Mainstream porn fans, I’ve got some bad news for you.

23 Oct

Reader isme has often made the observation in comments that porn copy that advertises that the men in a particular video will be doing something to the woman in the video “until she cries” or “until she chokes” or any other similarly disturbing and revolting “until she ____s” is very, very unsettling. I wholeheartedly agree, and I’ve been thinking about that phenomenon quite a bit lately. I know a lot of porn fans love to tell me that the women in porn like what’s going on, that they choose to be there, that it’s nothing but a big, awesome, hoser party that I have no place criticizing, but there’s something seriously amiss with that idea when it comes to this “until she ____s” shit. People aren’t enjoying themselves when they’re choking, crying, vomiting, gagging, etc. And, as such, the porndog who enjoys porn in which such things are occurring is not, in fact, getting off on watching two consenting adults get busy. I know I’m not telling feminists anything new here, but it needs saying. If you like that kind of porn, you are turned on by rape. Sorry, but that’s just the way it is.

Bookmark and Share

169 Responses to “Mainstream porn fans, I’ve got some bad news for you.”

  1. berryblade October 24, 2009 at 4:40 AM #

    Seconded.

  2. dean October 24, 2009 at 5:43 AM #

    yup.

  3. buttersisonlymyname October 24, 2009 at 4:37 PM #

    Word.

  4. marc October 24, 2009 at 9:34 PM #

    “If you like that kind of porn, you are turned on by rape.”

    Actually, my girlfriend likes that sort of stuff. She also wants me to do dominating stuff to her but I find it hard to do this, because I am not that kind of person.

    Some say that this kind of porn might prevent rapists from going out there and acting on their unnatural urges. I really really hope this is true, because the porn business probably wont stop making this stuff :(

    • Gayle October 25, 2009 at 5:10 PM #

      That’s not true.

      Some dudes looked at what they thought were declining rape rates during the same years internet porn use increased and decided there was a correlation between the two, although no real causation was proven.

      Less than six months later a new State Dept study found rape rates have actually increased dramatically during this same time period.

      Not surprisingly, the men who made the earlier submission have not yet come out and reversed their theory.

      • Marc October 25, 2009 at 7:04 PM #

        “Less than six months later a new State Dept study found rape rates have actually increased dramatically during this same time period.”

        I hate to argue with you on this, since I believe that finding sensible proof to support any corelation between porn and rape is not possible without being able to disect a soul.
        Correlation is not causation.

        Anways, my girlfriend does enjoy being choked and gagged during sex. (shes reading this as I am typing) She also has rape fantasies, where shes the one getting raped

        I doubt that all the women in porn like the “X until she Y’s” but there are women that do like that sort of stuff. (and men too) Are those couples rapists ?
        What is your position on this ?

        • Nine Deuce October 25, 2009 at 7:46 PM #

          No, I don’t think those couples are rapists, but I think that the desire to engage in such things is pretty problematic. What does it mean if you are attracted to such things?

          • MariaS October 28, 2009 at 4:29 PM #

            Plus, “some individuals/couples like this” is irrelevant to this post. If mutually consenting adults like to play with being gagged, choked, or driven to tears in the course of their sexual activity with each other, then so what? I as someone who would not personally like that and who finds problematic the general widespread cultural eroticisation of threat, coercion and violence towards women, have no power to affect what they freely choose to do and no interest in preventing them from so choosing.

            What ND is writing about is porn the money-making visual media product, not an individual’s preference for engaging in xyz act. When porn producers market their product with “see this woman be ____ until she [displays signs of physical discomfort/pain and/or emotional distress]” as the must-see enticement and selling point to customers, that’s disturbing as hell.

            This comment thread is veering all over a variety of related topics but barely discussing the actual post and the fact that seeing women being physically forced, hurt and bullied in a sexual context is a hugely popular and saleable theme in mainstream straight porn.

            I would HOPE that women or anyone peforming in porn on the receiving end of what appears to be rough or cruel treatment do actually enjoy it and are getting a kick out of it – because the alternative is utterly horrific. Or that the person inflicting the violence and brutality is simply simulating those acts very skillfully.

            That women in porn might like/enjoy/not mind/consent to what they do and what is done to them isn’t a very compelling pro-porn argument. The non-coercion of performers would be the bare minimum one should reasonably expect of the porn business. (And when porn users deploy this argument it’s never in a serious substantial “I do everything I can to check that the porn I am masturbating to was performed by willing, enthusiastic, well treated, well compensated women and men” kinda way. Rather, it’s used in an anxious, self-soothing way, to justify continuing to do something they really really have an urge to do without thinking too closely about it – the “surely women wouldn’t do it if they didn’t want to, would they?”, or “what about if the women in porn are ok with it? hah feminists, gotcha there”, line of argument.)

            The marketing of “until she ____s” porn tells us that there’s a significant number of porn consumers out there who get excited by seeing women hurt and by seeing them apparently forced and pressured into sex – aka rape. There’s also no shortage of men who commit sexual assault. Whether the two demographics overlap is immaterial – one commits rape and the other sees rape as entertainment and masturbation fodder. I see nothing good in that.

            • Nine Deuce October 28, 2009 at 5:05 PM #

              What MariaS said.

            • winter_lights October 29, 2009 at 1:53 AM #

              “When porn producers market their product with “see this woman be ____ until she [displays signs of physical discomfort/pain and/or emotional distress]” as the must-see enticement and selling point to customers, that’s disturbing as hell.”

              I, as it happens, find that sort of thing used in marketing disturbing myself. But I don’t think that necessarily means that anyone looking at porn using that language in it’s box copy is looking for rape fantasy, let alone that they’ve actually found it.

              From everything I’ve seen, people writing box copy for porn tend to be fans of the shotgun approach. They throw as many different images and phrases at the viewer in the hopes that something will stick. (It’s an approach that I find disturbingly similar to the covers on teen celebrity magazines.) A person who isn’t into one set of words is likely to just ignore it.

              Unsurprisingly given that methodology, while usually all the pictures on the package actually show something in the movie, the text often doesn’t have much to do with the content. It doesn’t need to, it just needs to be something that will get a few more people to buy the movie.

              (Interestingly, the most disturbing porn that I’ve seen along those lines doesn’t even use that method of description. It sounded perfectly normal from the box copy.)

