Is Pornography really degrading women?

[PassionFruit]

I just wanted to add, because I don't know if this has been pointed out already that not all feminists feel that porn is "degrading." It's a divisive topic, and I'll say there is some porn out there I would label as degrading (perhaps it's the type of sexual acts that are involved). But then there's other forms of pornography that aren't so bad. This is also true for other forms of sex work. Some feminists don't feel that prostitution is degrading.

You may be surprised to know there's a such thing as feminist porn. I know that sounds like an oxymoron (maybe it is) but it's basically porn that's made by women and focuses on women's pleasure. Mainstream porn unfortunately doesn't do that.

My position is basically that it doesn't have to be degrading, but can be empowering in some ways.

 

[Koldo]

To Koldo: Prostitution and pornography are intertwined on a lower-level. That is, porn stars who show up to conventions are usually not involved in prostitution (though, all the porn stars Charlie Sheen has paid for, makes me a unsure of that validity); however, the lower-level "actors/actresses" involved in live sex shows, strippers etc. routinely alternate between pornography and prostitution. Sex work is intrinsically connected.

Surely, but they are still different products. And should be treated differently.

If you want more evidence go read the book that I linked to. It's not terribly expensive, if a bit pricey. It is the single best source I have found on the topic.

One *pricey* book doesn't make up for a reliable argument ( unless you believe that it was written by God ).

In relation to the Marxist approach, all I can say is being we cannot get rid of the capitalist wage-labour system, we should try to ameliorate its effects. That is, we cannot make everyone autonomous and not dependent on wage-labour, but we can eliminate some of the more harmful lines of work. That vast majority of prostitutes want out of the profession and a sizeable portion use drugs to cope with the sex acts involved.

You are comparing prostitution and pornography as if they were one and the same, and such is not the case.

It is so unreasonable to assert that society should work to make sure no person has to resort to sex acts in order to survive under a wage-labour system?

No, but the problem in your question is the word "resort". No person should have to resort to sex acts to make a living, but everyone should be to free to live from them if they want to.

 

[Vendetta]

To Vendetta: In general, just because you are placing yourself in the position of an actor/actress in the pornographic film does not mean there is no objectification involved. In fact, if objectification is explicitly or implicitly present in the narrative, a vicarious attitude towards the film probably intensifies, as it is not as detached in the mind of the voyeur. Fantasies are good and all, but we must never forget that real people are involved in the making of pornography. Personal choice is taken into account, but it is not the end of the discussion. For instance, it is a personal decision to stay in a relationship with an abuser, yet we recognise this as an unhealthy relation.

So, in your view harm still is present even if both adults in the film.consent to sex as well as the acts that are also performed? I have a hard time seeing how objectification is present, objectifively if there is consent not just the actors but also the viewer.
With respect to someone that is in a relationship with an abuser I believe that is an unfair comparison. For example, porn actors and actresses are "free" to change or exchange partners as they wish or wherever the money is. Victims of abuse may not have that luxury since, perhaps these victims have become complacencent in that relationship for psychological reasons. Porn actresses are free to call the police if they feel they were abused, victims of abuse probably wont (except in other circumstances).

Tell me if I consent to being filmed on camera having intercourse I have a hard time understanding how my consent, plus my actions reduces me to an object of fantasy when given the possibility that a viewer is finding gratification from watching me perform.

 

[Father Heathen]

Essentially, is the intent behind the act what makes it insulting?
If slapping someone in the face is insulting... is it still insulting if they like it and ask you to do it?

If someone enjoys it, how can it insult them?

wa:do

ps. I know a woman who is VERY into being dominated and can achieve sexual gratification without intercourse thanks to it.

It could be due to psychological issues and low self esteem. A lot of women in the sex industry, and/or into the more questionable fetishes tend to have been sexually abused in the past. Just because something is done with consent doesn't necessarily mean it's emotionally healthy.

