New left project: Is porn hijacking our sexuality?

Most of the charts relating to what sells best in porn are compiled by the various producers, who are mostly interested in claiming that their products outsell those made by their rivals. The closest thing to an independent assessment (of success and artistic merit, not specifically workers' rights) would be the ETO awards, which tend to be given to stuff that's noteworthy for lavishness, humour, interesting twists, appearance of particular stars, etc.
I've watched a lot of porn DVDs over the past 5 years and I have seen a variety of stuff, very very little of which featured 'the obvious hurting of females' as its main selling point. Most of what I watched showed people having fun and sometimes women having what looked like genuine orgasms. Some of the performers looked a bit bored sometimes, and some of the dialogue was unpleasant (and in all my reviewing I always made the case for stuff that looked like fun and sent the message that this is all about fun not hurting people in a non-consensual way), but most of it was just about all-round enjoyment.

Just did a google search WidowWadman using the following terms:

Double anal: 15,700,000
Double penetration: 73,000,000
Facial 78,800,000
Feminist sex 38,300,000
Teen porn 205,000,000
MILTF 2,400,000
Elder sex 70,400,000

The porn industry compile lists, just like in anything else, music, films etc. Have a look at those. The porn industry really aren't coy is recognising what their material is. They write descriptions that are quite clear about this.

Every lesbian knows that lesbian pornography serves to fulfil male fantasies. It also serves to fulfil heterosexual females fantasies too. It most certainly doesn't fulfil lesbians.

But men don't find women above 30 attractive on a porn site. All those above 30 are seen as mothers I'd like to fuck. Anyone woman above 40 is defunct.

Within porn that is. Not in real life.

Petra Boynton doesn't offer any stats herself, despite being a scientist. And it's all very well rubbishing other's approaches but giving nothing to back it up in return, except, weirdly, her own anecdotal experiences. Based totally on her Doctorate.

Anyway, it's so obvious that porn is hijacking our sexuality. You only have to check out the relationships section. Porn is increasingly violent, feminist porn barely exists and is not hit upon, lesbian porn is a niche serving men mostly. Gay sex is a niche that is becoming increasingly marginalised. Mostly porn is about double penetration, double anal, multiple facials, and the obvious hurting of females.

If this doesn't hijack sexuality, I don't know what does.

I consume pornography. but it does concern me that some abuse takes place in that industry, i would rather be sure that the images i look at are in no way exploitative.
SGB's fair trade idea would be good
men will continue find women attractive and aroused by their undressing, and there are enough exhibishinist people out there who will enjoy being paid for it.
men and women will continue to enjoy watching other men and women having sex, in a voyeuristic way. better to regulate that to try to outlaw it, were all adults , people who can have sex should be able to watch others having sex without this harming anyone.

i have the distinct feeling that most links here will be cherry-picked to suit the agendas of the posters .

Yes, of course I know. I don't think that the existence of such practices washes away the validity of the questions I've mentioned in my post.

Why do women consume gay male pornography? Is it because it is free and clear of the misogyny and violence found in mainstream het porn? Or is it because two men together is hot, and female viewers are no more inclined to face the problematic circumstances of porn production?

Dunno, frankly. I think probably the latter, but I can see how the former could be argued.

Same goes for women watching women. Same-sex relationships aren't magic - patriarchy is bigger than individuals. It's hardly a criticism to observe that individual relationships and identities can't exist outside the tidal wave of influences that make up the world in which we live.

It's hardly mindblowing to argue that gay and lesbian sexuality is potentially as hijacked as heterosexuality is when we look at popular consumption of pornography.

Can people subvert this? I personally suspect not.

You do know that there is and has been for over 20 years lesbian porn that's made by lesbians for lesbians, don't you? (and that straight women often like to look at gay male porn, too...)

Yes SGB, that's exactly what is sounds like, doesn't it? That I'm a fuckwitted bigot with no sensitivity with regard to gay relationships. 'Which one's the man', FFS.

