Math Magazine and 'good' porn.

Also I agree with Audre Lorde:

noproncollective.blogspot.co.uk/2007/05/audre-lorde-sadomasochism-in-lesbian.html

"Leigh: What about the doctrine of “live and let live” and civil liberties issues?

"Audre: I don’t see that as the point. I’m not questioning anyone’s right to live. I’m saying we must observe the courses and implications of our lives. If we are talking about feminism then the personal is political and we can subject everything in our lives to scrutiny. We have been nurtured in a sick, abnormal society, and we should be in the process of reclaiming ourselves, not the terms of that society. This is complex. I speak not about condemnation but about recognizing what is happening and questioning what it means. I’m not willing to regiment anyone’s life. If we are to scrutinize our human relationships, we must be willing to scrutinize all aspects of those relationships. The subject of revolution is ourselves, is our lives.

"Sadomasochism is an institutionalized celebration of dominant/subordinate relationships. And, it prepares us either to accept subordination or to enforce dominance. Even in play, to affirm that the exertion of power over powerlessness is erotic, is empowering, is to set the emotional and social stage for the continuation of that relationship, politically, socially and economically.

"Sadomasochism feeds the belief that domination is inevitable. It can be compared to the phenomenon of worshipping a godhead with two faces, and worshipping only the white part on the full moon and the black part on the dark of the moon, as if totally separate. But you cannot corral any aspect within your life, divorce its implications, whether it’s what you eat for breakfast or how you say goodbye. This is what integrity means."

That's me finished with the C&P.

I don't agree at all that the quote applies to all sexual acts. It's talking about the eroticisation of force, domination and submission, sadism and masochism.

This is also on point from Sheila Jeffreys (only 4 pages):

www.mediafire.com/?f5t3dxwc0nf6c78

Talking about the beginning of pro-porn feminists, she says:

"What I think happened is that as feminists started putting out slide shows analyzing pornography, and as women started having reactions to those slides—at times becoming turned on by those slides them selves —there were two choices that women could make. They could say: "I am turned on by these slides. Isn't it absolutely horrifying how my subordination as a woman has been eroticised and gotten into what is the most intimate and personal part of me— the middle of my heart and my body—and appears to be part of what is most personal and most mine?"

"They could say that, and become absolutely furious about the extent to which women's oppression can actually enter into our hearts and minds. That is the choice I have made and other feminists have made. And therefore it motivates us even more to fight pornography and male violence.

"Alternatively, women who are turned on by such slides could think: "I am aroused by this material. Therefore, I am angry with the feminists who are showing it to me. I am angry because they are making me feel guilty and ashamed. Therefore, I will fight them." I think this is why some feminists are fighting the antipornography activists, are fighting us."

Not had time to read the link yet but I will.

Interesting quotes Flora but they apply to all sexual acts including those between consenting couples in a bedroom. Please don't tell me I can't have sex at all!!!!

Coming to this thread late but I have RTFT.

This is interesting: (7 pages)

www.mediafire.com/?6lcyid9dchi5bdi

It's an essay by Dorchen Leidholtd from The Sexual Liberals and the Attack on Feminism published in 1990.

These were written 25 years ago and I think we are seeing the realisation of the concerns they were talking about. It's clear that so-called "kink" or nonconformist sexual activities were not even really taboo or non-conforming back then, let alone today, in the context of women's sexuality in patriarchal society.

Talking about violent sexual fantasises reported by "pro-sex" feminists she says:

"we have to look beyond the fantasies themselves to the culture in which they develop. It is not just coincidence that they imitate the violence men do to women and girls. Think about the implications for our sexuality of the following statis tics: More than a third of us were sexually abused as children (Russell, 1984). For many of us, our first sexual experience was a sexual assault. Forty-four percent of us will be raped (Russell, 1984). The environment in which we learn about and experience our bodies and sexuality is a world not of sexual freedom but of sexual force. Is it any surprise that it is often force that we eroticize? Sadistic and masochistic fantasies may be part of our sexuality, but they are no more our freedom than the culture of misogyny and sexual violence that engendered them."

"The inescapable fallacy of the sexual repression thesis, as applied to women by the pro-sex people, is that it looks at sexuality within a context of largely mythical sexual restrictions and outside an environ ment of real, ongoing male sexual exploitation and abuse. In doing so, it turns what is done to women's sexuality by external oppression into something we do to ourselves in our heads. It suggests that if only women can break through internal "taboos," we will have sexual free dom, indeed we will be free. It ignores the real political lesson of wom en's sexual experience: women cannot have sexual freedom, or any other kind of freedom, until we dismantle the system of sexual oppression in which we live."