 

[painted wolf]

It could be due to psychological issues and low self esteem. A lot of women in the sex industry, and/or into the more questionable fetishes tend to have been sexually abused in the past. Just because something is done with consent doesn't necessarily mean it's emotionally healthy.

Agreed.... however, 1 out of 6 women in the US population has been sexually assaulted. I'm not sure there is such strong correlation between abuse and occupation/fetish enjoyment.

wa:do

 

[Father Heathen]

Agreed.... however, 1 out of 6 women in the US population has been sexually assaulted. I'm not sure there is such strong correlation between abuse and occupation/fetish enjoyment.

wa:do

How did they determine those numbers? Also, if the number is that high then the ratio of men who are rapists must be staggeringly high as well. Odd how society seems largely silent regarding something that's apparently happening on an epidemic level.

 

[Darkness]

I just wanted to add, because I don't know if this has been pointed out already that not all feminists feel that porn is "degrading." It's a divisive topic, and I'll say there is some porn out there I would label as degrading (perhaps it's the type of sexual acts that are involved). But then there's other forms of pornography that aren't so bad. This is also true for other forms of sex work. Some feminists don't feel that prostitution is degrading.

You may be surprised to know there's a such thing as feminist porn. I know that sounds like an oxymoron (maybe it is) but it's basically porn that's made by women and focuses on women's pleasure. Mainstream porn unfortunately doesn't do that.

My position is basically that it doesn't have to be degrading, but can be empowering in some ways.

I assent. Not all feminists do believe pornography is degrading/bad. However, in my opinion, those feminists live in a fantasy world. I have read a lot of sex-positive feminist writings and their writings are so ethereal. I actually wrote a paper for my Communication Theory class in which I compared sex-positive feminism to Communism.

 

[Darkness]

Surely, but they are still different products. And should be treated differently.

How are they different? Parties exchange sex for money in both arrangements. The differences are quite cosmetic.

One *pricey* book doesn't make up for a reliable argument ( unless you believe that it was written by God ).

The best evidence I have seen to support the argument come from that book. I will try to track down some individual articles, but you might need to belong to a University with a subscription to academic journals to view them.

You are comparing prostitution and pornography as if they were one and the same, and such is not the case.

(see above)

No, but the problem in your question is the word "resort". No person should have to resort to sex acts to make a living, but everyone should be to free to live from them if they want to.

Let me ask you this. Should people be free not to wear seatbelts?

I am going to be honest. I do not buy into the liberal/libertarian perception of freedom. I am firmly with Rousseau. Sometimes restrictions are necessary in order to reveal true freedom.

 

[Darkness]

So, in your view harm still is present even if both adults in the film.consent to sex as well as the acts that are also performed? I have a hard time seeing how objectification is present, objectifively if there is consent not just the actors but also the viewer.

Let me ask you a question. Should two consenting adults be able to fight to the death?

With respect to someone that is in a relationship with an abuser I believe that is an unfair comparison. For example, porn actors and actresses are "free" to change or exchange partners as they wish or wherever the money is. Victims of abuse may not have that luxury since, perhaps these victims have become complacencent in that relationship for psychological reasons. Porn actresses are free to call the police if they feel they were abused, victims of abuse probably wont (except in other circumstances).

You are utilising a double-standard. Yes, victims may have become complacent in their relationship, but according to your standard, as long as the participant is a consenting adult, shouldn't he or she be free to make that choice? There are plenty of other men/women out there to go have a relationship with. You see, in the abusive scenario you consider psychological reasons, but when it comes to pornography you throw those out the window. Maybe a man in pornography is in it for self-esteem issues. Maybe a woman is involved doing it, because she doesn't know feel any worth in herself besides her body image in an overly sexualised culture. A typical scenario is the heterosexual male who performs in gay porn, because it pays more.

Tell me if I consent to being filmed on camera having intercourse I have a hard time understanding how my consent, plus my actions reduces me to an object of fantasy when given the possibility that a viewer is finding gratification from watching me perform.

I have no problem with you filming yourself having sex and putting it on the internet. That is fine. I am merely concerned with the wage-labour monetary dimension to it.

