to be surprised at how many Mumsnetters are fine with pornography? II

[Judy1234]

Continuing the previous thread - people's sexuality varies hugely and what some people think is disgusting is good fun for others. It's impossible to generalise and say XYZ practice is wrong or repugnant and I agree with the posts at the end of the other thread that porn often just reflects what people do. Obviously you pick where your own interests lie and are glad human beings are diverse.

I think it's the verbal equivalent of putting their fingers in their ears and going "la, la, la - can't hear you"/

People who object to porn are generally not going to look at it because they see it as the sexual abuse of women thus its not something they want to participate in.

People who do watch porn aren't going to admit to what is actually in porn because it would require taking a different view of something they've persuaded themselves as harmless.

Elizabetth, you too could be accused of 'putting your fingers in your ears' you go on and on about porn being degrading and humiliating to women, as I have said time and time again, I DO NOT WATCH PORN! So surely my view is objective? I have read all the links everyone has posted, I can see that of course, there are some people who have been abused in the industry, but there are also a great deal more that enjoy their job, and enjoy sex that is not what you may call normal
Maybe once you take your fingers out of your ears and agree that some of the actresses are probably having a whale of a time, then maybe others will listen to you.

Of course you can disagree with something without seeing it.

of course there are aspects of the porn industry which are abhorrent just as there are things that I dislike about my own church or whatever. But I don't think in general overall the church or the porn industry is wrong or abhorrent. We can all pick out examples of corruption or abuse in just about anything but the core issue is whether we think women and men should be paid for displaying themselves sexually (although in a sense that is all dating is anyway).

I just think the libertarian argument wins out and is much more important than the supposed protection you'd give to men and women in the industry if you banned it.

MT, I agree, I don't think you have to have seen something to be able to argue it.

I do however think that basing your opinion on a few articles from some disgruntled porn stars or a handful of abuse stories is probably as bad as those who are refusing to take Elizabetth's points because she hasn't seen said films.

I didn't quite get what was being said about which women in which parts of the world wax/shave but that's probably not quite the point of the thread anyway.

"...but there are also a great deal more that enjoy their job, and enjoy sex that is not what you may call normal."

I think you will find that the evidence says the opposite. A minority are in it by unambiguous choice, the majority are not.

That is the objective view - the same applies for prostitution.

Xenia, there is a very important difference between 'display' and actual penetration. Women do seem to be empowered and have more choices from the former, but their choices and quality of life is substantially lowered by the latter. That is verifiable data and there is huge amounts of it.

I am certainly not talking of banning anything, I haven't read anyone here doing that, but I haven't read every post either. As far as I'm concerned the banning angle is a pseudodebate.

Oh god, I haven't said one goddamned thing about banning it. You change behaviour by changing social views about something - a bit like the way racism (although it still exists) is much less socially acceptable than it used to be.

It is an indictment of our society that people, mainly men, find it entertaining for women to be (ab)used this way. Pornography has always been about woman-hatred but now its becoming much more overt, yet people are still trying to pretend that's not what its about.

VS your view isn't objective in the slightest. I told you I've been on both sides of the fence - I used to think porn was harmless and that people who objected to it were prudes. I've moved on from that position when I got in touch with my empathy.

"Maybe once you take your fingers out of your ears and agree that some of the actresses are probably having a whale of a time, then maybe others will listen to you."

You know one or two might be having a whale of a time as you put it, because nothing is impossible in this world, but the majority are doing it for the money, because their sexual boundaries have already been so damaged by rape or abuse that they see being used again as all they are good for. Do you really think a woman in bukkake or ATM is having a whale of a time? The reports of tears in porn scenes means either the performers are really good actresses (and most trained actors can't cry on demand) or they are really being hurt. Linda Lovelace said she was having a great time doing Deep Throat, she said it because she was trying to survive.

My issue with Elizabetth saying she has not seen it is that she has asked for evidence, and when links produced - she says she wont look to determine that this is the case. Then she'll say she's seen no evidence.

But the evidence backs up Elizabetth's instincts about porn - it is damaging to women, more so the women that are in it than women not though, but that doesn't mean these women should be villified anymore than they already are by society.

Look up the thread on Ulrika Johnson to see what many people on this site think of a woman who has children from different partners, never mind being a porn star. She has been labelled a "slut" and far worse. The great thing about MN is that it is a massive source of data on general opinion; even though it is limited to those who own computers and can afford boradband, but are also the ones with the voting power politically too.

The actresses that you cna easily read about are the ones that want to tell everyone how awful it was, probably because they've realised people treat them different because of their jobs and want to distance themselves from it, there are more stories of actresses not enjoying it because that's the ones that give the shock value.

Rather than just linking all the horror stories why not try to work out the percentage of actresses those stories make up.

The banning thing is a red herring, a non argument, a false dichotomy - but that is a well known rhetotical trick (straw man) thap people use when their argument is on shaky logical ground.

Oh and Elizabetth, do you not think that if these tears are so rife in the porn industry maybe, just maybe like the 'trained actors' they have ways of making them happen?

Evidence provided here is not worth anything. Real studies have been carried out under strict guidelines to rule out bias and the like. They are the ones you need to be looking at. Mumsnet can only tell you about peoples opinions and preferences, not objective facts about the world of porn.

