There’s a reason why I’ve never really stated whether I’m pro- or anti-porn: my position is not that simple. And I don’t understand why anyone thinks it can be that simple. Not everyone’s working from the same definition of “porn”, for one thing. But there are so many elements to this conversation.
In fact, forget porn for a minute. Anemone distilled something for me a while back: in mainstream film, actresses are practically required to get naked and do sex scenes a lot – far more than male actors. This creates a situation of institutionalized sexual discrimination. It’s not that no actress ever happily and willingly filmed one of those scenes. It’s that very few (who, other than Julia Roberts?) manage to choose not to do those scenes and still have a great career. It’s not that women don’t have any other choice for how they can earn their living. It’s that they should have the option to work in film without facing special requirements their male counterparts don’t. Imagine being unable to get a promotion in your field of, say, telecommunications, without letting your bosses photograph you naked, and you begin to see a glimmer of what actresses go through. And the guys you work with get to skip that step.
This is wrong. And a lot of what happens to actresses in porn is equally wrong. The consequences can even be worse, given that commercial porn has gotten so hardcore that it seems likely actresses are being physically damaged for it. I know that link’s not the best source in the world, but when I searched the engines for links about women/actresses being hurt in porn, all I got were links salaciously offering to show me women being hurt in a sexual context. That says a lot, right there. (I got the Gail Dines link from Reddit Feminisms.) [ETA: a better link here.]
I have a problem with all that, and if it causes you to label me anti-porn, whatever. But you should also label me anti-film, I guess, since because I think both Hollywood and the porn industry are fully capable of providing fair working conditions for women but all too frequently don’t, my feelings on both industries and their treatment of actual women are pretty much identical.
Which brings us to the content of porn. As you know if you read this site, I object to a lot of mainstream movie content that I consider misogynistic. I feel the same way about porn. I have a problem with misogynist content wherever I find it. That said, I see the potential value of porn as sexual fantasies on screen, if the industry would (1) look after the well-being of actors better and (2) offer at least some non-misogynistic and midandrist content to balance out the misogyny. That certainly makes me anti-porn industry – at least the mainstream commercial industry as it is now. But then again, I feel pretty much the same way about Hollywood’s attitudes toward (simulated) sex.
I also see a desperate need for some realistic media representation of sex and sexuality (which some people would consider part of porn – I personally do not, but I’m including it to be complete). Perhaps some parts of the world are luckier, but in the US, we’re all caught between (1) people who refuse to talk about sex because that’s dirty, (2) people who blither on about it but actually don’t have a clue what they’re talking about and (3) porn, the most readily available of which is misleading about sex and the human body to say the least.
But perhaps one of the most puzzling aspects of the “pro-porn” position to me has always been that its proponents often see themselves as anti-prudery. I don’t get this, because porn conflates rape and sex even more frequently than religion. And that’s the most prudish belief anyone could harbor: to see sex as something so ungodly ugly and vile, that you can’t distinguish it from a form of torture.
One commenter at the above-linked Alternet article says: “I would say that we should be more worried about a sex-negative culture and attitude that has hijacked our society, necessitating porn.” That sounds good on the surface, but it actually misses the point. Prudishness does not force people to seek out porn; it encourages them to obsess on sex, because that’s what our brains do when you tell us something is forbidden. It’s the obsession with sex, fed by both prudishness and pornography, that causes a lot of problems both for individuals and for our culture in general.
Prudishness and porn both need to get out of our way, because both forms of sex-obsession are frankly just not merited. Sex is something that some people do (not all). It ranges from great to extremely disappointing. Sometimes the participants are gorgeous, but most often they’re just ordinary-looking. Sometimes there are yucky smells. Sometimes there are rude sounds. Sometimes it involves certain numbers and types of partners, other times it involves other configurations. Sex never involves seriously or deliberately hurting someone (outside of a safe BDSM environment).
Truth is, sex is just not that important, in the final analysis.
