirts with boys, mostly Jimmy Jr., who she is very, very interested in. She is becoming a woman in control of her own sexuality as she aptly tells Bob, “If you believe you’re beautiful, you will be. I did.” I adore this line. Tina Belcher does not wait for a boy to tell her she’s beautiful because she does not need that validation. She knows she’s beautiful and that’s all that matters.

Tina’s a girl who knows what she wants, and isn’t afraid to say it

I could go on and on about how Tina not only subverts typical representations of adolescent female desires, but also how she owns it, and how her family support her in every way, but truth is, I want you to watch it for yourself, because it’s glorious, it’s passionate, and most of all, it’s damn funny. Tina Belcher is without a doubt the feminist hero of animated comedies directed toward adult audiences.

While there are pretty horrific representations of female sexuality in animated comedies, there are also really progressive, pro-female ones too. Sex positivity for women is pretty hard to find in most film and TV, but when I do find it, it makes me really happy. Like, can’t control the giant smile on my face happy, because we are all too aware of male sex positivity, but female positivity in general is either shrouded in public displays of misogyny (in an acknowledging it but laughing at it too kind of way), made out to be a joke, or quite simply non-existent. Both Archer and Bob’s Burgers refuse to adhere to these norms, and portray actual female sex positivity in dozens of ways. It’s really refreshing–like getting a nice cold glass of homemade lemonade on a hot summer’s day when you were expecting a cheap coffee kind of refreshing.

These progressive sex positive shows really are charming the pants off us…pun not intended–just a happy coincidence

Belle Artiquez graduated from film and Literature studies in Dublin and since has continued her analysis and critique of film, TV, and literature (mainly in the area of gender politics and representations) as well as cultural and societal critiques on such blog spots as Hubpages and WordPress.

Call For Writers: Sex Positivity

Simply put, sex positivity is the notion that sex between and among adults with enthusiastic consent is healthy. Practicing sex positivity means that we don’t judge ourselves or others when it comes to sex, not the type of sex we enjoy, the number of partners we choose, or the frequency with which we engage in sexual activity.

Our theme week for September 2015 will be Sex Positivity.

Some urge critical analysis of the sex positivity movement because desire exists within our patriarchal landscape and, therefore, cannot be seen as separate or free from that oppressive force. However, it remains very difficult to even find examples of sex positivity in contemporary films and television. For example, the widely discussed film Fifty Shades of Grey showcases sex that pushes the boundaries of convention but has also been condemned as glorifying abusive masculinity. Boys Don’t Cry, on the other hand, is a film that focuses on the female pleasure of Lana (Chloë Sevigny) and the healthy sexual relationship between her and her trans* partner, Brandon (Hillary Swank). Because he is trans*, though, Brandon is tortured and murdered, underscoring the fact that we do not live in a sex positive world.

Show us examples of film and television that practice sex positivity, empowering their participants, or engage in the critical debate that questions whether sex positivity can even exist and whether or not it is compatible with feminism. Because sex positivity is complicated and nuanced, are there iterations of media that, on the surface, seem sex positive but ultimately are not?

Feel free to use the examples below to inspire your writing on this subject, or choose your own source material.

We’d like to avoid as much overlap as possible for this theme, so get your proposals in early if you know which film you’d like to write about. We accept both original pieces and cross-posts, and we respond to queries within a week.

Most of our pieces are between 1,000 and 2,000 words, and include links and images. Please send your piece as a Microsoft Word document to btchflcks[at]gmail[dot]com, including links to all images, and include a 2- to 3-sentence bio.

If you have written for us before, please indicate that in your proposal, and if not, send a writing sample if possible.

Please be familiar with our publication and look over recent and popular posts to get an idea of Bitch Flicks’ style and purpose. We encourage writers to use our search function to see if your topic has been written about before, and link when appropriate (hyperlinks to sources are welcome, as well).

The final due date for these submissions is Friday, Sept. 18, by midnight.

