"Women's Lives, Men's Laws" by Catharine MacKinnon

[Senior citizen]

This is a collection of speeches by a long-time Andrea Dworkin collaborator and feminist legal pioneer. Many of the speeches were given at law schools and international legal conferences.

To paraphrase MacKinnon, a woman does not wake up in the morning and say, "Oh boy, this is my lucky day! I can decide whether I want to be a brain surgeon or a prostitute."

The fact that women still do not get equal pay for equal work is not an isolated incident or the fault of individual women.

The fact that so many women are battered andor killed by the men they live with or are married to is not an isolated incident or the fault of individual women.

Women live in a world where men wrote the laws back when women were not permitted to vote and not permitted to practice law. The men who wrote the laws did so with an eye to their own interests and did not consider the interests of women--how could they? They were not women, they did not have the life experiences of women, and they were benefitting from the subordination of women.

I was able to get this book thanks to a birthday gift certificate from my daughter. It cost $40.00. It is slow reading, the information is densely packed, and MacKinnon uses a lot of big words and doesn't talk down to anyone. Luckily, I have a big dictionary. I have only finished the first three chapters, and I've already decided that this book is worth a lot more than $40.00.

[silverweb]

1. Thank you.

This book has just moved to the top of my list.

[Senior citizen]

3. You're welcome. Enjoy! n/t

[hue]

2. Thanks for sharing!

MacKinnon seems to be putting into words what I believe and what everyone knows but dismisses. Yes, the world of women is repressed, depressed, suppressed and overall undervalued.
There is an unbelievable amount of violence--all forms--against women. Yet it seems as if only a few select cases get publicized--as if those were the only cases happening.
I will get this book! Once again thanks!
(And I'll say I think this forum also participates in the minimizing of women's issues too! For example a lady started a thread on women's issues and it quickly degenerated into a debate about pornography!)

[Senior citizen]

4. MacKinnon has a lot to say about pornography.

I'm not a legal scholar, but behind the big words I suspect it boils down to something like:

Your free speech ends where my body begins.

That makes sense to me. I remember the line about if men got pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament. Well, if pornography that depicted men as sex objects and willing victims of violence became pervasive, it would be banned in a New York minute.

I wonder if there are any grrrl zines premised on plot lines where a group of females burst in on and take revenge on pornographers, rapists, and batterers, by doing to them exactly as they have done to women. And insisting all the while that they really like it, and that they're just resisting to try to maintain a macho image. Of course this would have to happen in reality, not in zines, before guys began to get the idea.

As for females who are pro-porn, you don't have to visit a shelter for battered lesbians to know that there are women who enjoy hurting other women.

The choice of living in a world where females are not subjugated does not exist. The choice of living in a world where females are not sexualized, does not exist. Not having the choice of being equal, or of having equal dignity and respect, the "choice" not to be equal or to prefer sexualization, is not a real choice. It is comparable to my saying that I prefer breathing air to breathing water. Unless I could grow gills, I have no such choice, so I cannot freely choose.

I am pro-peace. I am anti-war. But conservatives framed the debate so that liberals had to waste time demonstrating how much we support our troops instead of openly opposing war. War is the reality. To oppose war, no matter how unjust, illegal, and useless the war, is somehow seen as subversive. Similarly, pornography is the reality. Conservatives have framed the debate as being whether or not we support free speech. The real question is whether we support equal human rights and dignity without regard to sex. In a world where little boys are introduced to sex via magazines and web sites where females are depicted as sex objects, in a world where little girls are introduced to sex via those same magazines and web sites, or by those same boys, the possibility of equality is as inconceivable as the possibility of world peace.

But like the old saying goes, a lost cause is the only one worth fighting for.

[mongo]

5. Here we go again

Of course YOUR views of what feminism is are the only correct views :sarcasm:

Your free speech ends where my body begins.

And you're right to tell other women what they can do with their bodies begins where?

That makes sense to me. I remember the line about if men got pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament. Well, if pornography that depicted men as sex objects and willing victims of violence became pervasive, it would be banned in a New York minute.

Well, if Evan Stone (a very big male porn performer who looks like Fabio) isn't being depicted as a sex object in the movies he is in, I don't know what a sex object is. What about the magazine Playgirl? Does that not portray men as sex objects? As far as men being depicted as "victims of violence", there is a very popular BDSM genre with male submissivies being beaten and tortured by female doms. It is FANTASY!

As for females who are pro-porn, you don't have to visit a shelter for battered lesbians to know that there are women who enjoy hurting other women.

You can't really believe that all women who enjoy porn want to "hurt other women", can you? I have just as many women customers as I do men.

The real question is whether we support equal human rights and dignity without regard to sex.

And that includes repsecting the rights of audlt men and women who wish to read and view adult materials in the privacy of their own homes. And the right of a person to be a sex worker if that is their choice.

[Warpy]

7. Pornography is the price we pay for a free press

or at least a theoretically free press. It has never done a thing for me, not the coldly clinical male porn nor the hearts and flowers female equivalent, the romance novel. I have friends of both sexes who do enjoy it, though, both types. I just don't share it. I consider the obligatory sex scene in most movies as a cue to go for a bathroom break or to go get another snack. It's just not a spectator sport for me.

I have no problem with animated "forbidden" porn, since these animations might provide an outlet for men who would otherwise feel compelled to act out their fantasies in real life.

I do have one caveat about porn. Adolescent males expect women to act like that. Adolescent females expect the hearts and flowers. Both are set up for a life of disappointment in the real thing if they regard porn as having anything to do with reality.

Obviously, the "forbidden" porn of torture and exploitation of real women and children needs to be stopped. No one should be hurt to supply an entertainment market, not ever. That's where the line is.

If you enjoy porn, hey, have a ball. Just don't expect me to join in the fun, and don't expect me to tolerate torture or child rape as good clean fun.

[Senior citizen]

8. If we actually had a free press, that might be a good argument.

But we don't. Porn is a multi-billion dollar industry.

Big corporations own the mainstream media.

There is no longer an FCC Fairness Doctrine.

A fat, sexist, drug addict on mainstream media can reach a few million people with his lies.

You're lucky if you reach a few thousand here.

I recommend an earlier book by MacKinnon, a small, slim volume called, "Only Words."

Freedom of speech and freedom of the press were intended to permit the powerless to speak truth to power. The general idea of free speech is that you permit others to have their say, but you don't have to listen to them or you can rebut their arguments. With the prevalence of porn today, many people are impacted by it who never looked at it at all, because others did. And it would cost billions of dollars to reply effectively to a multi-billion dollar campaign to objectify and subjugate women.

While you don't have to look at porn, and your friends may use it responsibly, some people may go from enjoying hard core porn to deciding to act it out, and they can choose their victims randomly. The rapists who specialize in older women may do it simply because they believe older women are weaker and less able to fight back, or because they've seen a lot of porn featuring older women, or for both reasons or neither one. But due to the prevalence of porn in our society ALL females are impacted, even if they never know it because the comments the guys make at school or at work are made behind their backs and without their knowledge. They are being judged on a basis they may or may not be aware of, but they are still being judged.

To paraphrase Ghandi's comment about Western civilization, I think a free press would be a great idea. I think it would be wonderful if females had as much access to the press in this country to spread information about abortion, contraception, sexually transmitted diseases, self-defense, hot-lines and shelters for battered women and children, etc., as there is access to the press for pornographers.

Right now freedom of the press means that I can watch the chimp talk on TV, or I can turn the TV off, but I cannot talk back to him or question him, or even be in the same room with him, but a gay male prostitute using a pseudonym and sometimes forgetting to sign in and out of the White House, can. Stalin and Hitler had that kind of freedom of the press. What the dictator wants is widely disseminated, and the rest is underground or forbidden. Pornography is propaganda. It disrespects women exactly the way Goebbels disrespected Jews, by portraying them as suitable victims. There were Jewish newspapers and magazines in Germany that tried to counteract the propaganda, but they did not control the media--the government did. Here, big corporations control our government, so, in effect, they ARE our government, and therefore when they control the media, it is in fact government control of media, which is the opposite of a free press. I'm sure that many in Nazi Germany felt that they still had a free press because the media was free to openly denigrate Jews, without ever understanding that Jews weren't free to effectively respond or to escape the consequences of such media saturation.

One of the things MacKinnon points out is that some other countries, like Canada, have already understood this, while we have not.

On edit: Another example of the fact that we do not have a free press, is that you are free to choose whether or not you want to get email from the Democratic Party, the Republican Party, or any other person or entity. But you are not free to choose not to get ads for porn in your email. You can delete them without opening them, mark them as spam and block the sender, set up filters with as many vulgar and obscene keywords as you can think of, but they will still arrive. There is no V-chip for email. You have no choice. I managed to avoid getting that sort of spam for a few years, but recently I registered at a bingo site, and apparently they sold my email address. So now I have to go through the whole thing again, changing my email address, fowarding my mail through several email addresses with various spam blockers and filters, and eventually they'll go away, maybe. But I do not have the freedom to say no, I don't want that type of email. That freedom simply doesn't exist. Imagine how you'd feel if you could not choose NOT to get email from the KKK, the neo-Nazis, or similar groups, and every time you checked your mail you were assaulted with subject lines that invited you to disrespect blacks and Jews. Subject lines that invite you to disrespect women are every bit as much an assault.

