Amelia
AGA Blogger
Reged: Jul 14 2006
Posts: 15
Loc: California
|
|
So this always seems to be a divided issue with feminism and I’m really curious to see what all of you think on it. I’ve read through a lot of articles and books that claim to take the feminist stance on the issue and they have a tendency to contradict each other. I love that feminism can be individual and have personal theories but this particular subject seems to divide us much more than unite us. And although I don’t consider myself to be judgmental on this issue I do seem to lack understanding in why some women believe pornography can in any way be freeing to women.
I was processing a Bitch article a while back that talked a lot about how women were now becoming directors in the industry and how they brought a much more feminine, sexually freeing perspective to the scene. The same edition of the magazine gave a variety of summaries on the different branches of feminism. I mentioned it in passing to my Mom and how confusing it was and we both agreed that although woman-directed porn was bound to be more tasteful than that directed by men, it was incredibly worrisome how some women perceived such a thing to be healthy and long over-due.
I hate pornography with a passion. I’m not naïve, I know just about every guy friend I have keeps some handy to some extent. And I usually pass it off as normal for our culture but at the same time…I take a firm moral stance against it. I, personally, find it cheap and degrading, unhealthy, and although this stems mostly from it being a male-dominated industry I have a hunch that I wouldn’t even approve of the more tasteful pornography directed by women. (I must make a disclaimer that I don’t mean to offend anyone or question your takes on it, I am merely curious since this often times seems to be an issue that divides us rather than unites us.)
My personal experience that shapes my take on this is that I know a great number of men who have sexual addictions. I have one youth group leader, mentor, and friend who died trying to do pornographic stunts while his wife was out of town. I had a step-father that when combined with his alcoholism caused him to lose control of himself and hurt me in the process. I know others who have spent time in therapy and rehab for it. Although sexual addiction can not solely be blamed on any one thing, it can be fed. And my personal experience and upbringing paints an ugly picture for this industry. And I haven't even included the bits and pieces where I'm hanging out with the guys and someone mentions me taking my shirt off in passing, as if it's his right to make such a proposition. I believe in freedom as much as the next person but for an industry that feeds a diseased demographic and strengthens corrupt roots, I’m searching pretty hard to see any justification for it.
But that’s just my take and reasoning on it. I’m curious to hear what everyone else here thinks.
|
DrK
Wordsmithsta
Reged: Jun 22 2006
Posts: 94
Loc: AL, USA
|
|
Hey, great minds, eh? I was thinking about related issues, & posted another Roll Call- go check it out- it could be cool to have mutually-reinforcing conversations in blog-posts & this forum-thread.
--------------------
Contre tout le monde, je me defendrai...je suis le dernier homme, je le resterai jusqu'au bout! Je ne capitule pas!- Ionesco, Le Rhinoceros
|
Sarah P
Reged: Jun 25 2006
Posts: 36
Loc: Toronto, ONT, Canada
|
|
there was recently an awards ceremony here in toronto, the feminist porn awards, highlighting "female erotic directors revolutionizing porn".
here's the news-link, if anyone's interested in knowing more:
http://www.lsbntoronto.com/index.php/local/weblog/1779/
i was distinctly anti-porn at one point, on the basis of the porn i'd had access to / seen with guy friends, stumbling on friends' dad's hustler collections, etc. it was always unrealistic women in unrealistic circumstances doing unrealistic things. (at the used bookstore/cafe where i work i recently discovered a copy of the first porn i ever read - when i read it again, while the narrator of the text is a "woman speaking to other women", it was pretty obvious to an adult me that this book was written with a male audience in mind! as a 12 year old girl, during my first stunned encounter with the book, i think i'd missed that part.  )
my opinion has changed over the past few years - moving to a city where i had access to diverse erotic stuff, i came across a lot of porn that didn't feel so creepy / outsider-y to me. it's porn that identifies itself as feminist and/or queer, a lot of the time. while the storylines are still unrealistic, you can get a lot of pictoral stuff, at least, that shows a variety of people doing an array of things to each other that i can imagine myself doing... and liking.