In relation to "ethical porn" by couples, I know two women who were manipulated by their partners into being strippers because the partners got off on other men watching their GF/wife. At the time, both women happily said it was their choice and they were totally cool about it. Both couples split up soon after and neither woman would now characterise what happened to them as their free choice. It is simply not possible to know whether anyone being filmed having sex is consenting whether they give interviews before or after or not.

They know that other parts are acted, that isn't an issue, but the sex is real

This is something I really can't understand. I mean, I watch movies for the emotions they provoke, knowing full well that the actors don't feel those same emotions, and I wouldn't enjoy crying over, let's say, Boromir's death scene if I knew they really shot a man full of arrows to film that.

Porn is like, I don't know, watching someone actually die, and knowing that the people around him are not really sad, they just pretend to be.

I'm not much into visual erotica anyway, but could possibly enjoy something where it is made to look like the people have sex, as long as I know for sure they don't actually do.

I can only watch romance movies because I know the actors are not actually in love with each other and it is all acting. If I thought it had been filmed by a hidden camera, I'd feel like a voyeur.

"That was me and as I subsequently explained I was trying to understand why only porn will do to scratch that itch, not erotica or acted sex scenes ie no real sex."
I think this is the crux of the matter. It seems to me visual porn works so well for those who use it simply because they know that the sex is real. They know that other parts are acted, that isn't an issue, but the sex is real. What makes it work is exactly the same as what makes it problematic, in that someones bodily integrity and consent is being traded for your pleasure. And seems that people are not only willing to accept this, but that in and of itself is part of the thrill? And then we get into the power relationship behind all this..............whether that is male/female, or the gaze of the viewer versus the viewed.

Go to her social media account which talks about how great porn is, how great her scenes are, how much money she makes, how she loves entertaining her "fans". That's good enough for most people to deny any harm has taken place

This reminds me of a skanky guy at uni telling me how much the two women involved in a prostitute three some he had enjoyed it. It made my skin crawl that he genuinely had applied no critical thought whatsoever to their performance. Ugh. (He also thought if he bought dinner for a woman twice she owed him sex. I'm pleased I never have to talk to him again but I did get an interesting insight into the mind of a misogynist!)
Yes of course porn actresses have no ulterior motive for saying they love their job and their fans. Not like they are being paid or anything

Yes fine bitof. But at the point where I asked "what do you get out of it?" We hadn't covered all that
Suffice to say many people feel the pull, and they clearly do. If you want more details try opening a thread in 'Sex'. See this again illuminates your feeling that anti-porn = anti sex. I could say you are "prude shaming". I don't need to go and read the sex board to know about sex thanks.

It's a northern expression my granny was fond of. Expressing distaste at another women mostly in relation to said woman's sexual habits.

Their is an inference that I am "no better than she should be".

Well, that would be implying that you are exactly as good as you should be.

I am no native speaker, but if I interpret this correctly, this is a deeply patriarchal notion, the idea that there should be women who are "sluts" and whom men can use for sexual gratification.

Feminists have no such notions. We certainly imply that someone who watches porn has some room for improvement.
What we don't do is require a class of "bad women" so that we can shine all the brighter. Feminists want all women to be feminists.

Felas - I think generally people ignore the harm or deny it.

It's become even easier in the world of social media with porn actresses bring so accessible.

Was an actress harmed in a particular scene? Go to her social media account which talks about how great porn is, how great her scenes are, how much money she makes, how she loves entertaining her "fans". That's good enough for most people to deny any harm has taken place.

Indeed Dadwashere and the figures among young people are even higher. Also, most of the young women watch porn on their own.

Felsa "you are reading stuff that isn't there" that's my point. I think we all do that. My point was about linguistics and inference but you wanted it to be about porn. I am questioning the way our expectations feed into what we hear and how that impacts on the discussion. As always I was pointing the finger as much at myself as at others.

You have to be careful with "what do you get out of it" as discussions can quickly descend into swapping/judging sexual experiences. Suffice to say many people feel the pull, and they clearly do. If you want more details try opening a thread in 'Sex'.

