Not All Porn: Why the good parts don't matter

[AskBasil]

This is one of the best articles I've read about porn. It just says everything so well

stoppornculture.org/2014/10/21/notallporn-why-the-good-parts-dont-matter/

If most people don't get to YouPorn via the front page, how are the "front page" videos selected? I assume, but may be wrong, that it's either the most recently searched videos or the most clicked on videos? It must be related to some metric.

It's taken me a while to get around to reading this article (NSFW!), but I thought it was excellent. There are also some very good points made in the the thread.

I think it's true that there is some good porn - Claire refers to a real life couple, for example, and I suspect that, yes, it must be theoretically possible for porn to be ethical. However, porn doesn't come with any real ethical certification - whilst you might be able to convince yourself that the couple (or individual or, well.. whatever) are all happy and it's all consensual and nice and jolly, how can anyone be absolutely sure? Can they be completely sure that they aren't getting sexual pleasure from watching someone be raped - albeit that rape is dressed up to look consensual?

And that's just those that care that it's ethical. Clearly many simply won't consider that aspect (not necessarily not caring, more not thinking).

I think the point of the headline is proved; the good porn doesn't matter.

Buffy My view on kids is that you can't directly protect them. All you can do it teach them well so they can think for themselves.

damsili

I agree but I think it's hard to know what to say and when

For example 15 year old ds has undoubtably seen a bit of porn...mainly I suspect at school and I have had the sex talk with him and different people like different things etc

But he was cracked up laughing at a scene in a film which referred to fisting...how the fuck does he know what that is!!!!

Didn't occur to me to run through all the permutations!!!

And I suppose he will learn about all sorts of things and there is no need for me to explain everything but I didn't know about that at 15!!

Rufus It's a fecking minefield and - worse - rather beyond my comprehension in some ways as things seem so different now. However, I hope that certain things are generic, like empathy. I think it's very traditional to raise boys in a way that actually precludes empathy - particularly towards women (a point Puffins made well on the misandry thread). My concern with the increasingly individualistic nature of modern society is that automatic respect has diminished and we are only left with the hope of empathy and compassion.

> I mean classical renaissance art seems to celebrate femininity

>Modern porn does look as though it's something the Marquis De Sade would have approved of

Once again, there's an assumption there that all porn is the same and all modern porn is violent and abusive.

Lots of porn is tasteful, totally non-abusive and does indeed celebrate female beauty. That's the point of the article which brought us here.

The central thesis of the article is, not all porn is bad, but even if the ratio is 1000:1, that's not acceptable.

But you all seem to think that, at a certain time, all porn became brutal and violent.

I think it might also be worth considering what the world was like in terms of sexual behaviour before easily accessible porn. You know, those wonderful safe days when women who had been raped were locked up in mental asylums for 'moral enfeeblement'. When a teenage girl who became pregnant could be sent away from her family, friends (and quite possibly the boyfriend she loved, who possibly loved her as well) to give birth in some judgemental institution where the baby would be taken from her almost immediately and adopted. When violent abuse of women by their husbands and partners was considered 'domestic' and therefore of no concern to the police.
When getting married meant giving up foreverthe right to refuse your husband sexual access to you (that only stopped in 1991).

None of that makes abusive, exploitative porn OK. But it should be a reminder that not everyone who wants to put a stop to porn has women'sbest interests at heart.

>Octopus, going by the title, do you think: "Disgrace that Bitch! Slut gets a rough go…" is depicting a woman having sex freely?

Well first of all that's only part of the title, because hilariously, not only do you refuse to watch the porn, you refuse to even read the whole title.

Secondly I don't have to go by the title, because I can actually watch the video. I'll report back later if I can find it.

But ignoring all that, going purely by the title, there's nothing in there which specifically or even generally says that the woman is having sex against her will, being coerced, imprisoned or otherwise forced to have sex. Please explain why you think it does.