on our backs magazine would be a staple example of this, but things like nofauxxx.com or vegporn.com are more recent takes on "progressive" porn, where the subjects have a large amount of (or absolute?) autonomy/creative freedom over what they're doing.
while i think that porn can be an exploitative industry with the ability to harm, i think there are ways that that negativity can be avoided. feminist artists making the type of porn they want to see is a means of doing this.
|
Beppie
Reged: Jun 22 2006
Posts: 362
Loc: Sydney, Australia
|
|
I think it's important in any of these debates to define what you mean by pornography-- for instance, some people defend porn because they don't distinguish between pornography and erotica, but still believe that most pornography is pretty bad. Others do make this distinction, while others still feel that the porn/erotica divide is a false dichotomy designed to legitimate some porn which is ultimately just as misogynistic as everyone else.
My personal take on it: the term "pornography" is used in general discourse tends to pretty much always refers to misogynistic material designed for men. I have heard it used in other ways, but that is what most people mean when they say "porn."
However, I don't think that all erotic and arousing material is necessarily bad, though I acknowledge that much of it, due to the way that sexual dynamics are constructed, is likely to be at least implicitly misogynistic, though this is overt as often as not. Still, we make texts about all of our experience, and sexual experience is validly one of those experiences. I'd really hate to think that our sexualities aren't so warped that it's impossible to come up with ANY positive sexually arousing material. Of course, some people argue that that is the case... but I want to be an optimist here... so put me in the erotica camp, I guess. When I refer to "porn" in this post, I refer particularly to misogynistic erotic material (though I would also include degrading material that did not involve women, for instance degrating material involving only gay men).
Then there is the issue of exploitation in the porn industry, and the fact that it can often be completely imposible to tell whether or not the women involved (and indeed sometimes the men) are being forced into it, whether with direct threats, or simply due to their life circumstances.
All of these things make me deeply uneasy with porn. It's a bit of a chicken and egg thing here-- does porn cause the misogyny, or does mysogyny cause the porn? Personally I lean a little bit towards the latter-- let's say I see it like a three lane highway, with two lines of misogyny heading towards the porn (resulting in its creation) and one lane coming away from it (misogyny that occurs as a direct result of the porn's existence). I do think that combating misgyny in general is the best way to reduce the amount of porn out there, but the sheer volume of porn (something like 90% of the internet) really shows how far we have to go...
|
Andrea
AGA Blogger
Reged: Jun 20 2006
Posts: 106
Loc: Austin, TX
|
|
Last year after I caught my boyfriend looking at porn, it made me really face the topic of pornography and if I was okay with it. Needless to say, I was initially angry as hell, but at the same time I was really interested in what made it so appealing to him. My boyfriend isn't a bad guy - (some) guys that look at pornography aren't bad people, either. So I watched some for myself to see what the big deal was, and also to see what I felt like I was up against...
I started with current pornography, and then I watched some older pornography from earlier decades. I saw that not only have women's bodies in the pornography industry gotten more ill proportioned and unbelievable - but there's also no structure to the films, if you can even call them that these days. It's just an hour and a half of "Let's see what we can make these girls do." Whereas older films that I watched from the 70's era seemed generally more aware of what was degrading and what wasn't. G-Force, for instance - was all about the female orgasm (as exaggerated as it was). The lead character was a university student studying English literature, and another lead role was a female doctor. The film made it a point to involve the women's lives as well as their bodies through *gasp* dialogue. Another thing that I appreciated was the fact that the entire film was about this guys' endeavor to learn about female ejaculation so that he could better appreciate his girlfriend. Littered with cheesiness, yes. But so much better than the stuff that's being sold today. These were actually movies with plots, dialogue, and relationships - whereas today pornography specializes in selling women's stereotypes to men and nobody else. They know that women aren't interested in the pornography that they're selling, so they're probably thinking 'why should we consider paying respect to an audience that isn't there?'
I find myself appreciating, if not flat-out enjoying pornography that's aware of it's women audience. You might not agree with me, but I think that there *was* potential in pornography, but whatever it was has completely disintegrated with the exception of feminist-directed porn which I certainly don't see a lot of. I can really get into porn, provided it's aware that my gender doesn't automatically make me the accomplice/toy/receptacle/stupid little girl in the situation.
