To feel disgusted that Elle magazine are touting porn star Sasha Grey as a "feminist"?

[Scarletohello]

So I have seen a lot of porn and Sasha Grey is a very popular porn star. Mainly because she does very extreme stuff, for example the kind of scenes where she is gagged with a man's cock to the extent that she us virtually vomiting. And she acts like she is loving it. One of the quotes in the magazine article from one of her films is, " Rip my fucking holes open". It's the most brutal, mistogynistic, woman hating porn you can possibly experience. And she is talking about it as being liberating and empowering for women. I'm no prude but her stuff sickens me. And now she's written an erotic novel and has an interview in Elle magazine where the cover line is, " writer, actress, feminist,porn star".
Makes me absolutely despair of where we as women have come to if she is being described as a "feminist". She is absolutely everything anti feminist to me. Any thoughts? Also if you have never seen her stuff, prepare to be appauled...

Ok I would like to propose that we write a letter to Elle magazine raising our objections to this article, ie that it is normalizing sexual violence against women. Anyone like to volunteer? Some of you have articulated your objections much more eloquently than I could have done....

you can email here

Do you think elle actually have any idea of the nature of pornography that ms grey made? Will their research even extend so far as to see what she committed to film?

How can you regulate porn? Who decides what is acceptable or what isn't? I have watched porn, it was OK, pretty tame (vanilla?).

I read the Gail Dines link and googled some images, it wasn't pleasant. I don't want my DS's to see it at any stage in their life really, let alone as adolescents.

No easy answer is there? I don't think Sasha Grey should be in Elle magazine, although I very much doubt there are many girls who would want to emulate her. Or are there? I don't know.

Has everyone actually read this article? Elle aren't exactly honking her horn.

I'm not sure anyone on this thread is asking to regulate porn; rather that we don't label someone involved in the production of material promoting violence toward women, and the degradation of women as a 'feminist' in the national press.

What are they saying about her Binks?

Right. Well I'm guessing she labelled herself as 'feminist'. What can you do? Maybe she thinks she is. Maybe she is.

Yanbu. It is sick. Is there an email address we can complain to?

yes, cherry, look at my post at 20:32

The magazine is in the other room so this is not word for word, but they finish by saying that they aren't sure if she's trying to convince everyone else or herself that she's very much ok with her porn background. They also raise a lot of the concerns mentioned on this thread. She comes across as an interesting girl though, and I definitely agree with her that it is as much a female as male thing to have a predilection for that type of sex.

It's certainly nothing like the publicist prescribed hero worship of Miley Cyrus.

I noticed that on the glass door of my local WH Smith today that they had put a poster up.
saying...

             Free Benefit mascara only with
               this months 
                   ELLE.

So this promotion may increase sales.

Just thought I'd wade in after reading all 15 pages.

For info part of the article can be found here

printdigest.wordpress.com/2013/05/08/sasha-grey-in-the-latest-issue-of-elle-the-best-read/

Out of interest I googled her and the Wiki page goes into a fair amount of detail and highlights that she sees herself as a 'sex-positive feminist' so is not really Elle that has classed her but SG herself. Seems pointless complaining to Elle when they are simply stating what she describes herself as.

To be honest I find it simply a POV whether people agree with the feminist slant or not. Given there are many strands of feminism then there is no correct answer, simply opinions. Some strands find porn ok whilst others don't. The strangest thing in my mind is that the op is ok with porn and admits to being turned on by it but not with porn she finds objectionable. So mild abuse is ok but not extreme abuse?

In any case she retired from porn 4 years ago. Does that exclude her from being a feminist now? If anything Elle are not correct as she's not a pornstar, not nowadays anyway.

What Technotropic said, seems like for every Feminist there's another one telling them they're not.

Issue of whether kids should see this sort of porn is a different problem, goes in same category as violent movies etc etc to me, and I'd like to see a way of limiting it. I do t have a clue how to, however.

So Elle writers are saying 'modern feminism' is about women 'harnessing (their) sexuality to (their) advantage' and SG's its fiercest exponent.
Oh dear.

What a staggeringly bland article.

Thanks for the link, Techno. Has reminded me what a waste of paper Elle is.

Here, have another

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sasha_Grey

She actually sounds like a talented individual. She's currently acting, is writing a book, has modelled for a fashion designer, sings and also DJ's in clubs.

I hate this bullshit about 'sex-positive' feminism. I am sex positive; I just don't see what the porn industry has to do with actual sex. And the few clips of SG I googled this afternoon had FA to do with performance art - they weren't framed, presented, structured or contextualised in any way that subverts or calls attention to the norms and values of the genre they are referring to - they were just of it. Calling it 'performance art' just demonstrates that her understanding of performance art is as vacuous and reactionary as her understanding of feminism, which she basically assumes is about her freedom to have whatever kind of sex she likes.

The problem with the Gail Dines article is right there in the first paragraph:
mainstream Internet porn ? called gonzo by the industry

She claims that gonzo is mainstream porn, but it isn't. It is an extreme. Of course, the people making gonzo would also love for you to think that this is 'normal' porn and what everyone wants to watch.

I use porn, usually from the Internet, on a weekly basis and have literally never seen any of the acts in her list of bullet points, except maybe 'gagging'. Not saying it doesn't exist, but she is denying the reality of the majority of porn makers and users who are interested in many many more varied and in almost all cases less brutal fantasies.

Sparklyboots

You say that SG has a poor understanding of feminism but sex-positive feminism is exactly what she understands it to be. You may not like it or agree but this strand of feminism has actively fought against the anti-porn feminists and is generally pro BDSM.

I don't know if you're a feminist but if so it simply highlights the many differences of opinion that exist.

