[sukouyant]

My take - the only time porn worries me is when working conditions for the actors are sub-par and when it involves suffering. There's a lot in mainstream commercial media that I find much more offensive, probably only because it's more in my face than porn and is actually directed at me and is invested in playing on my sexual and other personal insecurities, unlike porn.

does porn affect young (sexually inexperienced) viewers more dramatically? Yes -*everything* under the sun affects the young and inexperienced more dramatically pretty much by definition.

Does porn perpetuate the myth of the vaginal (non-clitoral) orgasm? IMO yes, but not in an important or enduring way, no more than the myth of the everlasting hard-on. Reading non-fiction books, talking with others, having sex with women, not to mention the realization that porn is a type of fiction goes a long way in disabusing people of that idea. I am curious about the origin of that myth though. I wouldn't be surprised if was one of those medically established ideas of the 18thC or something like that.


Is it true that porn increases violent behavior in men (as military studies and other studies seem to suggest)?
Really? I'm curious about what findings like that would mean. What was it about watching porn that increased the men's violent behaviour (arousal? frustration?) Does violent mean more aggressive than before, or more bloodthirsty than before? And if they simply mean more aggressive, how is that surprising, when it comes to arousal of any kind? How was it measured? How long did the effect last? What is the meaning of life?

edit: i just wanted to add that i don't think my acceptance of porn somehow makes me a better or more enlightened feminist than anyone, which is sometimes where these discussions go. it's probably mostly indicative of the fact that i'm not involved with a man whose porn-use bothers me.

[koffeewitch]

sukouyant: I think you're bringing up the fascinating question of how much power/effect pornographic images have over *any* viewer, addict or not. I'm just throwing out some questions here, I'm not implying that I have any sort of correct answer, but does porn affect young (sexually inexperienced) viewers more dramatically? Does porn perpetuate the myth of the vaginal (non-clitoral) orgasm? Is it true that porn increases violent behavior in men (as military studies and other studies seem to suggest)? I'm sure that there are plenty of people who look at a pornographic image and gaze at it just until they get off...then forget about the image...but personally I've met way too many men who seemed like they could no longer stimulate themselves by imagination alone while masturbating. I found that a little bit disturbing, I guess. I'm certainly not trying to censor porn or eliminate it's sale from society....just personally, I feel it has very little to do with sex. It strikes me as ridiculous/corny or sexist-racist and disturbing. Maybe I would feel differently if I had seen more of the porns made by and for women.

[sukouyant]

I find that his coming from a place of addiction slants his perspective, making the images that he sees and the power they have larger than life.

[koffeewitch]

What a great article. Like the author, I, too, find myself taken with people who would not be considered beautiful in the modern commercial sense. I'm charmed by strong noses that give their owner the regal profile of a hawk. I like it when people have imperfect or even (gasp) crooked teeth. I'm turned on by my lover's wit and intellect. A big heart is infinitely sexier to me than a big dick (and the clit, afterall is on the outside of the vagina, so a big dick is pretty meaningless to me if it's owner is clueless about female anantomy). Porn either bores me to tears, makes me laugh at it's plastic absurdity or (at worst) disgusts and repels me. You could not pay me to even have a drink with most of the porn stars I've see, let alone fuck them.

But, hey, it's just my opinion. Porn's commercial success proves there are a gazillion people who feel differently. To each their own, right?

[pepper]

This is an article I snipped from Toronto's Now Magazine way back in the early '00s and glued into an old journal of mine. I came across it the other day and wanted to share since I think it's so great. Tell me what you think...

http://www.nowtoronto.com/lifestyle/story....e=22%2C4%2C2002

[enfermera]

bump

[anarch]

I'm glad you enjoyed the link, ketto. Thanks for saying so.

AP, thanks for summarizing what's in your link. Just reading your summary makes me get stabby. WTF is wrong with these people. Fucking control freaks. "Those have to be bigger! These have to be smaller! You don't look enough like a life-size plastic doll!"

EW.

[zoya]

wow - amazing how women's views of their bodies are warped by all forms of media. urgh.


"we just like saying vagina. Vagina!" - haha, love it!!

X-posted in OBOH

Okay, so this isn't for the more sensitive amongst us & it is NSFW. Labiaplasty Hungry Beast Ep 14. It's an Aussie news bit on labiaplasty/porn. Basically the Aussie porn boards not only do not like small breasts, they don't like pussies with any extra flesh: "it's too detailed".