Porn that I like doesn't necessarily empower me any more than a movie that I enjoy would, but I can see how a woman that was particularly sexual could identify with it and maybe feel more comfortable with herself as a result.
I definitely agree with you, Amelia, that a lot of contemporary porn is offensive and disgusting. But on the same token, instead of porn being completely wiped from the record, I'm just asking for a little 'porn reform.'
- A less offensive and fake portrayal of women.
- More creativity when it comes to making pornographic films. Treat them as what they're supposed to be: Films!...dialogue, plots and character development included.
- and lastly, More adult entertainment made available by and for women - because some of us *do* enjoy sex and deserve to be able to watch something relative that isn't insanely insulting.
--------------------
"In actual fact the female function is to explore, discover, intent, solve problems, crack jokes, make music – all with love."
Valerie Solanas
|
Beppie
Reged: Jun 22 2006
Posts: 362
Loc: Sydney, Australia
|
|
I've just read a totally mindblowing book: Making Violence Sexy: Feminist Views on Pornography, edited by Diana Russell. It's also a totally harrowing read in many ways, but I am incredibly glad that I read it, and would recommend it to anyone, with the warning that it could easily be triggering for people who have experienced rape and abuse, and that even if that isn't an issue for you, make sure you have someone sympathetic nearby who can provide hugs if needed.
This book interrogates the pornography industry from a variety of perspectives: the four sections of the book include one section involving testimonials from women who are survivors of the pornography industry, one providing an overview of issues surrounding porn, an academic section that provides some really great research, and a section on feminist anti-porn activism.
I think it's important to note that the book defines porn explicitly as material that is violent or degrading towards any human being, and concentrates specifically on porn that is violent and/or degrading to females. My own definition of porn, which I talk about in my previous (typo-ridden) reply to this thread, owes a lot to Russell's definition.
Russell actually includes a large amount of the research presented in her book here. This also includes her definition of porn vs. erotica.
One of the most important things the book talks about is freedom of speech: talking about the way anti-porn feminists are often accused of attempting to restrict freedom of speech, but at the same time, their own speech is often highly restricted. For instance, it compares the proliferation of texts such as American Psycho, which describes the violent mutilation and rapes of many women, to the restriction of attempts to simply criticise and boycott that text.
Has anyone else read this book? I'd love to have some discussion about it.
|
anon
Reged: Jul 22 2006
Posts: 115
Loc: NYC
|
|
Quote:
I saw that not only have women's bodies in the pornography industry gotten more ill proportioned and unbelievable - but there's also no structure to the films, if you can even call them that these days. It's just an hour and a half of "Let's see what we can make these girls do." Whereas older films that I watched from the 70's era seemed generally more aware of what was degrading and what wasn't.
Porn that is degrading to the women involved isn't inherently bad. Some people like that aspect of kink. I know I enjoy being submissive and being degraded in bed. Some people get off on that, both male and female.
Now--I don't like that being the general rule, but there is nothing wrong with being into sadomasochism.
--------------------
I somehow doubt we'll ever be the same--there's too much poison and confusion on your face
|
Beppie
Reged: Jun 22 2006
Posts: 362
Loc: Sydney, Australia
|
|
Quote:
Porn that is degrading to the women involved isn't inherently bad.
This comment really doesn't sit well with me, BDSM context or no. I'm not terribly well read on the politics of BDSM (another topic that in itself is incredibly divisive in the feminist community), but from the little reading I have done, plus from talking to friends who engage in it, my understanding is that many BDSM practitioners believe that there is a difference between "submission" and "degradation" when consenting BDSM is practiced-- consent being operative here in forming that distinction. Now, I know that some people would argue that there is no difference between the two, which forms the basis of a feminist critique of the practice, but as I said, I haven't read deeply into the topic, so I can't elaborate much more there. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable than I could continue on that point.
