A Call for an Open Discussion of Mass-Marketed Pornography

[Triana]

By Robert Jensen, AlterNet
Posted on February 10, 2007, Printed on February 11, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/story/47677/

At a progressive media reform conference dedicated to resisting corporate control of mass media, where many of the participants focus on gender and racial justice, it shouldn't be difficult to interest people in the feminist critique of mass-marketed pornography.

After all, the pornography industry creates a steady stream of relentlessly sexist and racist films and web sites that undermine attempts to build a healthy sexual culture, while filling the pornographers' pockets with substantial profits. A general critique of the effects of misogyny, white supremacy, and predatory corporate capitalism on mass media dovetails perfectly with the feminist critique of sexual-exploitation media.

Yet as I circulated at last month's National Conference on Media Reform and distributed fliers for an upcoming feminist conference on pornography, the responses I got were often skeptical and sometimes hostile. The questions that were commonly asked of me that weekend revealed the need for the left/progressive political community to deepen its understanding of the issue.

The most common of those questions was, "Is your conference an anti-sex project?" reflecting the common distortion that feminist critics of pornography share the right-wing's obsessions about containing sexuality within traditional "family values."

My co-author Gail Dines has developed a clear response to the question, which I borrowed during the weekend in Memphis: When we criticize McDonald's for its unhealthy food, environmentally destructive business practices, and targeting of children through manipulative advertising, does anyone ask whether we are "anti-food"? Of course not, because no one conflates McDonald's with food; we recognize that there are many ways to prepare food, and it's appropriate to critique the more toxic varieties. The same holds for pornography; pursuing a healthy sexuality does not mean we have to support toxic pornography.

More @ link...

[Porcupine]

1. Somebody define "sexual violence"

apart from forced or coerced sex, bruising, causing deliberate pain and/or bodily damage. I would seperate issues of financial coercion i.e. poverty from other forms of coercion.

Are there other forms of sexual violence?

[Traveling_Home]

2. My 1st wife broke my heart - does that count? n/t

[Ian David]

3. See related threads

Latest Breaking News forum

Booming Porn Faces Backlash (Porn Biz Explodes During Bush II Admin)
Topic started by Mark E. Smith on Oct-28-06 09:20 PM (82 replies)
Last modified by Anakin Skywalker on Oct-30-06 09:52 PM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2585016

GOP Donors drip with hot, sticky porn money
Topic started by IanDB1 on Dec-22-04 11:11 PM (6 replies)
Last modified by Moderator on Dec-23-04 12:30 AM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=1093853

General Discussion: Politics forum

Mary Carey, porn star to dine with smirk in W.H.
Topic started by donsu on May-19-05 12:35 PM (27 replies)
Last modified by cestpaspossible on May-19-05 06:41 PM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1793848

[omega minimo]

4. yup

"A general critique of the effects of misogyny, white supremacy, and predatory corporate capitalism on mass media dovetails perfectly with the feminist critique of sexual-exploitation media."

But the "reflecting of common distortions" prevent discussion of that (once) obvious statement.... it's too bad, because it really is a jumping off point for many important discussions that can never be born........

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

5. That's exactly why the world needs better porn.

Forget the L.A. crap, NYC porn is better.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

6. He downplays the support for censorship.

He's at pains to declare that he doesn't support state censorship/banning of pornography, but he downplays the extent to which he's a minority among feminist opponents of pornography in doing so, although to be fair to him he does acknowledge "there are even disagreements within the feminist anti-pornography movement about this".

I'm also slightly sceptical about what he means by "a civil-rights approach that would give people hurt by pornography a chance in court to prove the harm." People who have been hit by falling pornography? Forcing someone to engage in making pornography is already an incredibly serious offence; people who have engaged in making pornography willingly and knowingly should not have legal recourse even if they subsequently suffer as a result. Allowing people who have been harmed by users of pornography to sue the pornographer is an incredibly slippery slope, I think - it inevitably opens the door to suing writers, film-makers etc whose work is taken as an inspiration by copycat criminals.

[mongo]

7. I agree that most porn out there is crap

but, if the goal is not censorship -- whether by direct or indirect (civil-rights violation?) means, then futher marginalizing and demonizing porn only drives it further and further to the extream.

Want better erotica? Want to be able to watch exlicit acts that further "healthy" (whatever that is) sexuality? LEGALIZE IT! Get porn out of the quasi-legal state it is in (any clerk can be arrested in 40 states for selling ANY XXX movie), and stop demonizing it. Ignore it or call for better product. Support companies that produce better product (Candida Royalle, Girlfriend Films, Ninn Worx, etc.).

Every time a some OP Ed writer calls porn "toxic" just drives real talent and vision away from the industry, and give more fuel to crap gonzo mysoginist producers.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

8. I'm inclined to disagree.

I don't think that "marginalising or demoralising" the porn industry will lead to an increase in the amount of "extreme" pornography out there; it's possible it will lead to an increase in the proportion of porn that is extreme but that's a very different claim.

I also don't think that "quality" is relevant - how well-made or how erotic pornography is has nothing to do with its social impact (if any). I don't think well-made porn with "talent and vision" is any better than badly-made porn.

I strongly disapprove of censorship, but I don't think that strictly non-coercive campaigning against pornography will do any harm.