On second edit: There are two posts in this thread from a person or persons on my ignore list. My ignore list consists solely of people who used a thread on the occasion of Andrea Dworkin's death, to show disrespect for the deceased, or to defend the multi-billion dollar pornography industry. Here on DU I have the freedom to ignore people whose posts I consider inappropriate or offensive. I have little patience with those who are more concerned with the interests of a multi-billion dollar industry, than with the interests of those who are harmed by it, whether the industry be the defense-industrial complex, environmental destroyers and polluters, or pornographers. I'm a liberal. I care about the little guy, the weak, the vulnerable, and the powerless. The rich and powerful are doing just fine without my help.

[chicaloca]

10. and what I love...

is how so-called liberal men will defend porn to their death, even though it's no different from any of the other corporations that they wouldn't be caught dead associating with. Pornographers regularly fight tooth and nail against providing porn actors with even the most basic protections (i.e. the right to wear condoms) and their allegedly liberal defenders dutifully turn their heads when a teenage girl gets infected with HIV as a result of having two cocks rammed up her ass at one time (I'm talking about Lara Roxx, BTW). As one (male) blogger wrote, actors in the porn industry don't even enjoy as many workplace regulations as a fry cook at Burger King.

Also, I'm so bloody sick of "liberal" men's attitude that it's especially important to defend hate speech when women are the targets. Senior Citizen brings up a great point -- we can't control where or when we get these goddamn porn e-mails. There have been times when I'm at work and I get an e-mail at my work account with a subject that makes it clear that it's rape porn, and that a woman is the one being raped. As if it isn't enough that I've been through it, now I have to be reminded of it, because being raped isn't enough punishment for being born with a clitoris. How the fuck am I supposed to react to that? How the fuck am I supposed to get through the goddamn day knowing that people hate me so much that they get off on my spiritual death? How? HOW?

[Hello_Kitty]

11. Certain "liberal" men on this site

Also sound eerily similar to hardcore wingnut guys. They defend the sujugation and objectification of women based upon bogus, trumped-up evolutionary theories. Then they complain they are being picked on and "male bashed" when they try unsuccessfully to peddle their bullshit on the Women's Rights and Issues Forum. WTF?!?! They need to take their whiny, instigating asses to those woman-hating so called men's rights sites, (where I'm sure they'll get lots of sympathy and agreement) because if they keep posting on this forum they are going to keep getting smacked down.

That's all I'm sayin'

[lukasahero]

12. I'm so glad you ladies are here

Sometimes it feels like we've all given up but then I see a post like this and think - I am not alone and damn they're good. :)

[mongo]

15. Wow, a thread that's degenerated into a personal attack on me

Because I defend an industry that is attacked based upon bogus trumped-up social studies.

Who whould have thought?

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mongo]

31. I think we all know what thread you were talking about above

They defend the sujugation and objectification of women based upon bogus, trumped-up evolutionary theories.

And, FYI I do search for porn and pornography every day and post where I see fit. So, if porn is mentioned in a thread, I see it.

And I'm not so much trying to persuade those of you who think that being a feminist means telling women what they should be allowed to do with their own bodies, or that all porn is made by sex slaves, or any of the more ridiculus crap that I see posted on a regular basis, but to try to provide some balance and FACTS for others who might be reading.

FACT Most porn is NOT demeaning to women

FACT Many, MANY women enjoy adult entertainment (and not because they want to torture women or hate women as was sugested above)

FACT There have NEVER been any conclusive studies showing a causal link between pornography and violence against women. In fact, in countries where porn is more available, there is LESS violence against women. Millions of adults enjoy porn. That is why it is a 10 billion dollar industry.

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mongo]

35. First of all

I think you confirmed that you were specifically talking about me way back in post #11 - since you brought up the thread that both of us know you were talking about.

One more point, it's one thing for a pro-porn feminist to weigh in on a discussion about pornography, as several have in this one. But you are not one, your position of Self-Appointed Spokesperson for female sex industry workers not withstanding. You are a "purveyor of smut" as your own website states. In the Beauty Pornography thread you used the phrase 'self-serving' to dismiss me. That probably annoyed me the most, out of everything you said. Go back and look, you did. You implied that my position was invalid because of my personal stake in the issue. Well, you have a vested interest in pornography, therefore your argument is invalid using your own previous reasoning, right?

So, what makes one a pro-porn feminist? Do I have to be female? Because it seems like this is what you're saying - this is the women's rights forum - no men allowed. How would you know if I am a feminist or not? You have made some wild assumptions, which are not true. And yeah, I have a big stake in the porn debate. But that doesn't make me anti-feminist. Truth is there is a lot of bad information out there regarding what porn made and sold in America is and isn't.

And to rehash bad memories, all I started to say in the Beuaty Pornography thread was that maybe biology had something to do with the images of beauty we see in our culture, as opposed to the "it's all an atempt by men to keep us down", which was the gestalt of the thread at the time. As far as the self-serving commment, it was just an observation - your arguments were invalid because you were calling Desmond Morris "junk science", and implying that all standards of beauty are based in tyranny.

Your post:
Biology my ass
Our pre-historic genetic forebears did not have boobjobs, hair dye, teeth-whiteners, or the medium of photography to mass-disseminate airbrushed images of 6 foot tall 115lb. freaks to the world.

Nowadays, anytime there is a discussion of the tyranny of beauty standards someone has to weigh in with Discovery Channel bullshit junk science "but..but...we guys are PROGRAMMED to be that way! I'm not just a shallow idiot because I allow myself to be brainwashed by the media - I'm a shallow idiot because of my genes!!!"

If those evolutionary theories about mate selection and how they factor into what we consider attractive today are true, then why don't a lot more people look like what we consider ideal? Many, many young women don't resemble the image of female youth you described in any way. Wouldn't those gals with the bee-stung lips and 'good' waist-to-hip ratio and the guys with the wide shoulders and symmetrical faces have been chosen far more often to breed, leaving their less aesthetically gifted brothers and sisters to die out? Not from what I'm seeing in most of the people around me. I see all types of faces and shapes out there so obviously people aren't choosing their mates based on Morris' theories.

And my reply:
They why is it that when we are aroused, the lips become swelled, our eyes open wider, we smile, our body language causes us to stand up straighter, etc.?

Our less aesthetically gifted brothers and sisters mated with each other. The most ideal people still do have the most chance to mate - with the widest range of partners.

To follow your assumption: If chickens have a pecking order than why hasn't evolution caused ALL chickens to be at the top of the pecking order, and the lower chickens in the flock died out?

I never said that culture doesn't play a part in all this. If we were a perpetually starving society, then I suppose that women that have more fat would have more chances to breed.

But to decide that the images of beauty in our culture is all some attempt to keep women down, or whatever you're asserting, is a naive and self-serving position.

Well, I hope that we're done rehashing that old argument!

[Hello_Kitty]

36. Your post in that thread was flamebait as was your post in this one.

And you know it.

And now for some Fun with Paraphrasing: To decide that feminist criticism of porn is an attempt to keep porn purveyors or performers down, or whatever it is you're asserting, is a naive and self-serving position.

See how easy it is?

[mongo]

37. What I'm asserting

is that adult entertainment is just that. Simply entertainment.

Now here is some flame bait from this thread:

As for females who are pro-porn, you don't have to visit a shelter for battered lesbians to know that there are women who enjoy hurting other women.
-----------------------------------
While you don't have to look at porn, and your friends may use it responsibly, some people may go from enjoying hard core porn to deciding to act it out, and they can choose their victims randomly.
-----------------------------------
On second edit: There are two posts in this thread from a person or persons on my ignore list. My ignore list consists solely of people who used a thread on the occasion of Andrea Dworkin's death, to show disrespect for the deceased, or to defend the multi-billion dollar pornography industry. Here on DU I have the freedom to ignore people whose posts I consider inappropriate or offensive. I have little patience with those who are more concerned with the interests of a multi-billion dollar industry, than with the interests of those who are harmed by it, whether the industry be the defense-industrial complex, environmental destroyers and polluters, or pornographers.
------------------------------------
is how so-called liberal men will defend porn to their death, even though it's no different from any of the other corporations that they wouldn't be caught dead associating with. Pornographers regularly fight tooth and nail against providing porn actors with even the most basic protections (i.e. the right to wear condoms) and their allegedly liberal defenders dutifully turn their heads when a teenage girl gets infected with HIV as a result of having two cocks rammed up her ass at one time (I'm talking about Lara Roxx, BTW). As one (male) blogger wrote, actors in the porn industry don't even enjoy as many workplace regulations as a fry cook at Burger King.
-------------------------------------
Also, I'm so bloody sick of "liberal" men's attitude that it's especially important to defend hate speech when women are the targets.