They aren't really my instincts MT. I've seen porn movies. I've seen lesbian scenes and double penetration. From what people here are saying, they've only seen the "tamest" (although it's still hateful of women) porn like I have. I'm just telling them (as are others) that the market has moved on to stuff that is much much worse.

There are a lot more women in porn saying its fab, saying its wonderful (as they choke on some guy's penis) VictorianSqualor. Why aren't you accusing them of being liars. Most women who are ashamed of porn and prostitution don't say a word about what happened to them - they are silenced by people like you calling them liars.

Imagine being abused and then disbelieved on top of that.

If these women were trained actors they'd be acting on stage.

I don't know why you say you are coming from an unbiased position, yet refuse to entertain any evidence that contradics your personal opinion.

FWIW, I only have my opinion becasue of the evidence I have looked at over the years. I began thinking porn was harmless; or more accuratly, just not thinking about it. I did respond to it personally and found it arousing - show me a human being who isn't to some extent - but I changed my opinion on the basis of evidence, not wishful thinking.

This is what one porn director says in a piece by Martin Amis about the porn industry about what it's like for women in the industry -

?The girls could be graded like A, B, and C. The A is the chick on the boxcover?here you have a borderline A/B doing a double anal. Directors will remember that. She'll get phone calls. For a double anal you'd usually expect a B or C. They have to do the dirty stuff of they won't get a phone call. You've had a kid, you've got some stretchmarks ? you're up there doing double anal. Some girls are used in nine months or a year?a hundred movies in four months. She's not a fresh face anymore. Her price slips and she stops getting phone calls. Then it's, ?Okay, will you do anal? Will you do gang-bangs?' Then they're used up?the market forces of this industry use them up.?

-Porn director quoted in Martin Amis' ?A Rough Trade?

Commodities to be used up and then discarded.

Certainly it's better to try to persuade people to change views than ban things. I would have thought the pro pornographers like me are probably already a very small minority, though particularly if you did a survey of women only. I think you've already run the battle of hearts and minds, surely? I suppose you could try to shame men into it being so beyond the pale to use porn they give it up may be.

I think the ability for men and women to be aroused via new media, both within and outside their home is a great enhancement to the sex lives of many. I do think however that clearly some women (and some men) are abused in the sex industry although I'm not sure £30 for a photo session is worse than working a long shift on a minimum wage at Macdonalds.

Is it not the case that the benefits outweigh the disadvantages?

There is a comic/tragic Ali G - Jenna Jameson interview around too.

"Certainly it's better to try to persuade people to change views than ban things."

Xenia - NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT BANNING ANYTHING, GET ON THE SAME PAGE, PLEASE

And for women, the costs outweigh the benefits - that is the evidence, not an opinion.

"I would have thought the pro pornographers like me are probably already a very small minority"

Are you serious? Pornography is a mulit-billion dollar worldwide industry. Porn viewers (not just its defenders) number in the tens of millions. Porn is a large and powerful industry.

MT doesn't get spam from anti-porn people in her mailbox, she gets it from pornographers who want to fuck someone's girlfriend.

I wish you would address one thing I've said Xenia. For example what about that quote from the porn director. What do you think the experience of being sexually used up is like for a woman - to be reduced to gang bangs and double anal? How do you think she feels about herself and within her body after having that done to her?

But you haven't factored in the sexual pleasure countless women who aren't in the industry get out of the porn, have you? I would say that outweighs damage done to some women.

It's like saying cars are bad because some people are knocked over.

Think the Amis article deserves a link

"But you haven't factored in the sexual pleasure countless women who aren't in the industry get out of the porn, have you? I would say that outweighs damage done to some women."

I think you've just summed up the pro-porn position. Who cares who gets hurt as long as people get their orgasms? Where is the humanity in getting sexual pleasure from someone else's pain and degradation? I can't believe you said that actually.

sorry just dipping in and out now and then but Eliz, I do think that your last post of 20.29 states your point in a very accessible way.

1. even if some of us enjoy powerplay, this kind of porn is not about us, its about Women, with a capital W. The women in the gonzo-becoming-mainstream films aren't supposed to be women who love it - precisely the opposite. They're supposed to be women who don't like pain, but are going to get it anyway.

1. I've looked at too much porn, and there's a huge difference between how pain is represented in fetish/bdsm and how it is represented in gonzo-which-is-becoming-mainstream porn. You can hear when a woman is in real, scary, pain - pain that isn't a teasing, sexy pain but just actual pain like if someone was breaking your leg, but you'll be hurt even more if you whimper. You hear that sound a lot in the latter. It's a really upsetting sound.

I think the ones who are having a fabulous time, really enjoying 'pain', are overwhelmingly in the fetish/bdsm category, where women-in-control-of-their-own-destinies are very well represented.

1. the majority of porn consumers who are enjoying women in 'pain' - real or pretend - aren't fetish consumers (where the boundaries are very clearly set), they're just people who are increasingly thinking (gonzo to mainstream)that seeing women in pain is okay. More than okay, in facct.

sorry about hyphens, up at 5 again today.

nice to hear your position re ban Elizabetth, maybe missed it before, but v well said.