"porn is ethical because I say it is" - wow you set a high bar. I have considered body discipline, related it to Marxist theory, engaged with the ideas of ethical vs feminist porn, quoted academic treatise of 'pro sex' (urgh) feminists, considered the language used, referenced websites that promote ethical and feminist porn and found out what Harry Potter does in his down time. I have concluded I am a damaged feminist and that feminist porn is a difficult argument to justify. But really I said "porn is ethical because I say it is". That would have saved me loads of time.

I am cut down to size.

I recall on a previous discussion some one trying to defend porn said trainspotters were far more odd than consumers of porn. I don't know if they are odd ; it's certainly an odd hobby if you are not into it. Watching porn seems to me a very odd hobby.

What an utterly bizarre thing to write. Anything can seem uninteresting if your not interested in it. But for commonality I would imagine trainspotters make up no more than 1% of the UK population; even the term is largely unknown outside of it. But reasonable estimates I have seen (and I have seen estimates both higher and lower) of the numbers of people who watch porn would be 30-35% of women and 70-85% of men. While the percentage for men would seem static the percentage for women seems to be increasing, because younger women are growing up with a different attitude to porn.

Or asking "what do you get out of it?" prying into my habits while I am trying to keep it third person.
That was me and as I subsequently explained I was trying to understand why only porn will do to scratch that itch, not erotica or acted sex scenes ie no real sex. It's relevant because with erotica no women are harmed in production but with porn you can never be sure of that.
Please go back and read the thread because you are reading stuff that isn't there. No one is slut shaming you. But you can't come on a thread about whether porn is ethical with an argument which boils down to "porn is ethical because I say it is" and expect not to be questioned further.

BTW that is in no way a 'poor little me I am so sad' post.

I am interested in the language and the inference and why it is being used. Am I hearing what I expect and are you?

Italian "No one, absolutely no one, has said anything of the sort." That is why I used the word inference.

It has been implied when posters called me 'embarrassing' using shame as social control. Or asking "what do you get out of it?" prying into my habits while I am trying to keep it third person. My "obsession" is "creepy".

I am reflecting if any of us can jettison the linguistic and moral baggage, and if some of us actually want to.

I recall on a previous discussion some one trying to defend porn said trainspotters were far more odd than consumers of porn. I don't know if they are odd ; it's certainly an odd hobby if you are not into it. Watching porn seems to me a very odd hobby.

If trainspotters are odd they can of course rest easy that they are harming no one; no harm is done to the train when it goes through a tunnel.

Their is an inference that I am "no better than she should be". Tart

No one, absolutely no one, has said anything of the sort.

Italian Greyhound and SomeDyke and myself have queried why a person would be so into porn. I can't remember who said it but someone mentioned being uncomfortable with the idea that the men she sees around here everyday are porn users.

I find the idea of watching other people having sex weird. How you can extrapolate from that statement the conclusions you have reached escapes me.

Buffy It goes both ways though. It has been more than implied that I am weird and worse because of my choices. Their is an inference that I am "no better than she should be". Tart. There were some interesting questions early on about my 'masturbatory habits' , not cool.

As you note I try not to make porn=fun - no porn=frigid arguments, but these arguments are so rooted in the discussion they appear even if you don't mean them. Perhaps I am hearing the sexual condemnation even if it is not there because I expect it?

Not you obviously, but I have spent a lot of time on this thread refuting what people think and assume I have said rather than what I have actually said.

Can we have this debate outside of societal conventions or are we all in an echo chamber?

"opposing porn on the grounds that it harms women is associated with denying people enjoyment of their sexuality". Well, to be frank, it is denying people their enjoyment. The question is weather it is OK to do that.

The Marxist stuff reveals I am a nerd as well as a pervert.

Matilda I agree! Well mostly. Well a bit.

I won't call you a prude or frigid if you don't call me a pervert, weird I can live with. Name calling never helps.
The use of the words frigid or slut to control women's response to any discussion of sex is one the many ways society controls women. You are entitled to an opinion no matter what your sexual choices are. Lots of sexually open minded people do not enjoy porn.

This is also linked to judging people. Men tend to respond to clear rules and strong displays of authority (generalisation I know). Women respond to social controls, name calling, shame and judgment. "What WILL the neighbours say!". One of the many reasons I choose not to judge

Italian "What is someone consented to be eaten."
Well that may be consensual but it wouldn't be either safe or sane. Safe, sane and consensual.

Whatnow I think you reflect the opinion of many younger people I meet. It's here, it's available, we use it no harm no foul. Now what can we do to moderate it.