Characterizing porn as "hate speech", women who like it as women batterers, and comparing the adult entertainment industry to the defense industry or polluters - when there is NO proof that porn "harms" ANYONE, and subtly suggesting that porn producers don't care if there performers get aids when there is a very good testing system in place, and the HIV rate in the (straight) industry is LOWER than the general population is, IMO flame bait.

[chicaloca]

40. LOL!

"FACT Most porn is NOT demeaning to women

FACT Many, MANY women enjoy adult entertainment (and not because they want to torture women or hate women as was sugested above) "

LOL! Does anybody else find these absolutely unproveable facts to be beyond hilarious? I suppose Mongo thinks that because he's a man, he automatically gets to decide exactly what the definition of "demeaning" is, and what "many" is. (Or perhaps he just don't understand the meaning of the word "fact.")

Oh, Mongo. You slay me. Sometimes I think you're secretly in the business of turning people against porn. Thanks for the best laugh I've had all day.

[mongo]

46. Well if you feel that ANY filming of a consentual sexual act

is demeaning, then I can't help you. But if watching a film of a women enjoying sex and NOT being humilitated or forced, etc - is NOT demeaning, then yes MOST porn is not demeaning, because MOST fits this catagory.

Are you denying that many women enjoy adult entertainment? I have many couples who shop together for movies. I even have some ladies whose man is embarased to come into the store (it's usualy the other way around) - and they come in to pick up the movies.

How would you know what MOST porn is anyway? Do you read the trade mags every month? Do you have 1700 adult movies sitting around your house? Do you know what the biggest companies are and the kinds of entertainment they produce? How many adult films have you watched?

What's funny is the stuff that gets validated in this women's rights forum, that would be heavily challenged if it was in GD.

[chicaloca]

68. my point....

which you completely missed, as usual, is that the word "demeaning" cannot be scientifically measured, and therefore a statement using that word cannot be verified as FACT. If you had said "Well, I don't think most porn is demeaning to women," then I wouldn't be laughing so hard, if at all.

And as for your assumption that I view ANY filming of a consensual sexual act as degrading, all I can do is laugh at that as well -- you're using the usual pro-porn tactic of trying to paint anyone who criticizes the industry as anti-sex. Well, here's a news flash, smart guy: I spent a goddamn year studying in Amsterdam. I've repeatedly been to the Sex Museum and Erotic Museum there, I visited the Red Light District on a regular basis, I took classes on Foucault, prostitution, sexuality, etc. I had teachers who were former prostitutes, and some of my best friends worked for the Rode Draad (Red Thread), the prostitutes' union in Holland. I can speak Dutch with the best of them, which means I've read some famous sex studies in their original language. I also enjoy sex more than most men I know, but that didn't start happening until I stopped trying to act like the women in porn movies and actually focused on getting some pleasure for myself rather than always giving it. (Honestly, how often do you see women in porn receiving oral sex compared with men? And even in the rare instances when it is shown, which is usually in lesbian porn marketed to straight men, they're not even doing it right -- they use tongue flicks instead of a longer, more circular motion. For fuck's sake. It's not rocket science, people!)

And also, more for this thread's viewers than for Mongo, who has no intention of listening or changing his views, here are some recaps of some interesting porn studies:

http://www.dianarussell.com/pornsrole.html

These were the parts that I found most interesting:

And the Rev. Susan Wilhem testified in support of an anti-pornography ordinance in New York City that, "I came across a picture of a position my ex-husband had insisted we try. When we did, I hemorrhaged for three days. My bruised cervix is still a problem after ten years.... We should have some place to go to complain about how pornography is part of making our husbands into rapists" (Russell, 1993a).

And:

(4) Creating an appetite for increasingly stronger material

Dolf Zillmann and Jennings Bryant have studied the effects of what they refer to as "massive exposure" to pornography (1984). (In fact, it was not particularly massive: 4 hours and 48 minutes per week over a period of six weeks.) These researchers, unlike Malamuth and Donnerstein, focus on trying to ascertain the effects of non-violent pornography and, in the study to be described, they use a sample drawn from a non-student adult population.

Male subjects in the massive exposure condition saw 36 non-violent pornographic films, six per session per week; male subjects in the intermediate condition saw 18 such movies, three per session per week. Male subjects in the control group saw 36 non-pornographic movies. Various measures were taken after one week, two weeks, and three weeks or exposure, including the kind of materials that the subjects were most interested in viewing.

Zillmann and Bryant found that a desire for stronger material was fostered in their subjects. "Consumers graduate from common to less common forms of pornography," Zillman maintains, that is, to more violent and more degrading materials (1984, p. 127). Zillmann suggests this may be "because familiar material becomes unexciting as a result of habituation" (1984, p.127).

According to Zillmann and Bryant's research, then, pornography can transform a male who was not previously interested in the more abusive types of pornography, into one who is turned on by such material. This is consistent with Malamuth's findings (described on p. 53) that males who did not previously find rape sexually arousing, generate such fantasies after being exposed to a typical example of violent pornography.

This article on Houghton-Mifflin's Web site also cites some interesting studies:
http://college.hmco.com/history/readerscomp/women/html/wh_029600_pornography.htm

(I wonder how many people here know that the word "pornography" literally means the depiction of women's sexual enslavement.)

Now, I know there are studies that conflict with these, but I think one conclusion we can all draw is that there really isn't enough evidence to just assume that porn is completely harmless, and that it is reasonable to expect the industry to be a LOT more responsible in its treatment of women. And I don't understand why so many people are opposed to that.

[smirkymonkey]

77. Thank you for your great post!

[mongo]

51. And a little more info

since it came out today:

Quarter of US men view porn at work
Men look more often, women look more effectively
Iain Thomson, vnunet.com 11 May 2005
ADVERTISEMENT
Click Here!

Nearly a quarter of men view pornography in the workplace, according to a newly published poll by Harris Interactive.

Of the 500 people surveyed, just under a quarter of men admitted to looking at pornography at work, compared to 12 per cent of women. But only 17 per cent of men said that they 'intentionally' watched porn, compared to 11 per cent of women.

more http://www.vnunet.com/news/1162955

So, if 11% are surfing for adult entertainment at work, can we agree that probably many more are enjoying it at home on DVD, or the internet, or in Playgirl, or the many, many digest magazines?

What percentage of women does it have to be to be many?

[chicaloca]

66. One more rebuttal...

since I just happened upon this today. Your assertion that countries where porn is more available have less violence against women is based on a study by Berl Kutchinsky, who claimed that the number of reported sex crimes dropped after legalization of pornography. But in his study, it turned out that his definition of rape included some lesser sex crimes as well as homosexuality, which police stopped reporting after legalization. So obviously, those rates would have gone down. But actual RAPES increased in number after legalization of porn in Denmark.

Also, when South Australia liberalized its porn laws in the 60s and 70s and Queensland didn't, Queensland saw no increase in sex crimes, while South Australia had a sixfold increase.

Furthermore, your asserion assumes that wide availability of porn is the ONLY factor in preventing violence against women. But as we saw in this country in the 70s, just as the women's movement got big, so did the porn industry, possibly as a counter-response to women's increased rights. (Kind of like what we see today -- as women have made gains in the workplace, conservatives try to restrict our rights elsewhere.) I would tend to hold the women's rights movement more responsible for ending rape than magazines like Hustler and Playboy, which regularly run comics ridiculing rape and rape victims.

[smirkymonkey]

76. You aren't a woman, therefore you have no idea how porn actually

affects real women. You list your various points as "facts" when they are nothing more than you biased, one-sided opinion.

[mongo]

81. And you are painting all women with a broad brush

which is your biased, one-sided opinion.

Many women enjoy adult entertainment. That is simply a fact. Many more still do not have an issue with men looking at porn.

They do not see sex as some weapon that has to be controlled.

On edit - including many female DU'ers http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=105&topic_id=4225488

[Scout]

72. if you feel you are being attacked, perhaps you should alert

the moderators, rather than griping about it in a post

:shrug:

[lukasahero]

13. I'm so sorry chicaloca

I love reading your posts and I'm glad you're here. I'm sorry you live in a world that "gets off on your spiritual death". That is what it's like, isn't it? I'm also more sorry that few will listen and understand and that even this is not a safe place for you.

Just wanted to let you know that.

[Hello_Kitty]

14. Ditto n/t.

[chicaloca]

43. wow, thanks

Both your messages mean a lot to me. Really. :hug:

[mongo]

16. What I love

is how certain people take their personal distaste for adult entertainment and turn it into an argument for censorship - by labeling it "hate speech".

