Mackinnon vs. Strossen - on pornography

[MysticSang'ha]

For the purposes of this discussion, I'd like to point out the arguments made by both sides of the debate regarding the impact pornography has on society.

Catherine Mackinnon is perhaps best known along with Andrea Dworkin on her perspective regarding the use of violent imagery in mainstream pornography as well as its inherent objectification of women with its frequent viewing.

I put in Nadine Strossen on the subject of defending pornography, but we could easily offer Wendy McElroy's perspective on the social benefits pornography has, and that argues that women are sexual pursuers as well, and that censoring pornography does more harm to free speech than it does good.

Given that this is not a debate forum, but rather a discussion-only forum, I'd like to ask what the perspective is on:

1) How both arguments have impacted the social framework of how women are seen, how women see themselves, and how women see other people.
2) Is there a commonality between anti-porn and pro-porn stances? If so, what is it?
3) Since both feminists offered their arguments before the advent of internet porn, do you think their stances might have evolved?
4) Finally, has the issue of human trafficking become a bigger factor in each of their stances? How does it complicate or simplify their stances?

 

[Alceste]

For the purposes of this discussion, I'd like to point out the arguments made by both sides of the debate regarding the impact pornography has on society.

Catherine Mackinnon is perhaps best known along with Andrea Dworkin on her perspective regarding the use of violent imagery in mainstream pornography as well as its inherent objectification of women with its frequent viewing.

I put in Nadine Strossen on the subject of defending pornography, but we could easily offer Wendy McElroy's perspective on the social benefits pornography has, and that argues that women are sexual pursuers as well, and that censoring pornography does more harm to free speech than it does good.

Given that this is not a debate forum, but rather a discussion-only forum, I'd like to ask what the perspective is on:

1) How both arguments have impacted the social framework of how women are seen, how women see themselves, and how women see other people.
2) Is there a commonality between anti-porn and pro-porn stances? If so, what is it?
3) Since both feminists offered their arguments before the advent of internet porn, do you think their stances might have evolved?
4) Finally, has the issue of human trafficking become a bigger factor in each of their stances? How does it complicate or simplify their stances?

Good questions! I can't really see much wiggle room between a feminist anti-porn stance and a religious / puritanical / patriarchal anti-porn stance. Both positions seem to base their views on the idea that sex is something men do TO women, that women don't really like. That is not a realistic view. It's safe to say that pretty much everybody is into sex, and the idea that women are not supposed to be is extremely destructive.

On the other hand, it bugs me that most porn reflects BAD sex. That is, sex that satisfies the male with little or no regard to the sexual pleasure of the female participants. Not only have I seen a lot of sex like that in porn, I've HAD a lot of sex like that in my life, with men who clearly learned how to screw from watching porn.

Until the internet came along, pretty much 100% of the porn I had seen was porn that depicted sex that was obviously not enjoyable for the women on the screen, and as a sensitive / empathetic person I had a lot of problems with it because of that, and because of its detrimental impact on my own sex life (IOW, guys who didn't know how to screw).

Since the internet took the porn world by storm, I have been able to find porn that depicts women having a genuinely good time. A lot of it (OK, most of it) is produced by women and I think they're doing an awesome job.

I guess I'm kind of ambivalent, since I would not consider acting in mainstream porn (the "bad sex" kind) to be a healthy career or lifestyle choice for a woman, and the majority of the material online is still that kind of thing. On the other hand, I believe in choice - a woman should be able to choose what she does with her own body, even if that involves renting it out.

What I would like to see is lower-risk, higher reward economic opportunities for disadvantaged and underaged women, to reduce the temptation of entering the sex trade in the first place. I'd also like to see porn better regulated to reduce those risks, ensure there is never an atmosphere of economic or physical coercion (i.e. "now that you've done all the oral you agreed to, we're not going to pay you unless you do double anal"), and of course to ensure all parties are fully consenting adults and not trafficked / exploited abduction victims.

I don't know how those views have evolved over time, but since porn consumption is way, way out of the closet in modern culture (no more sketchy trenchcoated trips into the secret back room at the video store), and many women in the sex trade are taking control of their productions and the resulting income, I expect the anti-porn position would probably have softened while the sex-positive view would be broadened by the availability of so many new opportunities for public self-expression, sexual or otherwise.

 

[crossfire]

For the purposes of this discussion, I'd like to point out the arguments made by both sides of the debate regarding the impact pornography has on society.

