The organisers of Canada’s Third Annual Feminist Porn Awards (Toronto, April 4th and 5th 2008) think so.
In 2006 we decided that it’s not enough to criticize adult films for not adequately representing women’s – and in many cases, men’s – sexuality. So we decided to do something about it. As porn star and performance artist Annie Sprinkle famously said, “The answer to bad porn isn’t no porn…it’s to try and make better porn!” Good For Her couldn’t agree more. We believe the world is inundated with cheesy, cliché, degrading, no-budget, patronizing and stupid porn. But we also believe that erotic fantasy is powerful, and that women and marginalized communities deserve to put their dreams and desires on film, too. As feminists and sex-positive people, we want to showcase and honour those who are creating erotic media with a feminist sensibility.
It doesn’t take long for anyone reading about feminism to realise that there’s a lot of disagreement amongst the feminisms regarding porn, porn vs erotica and the larger picture of the sex industries generally. These tend to get summarised as “anti-pornography” and “sex-positive” stances, both of which terms are overly simplistic. “Sex-positive” especially casts opponents as “sex-negative”, when it is more true to say that they are “sex-industry-negative” or even better “sex-exploitation-negative”.
So, when I received this email about the Feminist Porn Awards I thought it was a good kick-off for an open thread on feminism and porn. Have at it. (ducks and runs)
Update: For a good collection of posts from advocates of the anti-prostitution/pornography feminisms, try the Third Carnival Against Pornography and Prostitution
Filed under: 101, Sexuality & Health, feminisms, objectification, sexual expression & exploitation | Tagged: anti-pornography, awards, feminism, feminisms, feminist porn, porn, pornography, sex-positive
True, I’d agree that the artist’s intent does not determine whether an image is pornography, the use to which the viewer puts the image is what makes it pornographic. Hmm, so no depiction of a naked body is “off limits” to being used as an aid to masturbation? I can’t quite articulate why I find that phrasing striking – reading in it an overtone of entitlement and co-option of the image/body of the depicted person perhaps?.
“Do you think this is unnatural, depersonalizing, a coherent or intentional action?” Yes to the first two descriptors. Because of the gender inequality in our society. Whether it is coherent or intentional is not relevant to the effects of such an attitude. Overwhelmingly, the norm is that bodies that presented as to-be-looked-at sexually – whether because they are nude or wearing clothes that are revealing and which show the shape of the body by fitting it closely – are women’s bodies and not men’s bodies. (I’ve realised recently that conventional masculine clothing is very modest – the body is not revealed or drawn attention to).
You’re coming back again to your question of whether there can be a gender and power neutral context of using some image that is arousing to masturbate to. As I said above the problem is the existing unequal gender/power dynamics. Feminist critiques of porn deconstruct and challenge those dynamics. For me as a feminist, the end result I seek is precisely for sex and sexuality to be gender and power neutral. We are not there yet, and the gender/power dynamics cannot be wished away.
I meant to post to this thread when it first went up, and never got around to it. I don’t think I’ve yet fully processed my thoughts on the question “can there be feminist porn?”, but here’s a sidethought:
My pipedream is that somehow for a year it could be arranged so that women are not objectified during that time – only men’s bodies are used to signify sex, are depicted as desirable, are used in sexy ways in advertising, films and so on. For example a camera operator filming the performance of a woman dancer or singer would not pan up and down her body – but would for a male performer . Hell, even six months would do it. We would have to find a whole different visual language to depict and signify male desirability – luckily we could borrow from gay culture
I think that this could not help but mainstream a more equal kind of erotica, plus would have the bonus of helping break down homophobia, since straight men would, in my plan, have no alternative but to get over any feelings of squickiness about fancying men/being fancied by men.
[...] reading on this in a post at Feminism [...]
I said in response to Huitzil “You’re coming back again to your question of whether there can be a gender and power neutral context of using some image that is arousing to masturbate to.”
Sorry Huitzil – I just realised that was marlo’s question in the comment I originally responded to and not part of your comment.
I think one facet that has not been fully addressed in this discussion on porn is the principle of a viewer and a performer that is created through the mechanism of media. Since this also exists in non porn scenarios, the same issues that apply to any media based mechanism of profit, power etc, will also be relevant to porn, feminist or otherwise. Porn has its own specifics added to the mix. Issues of commercialism, power, exploitation, choice, enjoyment exist in all forms of media, where those who consume the media, and those who perform for consumption are engaged in a complex balancing act of trying to achieve desirable outcomes through others. This is never easy, and are implicit in all social interaction. We should not ignore the specific issues of run-of-the-mill porn that shows stereotypical male/female scenarios of copulation, with predictable outcomes and geared for a mostly male audience. Neither should we reject porn as not being an appropriate vehicle for women, feminist or otherwise, in getting some titillation. We should just not lose sight of the social dynamics that frame most interactions. I consider that TV soap operas are a form of emotional and romantic porn, just as stereotypical as sexual porn. It shows stereotypical scenarios with predictable outcomes, bad acting, low budget, and caters mostly for a female audience. We could posit that the actors themselves are being exploited, not truly enjoying all the falsehood, and that it is demeaning to both the viewer and performer. Yet it gets consumed by a seemingly insatiable audience, just as sexual porn does.