And who categorize a whole industry by the worst of it's products. It is no different than saying that if you don't like "the Texas chainsaw massacre" - then all Hollywood movies should be banned.

As far as Lara Roxx, that was the first HIV outbreak in 10 years. They have a very good testing system in place. Performers in (straight)Adult have a LOWER rate of HIV infection than the general population. The outbreak affected 3 people total, and was caused by a us performer working in Brazil, where he came in contact with a Brazilian performer with a forged paper-based health certificate (the system in the US is call-in). It shut down the entire industry for 60 days.

As far as condom use, Wicked (the #2 us company) requires condom use in all of it's movies.

Also, I'm so bloody sick of "liberal" men's attitude that it's especially important to defend hate speech when women are the targets. Senior Citizen brings up a great point -- we can't control where or when we get these goddamn porn e-mails. There have been times when I'm at work and I get an e-mail at my work account with a subject that makes it clear that it's rape porn, and that a woman is the one being raped. As if it isn't enough that I've been through it, now I have to be reminded of it, because being raped isn't enough punishment for being born with a clitoris. How the fuck am I supposed to react to that? How the fuck am I supposed to get through the goddamn day knowing that people hate me so much that they get off on my spiritual death? How? HOW?

First, I'm really, really sorry you were raped. And spam in general is a problem. But you're taking your anger out on an industry in whole because of a small portion of it brings bad memories. Do you also condemn the news industry because they report on rapes that have occurred? How about a life-time movie that deals with the subject?

I do have some compassion for what you are going through, and I am not in favor of spam, porn or otherwise. I have some PTSD issues with medical procedures and I've never seen a nurse or Dr. that can minimize my issues fast enough.

[chicaloca]

42. ummm....

"But you're taking your anger out on an industry in whole because of a small portion of it brings bad memories. Do you also condemn the news industry because they report on rapes that have occurred? How about a life-time movie that deals with the subject?"

OK, so a news story educating people about date rape is the same as an on-camera rape made specifically to titillate people? What fucking planet are you from? I happen to be a journalist, and I find your argument to be repulsive and incredibly ignorant. We as journalists report on rapes because we want people to know if there's a serial rapist out there, if date rapes are becoming a huge problem on campus, and so forth, and will offer tips on how to protect yourself from being raped and where to go for help if it does happen. We report on it to EDUCATE people, to help them (although I will admit that certain media outlets, especially broadcast news, sensationalize it. But I'm in the newspaper industry.) Quite frankly, I don't think it HELPS anybody to have rape porn, and I REALLY doubt that the people who produce rape porn are trying to educate people on rape and help survivors, especially when some of the worst of it shows ACTUAL rapes. Your argument, I'm hoping unintentionally, says that reporting on rape is the same as actually committing one, videotaping it and disseminating it for people's pleasure. As with many arguments of this type, I'm guessing you didn't realize the implications when you made it, but I DO think it says something about our subconscious views on rape. It's like when there were riots on my college's campus, and the student newspaper and broadcast students who videotaped the riots refused to turn over the photos and footage they'd taken to police. (The argument for turning it over being that it would help the cops catch people who committed a lot of vandalism.) In response, some guy wrote in to the paper condemning their choice to not turn over the photos. He asked it they would would refuse to turn over photos they had of a rape that would help incriminate the rapist. Essentially, he was saying that setting a car on fire is just as bad as raping someone. I'm guessing he doesn't outrightly think that, but it's a good example of how we trivialize and completely misunderstand rape in our society, even when we don't mean to.

I'm also thinking that you're perhaps thinking I would be just as offended by rape porn as by an informational article on rape because both trigger me. Well, what happened to me doesn't make me stupid. Although I might be triggered by a report on rape, I can see the difference in what each is trying to do and the newspaper report won't make me feel even a millionth as bad. I understand and appreciate the newspaper articles, and I usually read them. If they're well done, I feel better. If not, I write a letter to the reporter or editor (not for publication, since I'm in the industry myself) because I know that wasn't their intention. Reporters want to do their best on this stuff and are receptive to what I have to say, so even an initially bad situation can turn into a good one through their willingness to listen. If I see an article on rape in a paper and I'm not up to dealing with it on a given day, I'll just turn the page. But I know that the article, even if it's poorly done, does not exist solely to humiliate me and celebrate something that has nearly, and might still someday, take my life. And that's why I can simply ignore a newspaper article on rape without a great deal of distress, but even though I delete rape porn immediately, it will stay with me, not for days or weeks or months, but forever.

Ugh. Sometimes I hate the world. Anyhow, I'm off to hibernate now -- I'll probably chat with y'all again in a few weeks or months or something, unless I get a little less busy and feel particularly strong on a given day.

Oh, and before I go, I'd like to say to all the people here who say people with my views are just "playing the victim," as has been put forth in this thread: FUCK YOU. I used to be pro-porn and anti-feminist, just like a lot of you, but that was before somebody I trusted and loved decided to fuck me without my permission. If you doubt me, you can look up just about anything I posted before 2002. And I think it's absolutely DISGUSTING that you all throw the term "victim" around so casually, condemning anybody who has what your holier-than-thou asses deem a "victim mentality." I have two responses to that: First of all, it's people like you who make it difficult for survivors of any type of trauma to get better, because of course it's the worst thing in the world to be a victim, there's obviously something wrong with you, and hell, even if something bad did happen to you, you should just buck up and get over it.

Secondly, I don't even prefer the fucking term "victim". None of you have any idea, ANY, of how much it takes for me to come here and face you all, or of how much it can take for me to get through the day. Sometimes I wonder how many of you would be able to do it. I work 50 hours a week and go to school part time, and all of my co-workers think I'm one of the happiest, most together people they know, even though most of the time I feel like I'm crumbling inside. I put on that facade because I don't want anybody to characterize me as a victim, because I don't want to fit that awful stereotype that so many anti-feminists here seem to think is rampant. As far as I'm concerned, I'm a fucking SURVIVOR. I didn't get into feminism because I wanted to feel persecuted. I got into it because I don't want anybody else to go through what I went through, and because the sooner women are no longer objectified, the sooner people understand rape and stop glorifying it, the sooner I'll be able to heal. I find it really too bad that so many people here have no intention of listening to the people who are most hurt by misogyny, that so many people choose not to notice that women are more likely to be the ones against porn, objectification, rigid beauty standards, etc. It's because it affects US. That's why, when I go to state legislature meetings, the people who give testimony about high crime in various neighborhoods are likely to be people FROM THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS. Not from low-crime areas. Because they know what the hell they're talking about; they've been there, it's their life. Yet so many people here like to tell women that it's all in our heads, there's nothing to worry about, we're just silly and crazy, etc. Well, how the fuck would you know how objectification affects women if you're not a woman? How dare you tell me how I should feel about rape porn if it hasn't happened to you? And honestly, the most difficult part about getting over rape is not getting over the act itself -- it's living with people's attitudes about rape, and about women and sexuality. Attitudes like the shit that's all over DU. Like the shit that's all over this thread, that's even inescapable on a women's rights forum.

[mongo]

49. I'm sorry to have hurt you.

This is obviously VERY personal to you.

But I am going to make 2 points

1. Rape porn is a small, small insignifigant portion of the porn market. In 3 years and thousands of movies, I have only seen one come through the store - and it didn't go out on the shelves. Due to my "discount porn" business model, I don't order anything by title. I get a box of 100 X from some company when they drop it from their catalog. I have had many more she-male enema porn (which doesn-t get put out either), come through here than anything that shows non-consentual sex.

2. There are no movies being sold in us adult stores of actual rapes. EVER. There are too many safegaurds in place, and the industry is being watched too closely. Look at R. Kelly - and his underage performer. When something like that happens, it is ALWAYS found out - and none of the companies want to take that chance.

[chicaloca]

69. Well, I appreciate that.

But that still doesn't change the fact that even mainstream porn focuses more on men's sexual pleasure than women's, and that exposure to typical porn has, in some studies, been shown to create a demand for harder stuff that includes violence. And that doesn't change the fact that the industry doesn't afford basic safety protections to its workers, and that a fair amount of porn is racist (i.e., black women are depicted as animals, Asian women in torture scenarios, black men as completely sexually insatiable and wiling to fuck anything, etc.)

And unfortunately, from what I've seen in places such as Sex World in downtown Minneapolis and various sex shops in Amsterdam, not all vendors are as cautious about what they stock. I also remember going to the Erotic Museum in Amsterdam (at least I think it was that one and not the Sex Museum) and seeing a cartoon porn played over and over in which some Latino guy fucked some girl so hard that his penis was thrusting in and out of her mouth, and when he came, she was flattened on the ceiling by his ejaculate. Kinda puts a damper on an otherwise interesting museum when that shit is playing in the background.

[femrap]

75. So is there a way to block posts from this businessman?

Please tell me how....