It's got nothing to do with the fact that, as I quite clearly stated, gay relationships (just as het ones) have gender roles harmfully inflicted upon them from their inception. None of us have the space to truly develop our own sexual identity outside of patriarchy. There's also the small matter of it being a POLITICAL analysis, and therefore not only would I not be so rude to ask the question you accuse me of, but I actively think it's irrelevant.

With regard to pornography, which is what we're talking about, does the inclusion of same-sex pornography overturn the harm frequently found in the paradigm, or does it reinforce it? Does the fact that it's a man being penetrated wickedly subvert the inequality inherent in penetration, or does it position him in the role of the 'sex class'?

'Lesbian' pornography has of course been frequently bent and twisted to serve heterosexual interests - the intended viewer is a man, bringing men into an act that, by it's very definition, neighter involves nor wants men.

Anyone wanting to make ethical porn has this minefield to negotiate.

I haven't made this up - this is current debate in queer theory and certain feminist circles. I've tried to capture both sides of the coin in my posts, and I'd really like it if you'd stop calling me names.

VG: That sounds awfully like you want to ask every gay couple 'which one's the man.' Which is regarded by most gay people as thoroughly fuckwitted and extremely rude.

I'm a fuckwit too then because I agree totally with VictorGollanz.

Well, it depends, doesn't it, on whether you consider gay relationships and interactions to overturn heterosexual conventions, or whether they mimic them.

Both make sense: given that heteronormativity is a founding assumption of much social interaction, there's never really been a safe, neutral space for gay identity (and therefore relationships and sexual interactions) to find their own way.

Whoops, there I go, being a fuckwit again. And there I was thinking that I was just thinking along the same lines as the thousands of other women who are all thinking about issues like this.

I have been tinkering for a while with the idea of setting up some kind of 'organic/fair trade' body for porn at least within the UK. The majority of the producers and performers I know and have worked with are not interested in harming people, they want to have fun and make money, and some are working within porn from a politicized viewpoint anyway.

Oh and do bear in mind that not all porn 'involves harm to women' because not all porn involves women in the first place. Or is someone going to come out with the fuckwitted nonsense that the men in gay male porn 'represent' women?

The mere fact that this issue can be sidelined (apologies if that's wrong term), or pigeonholed as a feminist issue, shows that men don't feel it is something that needs taking seriously.

That, in itself, should say everything about men's general attitudes, no?

AutumnSummers wrote - "Finding legitimately made porn is not difficult."

How can anyone verify the validity of claims that some porn is legitimate or "ethical" and not abusive?

Is there an independent porn classification board or a health and safety quango that has observers checking throughout the entire production cycle of those porn films or magazines? Or is it just a case of having to accept the unchecked claims of porn producers and consumers that "no person was harmed in the making of this film"?

FFS, I didn't say anything about abuse of women. I said that the sex exchange is inherently problematic in a patriarchal set-up. Which it is. I hardly think it is controversial or dogmatic to say so.

Anyone who wants to make ethical porn is going to have to work extremely hard to do so. Even if they acheive it (and I'm prepared to believe that someone, somewhere, has) they are still working within a paradigm that is inherently misogynistic.

The misogyny of mainstream porn taints everything it touches; this includes attempts to redeem or reclaim the genre.

But NEVERMIND THAT. Let's just portray one another as unthinking, uncritical drones and have done.

Bet you could get a Marxist to agree with a capitalist. If they were both men, and you suggested to them that the trouble with feminists is that they're so aggressive and strident... bet the two of them would agree then .

Yes SGB we won't ever agree on that one. We start from a different, and completely incompatible, political starting point. Neither are more like religion than the other, but we won't ever agree for sure. Would be like expecting a Marxist to agree with a capitalist.

Of course once we've got rid of patriarchy, who knows.

sgb that's a shame because it isn't the only pov being debated