Octupus if you are trully not aware of the overwhelming mysogyny that shoots through the pornography industry, I want to come and live on your planet as it sounds a hell of a lot nicer than the one I am living on.

octopus

"But you all seem to think that, at a certain time, all porn becomes brutal and violent"

I can't see where anyone has said this

This was in today's Guardian, and I think is relevant to the discussion.

www.theguardian.com/culture/2014/nov/01/ethical-porn-fair-trade-sex

It sounds like Zoe Williams is as ambivalent after writing that as she was before, and so am I after reading it.

The approach I have taken with my sons, is to talk to them about the pornography industry - the good and the bad. There is no point in just lecturing them and telling them never to watch it, that is neither realistic nor helpful. However, it is important that they understand that what they are watching, is usually a performance, and that means that the people involved are acting. They play parts and pretend. They do things that other people want to see, rather than things they want to do.
There are different types of porn out there and there is plenty of ethical and consensually made porn if you make a point of looking for it, but the industry itself is rife with abuse. Most, but not all is male directed.

What I want my kids to know, is that performed sex is not real sex, and there's huge chunks of the boring bits, that are cut out of porn. The bits where they get to know each other and talk about what they want to do and what they like. They miss out the foreplay and the small steps that couples make before jumping into bed with someone. You never see anyone changing their mind or saying no or anything going wrong.

They will watch porn and they will be influenced by it. The most important thing is that they understand consent, so they never pressure a girl into doing something she is not comfortable with.
There is a fantastic article HERE written by Stoya, which is what people need to know about having a healthy sex life in 8 common sense rules.

I completely understand all the issues with the industry and it does need cleaning up, but the solution is not a ban. It doesn't help to lump it all in together and claim that all porn is bad, because the definition of porn is far too broad. The truth is, that despite considering myself a feminist, I do enjoy watching some porn. I am quite choosy, and although there is violent porn available, I don't find it as abundant as the article would indicate. I also enjoy BDSM, which many people would view as violent, when I would view it as pleasurable. What other people need to understand, is that before that BDSM act took place, there was a conversation where rules and limits were agreed, and the act should never happen without that conversation happening first.

"Well first of all that's only part of the title, because hilariously, not only do you refuse to watch the porn, you refuse to even read the whole title. "

I took it from Buffy's post. What was the full title, then?

"Disgrace that Bitch! Slut gets a rough go…"

is depicting a woman having sex freely?

The language of this title references rough sex being done to a woman and thereby disgracing her.

The language of this title does not reference the woman having sex freely. Why do you think it does?

Oh look, here's the descriptor for the "disgrace that bitch" sub-site on YouPorn:

"Disgrace That Bitch - We pick up hot chicks, trick them into having sex on camera, get them totally disgraced and throw them out like dirty whores. We know it's disgusting! We don't even need to remember their names. We just use their wet pussies for pleasure and throw these bitches out like used condoms."

I think it might also be worth considering what the world was like in terms of sexual behaviour before easily accessible porn.

SGB how did porn change the world?

The "tricking women" is a common theme.
Descriptions and men in the videos proudly pointing out that they're pushing the boundaries of the women or girls in the video, doing something the woman hadn't agreed to do originally, fooling them in some way, not using a condom and making a big affair of it.
Used as a sort of high five to you bros watching-thing.

Saying that there is nothing inherently wrong with people wanting to watch sexually explicit material, as a defence of actual porn made in the real world, is on a par with defending the cocaine/heroin trades by arguing that there is nothing inherently wrong with enjoying getting high.

And defending porn, the institution, by saying that some of it is cuddly feely consensual and jolly is a bit like defending drug barons because your mate grows his own in his airing cupboard and he's a nice chap who wouldn't harm a fly.

So is it wrong for people to make and watch their own porn?

Beachcomber just answered that question, indirectly, didn't she.
This is about the porn industry, the mainstream porn that people can easily find on the web and which affects people.

"So is it wrong for people to make and watch their own porn?"

No.

Does the porn industry include the amateur sharing sites where like minded people share their own home made porn?