Math Magazine and 'good' porn.

[MrsToddsShortcut]

While I can see what she is trying to do, is the concept of 'nice'/'good' porn still not skirting around the same ballpark as all the hideous, damaging degrading stuff? It's still effectively saying porn is okay. Or would you say this is closer to erotic writing, I.e no real people involved? Is it just the wide end of a very nasty wedge? Genuinely not sure how I feel about this.

Huff post article about Math magazine

Link didn't work for me, here's another www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/math-magazine-feminist-porn_us_57ae25b2e4b069e7e50550d6?

Meh. It sounds a bit art house to me. I don't know how you can ever be sure about the ethics of porn. Yeah, I guess I don't know how I feel about it either

I don't want to see the pictures, as apparently there were photos among them, so didn't read the article.

I'm okay with erotic writing and comics, as long as it does not promote misogyny, but most "feminist porn" still involves real people, and I am very sceptical about the consent issues. (Also suspect the target group of, you know, porn-porn, doesn't really watch this nice, consensual feminist porn, because they want to see violence against women.)

I had a quick read and my problem with it is that aside from any possible ethical issues, it all looks pretty unsexy, if thats a word.

It does look very art house and 'unsexy' but then I'm guessing they were v limited as to what they could reproduce.

I just have a feeling that however ethical/nice/cool this stuff is, it's still validating the idea that porn itself is cool so long as it's produced a certain way. But by it's very existence, isn't it validating the wider porn industry (which does hurt/ damage people)?

However well intentioned they are, I don't think you can divorce the two.

but most "feminist porn" still involves real people, and I am very sceptical about the consent issues.

Why do you think feminists producing porn would care any less about consensual sex than you do, Vestal? If care is taken to remove any exploitation, then adults should be allowed to take part in any porn/erotica that they see fit. Manufacturing is very problematic, from iPhones to clothing. Workers abroad, often children, are open to exploitation and sometimes outright slavery. But we don't stop shopping at Apple or Primark, do we? Surely regulation of the industry and severe penalties for those who break the law is the way to go in any walk of life. And I don't see that forcing a woman to produce dresses in a building that might collapse on her head is any less evil than coercing her into having sex on camera.

Good to see the Whatabouters having a good trot round.

Grimarse wrote - "I don't see that forcing a woman to produce dresses in a building that might collapse on her head is any less evil than coercing her into having sex on camera."

I think both situations are very bad, but I regard your definite filmed rape scenario as more evil than your potential risk of being crushed by a building scenario.

I struggle to believe that many women would regard being forced to produce dresses in a building that might collapse on her head, as being equally evil to being definitely raped on camera and the video of her rape being sold to provide entertainment for however many men might choose to buy it.

Obviously most women would prefer neither scenario, but I'd definitely consider the rape on camera scenario as more evil than the forced to produce dresses in a potentially unsafe building scenario.

Hmm, I'm not sure that the images showed get away from "mainstream" porn in any meaningful way. It still all looks very male-gaze to me - naked women on show. What's feminist or transgressive about that? Seems like business as usual to me.

I guess I can applaud their goal of trying to be more ethical, or trying to challenge people around what they find sexy and why, and how that relates to the dominant narratives around porn. However, the main problem is that they just don't seem to have done that. The images don't seem to me to be challenging any stereotypes or subverting anything, and in the article at least they don't articulate in what ways the production of the material is less exploitative...so no. Doesn't work.

Let's ignore Grimarse. He is trying to derail the discussion.Which is about porn. Exploitation of women in the textile industry can be discussed elsewhere.

Does anyone of you know oglaf.com? I wouldn't say it is feminist, as such, but it is a comic, so no exploitation of women, and there's lots of male on male action, so not overtly male gazey. Or, not heterosexual male gazey, I suppose.

If men need something to wank to, then I would give this comic my feminist stamp of approval - however, I am not sure it is suitable as wank fodder. I read it for the jokes.

Agree - very male gazy. (I'm on a temporary namechange 'cos I was on a thread about "embarrassing stuff you do" - where quite a few of us were talking about reading and writing fanfic - and I'm not bothering to change back because it seems pretty relevant that a huge amount of fanfic erotica is male-male partnerships... so arguably, if they were really catering to a female audience, there'd be lots of drawings of men getting it on with each other... but there aren't. Funny that. Incidentally, as my namechange suggests, I'm in the minority that writes het - but I am in a minority).

For the record, I choose not to look at photographic/filmed images of sex, because you can never be sure about the conditions under which they were produced.

And in answer to Grimarse's question, if I had a straight choice - possibly get squashed versus definitely get raped - I'd take possibly get squashed, thanks.

Fuck sake, of course a magazine called Math aimed at women would have to be porn. Hilarious.