Well, I think it reactionary to assume feminism is about women's personal choices and the notion that feminism is primarily what one understands it to be is an extension of this. There are many differences of opinion in feminist thought; but in critical theory 'right to chose' politics primarily is a (neo)liberal position which co-opts the label of 'feminism' in order to underpin what is fundamentally a discourse of individuality (rather than gender). I think I'm right in saying that feminist politics is irrefutably about women as a class and so any serious consideration would reveal that neo-liberal conceptions of the individual as the absolute frame of reference are actually incompatible with a politics of women as a class. So when neo-liberal individuals, who are women or are talking specifically about them, describe that discourse as feminist they are making an error. Feminism is about women as a class and therefore can't -in terms of logic and as a category - take an individual as the primary measure for what is 'feminist'. Therefore I refute the idea that SG's self-identification is a valid understanding of what feminism is, not because of my personal view of feminism, but because it categorically is incompatible with a politics of the individual.

Technotropic, I actually think you are correct about this characterization of 'feminism', but you are arguing at cross purposes here.

As far as I can tell, no-one has said (apart from possibly some very silly people) that Sasha Grey is a feminist because she was a porn star (and starred in unpleasant/violent/whatever porn). What they are saying is that she might be a feminist even though she was a porn star.

On the other hand, some people are saying that she can't be a feminist because she was a porn star. This is what people are disagreeing with. Being a porn star does not make you a feminist, but it doesn't make you not a feminist, either.

The problem with the Gail Dines article is right there in the first paragraph:
mainstream Internet porn ? called gonzo by the industry

She claims that gonzo is mainstream porn, but it isn't. It is an extreme. Of course, the people making gonzo would also love for you to think that this is 'normal' porn and what everyone wants to watch.

I use porn, usually from the Internet, on a weekly basis and have literally never seen any of the acts in her list of bullet points, except maybe 'gagging'. Not saying it doesn't exist, but she is denying the reality of the majority of porn makers and users who are interested in many many more varied and in almost all cases less brutal fantasies.

Totally agree. I have to admit to finding some of Sasha's works to be pretty hard to stomach and definitely don't agree with this notion on here that this kind of porn is now the 'mainstream'. Check out the scene she did with Vanessa Monet which can be seen on most free streaming sites. I really doubt many persons would watch it and go 'hey that looks good let's go and re-enact it.' More likely they'd be grossed out, especially younger persons who watched it.
I would also give teenagers a lot more credit than some of the posters are giving them on here. I don't think it's fair to assume they are so gullible/ easily influenced by things they see on the internet. Why this massive assumption that all teenagers who have a free reign to the internet would default to the hardest, nastiest porn that's out there? Isn't this just Daily Mail style scaremongering?

Interesting to look at some very popular porn forums ( peachy and freeones) and to see what the most viewed themes/ fetishes are..... well it appears to be softcore ,amateurs and milfs.

now if we look at most popular models/porn stars it's again softcore which dominates the top ten lists eg Katie Fey, Kari Sweets, Anna Angel.

Finally talking of the Daily Mail, check this survey:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2292582/Most-popular-porn-site-search-terms-revealed-Americans-favour-MILF-Syrians-like-aunt.html

Sparklyboots

I think you've misunderstood my post (or perhaps I was being unclear) but thanks for the analysis

SG, AFAIK, has labelled herself as a 'sex-positive feminist' as 'sex-positive feminism' is a strand of feminism in its own right, just like radical feminism, liberal feminism etc. etc. Feminsim is a collection of movements, one of which is a strand that SG identifies with. Unless the members of MN are on the board of high council of feminism then it is, IMHO, purely down to POV and where you lie (in terms of feminist belief).

I get what you're saying about class but self identification is part/parcel of agency. If you follow a particular movement then you will identify with it and subsequently label yourself. You didn't answer my question about whether you are a feminist or not but if you are then you will undoubtedly class yourself as being of a particular strand. Does this make your classification any less valid than SG's?

LaLaGabby

TBH I wasn't arguing either way but simply highlighting the OP's position. I think you're right. Being a pornstar does not make you a feminist but if you identify with sex-positive feminism then it's ok to be a pornstar.

The OP is well within her rights to dissaprove but ultimately who is right? Who has the final say to decide which strand of feminism is right/wrong? It's like certain strands not recognising the trans community but others accepting it. Conflicts will always rage so the OP is not being unreasonable to have an opinion but should really understand that her views are NOT gospel and that many others believe differently.

I've been reading a lot about porn and feminism over the last few weeks and I'm still formulating my thoughts on the subject. However, I wonder if, as an analogy, one was to advocate for an industry which was
-Run and controlled by white people

• Where the subjects or commodities were almost exclusively black people
• and those subjects were frequently violently hurt and damaged and verbally abused and degraded.

-And where the object of the industry was that this was entertaining to watch -and the consumers were overwhelmingly white -the shareholders were white -and this product was widely accessible, freely available and even mainstream

• And there was a prevailing mainstream view amongst white people as a population that it is ok to sell the degradation of black people as entertainment

Would it be acceptable?
Or enormously damaging to black people as a group? (and detrimental to white people for that matter)

What about if a number of black people defended their participation as voluntary and empowering and profitable and they enjoyed being hurt and degraded.
And if all the white participants, shareholders and consumers claimed they were not racist and believed in equality but they just enjoyed watching white people hurt black people. That its perfectly normal and since the black people involved were consenting adults it's ok.

Does that make an entire industry of white on black violence and degradation presented as mainstream adult entertainment acceptable?

Perhaps this is a dreadful analogy. I don't know.

It's just the whole porn industry seems abhorrent to me the more I learn, the more I think about it.

Great post Hairycarrot :)