        • berryblade October 26, 2009 at 3:49 AM #

          The term “rape fantasy” is pretty misleading, I really, REALLY doubt there is a woman on this planet who genuinely 200% fantasies about being raped.

          I reckon this pretty much sums it up:

          “….ive always thought that “rape fantasy” was a bit of a misnomer, though i guess calling it “actively desiring someone to have sex with you while pretending as if you don’t actively desire it fantasy” takes some of the punch out of it”

          from

          http://tigerbeatdown.blogspot.com/2009/07/sexist-beatdown-love-means-never-having.html

          there.

          • winter_lights October 26, 2009 at 6:25 PM #

            Rape fantasy is one of those things that I don’t really get, but I suppose in some ways it’s not all that different from fantasizing about other things that one either wouldn’t want to actually do, or are actually impossible to do.

            For that matter, “rape fantasy” is a bit of a confusing term, since it could refer to fantasizing about being raped, about committing rape, or about rape that doesn’t involve the self at all. (There seem to be quite a few women in certain amateur erotic fiction circles who write stories about two men being forced to have sex. I’m not really sure how to interpret that.)

          • Faith October 26, 2009 at 8:52 PM #

            “The term “rape fantasy” is pretty misleading, I really, REALLY doubt there is a woman on this planet who genuinely 200% fantasies about being raped.”

            I did. At least when I was a teenager. My fantasies were very much a result of internalizing the messages from porn, from the men in my life, and from society in general. I honestly believed the crap that women are supposed to enjoy being raped and that rape was somehow a compliment because it was an indication that a man wanted you so much that he wouldn’t take no for an answer.

            I have stopped having those fantasies since I grew a spine and stopped watching porn.

  5. Ashley October 24, 2009 at 10:35 PM #

    100% true.

  6. polly styrene October 24, 2009 at 10:47 PM #

    Ah yes the cathartic release theory. I’m on a diet at the moment. What I find doesn’t help, if I’m struggling a bit, is say walking round the supermarket looking at delicious cream cakes. Because it doesn’t make me want to eat them any less. Quite the reverse in fact.

  7. winter_lights October 25, 2009 at 1:44 AM #

    I find that kind of porn pretty disturbing as well. But it sounds like you’re saying that if someone doesn’t like doing something, they couldn’t have consented to it. That doesn’t make sense to me for various reasons.

    If you’re just saying that that kind of porn looks like rape… Well, that’s a bit more complicated.

    Something I find interesting (kind of related to the cathartic release thing) is that Japan seems to produce far more rape-themed pornography than the U.S., yet their rates for rape seem to be much lower by all statistics I can find. But since Japan also has much lower rates for pretty much every other crime, it’s hard to determine anything from this.

    • Andrew October 25, 2009 at 10:19 PM #

      Hopefully I’m interpreting this correctly, but I think what ND was trying to say is this:

      Porn production is not necessarily a rape upon the woman. Porn production though, for the most part, is necessarily patriarchal and thus anti-feminist. The consumption of this kind of porn though involves being turned on by rape because the perceived resistance/ uncomfortability/disgust with the act is what stimulates the viewer sexually.

      Its similar to websites that use really young looking models to give off the impression they are under age. At the production level it is not child pornography, but is the viewing of it for that reason not pedophiliac?

      • winter_lights October 26, 2009 at 1:07 AM #

        What bothers me about it is that it seems pretty subjective.

        I suspect that, given some time and an IM program, it’d be possible to locate porn in which you perceive resistance, uncomfortability, or disgust, while I perceive enjoyment and something I’d maybe like to try myself if it’s something that doesn’t require a partner. Why, then, is your interpretation my problem?

        Or, to put it another way, not everyone consuming the same porn is consuming it for the same reason, or being stimulated by the same things. Like any other media, different viewers can perceive different things based on individual factors. And none of that affects objective traits of the work, such as whether someone actually is being raped. (Or, for that matter, consenting persons creating what is intended to be a depiction of rape vs. creating something that has traits some viewers associate with rape that isn’t intended to a depiction of rape.)

        The same thing could easily be applied to the age thing. There are things someone might like which are appearing in that sort of porn which don’t directly relate to age. (Say, the outfits.) And even if someone is into that, their ephebophilia doesn’t mean anyone else watching the same porn has a problem… or necessarily that the person has a problem. (Having a problem being something like, actually going out and propositioning underage girls.) Also, given the notices on things, I think it’s hard to not be aware that the people on the screen are, in fact, adults.

        I also think there’s a significant gap between (knowingly and willingly) watching story level rape vs. production level rape, legal teen vs. underage and distinctly not legal, and other such groupings.

        • truthvscompliance October 26, 2009 at 4:23 PM #

          The thing is – a lot of people THINK or tell themselves that they might like certain types of porn for certain reasons but they might not be honest with themselves about it (I know that I wasn’t and they can’t tap out any of the other subliminal messages porn sends by being primarily interested in one thing – like the clothing). And even if they like it for a certain reason at first, doesn’t mean the reason won’t change after a while… Maybe it’s the outfits at first (and i have to say – a school girl uniform is just as bad as watching it for the barely legal girls), after a while of seeing barely legal (or even illegal sometimes) women having sex, it can stimulate attraction to women that age.
          My dad watched porn for years – and he never really had strange issues but in his mid-fifties – he started becoming attracted to young teens etc. He also became an exhibitionist and struggles with hebephelia. Since he’s stopped watching porn – those problems have been basically taken out of his life… He’s going to struggle with these things the rest of his life I believe (because 40 yrs of pornography does change you, trust me) but since he’s taken the porn out of his life, the problematic sexual behavior is at least in remission.
          I guess my major point is how can anyone know if they are going to be one of the people it changes? How can they be so sure that these images won’t affect them? That’s like claiming that you can go into battle and you know for sure you won’t come home with PTSD but you can’t know that, until it happens… WHy take the risk? Which is basically what led me to being anti-porn… Why take the risk, when it can be avoided? Anyone who claims to KNOW that it won’t affect them is basically in huge denial or lying to themselves because they can’t.

