Pornography has not been with us for ever. A few erotic drawings in temples and caves do not equal a large proportion of the male population being regularly exposed to real women being used in the most degrading ways possible as has happened in the past twenty to thirty years, with a the explosion and move to the worst kinds of humiliation in the past ten.
"Sexual arousal is highly complex and often connected to the most taboo areas of our consciousness. Pornography can only reflect this."
Pornography reflects a male version of sexuality where women are treated as f*ck objects for men. As John Stoltenberg says, "pornography tells lies about women, but the truth about men".
"The spectrum of pornography is vast covering very benign activities which even the most prudish of us would accept to those which are utterly repugnant to most of us and those which would be criminal in real life. "
It's got nothing to do with prudery and everything to do with compassion. Porn performers are used and exposed for men's enjoyment. Exhibitionism isn't a facet of female sexuality, if it were, every next woman would be sitting in her front room masturbating for the passing public and that doesn't happen. Instead vulnerable women are preyed on by pimps and porn producers with paltry amounts of money in order to persuade them to allow their bodies to be commodified for men's viewing pleasure. And gee look what form that pleasure takes, ass to mouth, gang bangs, double anal, bang bus, gonzo porn, Animal farm (bestiality) - it's a horrible list and it's what people hear refuse to address - that men want to see this stuff being done to women.
"In pornography involving actors, I believe that the participants should have the same rights and recourse to the law that regular actors have, and the market should be regulated to reflect this. I acknowledge that in reality, sections of the pornography industry are exploiting workers in criminal and morally unjustifiable ways. I think this criminal behaviour should be addressed as any other criminal behaviour should be, not by means of a blanket ban on pornographic activity. However, I don't have any practical solutions as to how this might be better policed. Again, that's why I asked you the question."
Linda Lovelace was raped on film and was never able to get recourse. Lara Roxx got Aids when she was coerced into double anal, she hasn't had compensation. Tracey Lords was fifteen when she was used in porn - none of the pornographers who featured an underage girl were ever punished. Sexual crimes against women are not addressed by our society - the vast majority of rapists, sexual abusers etc. get away with it. Why on earth do you think pornographers woud be any different - especially as "she consented" seems to stop all thought, judgement and compassion?
"I think it makes no sense to blame the subjugation of women on pornography. In some of the countries where women are most restricted in their rights and freedom, pornography is also heavily restricted."
They are two sides of the same coin. In each case women's bodies are being used and controlled by men. Also I do believe if you investigate you'll find that Iran for example has a huge porn audience. Prostitution and the male exploitation of women's bodies thrive in male-dominated societies. It's why in Victorian times (which were supposed to be so prudish about sex) one in three women in the East End of London were prostituted in order that those Victorian patriarchs who owned their wives and daughters could also go and find some poor woman to abuse.