And that, ultimately, is why I don’t see much difference between porn, mainstream media and organized religion: they’re all just trying to manipulate us by generating an obsession with sex and then preying on it.
{ 90 comments… read them below or add one }
← Previous Comments
This is something that has always fascinated me about het porn, in that straight men are almost always the ones who fetishize huge penises. Which I guess is partly about competition, and partly about the misogynistic appeal of making sex painful for women.
Savannah(Quote) (Reply)
If someone whipped one of those 12″ monstrosities out at me I’d screech and try to kill it with a stick, then burn it to be sure.
Well, you have to negate the regeneration save somehow.
As for why the fetishization of penis size shows up much porn aimed at het men: The “monster cock” genre varies in the narrative presented, some of the very misogynistic. Others simply seem to be feeding fantasies of being better-endowed.
Patrick McGraw(Quote) (Reply)
According to a number of male performers and directors, it is mainly a performance thing. One needs to be able to repeatedly achieve and maintain an erection on demand over the course of a shoot that can last anywhere from four to eight hours, often in uncomfortable locations and with no help from one’s co-star. A female performer, on the other hand can get by with (to quote veteran performer Nina Hartley) “lube and acting.”
According to veteran performer/director Ernest Greene (Nina Hartley’s husband), failing to perform two shoots in a row can end a career. He states that ED medications have not actually changed things, because one needs to perform on demand under the changing conditions of a shoot – Viagra, for example, takes an hour to kick in and if there’s a technical problem at that time, you’re SOL.
This is also why there are comparatively so few male performers – producers are hesitant to work with unproven male talent.
Again, this all relates to het porn – I haven’t studied the gay porn industry at all.
Patrick McGraw(Quote) (Reply)
I think it’s such a thing now because if you’re watching porn on your laptop, and have it positioned right, it looks like it’s your dick in some positions. So it’s a fantasy not just about sex but about being a better/bigger/manlier man.
Maria(Quote) (Reply)
Haha. Porn bloopers entertain me more than actual porn itself. Nothing funnier than seeing two people going at it in a completely improbable position and then one of them falls backward off the couch…
And there was this other short vid of a bunch of coworkers surprising a girl in the middle of a porn scene with a birthday cake and song xD
Raeka(Quote) (Reply)
Actually, not to give everyone way too much information, anal sex can be quite enjoyable for a woman. It’s not like they show it in the movies, though, with the guy hammering away. I’m just saying that a prostate isn’t necessary.
Godless Heathen(Quote) (Reply)
Casey, perhaps you could just tell them that you don’t like it/aren’t interested in trying it, and it doesn’t matter what any other woman in the world thinks about it, period, end of story. Some women do like it – as Godless Heathen is pointing out – but others don’t. So what? Men need to realize women are not the borg. You like what you like – other women’s mileage may vary. Besides, anyone who tells you you SHOULD like something because other people who resemble you like it strikes me as VERY manipulative. I’m not sure that’s someone I’d want to keep around.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
Luckily the guys whom I’ve discussed these issues with were either already in a relationship or not interested in me, and after I found out they were…eh, unsavory(?) characters I never interacted with them again (thank God), one guy I knew said he thought a girl’s “plumbing was broken” because she ejaculated (a squirter, I guess)…that’s when I knew to sever my ties with him (I also found it odd that a total “bro” was bragging about his sexual conquests to a group of 3~4 young women, I mean, isn’t that something you do with other guys and try to at least keep up a facade of being a decent human being when you’re around girls?)
Casey(Quote) (Reply)
I had been thinking that I’d LIKE to at least give anal sex a try, provided I/we take it slow and use plenty of lube, but I’m so scared that any/every het guy I meet might be so desensitized due to porn that they’d just do that awful jackjammer sex…I’ve got to keep reminding myself that MEN aren’t the borg! >_<V
Casey(Quote) (Reply)
That’s true, too.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
Yep, there’s even an entire genre of POV porn, where the camera is positioned next to the male performer’s head.