However, I don't have any problem myself with equating "degradation" to "inherently bad." It is true that some people might find degrading things arousing, and I don't intend to go around telling people what they should or should not do in their private consenting bedrooms (or kitchens, laundries and lounge rooms  ), but at the same time, I do think that it is responsible for any and all of us to interrogate our own practices, including our sexual practices, from a feminist perspective (or a variety of feminist perspectives as it more often is), to make us more aware of how things like degradation can be implicitly accepted within our own lives as "normal" when it's really quite harmful. (And this is only really something that I've just started doing myself).
Beyond that, I don't think BDSM is exactly what was being discussed here as per pornography. The type of degradation that is often seen in porn-- very much as a general rule-- is the sort that posits the object of desire (usually a woman) as, well, an object rather than a human being, who is there solely for the sexual gratification of a largely male audience. There are many different ways in which this could manifest itself, but, the suggestion that a woman's body exists only to let a man do whatever he wants to it is always at least implicit and often explicit, whether the context is a BDSM scenario or not.
(Also, just editing to note that just because someone is into BDSM doesn't necessarily mean that they will be a fan of pornography-- it is possible to be critical of porn while still believing that private consenting BDSM is fine and dandy.)
I have to say, on a personal note, I'm also incredibly uncomfortable with the idea of any depiction of BDSM that doesn't make explicit use of safewords to indicate consent-- as far as I'm concerned, unless there is indication of consent, then it's depicting outright rape and/or abuse. Whether the actual rape/abuse scenario is fictitious or not, I find the suggestion that consent is irrelevant degrading, full stop.
I'm feeling quite strongly about this at the moment on another level too, because I have just read a number of accounts of women who were forced into appearing in porn, including in BDSM scenarios (which of course, when not consensual, adds numerous other abuses to the rape itself). This very clearly goes beyond issues of whether or not one's private kink-- or indeed one's private desire to view vanilla porn-- is okay.
Edited by Beppie (Fri Jul 28 2006 08:24 AM)
|
Brooke
AGA Blogger
Reged: Jun 23 2006
Posts: 466
Loc: Pennsylvania
|
|
I think its important to comment that the rape fantasy is not part of BDSM role play. BDSM is about a man or a woman, putting another man or women through a series of physical challenges to help the former person grow and learn more about themselves. Master or Dom's are supposed to be like mentors to the submissive persons. Both the master and the sub can get physical and sexual pleasure from pain or inflicting pain on others, but thats not the main point of BDSM. People also can play around without being subs or doms. Lots of people like doing wax play, bondage, biting, cutting, pulling hair, etc during sex. This is more like sex play sometimes role play, but not real BDSM. In real BDSM there is rarely any actual intercourse. What is depicted in porn films as BDSM is normally just rough sex or kinky sex, not two BDSM partners who are in a relationship.
|
Heather
Be-Musing Momma
Reged: Feb 05 2006
Posts: 721
Loc: Seattle, WA
|
|
A correction on that: some BDSM play does sometimes incorporate rape/abduction play and fantasy. Too, it's not always a BDSM "goal" to create personal growth: that'd be one approach of many. Too, some people's BDSM does involve intercourse, and then more, for plenty of people in S/M, pain is a main point.
It's a pretty big sphere with a LOT of diversity.
(I also want to caution that for various reasons, including our age group, I don't feel like detailed discussions/depictions of BDSM play are appropriate here, so let's veer back and away from this arena, okay?)
--------------------
If I had to characterize one quality as the genius of feminist thought, culture, and action, it would be the connectivity. - Robin Morgan
|
Brooke
AGA Blogger
Reged: Jun 23 2006
Posts: 466
Loc: Pennsylvania
|
|
I think there is a huge debate about this in the BDSM community. Some people consider people who do particpate in rape fantasy as "fake". Plus I think BDSM is often used as a code word for being open to various forms of sex, group sex etc and that isn't always the case. Either way there is a HUGE different between two people trying new things or being into alternative sex and a porn film. In porn the people are directed by a director who chooses such behavior, not the individuals at hand, unless its a indie/documentary style film.
