 |
|
|
||||
|
Nicely sums things upShe looks at why anti-porn feminists say that it's degrading to women, and asks why so many women aren't keen on porn. "Maybe the problem is that pornography is unquestionably targeted toward men - the woman's pleasure is always incidental, the man's always instrumental. Admittedly, a large proportion of porn involves sex acts that are only physically gratifying to the man involved. But that's not really so surprising - it's a case of art imitating life. Because the people who consume porn are overwhelmingly male, the object of most such films is male orgasm - on- and off-screen. "That perhaps belies the root of the relative status of men and women in porn: Women don't buy pornography because it's geared toward men. And it's geared toward men because women don't buy it. It's a catch-69." Good phrase, that. I also agree with her suggestion that depicting all porn actresses as "victims" is more demeaning to them than anything they do on screen. It does still come down to individual decisions and personal responsibility. Of course, that's not to say that the porn industry is blameless in how some women are treated. There are guys out there who are sharks, plain and simple, and I think that exploitation can and does occur. But it doesn't happen to everyone, and it doesn't happen all the time, and to suggest so would be stupid. If a woman chooses to make money this way, then all power to her. I don't believe she should be derided for it, as so many "reality" sites do - and as society as a whole does. It takes a lot of guts to have sex in front of other people. The other problem is that anti-porn feminists (and the media) speak of "porn" as if it was one great amorphous, almost living evil thing. The reality is it's incredibly diverse, and offers a wide range of material, both positive and negative. Posted: Wednesday 26th January 2005, 8:23 PM Back to the Blog
|
|