Patrick McGraw(Quote) (Reply)
Thanks for that. It’s sad to see the “safe” stuff, which tends to be full of gender baggage, sells so well. Which then goes on to make a bad name for “women’s porn”.
Karakuri(Quote) (Reply)
One thing I found extremely hot was the Crash Pad Series. It was just so obvious these people were into it, that they had real off-camera chemistry.
The Other Patrick(Quote) (Reply)
Okay this doesn’t really add to the discussion but “they like it in porn”?? Anyone who uses that excuse is in dire need of a brain adjustment.
And I’m guessing “my girlfriend doesn’t complain” is really shorthand for “women aren’t taught to put their own wants first and I’m still at the stage where her thinking ‘Well I don’t HATE it, I guess I’ll go along to avoid the passiveagressive tantrums later’ is good enough for me!” Ugh. ~_~
Cinnabar(Quote) (Reply)
“Well I don’t HATE it, I guess I’ll go along to avoid the passive-aggressive tantrums later.”
This is really cringe-inducing for me to reference, but that reminds me of the Kiss song “Nothing To Lose” (which is about coercing a girl into having anal sex): Once I got a baby/I tried every way/she didn’t want to do it/but she did anyway
Boo….>_>VV
Casey(Quote) (Reply)
I just came upon this blog post by Clarisse Thorn: “Sympathy for the Anti-Porn Activists that might be of interest or even relevance, since it also mentions Gale Dines.
The Other Patrick(Quote) (Reply)
Well, I have to take serious issue with an article that makes the statement: “Anti-porn folks are shaped by society’s irrational sexual fears and stereotypes.” How would it sound to say, “Pro-porn folks are shaped by today’s irrational hopes and stereotypes.” I mean, I’m so offended by her attitude toward the poor misguided anti-porn folks, and I don’t even consider myself one of them.
What’s really interesting is that her experience with men that led her to be so intimidated by porn is far less negative than some of mine, because I *have* dated/known guys who made it very clear:
–All guys like mainstream porn
–Yes, all guys want to do the things men to do women in porn
–Yes, if you won’t let us spray jism on your faces or whatever’s the trendy porn thing of the day, we’ll find another woman who will. Why shouldn’t we? If you don’t like something about us, you’re entitled to find another beau.
And yet, after some brief and crushing naivety that got straightened out by the time I was 21, I realized that different men had different attitudes about women and sex, and that when multiple men tell you All Men {Whatever}, they’re usually apologists rationalizing their own behavior or men who think peer pressure will work on me, which it never ever did.
But also, I was always more assertive about my own feelings about porn. I asked men precisely what they liked about it and what types they liked. Most of the guys I’ve known have limits that jive reasonably well with my own.
This woman is projecting her own failure to analyze the complexity of a situation onto everyone who holds a position she now finds distasteful. This is how born again Christians tend to regard atheists: “Oh, I used to be just like you, but now I have seen the light!” It’s wildly offensive to me.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
Yeah, a lot of the blog posts I’ve read of her (mostly having to do with porn and whatnot) have her come off like a douche.
Casey(Quote) (Reply)
Maybe it’s because I read through the SM-Feminist archive before where the writers decry a similar attitude with the anti-SM folks, but I went back to the article, and you’re right. I had mostly linked this because Dines’ name came up and a few links about porn possibly reducing sexual violence and I didn’t even pick up on that.
The Other Patrick(Quote) (Reply)
Understood.
Dines seems to be full of it, I agree: but once again, I only linked because I could find no other source confirming OR REFUTING that actors suffer physical harm in the making of porn. And once again, given how shittily they are sometimes treated in mainstream film, I can’t assume a totally unregulated industry would be free of harm to actors. And once again, that’s a problem with the porn INDUSTRY, not the content of porn. My issues with much of the content in porn sort of mirror my issues with much of the mainstream film content, and I find it highly ironic that in their rush to be pro- or anti-porn, very few people seem to look at porn as critically as they look at mainstream HW films for misogynistic content. It’s bizarre.