[ketto]

Wow, anarch. Thanks for posting that piece. It was really refreshing to read a conversation between two feminists on different sides of a really sensitive issue discussing it so respectfully and with real understanding. Annie Sprinkle is a little out there for me, but I like her. I saw her speak in my second year of university and it was a really inspiring and confidence boosting lecture.

AP, what can you even say?!

[auralpoison]

X-posted in OBOH

Okay, so this isn't for the more sensitive amongst us & it is NSFW. Labiaplasty Hungry Beast Ep 14. It's an Aussie news bit on labiaplasty/porn. Basically the Aussie porn boards not only do not like small breasts, they don't like pussies with any extra flesh: "it's too detailed".

[anarch]

Annie Sprinkle's Conversation with an Anti Porn Feminist

[anarch]

I bet it's all of those things. Except for women wanting less sex. The only women I know who don't want much sex are in relationships that already have serious problems.

[angie_21]

I always wonder about the supply and demand difference. Mostly, how real it is - is it really because women care less about sex, or because it's easier for us to get laid when we want to, or because we just don't want to pay for it because it's a big hit to the ego (I've never understood why men don't feel that way)? Or is it as much about supply - if ads for male escorts were as prevalent as those for women, if it was all over TV and movies that way it is with women (and if everything weren't so clearly still aimed, as with everything else, at other men), wouldn't it seem a lot less weird to female customers to actually call up a male escort?

[anarch]

There are men out there too, but there sure is a "supply and demand" difference.

Coincidentally, I was just reading this Daily Beast article on male sex workers and thinking about posting it here.

[girl_logic]

The situation in Alberta (at least in Edmonton and Calgary) is that they pay the city for an Escort license or an agency license (and it's a lot of money compared to other business's and individuals), and then they're permitted to advertise as such - however technically under our federal law that would make the government pimps under the Living Under The Avails law. So it's a bit schizophrenic -while the city knows what the license is for when they sell it to women, the letter of the law claims that it's a license for dating and introductions only. The women can still be charged for prostitution related offenses, and now the city knows who they are and where they live! And they are fined by the city if they advertise as escorts without holding the license. In order to get the money for a license, women frequently go into debt to agencies or individuals, which makes sense - who starts working when they're flush with money?

So that's where I agree with you, sex work can happen under exploitative situations, but we part ways when it comes to assuming government control is the best way to eliminate that.

Even in places where there is legalization, the working conditions are oppressive, because sex work is still treated as a vice to be contained and controlled. In Amsterdam, notoriously, Dutch women who are able work illegally - it's women with less access, such as women from other parts of Europe without full-citizenship, who work legally there, which says a lot. Prostitutes believe it's healthier and safer to work illegally. And then there's another tier of workers who couldn't work legally even if they wanted to. As far as I'm concerned the only way to respect women who do this work and to improve the situation is decriminalization and acknowlegement of the laws that are already in place to protect everyone - from the laws against forcible confinement and other forms of abuse to the most humble workplace safety laws. Prostitutes have been taking care of their own and their customer's bodies for a long long time and will continue to do so.


"I wonder what exactly leads these girls to be there, not individually (because there could be as many different reasons for being there as there are girls), but more generally, our society's attitudes towards sex and women's bodies that creates such a situation in the first place. "

There are men out there too, but there sure is a "supply and demand" difference. Kind of funny response to someone's mail in question in our local paper's sex advice column - he was wondering what other services he could provide to be a successful sex worker serving women. The advice was basically nude housekeeping, domination, scantily clad massage, learn how to pamper, learn to do a pedicure, learn to do it well. Good advice imo - I would pay a hot man to give me spa treatment with benefits, if he were worth it.

[angie_21]

wow, those are some tough questions! It might take me a while to be able to answer all of them.

You can drive down some busy streets in my city and see them any time of day, clearly completely cracked out and unaware of the rest of the world while the rest of the world pretends to be unaware of them."

Is the sad part the drug addiction or the prostitution or that they're women in a really tough situation all around?