          • winter_lights October 26, 2009 at 6:09 PM #

            “and i have to say – a school girl uniform is just as bad as watching it for the barely legal girls”

            That actually brings up something interesting. From what I’ve seen, things like clothing that might evoke the idea of a certain age range are more likely to appear in porn with older actresses than in porn focused on having younger ones. So, is watching for women in their late 20s wearing school uniforms as bad as watching for barely legal girls wearing nothing at all?

            Personally, I’m not convinced that people change what they look for in porn so much as that they eventually find what it is that they were looking for all along. At the least, it’s a model that serves to explain why I like certain things and not others.

          • hexy October 27, 2009 at 5:41 AM #

            A lot of men (mostly submissive men in my experience, but I’m dealing with a biased sample) are turned on by the school uniform not because they’re thinking “me as a grown man lusting after schoolgirls” but “me as a schoolboy lusting after schoolgirls”. A lot of them are still holding on to the erotic programming of their own youth… say, fixating on the girl they had a crush on in school, or the girl who used to tease them, etc and so forth.

            The uniform is a symbol, or a piece of code, relating to that time in their life, although it’s now worn by an adult woman as they aren’t attracted to teenagers like they were when they themselves were teenagers.

            • Faith October 27, 2009 at 6:47 PM #

              “A lot of men (mostly submissive men in my experience, but I’m dealing with a biased sample) are turned on by the school uniform not because they’re thinking “me as a grown man lusting after schoolgirls” but “me as a schoolboy lusting after schoolgirls”.”

              I’ve had similar experiences with men. The thing is, however, all the men that I’ve known who have eroticized adult women for that reason were also attracted to real live teenage girls. Whether or not they ever acted on that desire or not.

              • hexy October 27, 2009 at 11:03 PM #

                Our experiences on that front differ wildly, then.

                It’s also worth noting that there a whole bunch of men who watch porn where a man is dominating, fucking, or otherwise topping a women and who are identifying with the WOMAN in the scenario, not the man.

            • truthvscompliance October 27, 2009 at 7:45 PM #

              “me as a schoolboy lusting after schoolgirls”.

              but seriously – that is a huge problem – it’s almost worse… at least it was for my dad. Eventually – he was actually turned on by younger teens…and I think (as well as the forensic therapist that worked with him) it has a lot to do with him watching porn for years – he got older but the women in porn didn’t and in many ways – the 80′s porn that got him sucked in didn’t have nearly as much of the “barely legal” stuff (I’m sure it existed but wasn’t really mainstream yet). He often ACTED like he was a school boy flirting with school girls (I grew up with him flirting in inapropriate ways with my friends). If the guys watching that type of porn think of themselves as school boys – don’t you think it makes them feel more like there’s nothing wrong with actually hooking up with school girls (or invading their space inappropriately like my father did)? Not that I’m going to excuse his behavior cuz he watched porn – I’m just always wondering things like this.
              I realize porn is suppose to be about fantasy but for a great handful of people, the fantasy and reality of it gets fairly hazy after years of use (as happened with many people I know).

              • hexy October 27, 2009 at 11:08 PM #

                I’m certainly not going to deny your experiences or what you say about your father, but I’ve been largely exposed in this context to men who are able to compartmentalise their feelings, and who are entirely aware that they aren’t actually schoolboys, and that hooking up with schoolgirls is not only wrong, but that attempting to do so would break the fantasy pretty quickly. Real live schoolgirls are pretty clear about seeing older men as older men, even if they’re fucking them.

                I don’t see anything wrong with fantasising about elements of your past life… I think a lot more humans do that then watch barely legal/schoolgirl themed porn! If the fantasy IS crossing the line into dangerous and inappropriate behaviour, well, that’s clearly another issue in my brain. I’ve never made the claim that all porn is entirely harmless for everyone.

                I’m sorry to hear what your family has gone through. It sounds like a pretty epic struggle.

    • berryblade October 26, 2009 at 3:52 AM #

      On that note, I think it’s Singapore (although, I’m not 100% on this, and can’t be arsed googling, it could just as easily be Malaysia) that officially doesn’t have any drug crime. At all.

    • truthvscompliance October 26, 2009 at 4:08 PM #

      Yeah but how do you know that women who are raped in Japan report it? This is the problem with correlation studies (especially in terms of rape) – it doesn’t take into account the number of women (or men and boys, for that matter) who don’t report rape – if reporting a rape in Japan is heavily stigmatized – that could be the reason (I’m not saying that this is going on, I’m just pointing out one of the variables in the correlation studies that could drastically change the results).
      Also – I wanted to point out that child prostitution (which I consider rape – and which the country probably doesn’t consider rape) is still a huge problem in Japan…

      • winter_lights October 26, 2009 at 5:47 PM #

        Yeah, I’m familiar with some of the issues with correlation studies. (At least I learned something from my high school statistics class…)

        A question might be, how likely is it for rape to not be reported in Japan compared to the U.S.? It’s obviously a serious problem in both countries, but unless it’s significantly more likely in one country or the other, comparisons between the reported amount of rape will probably have a ratio similar to comparisons on the actual amount of rape. (The ratio was approximately 20:1 in the numbers I saw from 2003, so that’s a pretty big difference.) I really don’t know how the underreporting rates are likely to compare, just that there’s some pretty significant though not exactly the same cultural and social pressures for both.

        Not enough to draw any real conclusions here, but… it’s still interesting, I guess.

      • Rebecca October 26, 2009 at 5:49 PM #

        Men sexually harassing women is such a huge problem in Japan that there are women-only trains. I think that says all, really.
        I have also read that reporting rape (and even identifying rape as rape) in Japan is indeed heavily stigmatized, though I can’t find the article now.

        And child porn, drawn or real, is so damn popular in that country, it really scares me.

    • m Andrea November 3, 2009 at 10:08 AM #

      Japan has to have seperate train cars for females, because any female in a male designated car is likely to have a dozen men groping and pawing at her. Given that type of assault-permissive environment, it doesn’t surprise me at all that the women in Japan do not report rape. There’s a huge difference between not reporting rape, and no rapes occuring.

      Afghanistan had zero reported rapes, so according to your “logic”, that must mean that Afghanistan is a very egalitarian society.

  8. kristyn October 26, 2009 at 5:10 PM #

    ”Why is your interpretation MY PROBLEM????”

    can be rephrased as

    ”I don’t think that rape was rape, so why do you think it was rape? Your interpretation is not my problem.”

    and

    ”God why do you feminists take everything SO SRSLY?? MY dick is getting LIMP over here.”