 

[Koldo]

How are they different? Parties exchange sex for money in both arrangements. The differences are quite cosmetic.

In prostitution there is a person paying another to get sex. The first person in the deal is buying a service for his/her own pleasure. In pornography industry, a third person is paying two people to have sex between themselves.

The best evidence I have seen to support the argument come from that book. I will try to track down some individual articles, but you might need to belong to a University with a subscription to academic journals to view them.

Too bad.

Let me ask you this. Should people be free not to wear seatbelts?

Yes, but that is rather stupid of them. I wonder what this has to do with the currently discussed issue though.

 

[painted wolf]

How did they determine those numbers? Also, if the number is that high then the ratio of men who are rapists must be staggeringly high as well. Odd how society seems largely silent regarding something that's apparently happening on an epidemic level.

Victims and Perpetrators | National Institute of Justice
It is isn't it... but then we only recently decided that a husband can in fact rape his wife. It wasn't legally considered rape for a man to force himself on his wife in North Carolina until 1993.

wa:do

 

[Darkness]

In prostitution there is a person paying another to get sex. The first person in the deal is buying a service for his/her own pleasure. In pornography industry, a third person is paying two people to have sex between themselves.

Yeah, but it is kind of liking saying that gladiator tournaments are not the same as harming someone, because you are not doing it for your own purposes, but for the benefit of the audience. The end result is the same. Somebody ends up hurt or dead. Pornography is not acting in the same sense that normal actors act. In normal acting, there is separation. That is, when there is a fight seen and somebody is punched, they aren't really punched. In pornography there really is sex involved; it is not simulated, therefore it is not acting.

I am not under the illusion we could ban pornography-for-profit any time soon in the United States, but how about a compromise. We keep pornography legal, but set the age floor for participation at 25. The pornography preys on young people who are still not cognitively and emotionally developed. Taking those victims out of the equation would be a step in the right direction.

Too bad.

I will see if I can find them, anyway. Patience is a virtue.

Yes, but that is rather stupid of them. I wonder what this has to do with the currently discussed issue though.

It is the mere fact that many people (myself included) believe the society/government has the right to interfere with adult consent. We should enforce seatbelt laws, because they save lives; to hell with adult consent.

 

[ninerbuff]

Yeah, but it is kind of liking saying that gladiator tournaments are not the same as harming someone, because you are not doing it for your own purposes, but for the benefit of the audience. The end result is the same. Somebody ends up hurt or dead. Pornography is not acting in the same sense that normal actors act. In normal acting, there is separation. That is, when there is a fight seen and somebody is punched, they aren't really punched. In pornography there really is sex involved; it is not simulated, therefore it is not acting.

I am not under the illusion we could ban pornography-for-profit any time soon in the United States, but how about a compromise. We keep pornography legal, but set the age floor for participation at 25. The pornography preys on young people who are still not cognitively and emotionally developed. Taking those victims out of the equation would be a step in the right direction.

This is a good analogy. But today the "gladiator" fights happen in the ring where the combatants WANT to fight. MMA, boxing, Muay Thai, jui-jitsu, etc. all have competitors that try to inflict pain on their opponents and are willing to take the pain back for sport.
And I do believe that there are many (especially young females) that may not have thought about future consequence if they participate in porn. I mean look at all the "free" porn posted on the internet by couples or dorms that exploit themselves thinking that it was just good fun. Lol, I almost dread my for my daughter going to college after seeing some of these.

It is the mere fact that many people (myself included) believe the society/government has the right to interfere with adult consent. We should enforce seatbelt laws, because they save lives; to hell with adult consent.

There are some things we should enforce because some adults don't use common sense. Seatbelts, having driving insurance, and making sure your kid goes to school are good ones.

 

[blackout]

I am not under the illusion we could ban pornography-for-profit any time soon in the United States, but how about a compromise. We keep pornography legal, but set the age floor for participation at 25. The pornography preys on young people who are still not cognitively and emotionally developed. Taking those victims out of the equation would be a step in the right direction.