Catherine Mackinnon is perhaps best known along with Andrea Dworkin on her perspective regarding the use of violent imagery in mainstream pornography as well as its inherent objectification of women with its frequent viewing.

I put in Nadine Strossen on the subject of defending pornography, but we could easily offer Wendy McElroy's perspective on the social benefits pornography has, and that argues that women are sexual pursuers as well, and that censoring pornography does more harm to free speech than it does good.

Given that this is not a debate forum, but rather a discussion-only forum, I'd like to ask what the perspective is on:

1) How both arguments have impacted the social framework of how women are seen, how women see themselves, and how women see other people.
2) Is there a commonality between anti-porn and pro-porn stances? If so, what is it?
3) Since both feminists offered their arguments before the advent of internet porn, do you think their stances might have evolved?
4) Finally, has the issue of human trafficking become a bigger factor in each of their stances? How does it complicate or simplify their stances?

While I haven't read the various positions you cited, I would suspect that common ground between the anti-porn and pro-porn stances would be the issue of human trafficking. No legal porn would mean an illicit porn industry--likely supplied by human trafficking.

I have seen some studies showing a positive correlation between legalized institutional prostitution and an increase of human trafficking for illicit sex trade, possibly due to increased demand in response to an increased supply. (Demand for prostitution seems to increase faster than the supply.) I don't know whether porn would follow the same pattern or not.

 

[Alceste]

While I haven't read the various positions you cited, I would suspect that common ground between the anti-porn and pro-porn stances would be the issue of human trafficking. No legal porn would mean an illicit porn industry--likely supplied by human trafficking.

I have seen some studies showing a positive correlation between legalized institutional prostitution and an increase of human trafficking for illicit sex trade, possibly due to increased demand in response to an increased supply. (Demand for prostitution seems to increase faster than the supply.) I don't know whether porn would follow the same pattern or not.

How depressing.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Good questions! I can't really see much wiggle room between a feminist anti-porn stance and a religious / puritanical / patriarchal anti-porn stance. Both positions seem to base their views on the idea that sex is something men do TO women, that women don't really like. That is not a realistic view. It's safe to say that pretty much everybody is into sex, and the idea that women are not supposed to be is extremely destructive.

Indeed. I've heard often that males are "naturally" the hunter. And that females are "naturally" the prey (which was a weird and disturbing metaphor, but anyway). Naturally, I disagree that males are always the hunter. I don't even think most of the time they're hunters. I think males and females full of feel-good hormones are both actively heading to the bedroom, or the foyer if they can't wait any longer.

On the other hand, it bugs me that most porn reflects BAD sex. That is, sex that satisfies the male with little or no regard to the sexual pleasure of the female participants. Not only have I seen a lot of sex like that in porn, I've HAD a lot of sex like that in my life, with men who clearly learned how to screw from watching porn.

I've wondered what the shift in perspective was that prompted the phallic fetishization and ejaculatory bias. I don't think it was just the phenomenon of "Deep Throat", since a lot of skin flicks and peep shows before the '70s had nothing to do with the penis. I have a lot of material at our house to look into concerning politics and culture surrounding what was popular pornography and erotica it their respective times.

Something tells me that the advent of the pill was a factor. That it not only freed women from the fear of getting pregnant most of the time, but that it freed men too. I have my doubts about the high degree of my hypothesis, but it's influence IMO is much more far-reaching socially and culturally....and I have suspicions on how it's impact gave way to certain perspectives on erotica.

I might look into it more.

Until the internet came along, pretty much 100% of the porn I had seen was porn that depicted sex that was obviously not enjoyable for the women on the screen, and as a sensitive / empathetic person I had a lot of problems with it because of that, and because of its detrimental impact on my own sex life (IOW, guys who didn't know how to screw).

Since the internet took the porn world by storm, I have been able to find porn that depicts women having a genuinely good time. A lot of it (OK, most of it) is produced by women and I think they're doing an awesome job.

I do too. There's some mainstream porn out there that I do enjoy personally, but the slow movement of porn made by women for women is making its mark. I've found these works to be much more enjoyable, and specifically because they offer sex from a female lens. Literally.

I guess I'm kind of ambivalent, since I would not consider acting in mainstream porn (the "bad sex" kind) to be a healthy career or lifestyle choice for a woman, and the majority of the material online is still that kind of thing. On the other hand, I believe in choice - a woman should be able to choose what she does with her own body, even if that involves renting it out.