    • winter_lights October 26, 2009 at 6:37 PM #

      The problem is that we’re (or at least, I am) talking about porn produced by consenting adults, with signed contracts, and so on.

      If porn made by people who decided they want to make porn is not rape, then your rephrasing doesn’t make sense.

      If people who decided they wanted to make porn are still being raped… I’m pretty sure Renegade Evolution has had some scathing words about that in the past. If that’s the model being used, then isn’t anything about the particular activity in the porn basically meaningless?

      • factcheckme October 26, 2009 at 9:14 PM #

        porn = rape because of the consent “problem.” in porn, consent is a non-issue: its presumed. but presuming consent is a HUGE problem. because ethically and legally, without a constant negotiation and re-negotiation of consent, there is no consent. (the renegotiation comes in when one party has the ability, always, to stop, change, or decelerate the action AND are active participants, as opposed to drugged ones, or otherwise having no agency once the action has begun.) this renegotiation doesnt happen when the contracts are signed before hand. and where there is no consent, there is RAPE.

        because of the absence of renegotiation, and resulting lack of consent, i really am starting to believe that even paid-actors with signed contracts and all that shit are actually, not even figuratively or metaphorically, participating in/being victimized by rape.

        the other problem is in bringing porn-behaviors and porn-mentalities and porn-desires into your real life, and you know as well as i do that men do exactly that. but its not the ONLY problem with it. men who watch porn are indulging rape-fantasies, and can become rapists if they bring these behaviors into the bedroom. but the men who participate in porn really are rapists, and the female actors really are being and have been, raped.

        • Aileen Wuornos October 27, 2009 at 4:25 AM #

          That’s genius.

        • winter_lights October 27, 2009 at 4:55 AM #

          I’ve read various things that suggest that all parties can in fact pull the plug on things if they wish, but I suppose for a really authoritative response on that you’d need to ask someone who had actually made porn.

          What I am quite positive of is that at least one woman who works in porn was quite torqued by the idea that just the *first* time she was in porn was rape, regardless of how she felt about it. I don’t think applying it to every scene ever is going to make things better.

          As should be obvious from things I’ve said above, I don’t think all porn is rape fantasy, though quite obviously some of it is. Also, do you feel the same way about written, drawn, and animated porn?

          “but the men who participate in porn really are rapists, and the female actors really are being and have been, raped.”

          So, men are assumed to be always consenting, and thus are not having any rights of theirs violated by lack of renegotiation? What about transsexual performers?

          I could see this as being… internally consistent at least if all performers were considered victims, and someone on the production side was considered the rapist (although I’m not certain who that person would be). Saying someone who would have an equal lack of ability to consent breaks it. (Also, what about porn where there is no man? For there to be rape, someone has to be the rapist. … Or at least, if there’s a scenario that would work out otherwise, I’m scared of it.)

          • factcheckme October 27, 2009 at 12:11 PM #

            women cant rape if its the man doing the penetrating, rather than being penetrated. and all i have ever seen in straight porn is man-as-penetrator.

            rape is the penetration OF someone vaginally, anally, or orally without their consent. not forcing someone to penetrate YOU (aka. forced intercourse by a woman on a man). that might certainly be considered sexual assault (unwanted sexual contact) but its not rape. so firstly, its entirely “interally consistent.” secondly, can someone who is actively raping someone also be being sexually assaulted, himself at the same time? could be, but not by the woman. as you mention, third parties do perpetrate this atrocity, as we have seen in several cases where a son has been forced to rape his own mother for example by home intruders.

            but since my original theory was internally consistent…dragging in the third-parties isnt necessary…and kind of smacks of “what about the menz?” not that its not interesting. just that its not NECESSARY for an analysis of rape in porn, and it doesnt change whether or not the woman was raped. it also doesnt change whether or not the MAN was her rapist. it would seem to make him not legally culpable as a rapist if he was indeed being coerced. but if you (and most people) cant even believe that the women in porn are being coerced, i seriously doubt anyone is going to buy that the men are.

            • Faith October 27, 2009 at 2:20 PM #

              “rape is the penetration OF someone vaginally, anally, or orally without their consent. not forcing someone to penetrate YOU (aka. forced intercourse by a woman on a man).”

              That’s hogwash. If I point a gun at a man while someone else ties him to a bed, and then get him erect and sit down on his erect penis, thereby -forcing- him to penetrate me against his will, of course I’m raping him. Women can rape men. It just doesn’t happen terribly often.

              • factcheckme October 27, 2009 at 5:15 PM #

                rape is penetration. anything less than penetration is sexual assault, if theres no consent. the ONLY way, therefore, that a woman could rape a man if if she penetrated him anally. and THATS not gonna happen in any straight-porn that anyone could rationally conceive of.

                theres no reason to try to force mens experience with”unwanted sexual contact” into a rape-shaped box. doing so is disingenuous, and anti-feminist.

                • Faith October 27, 2009 at 6:40 PM #

                  “rape is penetration.”

                  According to -you-, rape is penetration (without consent, I’m hoping). According to -me-, rape is not defined as simply penetration without consent. According to -me-, rape is actually any form of sex that occurs without consent. And, if you actually take the time to look up legal definitions, you will discover that they state “any sexual intercourse that occurs without consent”.

                  According to dictionary.com:

                  “1. the unlawful compelling of a woman through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse.
                  2. any act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person.
                  3. statutory rape.
                  4. an act of plunder, violent seizure, or abuse; despoliation; violation: the rape of the countryside.
                  5. Archaic. the act of seizing and carrying off by force.
                  –verb (used with object)
                  6. to force to have sexual intercourse.
                  7. to plunder (a place); despoil.
                  8. to seize, take, or carry off by force.
                  –verb (used without object)
                  9. to commit rape.”

                  dictionary.reference.com/browse/rape

                  If you pay attention to #2, you’ll see what I mean.

                  According to wikipedia:

                  “Rape, also referred to as sexual assault, is an assault by a person involving sexual intercourse with or without sexual penetration of another person without that person’s consent.”

                  en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape

                  You’ll notice that little statement about how rape does not have to involve penetration.