The Dreamers

Nymphomaniac Vol. I & II

Hysteria

Bob’s Burgers

Transparent

Spy

Kinsey

Waiting to Exhale

Secretary

Stoker

The Diary of a Teenage Girl

The 100

The To Do List

Boys Don’t Cry

Fifty Shades of Grey

Star Trek: The Next Generation

Say Anything

Masters of Sex

Ladies No. 1 Detective Agency

Duke of Burgundy

Call for Writers: Representations of Sex Workers

Too often, sex work and sex workers on screen aren’t represented three-dimensionally. Media representation is a mirror to our own cultural attitudes and norms, and we’d like to use this theme week to explore and analyze the good, the bad, and the dangerous of representations of sex workers in film and television.

Our first Theme Week for 2014 will be Representations of Sex Workers.

Feminism has a complicated relationship with sex work. Even the most sex-positive sometimes stop short at embracing voluntary sex work as a (potentially) sex-positive, feminist venture. Subjectifying female sexuality–from recent SlutWalks through generations of fighting for reproductive choice–is a cornerstone of feminist activism, but how do we respond to sex work, which is maligned and complicated? How can we draw clear lines between voluntary and involuntary sex work, and listen to and hear stories from sex workers themselves? And how do film and television represent sex workers?

In a recent Salon article (which is an excerpt from the author’s book), “Ethical sluts and ‘dirty whores’: Straight talk about sex work,” Melinda Chateauvert says that even though feminists have reclaimed “sluttiness,” we still struggle with sex work:

Whorephobia remains pervasive in the social psyche, showing its ugliness even in sex-positive communities. The positive emphasis on sex work confuses “straights” into thinking that sex work is about sex, not work. That cognitive dissonance — the deep chasm filled with stereotypes and prejudices — interferes with the capacity of civilians to hear sex workers speak about their experiences. Stories that don’t conform to the “superhappyfunsexysexwork!” narrative tend to flummox pro-sex feminists; they can identify with privileged exotic dancers, porn performers and professional dominants (even fantasize about being one), but think “junkie whores” need to be rescued and should be prevented from working in their gentrifying neighborhoods. Such disrespectful treatment leads to silencing, ignoring, or rewriting what sex workers have to say.

(For more reading on the topic, see this Ms. article and this wonderful round-up of articles at POSTWHOREAMERICA and check out the conversation on Twitter at #notyourrescueproject. For commentary/ideas about sex work on film, see this Alternet article and links from the London Sex Worker Film Festival.)

We’d like to avoid as much overlap as possible for this theme, so get your proposals in early if you know who or what you would like to write about. We accept both original pieces and cross-posts, and we respond to queries within a week.

If you have written for us before, please indicate that in your proposal, and if not, send a writing sample if possible.

The final due date for these submissions is Friday, Jan. 24 by midnight.

A sampling of films/shows that highlight sex workers:

Pretty Baby

The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas

Working Girls

Mighty Aphrodite

Showgirls

Sweet Charity

Klute

Gunsmoke

Taxi Driver

Leaving Las Vegas

Midnight Cowboy

The Owl and the Pussycat

My Own Private Idaho

Risky Business

Moulin Rouge

Mysterious Skin

Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo

Reno 911

The Girlfriend Experience

Hung

Butterfield 8

Kansas City

Last Exit to Brooklyn

Irma La Douce

Claire Dolan

Elmer Gantry

McCabe & Mrs. Miller

Nathalie

Priceless (Hors de prix)

Pretty Woman

Breakfast at Tiffany’s

The Center of the World

Lost Highway

Inland Empire

Profane

A Kiss for Gabriela

The Client List

American Gigolo

The Man from Elysian Fields

Call Me: The Rise and Fall of Heidi Fleiss

Boogie Nights

Magic Mike

Porn Star: The Legend of Ron Jeremy

Vidiyum Munn

Margaret Cho: On Topping Trans* Queer Political Correctness

Let me begin by saying I’m queer-identified. I have trans* family, but it’s impossible for me to speak for trans* people of experience. I can share concepts, however. Too, my general line of thought in terms of sexuality, gender identity or personhood is that no matter how often your definition changes, you “are” what you tell me that you are.

“I refer to myself as gay, but I’m married to a man.”

– Margaret Cho

I’m the One That I Want: Can Queer and Trans* Folks Really Reclaim the Word “Tranny?”