I agree with that actually.

 

[Rakhel]

Then we might as well drive the legal age for gambling, smoking, alcohol, voting and joining the service to 25 as well, Mustn't forget driving, either. Can't drive until your 25.

 

[ninerbuff]

Then we might as well drive the legal age for gambling, smoking, alcohol, voting and joining the service to 25 as well, Mustn't forget driving, either. Can't drive until your 25.

Actually I believe they should raise the minimum driving age to 18. Having minors drive cars, and then do something utterly stupid and having the parents have to pay for it isn't what I call fair. Parents can tell their kids all sorts of right things to do, but even the most responsible kids have lapses of irresponsibility once in awhile.

 

[Rakhel]

Driving age should be raised to at least 18, I agree. Having different ages because one age is more mature for one thing but not mature enough for another is down right immature, IMO. Set the age to one age. It saves on confusion.

 

[Rakhel]

LOL I forgot marriage in my rant on legal ages. Set that to 25 as well, nation wide.

 

[Koldo]

Yeah, but it is kind of liking saying that gladiator tournaments are not the same as harming someone, because you are not doing it for your own purposes, but for the benefit of the audience. The end result is the same. Somebody ends up hurt or dead. Pornography is not acting in the same sense that normal actors act. In normal acting, there is separation. That is, when there is a fight seen and somebody is punched, they aren't really punched. In pornography there really is sex involved; it is not simulated, therefore it is not acting.

There is a very big difference between a fight , with two consenting adults, and randomly harming someone. It is pretty clear to me.

I am not under the illusion we could ban pornography-for-profit any time soon in the United States, but how about a compromise. We keep pornography legal, but set the age floor for participation at 25. The pornography preys on young people who are still not cognitively and emotionally developed. Taking those victims out of the equation would be a step in the right direction.

rakhel's answer was simply perfect so i will quote her:

Then we might as well drive the legal age for gambling, smoking, alcohol, voting and joining the service to 25 as well, Mustn't forget driving, either. Can't drive until your 25.

It is the mere fact that many people (myself included) believe the society/government has the right to interfere with adult consent. We should enforce seatbelt laws, because they save lives; to hell with adult consent.

People shouldn't have to be forced to use the seatbelt if they don't want it as long as they are putting ONLY their lives in danger. The fact is, however, there is no good reason to don't use a seatbelt.

 

[Darkness]

This is a good analogy. But today the "gladiator" fights happen in the ring where the combatants WANT to fight. MMA, boxing, Muay Thai, jui-jitsu, etc. all have competitors that try to inflict pain on their opponents and are willing to take the pain back for sport.

There is a crucial difference. People normally join MMA, Karate and Muay Thai training because they enjoy it. It is not done for money. As far as I am aware people do not repeatedly make pornography without being paid. Without money involved, we would still have people taking part in MMA fights.

And I do believe that there are many (especially young females) that may not have thought about future consequence if they participate in porn. I mean look at all the "free" porn posted on the internet by couples or dorms that exploit themselves thinking that it was just good fun. Lol, I almost dread my for my daughter going to college after seeing some of these.

Which is why society needs to regulate certain aspects of our lives for our own good. People cannot be allowed to do whatever they want, because too much freedom corrupts us. As Jean-Jacques Rousseau would say, natural liberty is not true liberty, because irrational exuberance reigns (i.e. a slave to our passions and short-sightedness). It always amuses me when people who are left-wing on economic issues (i.e. redistributionism), fail to see that we cannot have anarchy present in our social decisions. People make stupid mistakes all the time, and we need a social system, with wisdom passed down from generation to generation, constantly progressing in enlightenment, to guide our path. This is not a call to totalitarianism, but rather a call for communitarianism. What I am is not any more freedom stifling than government mandated labour laws, or government mandated safety designs for automobiles.

There are some things we should enforce because some adults don't use common sense. Seatbelts, having driving insurance, and making sure your kid goes to school are good ones.

We have found common ground.