Can you imagine what it would be like to make one's living in this way? Karma sure is nasty.

[mongo]

17. Well isn't that special....

On second edit: There are two posts in this thread from a person or persons on my ignore list. My ignore list consists solely of people who used a thread on the occasion of Andrea Dworkin's death, to show disrespect for the deceased, or to defend the multi-billion dollar pornography industry. Here on DU I have the freedom to ignore people whose posts I consider inappropriate or offensive. I have little patience with those who are more concerned with the interests of a multi-billion dollar industry, than with the interests of those who are harmed by it, whether the industry be the defense-industrial complex, environmental destroyers and polluters, or pornographers. I'm a liberal. I care about the little guy, the weak, the vulnerable, and the powerless. The rich and powerful are doing just fine without my help.


Putting anyone on ignore who doesn't share your views certainly helps keep you from hearing opposing arguments, doesn't it? It is just like the right wing telling it's followers to stay away from the "liberal media". And why they only watch FOX news.

And if I am so rich and powerful, how come my wife and I have been working 50-80 hours/week for less than minimum wage and no health insurance?

Personally, I have NO people on my ignore list. I didn't even alert on the poster further down in this thread who basically called me a freeper.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hello_Kitty]

45. Having my posts deleted proves my point about you.

No worries though. I've learned my lesson and will no longer feed the trolls.

[mongo]

47. Wasn't me

Never alerted on anyone in this thread.

Kinda funny though.

[Hello_Kitty]

48. I take it back then. n/t

[femrap]

74. Great post.....just discovered this thread.

Thank you for this discussion. You nailed the argument....I, too, am a fighter for the Underdog.

I always am amazed by Dem/Liberal/Progressive/Leftie folks who scream at the top of their lungs about their dear porn and how it is their unalienable right to have it at all times...and they want no limits to it either....Snuff, humiliation, degradation, violence.....hey...'It's my right to free speech!'

Is that really what the 1st Amendment is about....? The right to degrade women as objects?

I am sorry to hear that posters on DU, a liberal/progressive site, stooped to degrading the memory of the dead. That's some bad ass Karma, huh?

[chickenscratching]

20. im curious

i don't understand your complaint here in regards to little kids seeing porn on the internet.
i think the real problem doesn't lie within the medium (the internet), it lies in the way our society values sex.
we don't value sexuality, sexuality is not embraced. which is truly unfortunate.

[redqueen]

21. Being pro-porn does not mean I like to hurt other women.

Why isn't anyone complaining about all the viagra and penis enlargement spam?

Think of what that does to the male psyche?

Guess we're lucky all men are big and tough and strong and can think for themselves... not like all these delicate flower women, who need to be protected.

*sigh*

[chicaloca]

38. FWIW, I don't like those ads, either

I agree with you that they hurt men's psyches. But to equate rape with erectile dysfunction or having a small penis is more than a little troubling. I realize that you probably didn't mean it that way, but it's something to think about.

(I'm referring here to the rape porn ads that I get in my inbox, BTW.)

[redqueen]

41. Yes, I actually thought of that last night...

In fact I did not mean to attempt to equate them, only to point out that there are intrusive e-mails which insult both sexes... obviously your situation is much more severe.

[Marnieworld]

53. Clap! Clap! Clap! Clap! Clap! Clap! Clap! Clap!

:woohoo:

[politicat]

56. Cheers for redqueen

Stated beautifully.

I'm not anti-porn - it supports a very good friend of mine who is HIV positive and cannot otherwise work (he's a photographer.) It gives him a livelihood that keeps him sane and eating and on his meds; without it, he would have died several years ago, and he's worth keeping on the planet and breathing.

I refuse to be protected by a paternalistic government telling me what is okay to put in my head. I may not like bondage film, National Vanguard footage, Promise Keeper Literature, Million Man March propaganda, NRA press releases or the Book of Mormon spam I've been getting recently, but I realize they have a right to put it out and I have a right to view or not as I please. But I choose. Period. My body, my brain, my eyes, my life. I choose. I am an adult. I make the decisions here, not someone else, and definitely not some patriarchical government telling me what makes the world safe for me.

While I find most porn silly (like anyone could possibly perform that act with those fake nails on....) I also find anime silly. So....

[lukasahero]

9. "For example a lady started a thread on women's issues and it quickly..."

"degenerated into a debate about pornography!)"

Really? Who would have imagined?

:sarcasm:

I assume you weren't talking about this one but well, case in point, huh?

[mongo]

6. After you're done with the MacKinnon book

why don't you read "Defending Pornography" by Nadine Strossen or "Not in Front of the Children" by Marjorie Reams. Both have been former heads of the ACLU.

The Reams book in particular goes into methodology of the studies that find a link between porn and violence against women. It may give you a more balanced viewpoint.

[mongo]

18. Got the author wrong - it was Marjorie Heins.

[LoZoccolo]

19. I think that any feminist writer...

...that cannot prove that their broad-brushes are true about every single man in the country beyond a shadow of doubt in a court of law, should be put in jail for hate speech.

[Nikia]

25. That is ridiculous

For the past thousands of years, male authors have made broad brush statements about the inferiority of women and continue to do so. Some anti feminist women do this also. Women are a minority, not in numbers but in power. Some feminist authors who make broad brush statements do so to sound more powerful. It lessens the power of your message to continuously say, we know that not all men are like this and such. Some also refer to men when they mean men in power or the majority of men. For example, it might be correct to say that men did not allow women to vote in the U.S. until the 20 th century even though some men would have been supportive of women voting from the beginning. I think that broad brush statements also encourage men to challenge other men. For example, if you are offended by a feminist saying that men use sexual jokes against women to put women down, don't laugh along with your friends who tell such jokes.
I don't think that feminist writers go too far against men when viewed as I have stated. I don't think black writers who write about whites being racist are spreading hate speech either for the same reason.

[LoZoccolo]

28. So?

It's still hate speech, and actually may have further reach than anything men have ever said broad-brush in history. If you take the number of people who have ever lived, and subtract the number of people alive today from that number, you will find that there are more people alive today than the rest of human history. Therefore, the feminist hate speech has potentially more effect than the rest of that male broad-brush stuff anyways.

You are actually saying that these feminists are being manipulative, which shouldn't help the cause of feminism any, I should think.

I'm not completely serious about this, but I can't take this pornography argument seriously either.

[Nikia]

29. If what you define as hate speech is hate speech

Formal hate speech against women still is strong and still is more mainstream then feminism. Hate speech against women is practiced more by men than women in informal situations, whether it bar or locker room talk or it is domestic abuse. Why shouldn't feminists be maninuplative? Don't you think that Rush Limbaugh and others who discredit feminists are being manipulative? And is that really the case anyway? Is that sort of like calling feminists whiny?
As far as pornography goes, it seems like you take the right to view it very seriously and this is what angers you most about feminists, who happen to be anti porn. Is that all you hear? Do you think that your right to view porn is seriously being threatened? Why can't women seriously discuss this issue as to what porn? Can't blacks seriously talk about black roles that might be negative to how non blacks views them? Men can even talk about how men often play bufoons in sitcoms. Your porn is safe. People in your life will come to their own conclusions about it. If they think any less of you, it is not necessarily the work of feminists.

[LoZoccolo]

30. A response.

Hate speech against women is practiced more by men than women in informal situations, whether it bar or locker room talk or it is domestic abuse.

You don't know this and it doesn't matter. Two wrongs don't make...

Why shouldn't feminists be maninuplative?

Because they lose their credibility. Everyone knows when they're doing that.

Don't you think that Rush Limbaugh and others who discredit feminists are being manipulative?

Yes.

As far as pornography goes, it seems like you take the right to view it very seriously and this is what angers you most about feminists, who happen to be anti porn.

No it isn't.

[mongo]

32. This is why I take this seriously

Do you think that your right to view porn is seriously being threatened?


Justice Department Announces Formation of Obscenity Task Force
By: Mark Kernes
Posted: 3:30 pm PDT 5-6-2005

WASHINGTON - Assistant Attorney General Christopher A. Wray announced Thursday that the Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is establishing an Obscenity Prosecution Task Force dedicated exclusively to the investigation and prosecution of obscenity cases.

<snip>

Taylor, who was rehired by the DOJ in February of last year, is well-known as a former DOJ prosecutor in the National Obscenity Enforcement Unit, the predecessor to CEOS, and later, as President of the National Coalition for the Protection of Children and Families. He has been continually active in efforts to suppress sexual speech, and politically aware members of the adult industry have been speculating for the past year as to what role Taylor would play in obscenity prosecution.

It is clear from the DOJ's statement that the Obscenity Prosecution Task Force will play the key Justice Department role in obscenity prosecution, since it has been given the power to draw on the expertise of several other DOJ divisions, including the Organized Crime and Racketeering Section, the Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section, the Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section, and CEOS’s High-Tech Investigative Unit.