                  You are not the only person who gets to define what rape is.

                  “the ONLY way, therefore, that a woman could rape a man if if she penetrated him anally. and THATS not gonna happen in any straight-porn that anyone could rationally conceive of.”

                  Not true. And you’ve clearly never seen any BDSM porn involving sub. men.

                  “theres no reason to try to force mens experience with”unwanted sexual contact” into a rape-shaped box. doing so is disingenuous, and anti-feminist.”

                  Oh, bullshit. Rape is rape is rape. It doesn’t matter who the victim is or who the perp. is. We don’t have to deny the fact that it is possible for a female to rape a male in order to call attention to the -fact- that almost all rape is perpetrated by men with female victims.

            • winter_lights October 27, 2009 at 5:59 PM #

              “and all i have ever seen in straight porn is man-as-penetrator.”

              It’s kind of a side thing, but straight porn where the man is penetrated is out there. (Though I couldn’t tell you whether straight porn where only the man is penetrated is out there.)

              As for exactly what rape requires, according to wikipedia there’s a lot of variance by jurisdiction. So I looked up the relevant sections of my state code, and the law here at least sides with me – the definition of “sex act” includes things that don’t require penetration, and the definition of sexual abuse doesn’t make note of who’s on what end of the act, just that “The act is done by force or against the will of the other.” (Among several other things, but the others don’t seem relevant to this discussion.) And rape is listed as a “popular name” for sexual abuse. It even looks like it can handle third-party coercion, very nice.

              “secondly, can someone who is actively raping someone also be being sexually assaulted, himself at the same time? could be, but not by the woman. as you mention, third parties do perpetrate this atrocity, as we have seen in several cases where a son has been forced to rape his own mother for example by home intruders.”

              The assumption in that question is that the male actor in the scene is committing rape. Even accepting for the sake of discussion that *someone* is, it being the actor doesn’t make sense to me, as the actor is not the one applying coercion – it’s the person who holds the contracts. Both parties in the act are being coerced. Neither one is raping the other; they are both being raped by the person who has power over them. It’s differs from your example in the type of pressure being applied, but the idea is the same. (And I’m hoping you don’t consider the son to be a rapist in that example.)

              For that matter, let’s take male actors out of the situation entirely. How does this work with solo performers or scenes where all performers are the same gender? And transsexuals?

              To me, some of those questions are actually totally immaterial. I shouldn’t need to know the gender of anyone involved. Just who was coerced, and who did the coercing. (Though transsexuals are quite a good stress test. If a system fails for them, it suggests to me hidden flaws that will cause it to fail sooner or later for cissexuals.)

              Now, I’ve been informed by someone who works in porn that the ability to renegotiate is present, but it’s up to you whether you believe him. Personally, I’m back to believing that even people who make porn can decide for themselves whether or not they were coerced.

            • hexy October 27, 2009 at 11:10 PM #

              So it’s not rape if someone performs a sex act on you without penetrating you?

              Fucking bullshit. It’s rape whether they use their cock, their hands, their tongue, a foreign object, or anything else. Forcing someone to engage in a sex act is rape, penetration or not.

        • Ren October 27, 2009 at 7:11 AM #

          ” i really am starting to believe that even paid-actors with signed contracts and all that shit are actually, not even figuratively or metaphorically, participating in/being victimized by rape.”

          Believe what you want, that doesn’t make it true.

        • factcheckme October 27, 2009 at 1:02 PM #

          in real life, consent cannot be presumed. there is nothing outrageous about that, or about my observing that.

          just because a woman says “YES” beforehand means nothing, either legally or morally, towards whether the individual acts that follow are consensual. do we at least agree on that point? you dont just get to do whatever the fuck you want to her. porn seems to say you can, with the “free for all” aspect of it. porn is WRONG in that respect, and its a big problem because its wrong as to the issue of consent. and consent is ALL THERE IS between a rape, and a non-rape. dont want to be on the wrong side of the consent problem! but porn IS on the wrong side of it, in several different places.

          in real life, even if she initally said YES, she can stop it before penetration, or at any point thereafter. and the only way the man is going to know whether its wanted is through constant communication with his partner. if she is “acting” then the communications she is sending out are inauthentic. he should know better than to engage in this act, then, if he doesnt know whether its wanted, or not. is he no longer legally or morally culpable for rape, just because he is getting paid to do it? in real life, you have to be sure its wanted. in porn, what, you dont? or, it doesnt matter? bullshit.

          as to whether there are many, MANY rapes that i would consider rapes but even the victim wouldnt: yes. as to whether there are many, MANY rapes that are even rapes in the eyes of the LAW, yet the victim doesnt “feel” victimized: i think thats pretty obviously the case. too drunk to consent being one of them. because its not just the ruined lives that are left behind when women feel victimized, although thats part of it: its also that we as a society cannot tolerate MEN who engage in rape behaviors, at all. men who are morally and legally bankrupt and who engage in rape-behaviors should be punished. period. just because they chose a compliant victim doesnt make the rapist a better person: it just makes the victim more likely to move on with her life. she SHOULD be able to move on with her life, always. but certain things are ALWAYS harmful, and harmful to society, regardless of the response of the vicitm. some men are bad men, and shouldnt be free.

          just because someone doesnt cry over getting their car broken into, for example, doesnt make the thief any less culpable.

        • SheHasNoName October 29, 2009 at 4:54 AM #

          I used to be in porn, and I can certify that the shit that goes on behind the scenes to make women consent is disgusting. I was locked in rooms, literally held down…its just awful. I was raped, on camera, more times than I can count and it was all for mainstream and “legal” porn.

          • Ren October 29, 2009 at 12:08 PM #

            Did you take any legal action? Is there any way you could? People who do such things should be punished.

            • SheHasNoName October 29, 2009 at 8:26 PM #

              There’s no way I could have. I signed the initial consent form, that was all they needed. Anything that happened after that was legal, as far as the legal system is concerned. Even if I had a case, it would have been much too dangerous. I was hounded constatnly until I moved states once I got out. I don’t even want to begin to imagine what would have happened had I taken legal action.

  9. polly styrene October 26, 2009 at 7:26 PM #

    Something I find interesting (kind of related to the cathartic release thing) is that Japan seems to produce far more rape-themed pornography than the U.S., yet their rates for rape seem to be much lower by all statistics I can find. But since Japan also has much lower rates for pretty much every other crime, it’s hard to determine anything from this.