What I would like to see is lower-risk, higher reward economic opportunities for disadvantaged and underaged women, to reduce the temptation of entering the sex trade in the first place. I'd also like to see porn better regulated to reduce those risks, ensure there is never an atmosphere of economic or physical coercion (i.e. "now that you've done all the oral you agreed to, we're not going to pay you unless you do double anal"), and of course to ensure all parties are fully consenting adults and not trafficked / exploited abduction victims.

There's the thought of unionizing. However, the disadvantage is that porn actors and actresses suffer from a high turnover ratio. Hardly any workers stay in the business for any considerable length of time. This is a problem that necessitates, IMO, more awareness, education, and even less stigmatizing in order for it to progress.

I don't know how those views have evolved over time, but since porn consumption is way, way out of the closet in modern culture (no more sketchy trenchcoated trips into the secret back room at the video store), and many women in the sex trade are taking control of their productions and the resulting income, I expect the anti-porn position would probably have softened while the sex-positive view would be broadened by the availability of so many new opportunities for public self-expression, sexual or otherwise.

Personally, that view is a hope of mine. Not that I wish to "win" anything as a sex-positive feminist myself, since I appreciate the arguments made by the anti-porn side, as it always offers a perspective on how people view the depiction, the visual, body expectations for what is desirable and respectful, etc.

We'll see. Great response, btw.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

While I haven't read the various positions you cited, I would suspect that common ground between the anti-porn and pro-porn stances would be the issue of human trafficking. No legal porn would mean an illicit porn industry--likely supplied by human trafficking.

Sadly, I agree.

I have seen some studies showing a positive correlation between legalized institutional prostitution and an increase of human trafficking for illicit sex trade, possibly due to increased demand in response to an increased supply. (Demand for prostitution seems to increase faster than the supply.) I don't know whether porn would follow the same pattern or not.

I would be surprised if it didn't follow the same pattern. But tbh, I have a suspicion that it isn't the simple economic model where prostitution and porn exist in a vacuum. They're influenced heavily by cultural hang-ups and entitlement mentalities, too.

If we were to address the issue of trafficking in porn and prostitution based on heterosexual entitlement, how might the supply/demand curve be affected by greater acceptance of GLBTQs and female dominance? The easy answer is that it might deter the voracious appetite for women and girls being made available for men. But my question might be how is it deterred, and what are the possible alternatives?

Brainstorm time!

 

[Sunstone]

I have seen some studies showing a positive correlation between legalized institutional prostitution...

I'm not clear on the difference between institutional prostitution and non-institutional prostitution. Could you explain for me?

 

[crossfire]

I'm not clear on the difference between institutional prostitution and non-institutional prostitution. Could you explain for me?

Legal and regulated brothel industry and organized illicit prostitution industries is what I mean by institutional prostitution, prostitutes working on their own is what I mean by non-institutional prostitution. The institution is the organization that provides/markets prostitutes.

 

[Sunstone]

Legal and regulated brothel industry and organized illicit prostitution industries is what I mean by institutional prostitution, prostitutes working on their own is what I mean by non-institutional prostitution. The institution is the organization that provides/markets prostitutes.

Thanks!

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

Good questions! I can't really see much wiggle room between a feminist anti-porn stance and a religious / puritanical / patriarchal anti-porn stance. Both positions seem to base their views on the idea that sex is something men do TO women, that women don't really like. That is not a realistic view. It's safe to say that pretty much everybody is into sex, and the idea that women are not supposed to be is extremely destructive.

Everybody isn't into sex that's why we have a-sexuality

I feel you are missing the point of the anti porn stance. It is not that women are not sexual and/or shouldn't be sexual (which is pretty ridiculous since the anti porn feminists are very pro-lesbian, Audre Lorde anyone?)

It's that male dominating sexuality is something that happens to women. If you think sexuality can only ever exist under a hierarchy of male over female and exist under force and sexual abuse, then yeah sex is something that happens to women.

 

[Sunstone]

I can remember growing up in a rural culture in which the notion that sex was something women didn't like, but consented to only out of love for a man, was the dominant notion about female sexuality. Wrapped up in that notion was the similar notion that sex was something men did to women.

 

[Alceste]

Everybody isn't into sex that's why we have a-sexuality

I feel you are missing the point of the anti porn stance. It is not that women are not sexual and/or shouldn't be sexual (which is pretty ridiculous since the anti porn feminists are very pro-lesbian, Audre Lorde anyone?)