Well, just seeing them would be enough to answer your question. The sad part isn't a political idea or concept about society, the sad part is them, as humans, being in that situation at all. The fact that they're all screwed up on drugs whether they're there to feed the drug habit, or whether they developed the habit because they're there, or whatever, it's sad to think that this is the life a person is leading. It's sad and sickening to think that this is what sex is about to some people, this is what women are worth. It's sad that I've known men and women who just kind of laugh, as if these women somehow deserve it because they're just sluts or something.

"I don't have much of a problem with the idea of prostitution in theory, but as it exists in reality, it is in almost all of its forms, even the consensual ones, exploitative and abusive of women."

How do you come by that conclusion?

I did say most, not all! Like I said, I don't find the idea of sex for money immoral, provided everyone is on level ground, everyone consents, no one's getting hurt, and the women (or men) doing the work are actually receiving the money being paid. I know there are a lot of women working out of their homes in Alberta, they are even able to advertise in the weekly entertainment magazines without being shut down, and they seem to have control over what they do, and if they are happy and safe, then I certainly don't think that's an exploitative situation. But thanks (in part) to restrictive laws and societal judgement, that doesn't always happen. I think that a lot of consensual prostitution is still exploitative, though, based on who is making the decisions and the money for the women actually doing the work. Here's where I admit to lacking any details to back up my ideas, I don't know any statistics, but when there's mass volumes of human trafficking, sexual slavery and semi-consesual prostitution in the world, I don't see how that can't be exploitative. Look at Las Vegas. Men are out on the street basically hawking girls to anyone who passes by, handing out flyers with naked young girls all over them. And these flyers end up on the street with people's dirty fotoprints all over those girls bodies and faces. Billboards are up that say "Girls delivered to your door within one hour!" I don't care if those girls are consenting to be there, I don't see how mass marketing of women's bodies like that is not exploitative, of the girls who are working and of women in general. Its the attitude that women can be bought that is exploitative. There is a difference between buying sex, and buying women, and the idea that you are buying the whole woman is scary and promotes abuse. Even though it's consensual, I wonder what exactly leads these girls to be there, not individually (because there could be as many different reasons for being there as there are girls), but more generally, our society's attitudes towards sex and women's bodies that creates such a situation in the first place.

Whew.. that probably just raises more questions than answers!

The thing I feel very strongly about is that fact that prohibition in general, whether of alcohol or drugs or prostitution, only causes more problems by driving things underground. When there could instead be government regulation of the business..."

This is going to sound bad, I really don't mean to be crude, but do you really trust the government with regulation of your vagina? I sure don't.

No, I don't. It's not that I want the government to be in control of it, but prostitution needs to be recognized because the government does require businesses to adhere to health and safety codes, worker's rights, etc, and if it is an underground business, then that isn't regulated. If your job isn't recognized as existing, you don't have access to worker's compensation or employment insurance, and you can't complain to the government if you're fired unjustly or not paid for overtime (or not paid at all!), and you lose your right to refuse unsafe work. Again, I know that there are women who are in control of their own bodies and businesses, but that doesn't mean we can assume everyone has that power. I don't think it is disparaging to the sex trade workers who are successfully running a consensual business to recognize that there are a lot of women who are flat out exploited by brothels, pimps, and their customers, that there are prostitutes beaten, raped or murdered while the police look the other way. I don't think that recognizing that in many of these cases, drugs are used to control women, or used by women to numb themselves to their situation, is disparaging to the women who wouldn't need protection from drug addiction at all. Leading to:

"..and protection of women from exposure to violence, drug addiction, and human trafficking, everything goes hidden and unregulated."

Okay this also didn't totally compute for me. Do prostitutes need more protection from drug addiction than most people already have? Do they need that protection before they start working or during, or after?

I see what you're getting at. But I don't think I said, "protection of all prostitutes from drug addiction." If it sounded like that's what I meant, I apologize, because it certainly isn't. I should have maybe said, "protection of vulnerable women (because there are women in our society and every other society who ar more vulnerable) from exploitation through violence, drug addiction, and human trafficking." I'm not saying legalization of prostitution would solve these problems, either, but pretending they don't exist at all is much, much worse. I'm saying that these facets of prostitution exist, but if legalized, safe & accessible forms of protitution were allowed and socially sanctioned, then there would be far less demand to fuel the scary side of it.

OK, that took a long time to write, and I know I just opened up a huge can of worms. So please take into account - This is all my opinion, I know I'm not fully informed, and I know there are so many different possible viewpoints on an issue like this. And I would really like hear your opinion now, g_l!