It reminds me of Rowan Pellings Erotic Review which Julie Burchill in one of her (occasionally) spot on attacks ripped to shreds.

She made the case that at least porn is an honest, WYSIWYG word. Erotica, on the other hand, was a weaselly, thoroughly up-itself, Hyacinth-Bucket-ish definition of something that purports to be better than porn, but really isn’t.

Yes, the whataboutery in my post was uncalled for. Apologies. My only defence is a lack of caffeine today...

Grimarse- you are basically just a porn apologist. Get used to it. Or engage your brain and your imagination and change. Just don't come on here telling women they've got it wrong.

What exactly is a porn apologist? I understand why some people hate it. I understand why some people like it. Porn includes those taking part of their own free will. Porn also includes people coerced into taking part. On balance, the world would be a better place without it, as the coerced people would be free of it, and the others - well, they could find something else to do. But I feel uncomfortable telling women what they should or should not be allowed to do with their own bodies. They aren't breaking the law. Does that make me a porn apologist?

Vestal was right. I can always go and make another thread about how women in the third world are exploited. I still don't understand why she thinks feminist porn producers won't be concerned about consent.

Just don't come on here telling women they've got it wrong. What, ever? Are you all perfect then?

Yep. That's being a porn apologist.

Then I guess I am.

Porn = bad = no discussion

If people find it sexual and it is produced ethically who am I to judge.

Go have a look at 'kink' performers discuss what they want before and after the scenes. Who am I to tell them they are wrong. They appear to be thoughtful, intelligent individuals who CHOOSE to take part in porn.

Most porn is unethically produced.
Most chicken is unethically produced.
A lot of clothing is unethically produced.

I source ethically. Porn, chicken and clothes.

Bitofacow, your lack of concern for prostituted young women and laziness regarding their health and welfare is tolerance of coerced sex (aka rape) masquerading as openmindedness.

Instead of saying why you're a hero for respecting women's "kinks" (because what industry DOESN'T operate by the will of its lowest level employees?), could you tell us why you like to voyeur women being sexually humiliated and abused?

For just this thread, don't dwell on the scripted and filmed post scenes intended to set your consumer conscience at ease for the guilt you feel at enjoying visuals of women being sexually humiliated and abused. Instead, focus for a few minutes on what it is you like so much about "kink" porn that presents female human beings as fuck-hungry animals who enjoy mistreatment that any rational person would recoil against.

Because let me tell you as a favor to you that casting yourself as magnanimously helping whores reach their sex-based life goals of sucking on countless shit-covered penises and getting physically bashed around while naked is the #1 dumbest excuse you could have gone with.

There's no such badger as ethical porn.

If you want to kid yourself that there is, fair enough, but that is what you're doing.

The fact that people find women in obvious pain sexy says everything you need to know about porn consumers. That they also surely know that consent is negated at every turn and they still get off on it means that they get off on watching other women being raped.

Lovely.

Okay, so I can find a section about Feminist porn on Wikipedia. I will not post a link as it will doubtless be interpreted as the actions of a sick, twisted male. But anyone can find it easily enough. No pictures or videos, safe to view.

The page lists umpteen proponents of feminist porn - studios, producers, participants etc. What actually is that all about? Is it just another arm of the Patriarchy trying to placate gullible women? Is it independent but misguided women? Is it misogynistic women?

OK soooooo I am totally wrong and the seemingly intelligent, articulate women are pawns of the patriarchy.

You are telling these women they are wrong and are victims of false consciousness. You are TELLING them that and you are right.

I am very concerned about prostituded women forced into porn where do I say I am not? As with many industries (as I said) we need to promote the good and castigate the bad. And, as you indicate much of porn IS bad, but not all as with many industries. If everything we did and ate was ethically sourced life would be wonderful. I can not claim I have reached that level of perfection.

So can porn ever be ethical? I think it can. Feminists trying to grapple with this complex issue are dismisses out of hand as stupid, misogynistic and ill informed. Made to feel shame for their sexual preferences. You have slut shamed me. My kink is a source of shame.

I will continue to source my food organically, my clothes fair trade and my porn from feminist sites. You will continue to shame me. Way to go sister.

Is it independent but misguided women?

I had a look at the Wiki page. It's here if anyone wants to read it. I suppose my objection is it normalises and validates pornography.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_pornography?wprov=sfla1

It mentions Annie Sprinkle who from time to time appears in laudatory articles in The Guardian.

Amongst other things Sprinkle performed The Legend of the Ancient Sacred Prostitute, in which she did a "sex magic" masturbation ritual on stage.

I'm inclined to think useful idiot probably applies to her given her past experience in the "sex industry"

On a lighter note Xenophile's There's no such badger as ethical porn is an impressive autocorrect