I still don’t get why people are seeking studies on what porn does for or against violence when the whole discipline of psychology makes it perfectly obvious: media doesn’t make anybody do anything. It is completely neutral. Beyond that, some people USE* media to work themselves into a state where they can do wonderful or horrible things, but if you took some media away from them, they’d just use another (or rely on their own fantasies). If pressed, the Bible has some good rape stories for those who crave them. What media CAN do is gradually desensitize entire communities, dulling but not destroying empathy. In fact, I would argue that IS what’s happening now… but that conclusion is where you need the studies to confirm. What media can and can’t do to the human brain – psychology already knows that answer. Why people are still debating it, I don’t know.
*Some people also use media to work through their socially unacceptable desires. I don’t know if this qualifies as “preventing” violence, though, because who’s to say those people would ever have escalated to hurting anyone?
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
Well said.
As for the industry, I think one problem is that it is very difficult, just like with Hollywood, to actually get at how actors and actresses are treated. Those people rely on the industry for their money, so usually you will mostly find stories of good behaviour. With HW, at least you can look at the on-screen representation, but if a film actually *sells* degradation, where is the line between acting and reality? I know I don’t trust most porn companies, if only for the fact that industry over time does not get more humane without social pressure; quite the opposite. And even more extensive internet research often doesn’t turn up anything definitive about the industry or even specific companies.
The Other Patrick(Quote) (Reply)
Very true. If you work on a film set, you see a lot of it for yourself. If you just talk to people who work on sets, you know precisely who has a reputation for groping female crewers and so on. But getting people to talk on record? They have to be prepared to give up their careers in film first because the laws that have begun to protect women in most other industries are just ignored in Hollywood.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
For everyone, including me, who wanted a better link than the Gail Dines interview on how porn actors are treated, I just came across this:
http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2010/10/08/i-can-never-tell/
It’s talking more about BDSM porn than strictly mainstream, but I think it provides relevant food for thought all the same.
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
I read the same interview and was pretty frustrated because it alleged things without naming names.
In a similar vein, the documentary Graphic Sexual Horror talks about Insex and how models’ boundaries there were sometimes not respected; Insex is gone, but the owner has new sites and I pretty much expect that to not have changed much. On the other hand, lifestyle bdsmer and author Laura Antoninou has written about being a guest at kink.com which sounded more positive – but even there, I would at most go so far and be comfortable with sites where well-known lifestylers direct. In the end, though, even then I personally think that the model needs to be kinky, as well, just to make it more likely that she can discern and decide what she wants to do – which is no guarantee at all, but I feel it’s the best I can get to.
The Elite Pain case is a little muddled, as far as I know, on whether or not they really disregarded a safe word. What they undoubtedly did, however, was cast young women who were absolutely not into bdsm and, with the promise of money (and not that much money, but hey, it’s the former sowjet bloc), proceeded to film very, very hard punishment scenes – and I mean very hard. With tops who didn’t always seem to know what they were doing, and with canings that never stopped before they drew blood, if then – a severity that even kinky models might have problems with, but where outsiders would have no way of knowing what they were getting into. I never watched these films anyway, but that was not a good production company and I’m glad it’s gone. At least I think it’s still gone. And it reminds me of all the other porn that we see from Russia or South America which has a reputation of being extreme, and which often does not look at all as if the models enjoy it – and if I ever see a clip or something where the model seems to struggle emotionally and is just put through anyway, I never watch any of those company’s films again. So anything from Brazil, Russia, Czechoslowakia is problematic at least, to me.
Just as well as I am suspicious of Infernal Restraints, Real Time Bondage and whatever other sites PD has. On the other hand, I still think kink.com is generally good about consent and respecting the performer, though I don’t doubt even there have been some shoots that are borderline or worse – but I know that one of the models I greatly admire, Madison Young, who I know from queer porn, is in a lifestyle relationship with the owner of the site, and at least some lifestylers I know have directed there, as well as Antoninous report; I feel somewhat safe in the assumption that they are one of the better companies (I still don’t watch their films, though, as I don’t find them that erotic, which applies to many other porn films, too – I mostly read erotica).