Anyways, I think this whole forum is going to be hard to continue without getting into some detail about porn itself. But I think it would be more on topic if it was explained why all porn is demeaning to women, not just or only porn that is representing BDSM, rape fantasy etc etc. I'm trying to keep my two cents out of this because I want to hear what other people's views are...so anyways, for those who view porn as demeaning to women, how is it so? Also is porn demeaning not only to women in porn films, but women in general? How has porn or how could porn change our preceptions of ourselves and other women? How has it changed men's perceptions of us?
|
anon
Reged: Jul 22 2006
Posts: 115
Loc: NYC
|
|
Quote:
This comment really doesn't sit well with me, BDSM context or no. I'm not terribly well read on the politics of BDSM (another topic that in itself is incredibly divisive in the feminist community), but from the little reading I have done, plus from talking to friends who engage in it, my understanding is that many BDSM practitioners believe that there is a difference between "submission" and "degradation" when consenting BDSM is practiced-- consent being operative here in forming that distinction.
Yes. Consent is important. But degradation can occur in conjuncture with consent. Whatever you have read, some people like taking it to an extreme, and submission often involves degradation. Some people like feeling used sexually, and they are not just women--if the porn was depicting men being degraded, would you find it as offensive?
Quote:
Now, I know that some people would argue that there is no difference between the two, which forms the basis of a feminist critique of the practice, but as I said, I haven't read deeply into the topic, so I can't elaborate much more there. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable than I could continue on that point.
Like me.
Submission and degradation are different, but the two can go together. People involved in BDSM often have a safeword. Protesting is part of the game. The safeword exists so the person knows if you really want it to stop.
Feminists have no right to object to what two (or me) consenting partners do in the privacy of their own bedroom.
Quote:
However, I don't have any problem myself with equating "degradation" to "inherently bad." It is true that some people might find degrading things arousing, and I don't intend to go around telling people what they should or should not do in their private consenting bedrooms (or kitchens, laundries and lounge rooms ), but at the same time, I do think that it is responsible for any and all of us to interrogate our own practices, including our sexual practices, from a feminist perspective (or a variety of feminist perspectives as it more often is), to make us more aware of how things like degradation can be implicitly accepted within our own lives as "normal" when it's really quite harmful. (And this is only really something that I've just started doing myself).
Why?
Kinky things do not have to take place outside of the bedroom. It can be fun in bed without occuring outside of it. My boyfriend, for example, absolutely respects me. He absolutely values me. He treasures me more than anything in the world and would never do anything I was uncomfortable with. The idea repulses him.
That doesn't change the fact that we both enjoy consentual BDSM.
It isn't about feminism. Feminism has nothing to do with this, and I have no obligation to inject something that diminishes from my pleasure and enrichment because some people think it undermines feminism.
It is about me, personally, not about women. Why do I need to keep my gender in mind when I'm engaging in sexual gratification?
BDSM isn't about degrading women.
It's about submission and dominance, and women are not necessarily bottoms, and men are not necessarily tops.
Quote:
Beyond that, I don't think BDSM is exactly what was being discussed here as per pornography. The type of degradation that is often seen in porn-- very much as a general rule-- is the sort that posits the object of desire (usually a woman) as, well, an object rather than a human being, who is there solely for the sexual gratification of a largely male audience.
I agree. I didn't say that I thought that that general attitude was a good thing--simply that it isn't necessarily wrong to enjoy that kind of sex, which is what I saw being said.
Beyond that... it isn't wrong to enjoy objectification and feeling objectified inside a consensual situation.
Quote:
There are many different ways in which this could manifest itself, but, the suggestion that a woman's body exists only to let a man do whatever he wants to it is always at least implicit and often explicit, whether the context is a BDSM scenario or not.
And what about a man doing it to a man, or a woman doing it to a man, or a woman doing it to a woman?
Why is it wrong?
Quote:
(Also, just editing to note that just because someone is into BDSM doesn't necessarily mean that they will be a fan of pornography-- it is possible to be critical of porn while still believing that private consenting BDSM is fine and dandy.)
I agree. I am very into BDSM and porn does nothing for me. However, there is no reason to object to BDSM-inspired porn if you do not object to porn in general.
There is a difference between BDSM and seeing women as objects outside of the bedroom and dehumanizing them in general. The two are only loosely related, if anything.