It's that male dominating sexuality is something that happens to women. If you think sexuality can only ever exist under a hierarchy of male over female and exist under force and sexual abuse, then yeah sex is something that happens to women.

Ok, I guess I don't think that. I think sex happens in relatively egalitarian societies and subcultures too.

That said, mainstream porn is definitely not what I would call an egalitarian sub-culture. It's a hyper-patriarchal paradigm that I find disturbing and offensive. But I don't believe making images of sex is inherently disturbing and offensive. There are women making porn that seems relatively egalitarian. I think there should be more of that and less of the other, but I don't really know how to go about making that happen. I just hope it will as our status continues to evolve.

 

[Alceste]

I can remember growing up in a rural culture in which the notion that sex was something women didn't like, but consented to only out of love for a man, was the dominant notion about female sexuality. Wrapped up in that notion was the similar notion that sex was something men did to women.

Sure, I got that distinct impression myself. It's confusing when you're a hormone-filled teenage girl. I "fell in love" twice a week. Lol.

 

[Sunstone]

Sure, I got that distinct impression myself. It's confusing when you're a hormone-filled teenage girl. I "fell in love" twice a week. Lol.

It's also confusing when you're a hormone filled teenage boy. You fall in love with someone, want to have sex with them, and hate yourself for wanting to have sex with someone who, you are told, doesn't really want to have sex, actually loathes sex, but will only do it to please you. Twists your feelings seven ways to hell.

On the bright side, it paves the way for some kinky consensual sex later on in life.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

Ok, I guess I don't think that. I think sex happens in relatively egalitarian societies and subcultures too.

That said, mainstream porn is definitely not what I would call an egalitarian sub-culture. It's a hyper-patriarchal paradigm that I find disturbing and offensive. But I don't believe making images of sex is inherently disturbing and offensive. There are women making porn that seems relatively egalitarian. I think there should be more of that and less of the other, but I don't really know how to go about making that happen. I just hope it will as our status continues to evolve.

I don't think making images of sex is inherently disturbing either. But I think making an industry out of it is what creates all kinds of problems, because then it becomes about making as much money as possible, whatever it takes.
Not to mention it attracts people who have been abused and are self destructive.
This is because some victims of childhood abuse end up getting into situations to re-live their abuse over and over and over again but this time they convince themselves that they are now in control.
I don't know if making nicer images would solve everything, but that's why I actually agree with Dworkin and Mackinnon's pornography laws.

 

[Sunstone]

... I actually agree with Dworkin and Mackinnon's pornography laws.

What are their laws? I've forgotten, although I read about them some time ago.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I don't think making images of sex is inherently disturbing either. But I think making an industry out of it is what creates all kinds of problems, because then it becomes about making as much money as possible, whatever it takes.
Not to mention it attracts people who have been abused and are self destructive.
This is because some victims of childhood abuse end up getting into situations to re-live their abuse over and over and over again but this time they convince themselves that they are now in control.
I don't know if making nicer images would solve everything, but that's why I actually agree with Dworkin and Mackinnon's pornography laws.

Thank you very much for representing the anti-porn stance.

For the purposes of the discussion, H, did the OP fairly represent your stance along with Mackinnon and Dworkin?

And I would very much like to hear your take on any commonalities between anti-porn and pro-porn, as well as the introduction of internet porn on the industry, on more women producers, and on more demand of erotica online by women.

Thanks for entering the discussion.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

What are their laws? I've forgotten, although I read about them some time ago.

You can find them online under "Andrea Dworkin and Catherine Mackinnion Anti-Pornography Civil Rights Ordinance"

 

[Sunstone]

You can find them online under "Andrea Dworkin and Catherine Mackinnion Anti-Pornography Civil Rights Ordinance"

Thanks!

 

[Alceste]

You can find them online under "Andrea Dworkin and Catherine Mackinnion Anti-Pornography Civil Rights Ordinance"

Thanks, found it on wikipedia. I'd link, but it's Pain on my phone.

I generally agree with those ordinances, especially where they address the subject of coercion, sexualized violence causing injury and the unauthorized use of such images being defined as defamation. I'm not sure we can define all sub / dom porn as a violation of civil rights. Some folks do enjoy humiliation and pain, and we shouldn't deny anyone the right to explore and even profit from those inclinations, even though they are more often than not caused by childhood sexual abuse.

I'm not sure about the trafficking ordinance. Seems to me that making the images is where we need to focus our efforts, and ensure everyone involved is consenting and protected from unsafe working conditions and exploitation.