Mumsnet Talk

Tentative!

Um, the way I see it is that a lot of porn (I have heard) is appallingly violent and degrading for women. This stuff, ideally wouldn't exist and should be banned (how, I don't know, but ideally).

However, the porn that I have seen or enjoyed is not. I wouldn't enjoy porn that is degrading.

So, why is all porn bad? (in some people's opinions?) If it isn't degrading and is equal in its approach, for the entertainment of others, then I don't see any harm.

Is the argument that you don't get the 'good' porn without the bad?

Don't flame me please, I really want this to be a considered conversation.

maybe no one has an opinion on this?

What sort of porn are you talking about?

I don't see how you can talk about "good" porn when it's about wanking to prostitution on film.

I'm trying to distinguish between the violent, degrading stuff and the non-degrading consensual filmed sex.

At the risk of being seen as joyless and prudish (I am neither), I am with Dittany on this. I am no expert on porn but what constitutes 'good' porn? Ok, it might be the kind of porn that looks consensual and, maybe, no one looks to be physically hurt by it, but how can you possibly know that's the case?

Well I guess I don't know. So are you saying because I don't know then I should assume it isn't?

How do you know it's consensual msrisotto? People would probably have described Deep Throat as non-degrading consensual even though Linda Mariciano was being raped on camera.

I think the fact that sexual torture has basically become de rigeur in porn has let people off the hook who watch less violent but no less degrading (how could it not be degrading to have your most intimate moments filmed in exchange for money) pornography.

When I said what sort of porn are you talking about, I was wondering if you could give some sort of details or examples. Who are the producers for example?

(Sorry typed that before reading LifeisSweet's post).

I don't have a clue about producers of porn.

Some people are very willing to degrade themselves in exchange for money, I'm thinking big brother contestants!

Perhaps it depends on what you define as sexual torture. What is your sexual torture may not be someone else's I guess. This doesn't mean there aren't legal definitions of course.

I think the industry is well known for exploiting women - and in a way that is often not obvious from watching the stuff. I can't imagine a life where I did that for a living and I would hate for a daughter of mine to do it too (I have none, thankfully, because I would worry for them).

Apart from all that, viewing porn of any kind is feeding the industry that is undermining women's progress in the world and wildly confusing our young people about what women and sex are about.

I agree with what you're saying in respect to some porn, but surely not all of it?

Can you be more specific about the contents of the porn you're watching or the titles etc Msrisotto. It's not really possible to have this conversation if we don't know what you're referring to.

Also if you're agreeing that people in porn are being degraded for money, hence the reference to the Big Brother contestants, then why would you want to watch it?

When I say sexual torture I'm talking about extreme BDSM (drawing blood etc), brutal practices like double anal or choking on penises, flushing women's heads down the toilet, making women ingest excrement or urine, bukkake, gang bangs/gang rape, punching, slapping.....the list goes on.

I would add psychological torture - the sort of coercion that is not immediately obvious. The sort that makes women take mind-numbing drugs to block out what's happening to them. The may appear to be having straightforward sex and consenting, but you still don't know whether they are being very damaged.

Well, I don't necessarily agree that people in porn are being degraded for money. I made that comment in response to your judgement that they were being degraded for money.

I haven't watched porn for years actually, but I used to. I guess I'm talking about the kind of porn where it is just sex, no violence or misogyny (which I agree, is out there though I haven't personally subjected myself to watching it).

In my OP I tried to make the distinction between 'bad' porn where all the sexual torture stuff went on, and 'good' porn which is more like what I described above. I.e respecting another persons humanity

It's not good porn though. It's all bad porn.

I watched porn in my late teens and early twenties - the kind of stuff you are claiming that is good. It's nothing of the sort, it's prostitution on film, it's degradation and objectification of women's bodies and it is harmful to all women because it reduces women to the status and value of sex objects.

Can I ask you a couple of questions if you don't mind MsR - you must have read the feminist arguments against porn now, is there a reason why you think they have had no effect on you, and secondly, if you haven't watched porn for years, is there a reason why you feel the need to defend it?

Good point lifeissweet, a lot of porn performers take drugs to get through being used like that on film.

I, personally, have never seen porn that is not degrading to women, or centred on male fantasies. I am no expert and haven't seen much, but there seems to be a lot of focus on penises and blow jobs and lots of plastic looking women with that acceptable porn body that seems to have taken over our culture (skinny with massive breasts).

None of that does anything for me.

If you have found something that is not degrading to women in how it portrays them and that is more tailored to a woman's sexual experience and that you know for sure has not been made by exploiting anyone at all then I would like to hear about it.

If it is degradation and objectification of women's bodies, it is of men's too. Seeing as it is in the sex context and not in the workplace or outside of the bedroom then I'm not sure that is a problem.

I have read some feminist arguments against porn and I wholeheartedly agree with them in reference to torture porn. I'm not sure it applies to softer core porn.

I'm not sure I'm out to defend it. My position is that I'm not sure that all porn is bad and seeing as there are a lot of people who disagree with me, I am out to discuss this with them to see if I'm missing something I guess. I haven't done a lot of things but I nevertheless can have an opinion on them.

Like I said it's hard to talk about it when we don't know what you're referring to. Nuts magazine is degrading, it's softcore. Would you say it is OK?

Why do you think prostitution on film is acceptable?

It isn't degrading of men's bodies perhaps with the exception of gay porn where the "bottom" is treated like women are treated in porn. Men in heterosexual porn are being paid to degrade and hurt the women.

I've never seen any porn but, my personal feeling is that is jporn as a category is inherently misogynistic and destructive. I can't imagine it being anything but.

I have seen a few episodes of that 'Girls Next Door' show: the one about Hugh Hefner and his 'girlfriends' late at night whilst bfing. I was just gob-smacked at how degrading it was. These 3 women were being feted for their relationships with Hefner but it was just disturbing. I honestly can't believe its on during the day. Its not just the nudity but the deeply unpleasant protrayal of the women. One episode featured their 'careers' and it was distressing especially since some of the are supposed to be college-educated.

I just can't see how porn is anything but misogynistic.

I agree that Nuts is degrading and not ok.

Can we accept that I'm not talking about violent porn?
With that in mind, how is it more degrading to the woman than the man? Simply because she is being penetrated? If so, that is like saying all sex is degrading.

SGM, I dunno, am I thinking of porn that doesn't exist? Where it's just 2 people having sex for fun?

natch - but being paid!

I don't know. I googled it after reading what Kat Banyard found. I didn't open anything just looked at the descriptors and it all looked violent.

But Nuts isn't violent! So if you're saying Nuts isn't OK how can you say hardcore pornography, even if it doesn't include any of the extremes I listed, was OK msrisotto?

Seriously the porn you saw can't have been any less degrading than Nuts. What was it you were watching, what was the context you were watching it in?

And being paid to have sex and having "fun" are very unlikely to exist in the same episode.

Saying that a woman being used in prostitution on film is degrading is not the same thing as saying that all sex is degrading. The man in porn is acting as the proxy for the viewer. It's not good for men to be used in porn either but it's not the real issue. The issue for porn users and for feminists is that women are being degraded, in porn users case because they want to see women being used like that, in feminists' case because they don't think this should be done to women.

and what about male porn?? is that viewed the same way?

The woman is acting as a proxy too. It depends on the viewer.

I classify Nuts as different because that is solely about the objectification of women for men whereas porn can be for both men and women.
Again, how is just the woman being degraded (if you view sex on film as necessarily degrading)?