The Other Patrick(Quote) (Reply)
I’ve thought for a while that the producers of porn have the same problem that the producers of other types of film have: they think they know what viewers want to see, but they haven’t actually asked.
Keith(Quote) (Reply)
Very true!
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
I came across this site after browsing through internet porn and coming across caning videos that I would classify as non-consensual. It started innocently enough — browsing through simple spanking videos that were fairly benign, and were clearly consensual; the woman or man being spanked was not being hit hard enough to truly cause agony, and was clearly okay with it. Fine. I’m okay with that.
But as is the case with browsing, recommendations on other videos I “might enjoy” took me to a very disturbing place. All of these videos seemed to come from Eastern European countries, and all involved young women who clearly did not understand what they had gotten themselves into. Appalled, I googled this topic to see if other people were talking about it, and came across your blog.
A previous commenter said something about situations in which there was a safe word, but the women are made to understand that they will not get paid if they use it. By the time they realize the severity of pain associated with caning, they are left with a decision to make (in a very compromised state of mind to boot — one of pain): If they stop now, the pain they have experienced up until now will be in vain, so it’s best for them to keep going. I honestly don’t know how anyone can get off on this kind of porn, as it is very clear that these girls are suffering, and all I wanted to do was break into that studio and arrest everyone involved in this torture.
Of course, that was just an emotional response. Intellectually, I understand that it is a complicated issue, but I am stymied why more people aren’t talking about it. On the one hand, *technically* it’s consensual, since I am sure they are told they will be caned for monetary compensation and they agree. But do they know how much pain is actually involved when they are agreeing? Since all I saw were young girls, shouldn’t we consider their level of ignorance when determining whether this is truly consensual? Also, what about the socio-economic ramifications of all of it? Do we want to allow people to sell themselves into torture for money?
The people I personally know who are into BDSM are insistent that it is only enjoyable if the sub *likes* feeling pain — there is a connection in their brains between the experience of feeling pain and sexual arousal/fulfillment. I am fine with that kind of kinky porn…but this stuff…this stuff is just WRONG to me.
Anne C.(Quote) (Reply)
I totally agree. I think a helpful analogy is this one:
–A man gets a dangerous job in a mine, believing he knows what his duties will be and what safety precautions the company will take to protect him
–He starts the job and finds his duties are way more dangerous than he thought, and hardly any safety precautions are being taken
–THERE’S A WHOLE FED GOVT AGENCY TO HELP HIM.
How is it any different when a porn actress takes a job, believing she knows the dangers of it, only to find out the dangers are much worse than she was led to believe?
Jennifer Kesler(Quote) (Reply)
Jennifer,
Excellent point. People can’t sell a kidney for money but they can sell themselves into torture? What about death? Would we, as a society, ever condone a poor man selling himself to a sadist who wants to murder him in exchange for having his family generously compensated after his death? I think everyone would oppose the legalization of that, which begs the question: where do we draw the line?
Anne C.(Quote) (Reply)
All this talk about pornography and cultural attitudes got me thinking–one half of our culture seems to be sexualizing the very concept of intimacy by making “intimate” a euphemism for “genitalia” while the mainstream porn industry and other corporate sex media seem to be systematically scrubbing actual intimacy out of the cultural narrative of sexuality. Intimacy is not penises and vaginas, it’s trust, closeness, and emotional tenderness. One can be intimate with someone without having sex with them, and one can have sex with someone without the slightest hint of intimacy. The result seems to be that it’s becoming increasingly difficult for people, especially men (who are the target audience and primary consumers of corporate porn), to have actual emotional intimacy of any kind in our culture.
Harrison Murray(Quote) (Reply)
← Previous Comments