<snip>

Another reason for the creation of the Task Force at this time may be to attempt to create as many prosecutions as possible before the government's appeal in the case of United States v. Extreme Associates is heard by the Third Circuit. The opinion of U.S. District Court Judge Gary Lancaster dismissing the indictments in that case created shockwaves throughout the government, and led to a flurry of activity, including a Senate subcommittee hearing directed at finding ways around Judge Lancaster's decision, whose well-researched reasoning will be difficult to refute at higher judicial levels.

more http://www.avn.com/index.php?Primary_Navigation=Articles&Action=View_Article&Content_ID=226106

I can be arrested for any of my 1700 movies under today's laws. I take the current climate and the current administration VERY seriously. My right to sell porn has NEVER been "safe", and the false arguments, broad generalizations, bad and misquoted studies only add to the purpose of eliminating adult entertainment from our society.

[Marnieworld]

54. I think they were being fascetious

Just my guess.

[lukasahero]

34. Excellent idea!

And of course, since we live in a perfectly just and equitable society, I assume you would make this law fair and equal across gender, race and party lines.

"Any" female, male, black, white, latino, asian, straight, gay, parent, non-parent, urbanite, suburbanite, Jew, Christian, Muslim, Buddist, aethiest, Democrat, Republican, liberal, conservative, Southern, Northern "writer that cannot prove that their broad-brushes are true about every single" person "in" that group "beyond a shadow of doubt in a court of law, should be put in jail for hate speech."

Fair is fair after all.

Oh yeah /:sarcasm:

[Marnieworld]

22. FWIW here's my take on the issue:

I am female and 33.
I like sex. I like Men and I don't consider them my enemy.
I have seen a bunch of porn. Porn on tapes and DVDs. Porn on websites. Porn downloaded from newsgroups. Pay-per-view porn. Some stuff on late night HBO and cinemax has gotten a bunch more graphic since I was a kid and sneaking peeks at those "Emmanuel" movies. I have NEVER EVER seen porn that was violent towards women. No rape fantasies. No bondage. No clear-cut child molestation plots (I say clear-cut because there's a big difference between an 18 or 19 year old playing the school girl fantasy and an obvious little girl fetish which I've never encountered.) I wouldn't even know how to find it.

I have an awareness that there are markets for these types of movies but I havent seen them as THE PREVALENT form of pornography. The main stream porn "actresses" are very powerful and financially successful, hardly victims. For an entire industry to be classified based on a genre that is NOT the norm is like saying all Christians are Fristians and getting away with it. It's like comparing actual snuff films with the glamorized violence pervasive through pop culture. Because snuff films actually have victims should we do away with all creative expressions of the consquences of violence?

Pornography is the selling of fantasy. Naked people get together and act out stories designed to titilate the viewer. That's all. If anyone involved of any age or gender is forced to participate against their will then it is a crime that should be prosecuted. If everyone, especially the women, chooses to be there than shouldn't they be considered responsible for themselves?

Either women are equal or they are victims. You can't be both. If they are equal, as they should be, then aren't we empowered enough to be the ones choosing to be in porn? Can anyone ever get past what they THOUGHT porn was in the 70s to the reality it is today?

What is wrong with celebrating physical beauty and sexuality anyway? How is it subjugating women just to film them having sex with their consent? If all porn is is fantasy then really the issue is controlling thoughts. Some thoughts are acceptable to them and some are unacceptable. Since thoughts and speech are the same then how can this be anything other than free speech plus capitalism? God Bless America?

[plcdude]

26. we said

I agree with what you have written. You have offered a more balanced and objective view. I see porn all the time and enjoy it. I do not see violent, or child porn because I do not want to and it is not available unless you specifically want to get into it. Which 95% of those who enjoy adult entertainment do not want to go there and are offended at it. Thanks for your contribution.

[chicaloca]

67. and...

I think everybody can agree that Playboy, Penthouse and Hustler are pretty mainstream. Yet here's a sampling of some cartoons they've run:

http://www.oneangrygirl.net/wackyrape.html

Yeah...so, pornographers don't think rape is funny or promote it. Right. I'll just repeat that over and over and march on like a brainwashed drone. (Kind of like...ooooh....like a CONSERVATIVE!)

[chicaloca]

39. article

I'm guessing you haven't seen a lot of gonzo porn, which is the fastest-growing genre of porn. Here's a description of one gonzo movie from an article by Robert Jensen (I can almost guarantee it will trigger rape/sexual assault survivors, so be in a safe place if you want to read this.)

Let me describe one kind of sex that I’m afraid of. This is a scene from the film “Gag Factor #10” released by J.M. Productions, which boasts that it pushes the envelope in pornography. The company website brags that this gag series, which is going on #17 as of March 2005, offers “The best throatfucking ever lensed.” If you want a sample, the website has pictures and short video clips, under the heading “this week’s victim,” with the promise “new whores degraded every Wednesday.” <>

In one of the 10 scenes from “Gag Factor #10,” released in 2002, a nagging wife is haranguing her husband and asking why he is so lazy. “Why can’t you do anything?” she asks, going on to insult his intelligence and criticize him because he doesn’t read. She asks him if he even can read, and then suggests Henry Miller, from which she starts to read. The camera focuses on her mouth as she reads, then cuts to his eyes, which look increasingly angry. The film cuts to the woman on her knees as he yells, “Shut the fuck up.” He grabs her hair and thrusts his penis into her mouth. From this point on, we hear almost exclusively from him: “Your teeth feel good you little bitch. Eat that dick. … Are you OK? Are you crying? I love you. I fucking love you. Open that mouth.” He slaps her mouth with his penis. “Open wide. Choke. Open wider, wider. You’re so good baby. Put your mouth on my balls. You treat me so fucking good. That’s why I keep you here. Give me the eyes while I gag you. … Do you like to gag? Beg for it. Say please. Say please gag me some more. … Your throat is so good.”
At this point, she re-enters the conversation. She says, “Keep going.”

<>He says, “Good, that’s the fucking answer I was looking for.”
He the flips her over, putting her on the table with her head hanging over edge. She gags several times when he thrusts into her mouth. He holds her by the cheeks, spreading her face apart. She gags but he doesn’t stop. He allows her to catch her breath. Her face is unexpressive, almost frozen.

<>“I want those tears to come out again, baby. I want to choke the shit out of you,” he says.
He grabs her hair and drives his penis into her mouth. He says: “Suck that dick. Convulse. I want to see your eyes roll back in your fucking head. Yes, I love it.” He asks her if she loves it; she says yes. He ejaculates into her mouth and says, “Spit that cum out. I can’t hear you. What did you say? Don’t talk with your mouth full.”

<>He walks away and says “Don’t give me any more shit.”

Full article at: http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/%7Erjensen/freelance/justprudes.htm

[Marnieworld]

52. Like I said

Exception to the norm. Perhaps that is someone's fantasy. Is it mine? No way. Would I get off on it or be with someone who does? No. A fantasy is just a thought. I would be against actual infliction of pain but I'm not against the depiction of it. Do I recognize the inherent misogynism? Of course. Do I think it is such a horror to protest, that its impact will poison the minds of men and women everywhere, causing otherwise benign people to become women hating beasts? Do I think that this is what we as women should rally against? Clearly not.

Domestic Violence=bad.
Honor killings=bad.
Female Genital mutilation=bad.
Men liking looking at boobies= not so bad.

I also have played violent video games and I love Martin Scorsese movies but I've never killed anyone.

[mongo]

55. And do you think the movie you described is what the term Gonzo means?

I'm guessing you haven't seen a lot of gonzo porn, which is the fastest-growing genre of porn. Here's a description of one gonzo movie

Gonzo porn refers to porn where they acknowledge the camera, and usually the camera man is giving a narrative while filming - or the cameraman is also involved in the sex.

Once again, you have taken the exception to try to paint an entire industry in a certain light. JM productions is not one of the biggest player in the industry, or characteristic of MOST porn that is sold in this country. Yes, this type of porn exists - but who gets to decide where the line is drawn?

More popular producers in the Gonzo genre are Ed Powers and his long running Dirty Debutants series, shanes world college invasion, and video teams no mans land. Ben Dover is worth a mention here too, but he is no longer producing porn. None of these is the fantasy violence and huimiliation that you are describing above.

[Scout]

73. but, but, porn isn't demeaning to women, it's just fantasy! n/t

[Senior citizen]

44. If you are really female (one never knows for sure online),

I hope you can continue to live in your little fantasy world. And if that isn't possible, I hope that at least you survive the attack, hopefully without permanent mental or physical damage.

If people in our society enjoyed equality, there would be as much porn produced by females for THEIR enjoyment, as porn produced by males. Females have sex drives and enjoy sex. And I'm sure that if porn wasn't primarily a means of objectifying females as sex objects in order to maintain male supremacy in our patriarchal society, there would certainly be as much female-produced erotica as male-produced porn. The fact that we do not have an egalitarian society does not mean that people are not equal, it means they don't have equal opportunity and an equal playing field. Of course if you think you were raised with as much chance of being a profesional baseball player or President as males, then you don't see a problem.