Quote:
I'm feeling quite strongly about this at the moment on another level too, because I have just read a number of accounts of women who were forced into appearing in porn, including in BDSM scenarios (which of course, when not consensual, adds numerous other abuses to the rape itself). This very clearly goes beyond issues of whether or not one's private kink-- or indeed one's private desire to view vanilla porn-- is okay.
There's a difference between consensual pornography and forcing women into it. Forcing a woman into pornography is never okay, but BDSM is not about lack of consent.
Unconsensual sex is not okay.
BDSM is.
Don't equate the two.
--------------------
I somehow doubt we'll ever be the same--there's too much poison and confusion on your face
|
anon
Reged: Jul 22 2006
Posts: 115
Loc: NYC
|
|
Quote:
I think its important to comment that the rape fantasy is not part of BDSM role play. BDSM is about a man or a woman, putting another man or women through a series of physical challenges to help the former person grow and learn more about themselves. Master or Dom's are supposed to be like mentors to the submissive persons. Both the master and the sub can get physical and sexual pleasure from pain or inflicting pain on others, but thats not the main point of BDSM. People also can play around without being subs or doms. Lots of people like doing wax play, bondage, biting, cutting, pulling hair, etc during sex. This is more like sex play sometimes role play, but not real BDSM. In real BDSM there is rarely any actual intercourse. What is depicted in porn films as BDSM is normally just rough sex or kinky sex, not two BDSM partners who are in a relationship.
I have no idea where you're getting this from, but that's not the "point" of BDSM from anyone I have heard from.
Where are you getting this from?
Maybe that's the way a few people approach it, but that isn't the way everyone does.
As Heather said--there's a large sphere that BDSM includes, and to say that it only includes what you're saying is really incorrect.
--------------------
I somehow doubt we'll ever be the same--there's too much poison and confusion on your face
Edited by anon (Fri Jul 28 2006 06:57 PM)
|
Brooke
AGA Blogger
Reged: Jun 23 2006
Posts: 466
Loc: Pennsylvania
|
|
I have gathered this after talking to lots of people in the BDSM community, reading articles etc. I kind of ended up researching it after a ex-boyfriend suggested that I should create a profile on a BDSM website to find female partners. After I broke up with him, the site itself kind of became a joke and then a interesting topic with my next boyfriend who created a "joke" profile. I kind of wanted to know what it was really all about, because most of my friends had alot of misnomers about the whole thing, so I just started talking to people from there and other places online just on a friendship level. I think the most interesting thing I discovered was that BDSM was everywhere. They even had a monthly munch in the town I was living in (which I didn't attend). Anyways, this is really really off topic. I wasn't trying to make a huge generalization, I was just expressing what various people who label themselves as subs and doms have expressed to me.
|
Beppie
Reged: Jun 22 2006
Posts: 362
Loc: Sydney, Australia
|
|
To me, the statement "degradation is bad" is something of a tautology, though perhaps "unhealthy" might be a more sound term to use here. I am not attempting to use the term "bad" in a moral sense, at least not in the context of consenting adults. And yes, I think degradation is bad or unhealthy whether it is a man or a woman being degraded-- but I have been focusing on women because women are degraded to the greatest extent by the porn industry.
Please understand that I am not in any way trying to tell you what you should or should not do with consenting partners. All I am saying is that as feminists, it is a good idea to interrogate our own sexual practices, particularly if we find those practices to be degrading in some way (and this applies whether BDSM is a factor or not). And we do need to keep gender in mind because it pervades just about everything, and it CAN influence the way that we relate to people in all circumstances-- sexuality is no exception to this. If we attempt to ignore gender, then we run the risk of not seeing a bunch of issues that could be related to that factor.
An analogy might make my position clearer: I believe that cigarettes are inherently unhealthy. I do not believe that I have the right to tell an adult that they should or should not smoke, but I do believe that it is important to analyse the ways in which smoking can be harmful to one's health, and I would hope that anyone who makes the decision to smoke as an adult takes this into account. I am certainly not going to avoid saying "cigarettes are unhealthy" simply because some people make the choice to smoke for themselves, nor would I stop criticising cigarette advertising that promoted smoking.