Along with Stephen Fry, I feel that language and politically correct linguistic constructs can at times become as bullying, domineering and “victimizing” as those who claim to be victimized by language. What with people being as individualized and fluid as language is, sometimes experience does indeed trump the words we use to describe and protect it.

All Margaret Cho Everything

Margaret Cho (“Drop Dead Diva,” “I’m The One That I Want”) is as scrappy as she is electric.

She’s “scrappy” because she’s taken so much guff, sharing her multiple talents on and off-screen (she acts, sings, directs, writes, designs clothes, and is a walking-tattooed work of art and standout standup comic, for starters). Cho’s speech can transition from elegant purrs to lioness’ growls without hesitation. She’s electric because she sings the body electric: she’s sensual, naughty, flirtatious, often bawdy and ultimately playful.

If you’ve seen her comedy flick “I’m The One That I Want,” the efforting in her journey to long-term success is palpable. You get the sense she’s had to claw her way all the way up to the glass ceiling, brace herself with her back up, and kick the glass away with a pair of steel-toed Doc Martens just to disappear the whole damn thing. As she unfolds her own narrative in this cathartic and she-larious comedy film, we discover that now she’s not even in the friggin’ building. So, damn a glass ceiling anyhow.

Cho doesn’t “play the queer card” or the race card. Rather, she is always and forever queering play. She is queering entertainment. When cameras roll as you share minute details of your open relationship on morning chat shows, segue seamlessly into outing fellow celebs, put the world on notice that you will happily eff anything that moves as you like/when you like (just like men do), and always leave ‘em laughing…if anything, you could say Cho plays “the laugh card.”

Yes. We’re laughing. But to what end?

Well, they don’t call it “gender wars” just because.

Margaret Cho’s comedic M.O. doesn’t feel like a manipulation. Rather, it’s a weapon.

As she’s currently promoting her latest comedy project The MOTHER Tour, thoughts and themes come to mind about Margaret Cho’s presence in the world.

Yes, We Recruit: She’s All About Her Funny Business

Cho is forever quotable (damn skippy, and Bitch Flicks knows it) and impossible to ignore.

Case in point: In Conan O’ Brien’s documentary Conan O’ Brien Can’t Stop, the uber-successful talk show host and fellow comedian makes it a point both to “ignore” and dismiss Margaret Cho. On film.

An ever-irrepressible social sharer and networker, Cho was waiting to have a little comedic kiki with O’Brien as he slunked away, cheating to camera as he let us know he had to ditch her because he didn’t “want to get Cho’d.”

This sarcastic film bit could have been classified as gag reel material if O’Brien hadn’t spent the rest of the film kiki’ing it up with cameos by Jim Carrey, John Hamm and Jon Stewart, along with his cast and crew. (He preferred to be Carrey’d Hamm’ed and Stewarted.)

No doubt, comedy is a cutthroat business: Cho and O’Brien still work together and socialize, but O’Brien’s production choice and life decision in his own docu-pic is a telling one. So-called avoidance and disgust is attraction’s twin. C’mon Conan, fess up! Fully-embodied and empowered women carry with them a transformative energy that cannot be controlled. People can often find that to be at-once infuriating and hot.

There’s Some Tranny Chasers Up In Here

“ A few words about ‘trannychasing.’ I am not a trannychaser. Ok, actually I am a trannychaser. No I am not. I am a trannycatcher! Just kidding!”

– Margaret Cho

As a self-confessed “tranny chaser,” Margaret Cho’s taken a good amount of flak for expressing her trans* chasing feelings and affirmative desires without too much apology. It’s a tough concept to think about, as she’s done so much brilliant work and she’s really been out there on the road, touring with Ani DiFranco and Lilith Fair, indie all the way for decades on end, fearlessly advocating for trans* and queer rights, feminist and race equality, and respect of her own in the entertainment industry.

Making Visibility Sexy

Margaret Cho and Ian Harvie — Ian Harvie and Margaret Cho – Promotional Photo by Kevin Neales

There’s no doubt Cho is sex positive (she’s on the Good Vibrations board, and her activist and fund-raising work is notable).

