flexibeast

One of the things i find interesting about Pleasure Activism Australia is observing how people respond to it. Over the course of its existence, i've got the impression that:

Sex-oriented groups aren't fussed about its pro-feminist politics.

(Cisgendered) men often don't like its feminist politics, making comments ranging from "Feminism is no longer relevant" and "Feminism has gone too far" to "More people would be interested in the group if you dropped the 'pro-feminist' bit", which, given that PAA was explicitly founded as a pro-feminist group, is roughly equivalent to saying "More people would be interested in joining the Greens if they dropped this 'environmentalist' bit".

Feminists and/or feminist groups often aren't fussed about PAA's position on sex work, and perhaps about PAA's failure to stand alongside Sheila Jeffreys and declare Officially Feminist Non-Patriarchal Forms of Sexual Expression.

Some queers don't like PAA's insistence that members respect each other's sexual identities. One classic instance of this was a member stating that "Bisexuality is merely a falsity inferred upon a certain section of confident and responsive people simply because the "normal" population needs this labelling process." When other list members called this person on hir dissing of bi people, zie left the group.

People and groups that go naked as a form of activism (to protest against, for example, the war in Iraq, or the fur trade) aren't fussed about the notion of PAA supporting such activities, because PAA is about OMG TEH SEX!!1! and if a sex-oriented group is seen supporting such things, that will discredit the naked activist movement. Never mind that the sort of people who have a problem with sexuality are usually also the same people who have a problem with nudity. :-P

PAA is clearly (and not surprisingly!) just like me - a chronic edge-case. :-)