In criticising the degradation of women (and anyone else who is degraded) in porn, I am criticisng the way in which a particular set of ideas about women is promoted in a set of texts. These ideas revolve around the concept that women (or anyone else made into an "object" of porn) are lesser beings than the implied male audience and that therefore, will/should always be sexually available to men, whether this consists of portrayals (staged or not) of overtly abusive situations or of portrayals in which this dynamic is established through use of language, body language, camera angles, etc. I don't think that anyone should cease to interrogate and criticise the promotion of this idea from a feminist perspective, just because some consenting people-- including women-- may personally decide to engage in some of the depicted behaviours.
Also, I want to ask you: if we can't base a critical analysis of porn and erotic texts on the degradation of women, because some women like degradation, then what, as feminists, should we use as the basis of a critical analysis of porn? What should we use to assess whether or not an erotic text is misogynist and harmful to women?
|
anon
Reged: Jul 22 2006
Posts: 115
Loc: NYC
|
|
Quote:
Also, I want to ask you: if we can't base a critical analysis of porn and erotic texts on the degradation of women, because some women like degradation, then what, as feminists, should we use as the basis of a critical analysis of porn? What should we use to assess whether or not an erotic text is misogynist and harmful to women?
The issue is not individual pornographic articles. It is about consent and personal fulfillment, and the way you act outside of the bedroom.
Kink inside of it doesn't mean disrespect outside of it.
The issue is not and, imo, is never about personal tastes. It is about the way that you treat women outside of the bedroom and about your making sure that you have full consent before doing anything. It is about making sure that the sex is consensual and fun for you both, and about making sure you both have a way to indicate when something goes wrong.
Critical analysis should never exist when discussing what people consent to in the privacy of their own homes. It exists in what people do outside of their homes, or what they push on people who do not consent.
If every man in the world enjoyed kinky sex and treated every woman with absolute respect, the world would be a good place.
It is misogynist when it advocates treating anyone with anything but respect outside the bedroom, and bypassing consent.
--------------------
I somehow doubt we'll ever be the same--there's too much poison and confusion on your face
Edited by anon (Sat Jul 29 2006 02:15 AM)
|
Beppie
Reged: Jun 22 2006
Posts: 362
Loc: Sydney, Australia
|
|
Quote:
The issue is not individual pornographic articles. It is about consent and personal fulfillment, and the way you act outside of the bedroom.
[...]
Critical analysis should never exist when discussing what people consent to in the privacy of their own homes. It exists in what people do outside of their homes, or what they push on people who do not consent.
But this discussion is about pornography, something that exists in the public sphere-- and we are talking about pornography broadly, not focusing only on porn that portrays BDSM. To me, you seem to be saying that we should not critically analyse pornography that depicts certain kinds of degradation, because those acts resemble things that you might do privately, or that we should not analyse pornography with degradation in mind because of your personal choices.
It is up to you as to whether or not you might want to apply those analyses to your own private practices. I have said that I think it is a good idea for any feminist to analyse her approach to her own sexuality (whether in relation to feminist analysis of porn or not-- it doesn't have to be in relation to feminist porn analysis, that's just one possibility), but it's not as though I want to force anyone to do any of this-- I'm just suggesting it as something that I believe is a good idea to do privately and/or with one's partner/s, regardless of whether or not BDSM is even an issue. If you don't want to do that, then that is absolutely your choice, but I don't see why that should prevent us, as feminists, from critically analysing the pornography that is available to the public, in the same way that we might analyse ANY publically available text.
This discussion is not about feminism and the private practice of BDSM (and Heather has clearly asked us not to have that discussion here and now), it is about feminist approaches to thr pornography. I have suggested that the degradation of women in pornography is a valid basis for that approach, but you seem to object to that as the basis for a feminist perspective on porn, because you do not believe that degradation is unhealthy in your private life. I have asked you for an alternative that you think works better.
So: How do you suggest that we approach pornography as feminists? What issues do you suggest that we look at when approaching misogyny in porn? To sum up Amelia's initial question: What is your take on porn? That is the discussion here.