    Because there are so many other variables! The only way you could definitively reach any conclusion by that method one way or the other would be to monitor two exactly identical populations, expose one to porn and not expose the other and then see how many rapes they committed.

    Which would be impossible. That is why the studies that have been done have been attitudinal – seeing what effect porn has on attitudes to rape by questioning subjects on their attitudes before and after viewing it.

    • winter_lights October 26, 2009 at 7:56 PM #

      I suppose that would be why I called it “interesting” and not “probative”.

  10. Ren October 27, 2009 at 7:13 AM #

    I don’t even think I want to get into this. So I am going to stick with Universal Assumptions about anything are a complete load of crap.

  11. yulia October 27, 2009 at 11:03 PM #

    Other than women having to use separate trains to avoid being sexually harrased, Japan also has huge child pornography market (and not just animated), women not reporting for rape and on the other hand, culture of shame that discourage people to do crimes.

    Personally, I think all men will rape if given perfect chance. All men DO fantasize about it. They want to ruin us, period. I don’ t know if I despise or pity women who act in porn voluntarily.

    How about those Girls Gone Wild videos? Here’s what Wikipedia says:

    “The first GGW film was released in 1995 by Bob Ballinger.The films center around pornography, and always conform to the same formula.Girls Gone Wild videos usually involve a camera crew patrolling an area frequented by young drunk women, such as a spring break or Mardi Gras vacation resort, or nightclubs. The crew search for attractive young women who agree to expose their bodies for the camera, in exchange for a Girls Gone Wild branded t-shirt, shorts or cap.Usually the girls are encouraged to strip by crowds of onlooking young men. Women usually kiss each other and expose their breasts, butt, and/or vagina,and sometimes the camera crew follows a group of young females back to the GGW “tour bus”,a hotel or other location, and tapes them engaging in additional sexual activities including intercourse. ”

    Basicly, they use drunken, confused young women and in return they get – a cap with the name of the company who earns money by ruining their reputation.

    • hexy October 27, 2009 at 11:14 PM #

      I’d go for despising. You’ll find that they tend not to want your pity.

      • Ren October 28, 2009 at 2:32 AM #

        word.

    • Sadinotna October 28, 2009 at 1:53 AM #

      Well, yes. Ring of Gyges, and all; will to power is hardly an exclusively male aspect. As for whether men despise you, well, most don’t. In fact, they probably like you, and they can do so while dominating you, and no one can call them out on it. That’s one of those privileges that we talk about. It’s the ones that can’t dominate you that tend towards hatred; hatred is always found in the powerless towards (their perception of) the powerful. It’s usually an understandable -even useful!- feeling, but men’s ressentiment today is targeted on women, of all things, who are laughably unrelated to their present slave-status, something which was seized upon and exploited by their slavers. Women have a similar dynamic, but it’s a much more sane stratagem, which has nevertheless been co-opted by the same systems. (The second-wave of feminism is the quintessential example as the third-wave had literally nothing to co-opt.)

      • Faith October 28, 2009 at 3:51 PM #

        “In fact, they probably like you, and they can do so while dominating you, and no one can call them out on it.”

        I’m pretty sure that the fact that they try to dominate us is, in fact, a sign that they hate us.

        I’m pretty positive that believing that they are entitled to dominate us is at least one definition of misogyny.

        The ones that can’t find a woman to dominate just hate us more.

        • Sadinotna October 29, 2009 at 5:13 AM #

          Oh dear.

          “And when the lambs say among themselves, ‘These birds of prey are evil, and he who least resembles a bird of prey, who is rather its opposite, a lamb,—should he not be good?’ then there is nothing to carp with in this ideal’s establishment, though the birds of prey may regard it a little mockingly, and maybe say to themselves, ‘We bear no grudge against them, these good lambs, we even love them: nothing is tastier than a tender lamb.’ ”

          Do you understand?

          • Faith October 29, 2009 at 11:41 AM #

            “Do you understand?”

            Oh, I understand, alright. I understand exactly what I said above.

            • Sadinotna October 30, 2009 at 5:23 PM #

              Not a philosopher? Then I’ll write this long-form: Men do not, in general, hate women. Hatred is an active thing that requires thought and empathy towards the subject. Men do not think about women. They do not care about women. They do not hate women. They objectify women, and that means they can’t hate a woman anymore than they can hate a chair. Only when a woman has power to resist (or, more accurately, when the man lacks the power to do so) this can she be be empathized with. This is not a comforting thought but it is true nevertheless.

              • Faith October 30, 2009 at 6:27 PM #

                “Not a philosopher?”

                Not a tad bit arrogant?

                I wasn’t claiming ignorance of what you were stating. I was stating that I didn’t agree with it, which I thought should have been obvious.

                I just can’t relate to anything that you have said on this thread or on the others at all. First you try to convince us that men can like women while wanting to dominate us. Now you’re saying that they don’t even think about us at all, much less hate us (and hate require empathy? What the hell? Hate is the opposite of empathy). Now you’re also claiming that feminists must dominate in order to succeed…it’s all really quite a tangled mess that I can’t see having anything to do with feminism.

                You might be a feminist. I’m not going to tell you that you aren’t if you say you are. But you aren’t any kind of feminist I can relate to or agree with. At least so far.

                • Sadinotna November 1, 2009 at 2:27 AM #

                  They do not think of you as a person. They can like you as an object, but can be indifferent. Hatred requires you to project the qualities of the self (the _definition_ of empathy) onto phenomena in order to feel ressentiment. Ever seen someone despise an object without anthropomorphizing it?
                  Feminists need not personally dominate, but feminism itself must dominate, much the same way that patriarchies currently dominate.

                  This is a description of the way things work. If you are making moral judgments about it then you are being religious. That is not usually productive.

    • sour song October 29, 2009 at 1:13 AM #

      Do you really believe that of all men?

  12. pg October 29, 2009 at 6:27 PM #

    Regarding what is legally rape – it differs from state to state in the US. In Virginia, it has to be vaginal penetration, otherwise it’s “sexual assault.” Yes, a woman that has a penis forced into her anus has not been raped in Virginia :(

    • Ren October 29, 2009 at 7:45 PM #

      the sex laws in Va are absolutely insane. No question.