[girl_logic]

That's too bad that it got passed. I have very strong feelings about this topic too, though actually I find it much more complex and confusing than the debate about abortion. I don't have much of a problem with the idea of prostitution in theory, but as it exists in reality, it is in almost all of its forms, even the consensual ones, exploitative and abusive of women. The thing I feel very strongly about is that fact that prohibition in general, whether of alcohol or drugs or prostitution, only causes more problems by driving things underground. When there could instead be government regulation of the business and protection of women from exposure to violence, drug addiction, and human trafficking, everything goes hidden and unregulated. What a joke.

Here in Alberta, solicitation is illegal while the act of prostitution is not, thereby making it impossible to run an legitimate business but harder to prosecute johns & pimps. Hooray. Of course the police turn a blind eye to the whole thing, including home based businesses, but also including abuse and murder of street prostitutes. You can drive down some busy streets in my city and see them any time of day, clearly completely cracked out and unaware of the rest of the worldm while the rest of the world pretends to be unaware of them. It's very sad.

Hey Angie, your post gave me a lot to consider, but before I say anything could I ask you some things?

"I don't have much of a problem with the idea of prostitution in theory, but as it exists in reality, it is in almost all of its forms, even the consensual ones, exploitative and abusive of women."

How do you come by that conclusion?

"The thing I feel very strongly about is that fact that prohibition in general, whether of alcohol or drugs or prostitution, only causes more problems by driving things underground. When there could instead be government regulation of the business..."

This is going to sound bad, I really don't mean to be crude, but do you really trust the government with regulation of your vagina? I sure don't.

Or are you talking about regulating against the labour violations etc. that happens in some brothels, is that what you mean?

"..and protection of women from exposure to violence, drug addiction, and human trafficking, everything goes hidden and unregulated."

Okay this also didn't totally compute for me. Do prostitutes need more protection from drug addiction than most people already have? Do they need that protection before they start working or during, or after?

"You can drive down some busy streets in my city and see them any time of day, clearly completely cracked out and unaware of the rest of the worldm while the rest of the world pretends to be unaware of them."

Is the sad part the drug addiction or the prostitution or that they're women in a really tough situation all around?

[angie_21]

That's too bad that it got passed. I have very strong feelings about this topic too, though actually I find it much more complex and confusing than the debate about abortion. I don't have much of a problem with the idea of prostitution in theory, but as it exists in reality, it is in almost all of its forms, even the consensual ones, exploitative and abusive of women. The thing I feel very strongly about is that fact that prohibition in general, whether of alcohol or drugs or prostitution, only causes more problems by driving things underground. When there could instead be government regulation of the business and protection of women from exposure to violence, drug addiction, and human trafficking, everything goes hidden and unregulated. What a joke.

Here in Alberta, solicitation is illegal while the act of prostitution is not, thereby making it impossible to run an legitimate business but harder to prosecute johns & pimps. Hooray. Of course the police turn a blind eye to the whole thing, including home based businesses, but also including abuse and murder of street prostitutes. You can drive down some busy streets in my city and see them any time of day, clearly completely cracked out and unaware of the rest of the worldm while the rest of the world pretends to be unaware of them. It's very sad.

[kittenb]

if you're not white, and don't speak English you're probably a victim whether you know it or not

Yes, yes, yes!

I hear this all the time although it took me awhile to figure out that was what was being said.

[girl_logic]

An update about this and also some full disclosure - asking who Donna Hughes is was disingenuous of me as I've recently had my memory jogged by a friend - this is Donna Hughes who has been using, for years, against her will my friend's story of brutal exploitation in order to put forward her abolishionist agenda (at the same time, my friend reflects on her own story as the most important reason why Donna Hughes's position is wrong, dangerous, harmful and even deadly to women and girls).
We have a woman like her in Canada too who runs a women's studies journal, but who views sex workers with utter contempt, going so far as to refuse them publication in her journal. It's really quite an ugly thing she's asking her letters and qualifications to do - to mute the voices of other women. It's wrong.

Anyhow it looks like that bill banning indoor prostitution was passed.. Making consensual sex work riskier and driving people being exploited even further underground and further from help by continuing to criminalize them. (yes I have a very strong view about this kind of thing)