I have not taken a position for or against porn or feminist porn, just a perspective of the way society frames interaction between groups. If we lose sight of the bigger picture we tend to demonise certain behaviors and sectors of the community, perhaps forgetting or denying that we too are targets of other peoples bigotry with equal justification.
On the rare occasions that I write erotica, it’s focused on the women involved—in a male way. I can’t possibly feel, let alone evoke, a woman’s subjective experience of sex, if such an abstraction can even be pinned down. I do try to avoid female characters whose desire conveniently happens to be mindless nymphomaniacal subservience, because it holds no appeal for me (sorry, TMI).
What I found most ridiculous about a lot these comments is that I am a feminist, a woman and I regularly watch and masturbate to porn that’s allegedly only designed for men.
Does that make me male? I think not.
The fact that women can, and DO watch mainstream pornography AND (oh my gods) are actually AROUSED by it says a lot.
Abby Winters is a great site. So is Kink.com. The only kind of porn that ISN’T great is ACTUAL rape porn (yes, it exists), BESTIALITY, NECROPHILIA and CHILD.
Pornography is a censorship issue imho rather than a feminist one.
i am not pro-censorship, other than the illegal stuff.
but i am a male who is disgusted at the messages of (legal) porn,
( yes, all while returning for more, back then)
i have turned to asexuality for solace. it’s still a price to pay,
but a justifiable one in my opinion, my commitment to my choice
deepens with the passing years,
that doesn’t change the fact that socially, as a man, this material
is penned in my name, it will continue to exist and degrade
my name, announcing boldly and incessantly that i am scum and filth and have not the slightest potential to be otherwise.
Ugh, this thread was downright painful for me to read, but I’m going to give my opinion because it’s important that some of y’all hear this.
I get really frustrated at discussions about porn that take place on the internet between people with lots of spare time with which to engage in this sort of banter, extensive vocabularies which evidence extensive schooling, English skills, the ability to casually reference the companies they own, etc. I’m also willing to bet that people of color are vastly under-represented in this conversation, but I hate to assume.
I mean, you might as well limit the discussion of neoliberalism to CEOs of Fortune 500s. You might as well assess the merits of Coca-Cola as a company by interviewing their American office-workers exclusively.
As an actual former prostitute whose feelings about what I went through are consistent with those of the majority of former prostitutes in the world, I’d have to say that I AM DEEPLY INSULTED BY THE IDEA THAT PEOPLE PURPORTING TO BE INTERESTED IN MY LIBERATION COULD ACTUALLY HAVE A DEBATE ABOUT WHETHER IT’S OKAY TO MASTURBATE TO OTHER HUMAN BEINGS HAVING SEX FOR MONEY. UNTIL MONEY IS NO LONGER NECESSARY TO LIVE, THE ANSWER IS NO.
Yes, I know, we all do things for money, and all work is inherently coercive. But being forced to allow somebody to jack off inside you is worse than being forced to sit in front of a computer screen all day.
It’s quite possible that this isn’t only related to feminism. I think that there are issues of class and race involved as well. Women who make money from porn and have no reason to suspect that they will ever be relegated to the bottom rungs of a vicious sex industry seem more prone to making apologies for the rapes that occur within. They also seem more able to get off to pictures of other people having sex under coerced conditions for which NOBODY CAN NEVER KNOW WHETHER REAL CONSENT EXISTS BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT PRESENT.
I repeat, you cannot know whether or not a person whose sex life you are only viewing by camera has consented without off-camera coercion. The only way you could know consent is heartfelt is to watch them in person, no money involved. (And I’m not actually against that.)
I think that this literally a case in which some women have noticed that they are near the top of the status-ladder, even if they aren’t technically all the way up, and have decided to uphold all oppressions, even the ones that hurt them, in place in the hopes of maintaining a hierarchical system that gives them relative privilege. They’re willing to put up with the occasional rape (especially rapes which happen to other people) in order to maintain a social order which means that they will never go hungry.
Feminist porn is entirely possible. Just because the vast majority of porn available currently does not cater to many women, and exploits and demeans female porn actresses (and, by extention, females in general), does not mean that this must necessarily be the case.
Judging by the amount of positive feedback towards the idea on this thread alone, there appears to be a market for feminist or ‘female-friendly’ porn. Those who are anti the idea are perhaps being put off by the idea of porn as it is, rather than as it could be.
Lots of good stuff here but I have a quibble with a line in the original:
“Sex-positive” especially casts opponents as “sex-negative”, when it is more true to say that they are “sex-industry-negative” or even better “sex-exploitation-negative”.
The problem with this statement is that it implies that those of us who are sex-positive are also sex-industry-positive or sex-exploitation-positive. We’re not. Sex-positive means we think sex can and should be pleasurable for all involved–and that’s usually not the case in the sex industry. And even when it is, the dominant and ubiquitous tropes of mainstream porn (and media more generally) make it generally more difficult for women to have sex that is pleasurable for them. I think both the ‘anti-porn’ and the ’sex-positive’ folks can agree on this last point.
Sara, the problem is that the “sex-industry positive” folks have appropriated the term “sex-positive” for themselves so thoroughly that I don’t think it can be disentangled. Your attitude strikes me more as what second-wavers meant, and many feminists still mean, by “sexually liberated”.