  13. James October 31, 2009 at 3:54 AM #

    People aren’t enjoying themselves when they’re choking, crying, vomiting, gagging, etc.

    You’d think so, but tastes vary.

    • Gayle November 1, 2009 at 2:43 AM #

      You think we enjoy it, don’t you, James?

      Quit the porn. You may stabilize. Eventually.

      • James November 1, 2009 at 11:44 AM #

        I think that some people enjoy it. I wouldn’t say that you specifically enjoy it, but that’s because (unlike you) I don’t make presumptions about complete strangers I’ve come across upon the internet.

        Speaking of which, your stab in the dark didn’t strike home. I don’t tend to use porn.

      • berryblade November 2, 2009 at 5:26 AM #

        Sound advice.

  14. Alina December 1, 2009 at 4:40 AM #

    Great point m Andrea!

    This whole “whatever floats your boat” mentality worries me. Just because someone likes it doesn’t mean it’s okay. And women in Japan are conditioned to be super passive. From the bits of mainstream Japanese pornography I’ve seen, Japanese women are expected to be either really unhappy or really bored with sex. :/ Kinda like British women in the Victorian age.

  15. Miss Andrist December 5, 2009 at 12:43 AM #

    Have you ever gotten off to porn? Then you’re a rapist. Why? Because porn equals prostitution on camera, and prostitution is commercialized rape. So pornography is rape on camera. That means jacking off to porn is collusion in rape, which makes you a rapist. Regardless of your sex, wah-my-girlfriend-gets-off-to-porn: then your girlfriend is a goddamn rapist, too.

    That’s right, if you jack/jill off to porn, somebody has probably cried and wished she would die while you were getting off, so you could get off. Somebody somewhere is scarred for life, for your convenience, at your convenience. Feel like a monster? That’s because you ARE a monster. And you might consider thanking your lucky stars that I’m not in charge, because if I had it my way, you’d be drug into the street and shot.

    The end.

  16. Miss Andrist December 5, 2009 at 1:00 AM #

    The problem with porn is porn has a victim. Too many opinions focus on the perspective of everyone but the victim: the primary victim is the woman on camera being abused. She is the person who is being scarred for life so you can get off. What about her? So what about what floats your boat, the problem with porn is that her boat doesn’t even exist. What’s happening to her probably doesn’t feel good, she doesn’t enjoy it, she’s not there to have sex, she’s (almost certainly) there to get paid. If she’s being slapped, insulted, degraded, hurt, injured, and so forth – she is not enjoying having sex, almost inarguably is NOT doing it for the sake of having sex alone, and wouldn’t be doing it if she weren’t reduced to subhuman status by social definition in the first place.

    The determination to provide exemptions is disgusting. People do not enjoy abuse. That’s why it’s called “abuse.” You know, instead of “fun.” If it were fun, it would be called something like “fun.” Women in porn are abused. Women are people. People do not enjoy abuse. Therefore, women do not enjoy abuse, women in porn do not enjoy what is being inflicted upon them, therefore, porn is bad. It’s not about what YOU enjoy. It’s about the fact that SHE does not enjoy it.

    All women are made victims by porn, but secondarily. Proof positive that women are not human at any point: it is necessary to interject and actively remind conversants that in every porn, a primary victim exists: the woman who is being treated like an object, used, and degraded for the viewer’s sexual gratification. That we have to remind ourselves of her existance is proof positive that she is indeed made into an object, because too much discussion focuses on everybody’s feelings except hers.

    The end.

  17. Ren December 6, 2009 at 6:12 AM #

    Heya there Miss-

    Thank you for speaking for all women in porn. As one in it, I can tell you how much I just love that shit.

    Getting the women who are in porn who do want out is a good thing, seeing that they have other opportunites and choices is a good thing, and I will agree on that with anyone until the end of time.

    Deciding that what you believe is simply how things are for Women In Porn (all of them) is not however helpful, and actually, it is pretty insulting. As is making a default setting and standard by which you can judge when someone has or has not been raped (or is a rapist for that matter). Hell, by your standards, I am both.

    And yeah, a good thing you are not in charge, because murder via dragging people into the streets and shooting them is just a fine display of your obvious concern and humanity.

  18. Nine Deuce December 6, 2009 at 7:23 PM #

    Well, Miss Andrist’s view might not apply to you, Ren, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t fit others.

  19. Ren December 7, 2009 at 7:36 AM #

    Nine: When Have I ever said that all women in porn absolutely love it…

    Lemmie check…oh right, NEVER.

    Point is, people coming along and deciding they just know everything for all women in porn is flat out bullshit.

    And guess what, I am not going to stop reminding people of that. Women, after all, no matter what they do, can and often do speak for themselves and do not need other folk doing it for them.

  20. buggle December 7, 2009 at 5:54 PM #

    Hey Ren, why don’t you post the titles of all the porn movies you’ve been in, so that the porn-lovers can watch porn and know for sure that the woman in it (you) is loving every minute of it, and is not being abused or raped.

  21. buggle December 7, 2009 at 6:05 PM #

    Also, major safe hugs (if wanted) to SheHasNoName. Thank you for speaking out, your words matter:

    “I used to be in porn, and I can certify that the shit that goes on behind the scenes to make women consent is disgusting. I was locked in rooms, literally held down…its just awful. I was raped, on camera, more times than I can count and it was all for mainstream and “legal” porn.”

    I’m so, so sorry that happened to you. That is completely horrific. This is why I am anti-porn. Your comment is incredible, and deserves some attention. I find it interesting and disturbing that people aren’t discussing this.

    This is the thing for me- how does a porn consumer know if they are watching men rape and abuse a woman (like SheHasNoName) and when they are watching a woman “enjoying” herself, like Ren? I think it’s safer to assume it’s all rape, even if it isn’t, because I would never ever ever ever ever want to get off watching a man rape a woman. That is fucking horrific. Is your orgasm really worth the risk? Mine is not.

  22. Miss Andrist December 7, 2009 at 7:02 PM #

    Ren,

    My knee jerk reaction is:

    Obviously, you’ve never been raped.
    Obviously, you’ve never been a prostitute.
    Obviously, because you’re talking out your ass.