She is queer-identified and trans* inclusive: she directed the highly acclaimed “Young James Dean” video by Girlyman, featuring trans* peers and allies covering lyrics about coming up in the world as genderqueer.

Her comedy routines, filmic work, creative projects and writing boast a high trans* visibility ratio, including her clearing the floor for trans* folks, often guys, to speak and co-create with her. These men need to be mainstreamed, as success for trans* persons of experience is exceptionally important and more common than we’re led to believe. Trans* folks face harrowing odds when attempting to begin any new business or creative venture, even if that enterprise was something they’d become successful at and mastered pre-transition.

Margaret Cho big-ups trans* men regularly, and we don’t see this enough elsewhere in the world in terms of proactive, high profile allies doing so. Cho supports fellow trans* comics and entrepreneurs and leverages her celebrity to help folks earn a steady income who might not do so otherwise, or as quickly. She will tweet, promote, and help to encourage business ventures for others—often tirelessly so. Her podcasts likely do much more for her regular indie artist guests than other shows whose DJ isn’t a comedy diva who reigns supreme.

Community leaders and others have voiced concern about Cho’s humor and “tranny chaser” (or catcher) jokes and statements. Cho has formally explained her views, stating these are just jokes based on reverence and respect, and that people are taking things out of context—too seriously.

Writer/filmmaker Tobi Hill-Meyer states Cho is objectifying trans* men like cis gender men often do with trans* women, fetishizing them and changing people into “things.”

“Trans IS a legitimate gender” is one trans* man’s defense against such an idea, posited by Cho’s comedic peer and BFF, Ian Harvie. Harvie wrote, “ If you believe Transgender IS a legitimate gender, how can you argue that it’s wrong to eroticize Trans people? If you do not see Trans as a legitimate gender, then what’s wrong with you?! I’m Trans, I’m Butch, and identify as a Trans man, regardless of my given biological sex. I absolutely believe it’s okay to be attracted to, exoticize, fetishsize, and eroticize any and all Trans people. After all, a fetish is something that we desire or that turns us on.”

Too, RuPaul penned the song “Tranny Chaser” as a declaration of sexuality, desirability, and a playful take on the concept. “Do you wanna be me?” That’s how the song’s bridge begins. Fully aware of the seduction in the words, RuPaul goes on, “That don’t make you gay. Or do you wanna [beep] me? That don’t make you gay….”

It’s hard to laser-focus down to one “right take” on topics like trans* and queer sexuality when so many folks in-community with so many different experiences feel empowered by erotic aspects of being queer or trans* as well as desired. Other bloggers and commenters have called Cho’s tranny chaser phraseology disgusting. Meanwhile, she is blowing heteronormative minds open simply by sharing these concepts, matter-of-factly and without shame. No one has accused RuPaul of anything similar.

Seemingly pointless rhetorical questions arise: is it better to be vilified or romanticized? Dehumanized, or eroticized? If we’re all “in on the desire,” is it wrong? Is there a happy medium that requires no context or linguistic boundaries and protections when you’re speaking to heterosexual or heteronormative folks?

Cho grew up in San Francisco, which could better explain matters somewhat. In the City (at least in most LGBT circles), you are what you say you are. Period. Middle America doesn’t quite resonate with such a mindset (yet?).

Issues of class and power can’t be ignored. Though they all had challenging beginnings in their careers, now relatively better-paid or well-paid performers Cho’s, Harvie’s and RuPaul’s experiences differ by definition from that of a queer or trans* man or woman who doesn’t have the same means or sense of empowerment to feel okay leading with sexuality or identity. Harassment is much more difficult, to say the least, when you don’t have financial or social resources to work your way out of it or away from it.

When these issues and conundrums arise, I consider them to be a gift: because they grant us the opportunity to be honest with ourselves about them, regardless of political correctness.

We have to name and claim the final word(s) about our experience. We have to find our own ways to survive and to thrive in the world.

“Bitch,” Please

In a previous Bitch Flicks Quote of the Day update, Margaret Cho waxes fantastic about the word “bitch.” Have a look: you don’t want to miss it.

–

The first draft of this post appeared at Gay Agenda online.