Edited by Beppie (Sat Jul 29 2006 03:56 AM)
|
Beppie
Reged: Jun 22 2006
Posts: 362
Loc: Sydney, Australia
|
|
Quote:
so anyways, for those who view porn as demeaning to women, how is it so? Also is porn demeaning not only to women in porn films, but women in general? How has porn or how could porn change our preceptions of ourselves and other women? How has it changed men's perceptions of us?
Brooke, I just noticed that these questions of yours have totally been lost in here. I think I have addressed some of the points you bring up here in my different posts in this thread (particularly see the Diana Russell link), and I will save addressing the others until later, but I did want to highlight them again for anyone else participating here, because I think they form a great basis for continuing this discussion in a constructive way.
Also, I would add to the list: if you think that some porn is demeaning and some is not, how do you draw that distinction?
Edited by Beppie (Sat Jul 29 2006 08:37 AM)
|
anon
Reged: Jul 22 2006
Posts: 115
Loc: NYC
|
|
Quote:
So: How do you suggest that we approach pornography as feminists? What issues do you suggest that we look at when approaching misogyny in porn? To sum up Amelia's initial question: What is your take on porn? That is the discussion here.
Why is pornography an issue for feminism at all? Why do we need to approach it "as feminists"?
Amelia's question--what is your take on porn--does not have to include feminism in its response, and I'm not sure why that's the first thing people leapt to. You can be a feminist and find porn disgusting without having the two be at all connected.
There is nothing--nothing--wrong with consensual pornography. It is not a topic for feminism, and to discuss consensual pornography as an issue for feminism is ridiculous.
Pornography only becomes an issue when it becomes corrupted.
It is an issue when a person is forced into it. It is an issue when a person is underpaid. It is an issue when a person is forced to do something with which he or she is uncomfortable. It is an issue when people take their personal kinks and use them to degrade other people outside the bedroom or do not obtain full consent.
To say that porn is demeaning to women who are perfectly happy being in it is nonsense.
It's demeaning when they are not perfectly happy doing it but have no alternative.
--------------------
I somehow doubt we'll ever be the same--there's too much poison and confusion on your face
|
Heather
Be-Musing Momma
Reged: Feb 05 2006
Posts: 721
Loc: Seattle, WA
|
|
I respectfully disagree, and would please ask you to make sure when you post here that you remember this forum exists for those here to explore what are feminist issues for them, and to evaluate things via that lens. It's not okay to come into a thread and state dogmatically that something just is NOT a feminist issue. You can't define that for someone else, and in a case like this, an issue which a myriad of feminists have addressed over the years, it's even more preposterous, since very clearly many, many women, many feminist theorists HAVE felt it was a feminist issue, vert strongly.
Pornography is a feminist issue because labor issues for women -- who are the majority of the workers in porn at the highest risks, with the lowest pay -- are a feminist issue. Because some women in pronography ARE exploited, and that exploitation has in the past, and is often enough still, part of what feeds the mill of much mainstream pronography. Pronography is a feminist issue because the sexual objectification of women is a feminist issue; because when men -- the majority group who make the MOST money from porn, as well as the largest group per who purschases and uses it -- make money off of calling women misogynist names, presenting women as they'd like them to be seen, celebrating women as objects -- all of which happens in most pronography -- it's a feminist issue. Because a lot of women in pornography through history and at the present time have reported NOT being happy doing it (bear in mind porn is made internationally, and most porn actors are not Jenna Jamesons, not by a serious long shot: bear in mind the history of pornography), feeling they don't have other options. It's a feminist issue because it can, or does, or has the capacity to influence the overall treatment and view of women. And on, and on.
Amelai's question, no, does not HAVE to include feminism, but it's being addressed that way because this is a community intended to address things per feminism. If you don't want to address it via that lens, or it's not a feminist issue for you personally, obviously, that's fine: no need to participate in discussing it. But it's not okay to post in a way that blocks conversations from that perspective off at the pass, especially at a site and in a forum which exists to provide opportunites to address topics expressly per feminism.
--------------------
If I had to characterize one quality as the genius of feminist thought, culture, and action, it would be the connectivity. - Robin Morgan
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