Catharine MacKinnon is happily married to Jeffrey Masson. But I wouldn't say MacKinnon loves men. MacKinnon loves Masson. He is an intellectual, an author, and a feminist. He respects MacKinnon. Why would MacKinnon want to love less intelligent, less feminist, less respectful males? Why would anyone assume that because MacKinnon is opposed to a form of "speech" that cannot be spoken except through the use of somebody else's body, MacKinnon hates men?

Today's Oprah show featured women who were married to pedophiles. One had no idea whatsoever that her husband, the father of her kids, was one of the worst child rapists the FBI had ever encountered. She knew he spent a lot of time watching porn with the door locked, but she didn't know what kind of porn, or that he was also producing it--using her daughter and other kids.

I hope you're a freeper, not a female. But if you're female, I hope you never have to learn the hard way what MacKinnon is saying. I don't suppose you'll read the book--not a book by someone you think is an anti-fun, anti-free speech, man-hater. In the pornography industry, animals have more legal rights than women. It is illegal to kill, torture, mutilate, or otherwise harm animals for the purpose of pornography. Women, however, can be deemed to have legally "consented" to such treatment--particularly if the gun pointed at them wasn't shown in the film.

[Marnieworld]

50. hmmmm

Yes I truly am female. No I am not a "freeper". I am a donating member with a 1000+ posts in good standing as far as I'm aware of. I find it interesting that my thoughts were so objectionable to you that you assumed that I couldn't be who I said I was or that I truly couldn't be a member of this community just because I clearly disagreed. I'd also like to mention that you were a tad bit condescending as well.

I am not in a "fantasy" world because I disagree with you, McKinnon and others that have the anti-porn philosophy. I have not experienced any attack that you speak of and implying that you know more about my experiences is once again, condescending.

I'd like to point out that there is a considerable movement within the industry of women producing porn for women. Google that phrase and you will find much. As "actresses" age, they often stay within the business and work behind the scenes. This is not such a closeted profession anymore. They have industry magazines and award shows. There's a billboard currently in Manhattan with the likeness of two porn "actresses". The "gun to their head" isn't pictured of course.

Human rights toward equality takes time. There has been much progress for women in all areas of society. There is no industry that I am aware of that has a direct male to female ratio in correlation with the population, porn included. In the past 10-15 years there has been much progress of women in power/creative positions in Mainstream movies but the proportion is still not equal. Mainstream porn is in its infancy really and over time it may have the power equality revolution as any other industry.

If you read my post more carefully you'd see that clearly there is porn for women in all of the places that I listed because I am a woman and that's where I find porn. Female porn is generally more talky and touchy and focused more on the story line. In essence it's naked people still doing dirty things for a viewer's pleasure. I assume that you accept only these pornos or are these just fruits of the poison tree of the greater industry? Have you assumed that these women have no ability to think and chose for themselves and that they are all brainwashed if they disagree with you? Could you ever conceive of the possibility that these women chose their life like any other profession?

As I've said porn is just fantasies for sale. Fantasies are thoughts. Trying to control thoughts, through laws or books stc, is a futile exercise.

I'm against pedophilia. I'm against beastiality. I am against any act of aggression towards another without consent. There are laws protecting individual rights that we can rely on.

Women do not have equal power yet here, and throughout most of the world have very little. I'm against actions against women. Not thoughts. I'm against honor killings and femal genital mutilation. I am against how women are treated in the Arab world. Are these horros the result of pornography? Puh-leeze.

The reality of porn is that many men and some women watch it. A viewing lasts most likely 2-10 minutes. The majority of these voyeurs are mothers and fathers and fine, other-wise upstanding citizens of society. It is a multi-billion dollar industry that the handful (in comparison) of sociopaths (rapists, child molesters, domestic abusers) that we have to deal with as a society couldn't possibly keep afloat.

If all pedophiles ate McDonald's too would that be a correlation or causation? Slippery Slope. All of my opinions are my own and not regurgiated dogma.

[Senior citizen]

57. No, we cannot rely on laws protecting individual rights.

All the females murdered by males against whom they had already taken out restraining orders is a case in point.

The reality of porn is that many young boys watch it before they ever have a relationship with a female. By the time they do, they have come to think that porn exemplifies what is normal in male/female relationships. While the female porn stars may be proud of showing how far they can go, the young female who is attracted to a young male in our society may not have watched the same porn, and is probably not prepared to be treated that way their first time--or ever.

It is not restricted to upstanding adults. It is part of our culture and you would be hard-pressed to find young boys in our society who have not been exposed to it. Neither would exposing young girls to the same porn be a solution to male/female relationships.

There are many ways to make money by using people. You can pay them low wages or put them in sweatshops, for example. But there are two specific ways to make money by using females in our society, pornography and prostitution, that are extremely common. And the females who freely choose these options or get rich from them are a tiny handful of exceptions to the rule. I'm not saying all of them are forced at gunpoint--some simply have no other options for earning an equivalent amount of money.

I have to wonder. There was recently a study evaluating what a housewife's wages should be--something like $300,000 a year. But nowadays there are fewer stay-at-home wives and many more dual income families. So an average female may get less pay for the same work during the day, come home and do unpaid housework, and then have a husband expect the performance of a porn star (again unpaid) in bed. I think the devaluation of female work has been exacerbated by porn. Females are more likely to have to tolerate discussions of porn at work, and be expected to watch it and perform similarly at home, without any addition to their job description or extra pay for extra work in either situation. Not really a problem if you're young and hot, but it might be very inconvenient if you wish to focus your life on something other than sex work.

[mongo]

59. Porn is ADULT entertainment

but even young boys know the difference between fantasy and reality. I grew up with Tom & Jerry, and never once hit anyone in the head with a frying pan.

Why is it when it comes to porn - kids OR adults are destined to imitate anything they may see in it? Even though we know it's fantasy? Why is it that when it comes to porn we have to censor what adults can view because a kid might come into contact with it?

We certainly don't treat alchohol that way. If you want to talk about a REAL contributing factor to violence against women, alchohol is at the top of the list. But I've never heard on this forum or anywhere on DU that alchohol should be banned because some cannot drink responsibly. And alchohol abuse and irresponsible use by both adults AND kids KILLS people.

[smirkymonkey]

78. Because it teaches boys and men how to SEE women.

And eventually how to treat them.

[mongo]

80. More BS from the authoritative left

So, if entertainment (TV, movies, books, etc) TEACHES us how to behave, do we need a culture board to preview everything that is released and to censor anything that does not give the "correct" slant to society?

[bloom]

82. That is a bogus accusation

We're talking about a measure of what society in general will tolerate.

For instance - society does not tolerate the open expression of bigotry toward black people - quite a positive development, IMO. People who express bigotry are - and should rightly be - scorned.

If women are simply trying to work on getting a reasonable measure of respect - that hardly makes us "authoritarian".

[mongo]

58. Plenty of porn is produced by females

Candida Royalle bills her movies as made by a woman - for women.

Jill Kelly and Jenna Jameson both own their own companies and produce their own videos now. Tera Patrick has directed some of her films - really the list just goes on and on.

I hope you can continue to live in your little fantasy world. And if that isn't possible, I hope that at least you survive the attack, hopefully without permanent mental or physical damage.

Yes, and the millions of adults who enjoy adult entertainment are risking permanent mental and/or physical damage - LOL!

Today's Oprah show featured women who were married to pedophiles. One had no idea whatsoever that her husband, the father of her kids, was one of the worst child rapists the FBI had ever encountered. She knew he spent a lot of time watching porn with the door locked, but she didn't know what kind of porn, or that he was also producing it--using her daughter and other kids.


Of course, there is NO ARGUMENT from anyone that CHILD PORN IS AND SHOULD BE ILLEGAL. So why even bring it up? But since you brought up Oprah - here's a really good article about Oprah and Dr. Phil -

What Oprah & Dr. Phil Don't Understand About Sex

Marty Klein, Ph.D.

If your girlfriend, wife, or marriage counselor has conservative, misguided, or just plain inaccurate ideas about sex, you might want to ask if she watches Oprah. The daily talkathon is a veritable fountain of sexual fear, prejudice, harsh judgment, and male-bashing.

Oprah doesn't seem to know that various people can be happy with sex that is unpredictable, casual, sloppy, or nasty. Instead, her show features an endless parade of people who are trying to get sex cleaned up, so we can all enjoy some tidy, wholesome version of it.

You can't talk about Oprah without talking about her alter ego, "Dr. Phil" McGraw. In what looks exactly like an actual case of penis envy, the worshipful diva finishes his sentences, predicts what he'll do ("I feel a dyad coming on"), and ejaculates over his power ("Watch out folks, he's on the warpath!"; "Just speak your mind, boy. Go ahead." "That's good Phil, that is good. Bring it on, Phil!") They're a perfectly matched set, sharing the same simplistic feelings and middle-class judgments. McGraw gives Oprah's moralism a psychological veneer, and without any apparent self-consciousness tells people what's normal, acceptable, or swinish.

Rising to the challenge of creating a trend during a slow news week, Newsweek recently ran a cover of McGraw. But Newsweek is confused. They applaud him for telling people to "deal with their own problems rather than whining and blaming others"--even though in each couple he selects who the victim is, insists that that person's needs are the ones that must be met, and tells both parties exactly what to do. This doesn't "empower" or "transform" anyone, to use Oprah-ese. And where did McGraw get his national stage from which to attack America's "culture of victimology," as Newsweek calls it? From the woman who made victimhood respectable--Oprah. McGraw is just the latest product line in the Oprah house of psycho-couture.

more (scoll down, his pictures on the top of this page are broke) - http://www.sexed.org/archive/article18.html

I hope you're a freeper, not a female. But if you're female,

Why is it sooo hard for you to believe that there are women out there who enjoy porn?

But of course, since you have me on ignore - you might as well be standing in front of me with your hands over your ears yelling LA, LA, LA, LA!

[cassandra uprising]

61. thank you for this post

Do you know if Suicide Girls has female leadership in their company?

[mongo]

63. SG girls is mostly an online company

So I haven't seen any of their work. I have heard of them, I think I read about them in Bust

Here's an interview I dug up - didn't listen to it because we have a dial-up connection shared by TWO computers

Ben Adair sits down at the computer with Missy Suicide, the creator and chief photographer of Suicide Girls.com -- what she calls a "punk rock pin-up site and online community" -- and two of her "Suicide Girls," Katie and Pearl. The always tasteful conversation moves from feminism and social notions of beauty to what the women's parents think of them posing naked on the web. Good stuff -- funny and light-hearted.

http://prx.org/piece/3763

[smirkymonkey]

79. Read this....

PIN-UP OR SHUT UP
Is SuicideGirls bleeding to death?

http://nypress.com/18/40/news&columns/maldonado.cfm?in1=y

"SuicideGirls’ carefully cultivated claim of being female-run has been attacked as a marketing ploy, and one of its male owners attacked as a woman-hater. About 30 of the site’s best-known and most-popular models have left or been booted from the site in the last month, and their online journals purged. The idea that the site was as much about the girls’ minds as about their bodies—always transparently false, but for some reason accepted at face value by the girls, by a press all too eager to promote purportedly female-empowering porn and by a large female viewership willing to play along—has been exposed as a fraud. The new, enlightened sex is looking awfully similar to the old exploitative porn, which is a shame, but no surprise.

This mythology of sexy, pierced women creating a frolicksome community was what drove the site's popularity. As it turns out, though, neither Missy Suicide nor any other woman is the force behind the nudity. That would be one Sean Suhl, one of the four owners of SuicideGirls, and the one the departing girls all say is the power behind the throne, while Missy is mostly merely the public face. Sean's possessed with a unique attitude of his own.

Whores, sluts and junkies are some of the names Caravella says Suhl has used to empower his models when not allegedly declaiming that "You guys are a bunch of vapid idiots," "An ass-sex video wouldn't have paid you as much," or "Why don't you just shut the fuck up, lady. No one asked you!"

"Sean basically told me to 'fuck off' when I requested that we sign contracts ensuring his word on the royalties," says Caravella. "Sean promised all the girls a 5-cent royalty on the DVD after a 200 grand re-coup. He later took back his word with one of the girls because she couldn't do the next tour (though she had done a TON of free promotion for SG). Another girl was told there was no re-coup. Another girl was told one thing from Missy and another from Sean. His whole deal was to use this 5-cent re-coup promise to justify having the DVD girls do free-promotional stuff. He said that it was in our best interest to promote the DVD because it would pay off for us in the future. Hence, the feeling of exploitation. Sean is full of big promises and little follow-through." ...more

Kind of puts a damper on the myth that female-run porn is emporwering to women, doesn't it?

[chicaloca]

70. So, by your logic....

Condoleeza Rice and Colin Powell actually have the best interests of black people at heart. Just because somebody is a member of a particular group doesn't necessarily mean they give a shit about that group's welfare, and unfortunately self-hatred and willingness to turn on each other are more common among women than just about any other oppressed group.

[cassandra uprising]

60. I find it this post really suspect,

in that you feel justified insinuating that this woman is a freeper.

To rif on what Redqueen was talking about in her post above:

I gather from your posts that you feel quite resolved on this issue that porn bad and is degrading to women. You are eloquent in facts and statics about the status of women in American culture, however you seem to make broad sweeping generalities about porn, which in my opinion, is a topic in which you are not as equally informed.

However, that doesn't seem to stop you from doing so. You seem to use extreme cases to prove you argument and your rebuttals don't address other perspectives.

Perhaps this thread needs a working definition of pornography?

I don't think this issue is as cut and dry as you make it out to be.

I am a woman and a feminist and I enjoy looking at pictures of naked women.

I would like you to explain to me how I am contributing to the degradation of my gender.

[Nikia]

62. I have mixed feelings on porn to be honest

I actually was exposed to it at a much earlier age than I should have been. Both sets of parents weren't exactly careful about keeping the tapes out of sight and my sister, friends, and I were curious preteens and early teens (all girls 10-14 years old). The interesting thing is that some of these girls vowed never to have sex after viewing these tapes if that was what sex was about. I don't know how boys, of the same age group, would react.
Most porn has a target audience of men because men traditionally have consumed the most pornography and are believed to be more visually oriented sexually. Both men and women are more sexually stimulated when they view porn where their gender is the more dominate one, receiving more pleasure than the other sex. Most videos, unless they are specifically geared towards couples, are set up that way with the male fantasy in mind.
My husband and I occaisionally view porn together and have managed to view a couple of good Vivid tapes. When done well, I do find pornography arousing. The majority of tapes that we have rented though have been really horrible. Several of them, which were not S&M tapes nor clued us in on the back about the plot twist, did include violence like kidnapping and making her his sex slave or murder after sex and really disturbed us. Personally, I find other types of things degrading in mainstream porn like "dirty talk" that includes calling the woman in the act things like "slut". "whore", or "bitch". I also find the "money shot" which seems to be in all full intercourse porn to be degrading to women.
Sometimes I do wonder too if some of the actresses were really comfortable performing certain scenes. We recently watched a porn movie type documentary about one of the actresses becoming a porn actress. It showed her interviewing with the director. She said that she really didn't want to perform certain acts on camera. He said that those acts were pretty much necessary if she was interested in becoming a big name, but I suppose they know what they are getting into.
As far as pornography's effect on men, I did have one partner in college who did seem to have watched too much porn (wanted to switch positions a lot and call me bad names)and I ended up not staying with him. For men with a healthy view of sexuality and a good view of women as people, I don't think that non violent porn necessarily effects them more than a lot of what is in the mainstream media. I actually think that photographs that appear in mainstream porn magazines like Penthouse and Playboy are less degrading to women than some advertisements of women in bikinis and underwear appearing in mainstream magazines or on television. I do think that porn movies with graphic sex can be damaging to men who do not have much experience with women as people and who grew up without learning about sex or being taught that it was bad in any context. Yes, these men may be more likely to be sexually abusive to women than if they hadn't seen porn. By the same token, there are also men who watch mainstream movie violence who may be more likely to become violent than if they had never seen such movies.
As a society, we have decided that free speech is an important value. Because of that, we do have both pornography and violent movies even though they may reinforce tendencies in certain individuals to committ violence. Perhaps, if other values were encouraged though, there would be no reason to worry about that happening to a significant portion of the population. For pornography to have less of an impact, that would mean that children would be taught that sex was an important part of a loving adult relationship. Sex, whether carried out in the above context or not, should be something between equals and not done by any force, lying, manipulation or coercion. They should also be taught that men and women are equal value as people.

[mongo]

64. As Nina Hartley recently said:

"I think the culture gets the porn it deserves, and ... in a deeply conflicted culture and conflicted people, of course the erotic images that we make are going to reflect this conflict. And in a culture that keeps sexuality discussions extremely underground, it is sad that people are reduced, driven, forced to look at an entertainment fantasy medium for kernels of educative moments, and it's really not a good idea, because porn is not educative; it's fantasy, it's live-action cartoon, and we should not be trying to glean from it relationship advice."

[bloom]

27. Thanks for the post... eom

[Swamp Rat]

65. Way'at Senior citizen!

:hi:

Glad to see you're here fighting the good fight! We have a long way to go to protect ALL citizens from the forces of evil, especially from racists and misogynists.

Long time no see! :hug:

[Name removed]

71. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.