    Yes, I speak for all women in porns. It hurts. A shooting victim can speak for everyone who’s been shot. It hurts. SIMPLE CONCEPTS. You, however, are have based your argument on the insistence that being raped hurts some women LESS than it hurts others. That’s like insisting that it’s wrong to condemn shooting people because not everybody dies of it.

    And by the way? The dialogue never had a single goddamn thing to do with the integrity of my moral character. So you can take that flimsy, contrived, sanctimonious windbag flatulence, and blow it right out the back.

    When humanity gives a flying rat’s ass about me, I’ll give a flying rat’s ass about humanity. Until that day, I have learned that misogyny is a very visceral, very direct threat upon my life. When I respond to said threat, you presume to cast judgement on me for defending my life? Well. Your privilege may make this difficult for you to put your head around, but I failed to give a shit what you or anybody else thinks about my survival instincts; your approval is irrelevant to me. As far as I am concerned, it’s life or death, so make my day. So, yeah. I shoot rapists. (And any other assailant.) Tough titty, kitty.

    Furthermore…

    Since your opinion will not stop me from being raped (and will in fact probably conspire to facilitate in the grander patriarchal bullshit-machine yet further assaults and outrages against my personage), your opinion is as useful as – oh gee. A bicycle is to a fish.

    So I propose a solution, a path to legitimatizing your opinions in the esteem of your more worldly peers (namely, myself.) If you want to be taken seriously about this – if you actually believe what you say in even the tiniest fraction – why the hell don’t you give it a try? If you can come in here and blather on about how it’s not so bad, PROVE IT.

    I mean… what’s stopping you? ^_^

    Then when you tell me I’m wrong, I won’t disregard you and your remarks opinion as utterly irrelevant. Til then? Whatever, d00d.

  23. James December 7, 2009 at 7:09 PM #

    That would somewhat infringe upon her anonymity, buggle.

  24. Ren December 7, 2009 at 8:44 PM #

    Miss:

    Obviously, you’ve never been raped. – Correct.

    Obviously, you’ve never been a prostitute.- Well, you know what they say about assumptions.

    Obviously, because you’re talking out your ass.-Why, because I do not flat out agree with you? Interesting.

    And just to clarify, I am no great fan of humanity in the least. Shoot who you want, I actually do not care, I just find it odd when people advocate against violence against women but for violence in general.

    However, I do not think anyone has a right to decide when another human being has been raped or not, even if that woman is involved in the making of pornography. When a woman says she has been raped, she should be believed. When a woman says she was not raped- she should also be believed. Or so I think anyway.

    Buggle: Thanks, but no thanks…after all, I wouldn’t want to be accused of being a marketing front or end up getting threatened (oh, wait…). People who have an interest in seeing what I do can usually figure out a way of asking/finding out that does not require I make such a list and post it.

  25. berryblade December 8, 2009 at 2:55 AM #

    “Do you really believe that of all men?”

    Yeah, I really, really do. Even the two or three I would call “accomplices” I wouldn’t trust them as far as I could throw them.

  26. berryblade December 8, 2009 at 3:21 AM #

    Also, I’m all in favour of Miss Andrist and buggle’s solution. You two are my new heroines.
    “That is fucking horrific. Is your orgasm really worth the risk? Mine is not.”

    Word.

  27. lizor December 8, 2009 at 4:25 PM #

    “This is the thing for me- how does a porn consumer know if they are watching men rape and abuse a woman (like SheHasNoName) and when they are watching a woman “enjoying” herself, like Ren? ”

    I’ve been thinking about this, trying to imagine that I – and I’m struggling with this picture here – am a person who wants to watch porn as part of my sexual practice. How could I ensure that I am not jilling to someone being raped? Maybe if the woman appearing in the film were also both the director and the producer – i.e. she’s completely in change of what happens on set and she is the sole recipient, after production expenses, of all of the profits.

    Just throwing this out.

    If some porn-luvin’ guy showed me that he was exclusively using female actor-controlled and owned imagery… well, I might not exactly LIKE the guy, but I might hate him considerably less.

  28. antiprincess December 8, 2009 at 5:26 PM #

    This is the thing for me- how does a porn consumer know if they are watching men rape and abuse a woman (like SheHasNoName) and when they are watching a woman “enjoying” herself, like Ren? I think it’s safer to assume it’s all rape, even if it isn’t, because I would never ever ever ever ever want to get off watching a man rape a woman. That is fucking horrific. Is your orgasm really worth the risk? Mine is not.

    why the scare quotes around the word “enjoying”? do you think Ren’s not really enjoying herself?

    • Nine Deuce December 8, 2009 at 5:40 PM #

      That is a bit nitpicky and far from the point of the comment.

  29. antiprincess December 8, 2009 at 6:24 PM #

    I disagree. I don’t think it’s nitpicky at all.

    It implies that a woman who claims to be enjoying herself is actually NOT, which is just as spurious as the implication that a woman who appears to be suffering is actually enjoying herself.

    why is it that the idea of a woman in fake pleasure/real pain is easier to conceive than the idea of a woman in real pleasure?

    not a trivial point by any means, and also more-or-less pertinent to the topic, in my opinion.

    • Nine Deuce December 8, 2009 at 9:50 PM #

      A woman in fake pleasure/real pain is a fucking tragedy (and likely a crime), and if we deny that it is occurring, we’re culpable. A woman in real pleasure is usually a good thing, and if we deny that it is occurring, there is no real effect. Your attempt to equate those two things is offensive.

      Sure, it’s not cool for society to shame women for liking sex, but there is a difference between fundies saying “If you like this, you’re a worthless human being” and feminists saying “I don’t believe anyone actually likes this.” The feminist saying that might be wrong, but she’s not hurting anyone any more than I am when I say that Family Guy is a shitty show. You see, fundies try to limit women’s sexual agency, often by force. Feminists do not. Even radical ones. I can tell you all day long that I think you should do something different, but all I’m doing is trying to persuade you. I’m not in charge of the state, and even if I was, I’d surely find better uses to put it to than preventing you from doing sex act A, B, or Y and liking the shit out of it.

  30. Ren December 8, 2009 at 9:55 PM #

    “A woman in real pleasure is usually a good thing, and if we deny it, there is no real effect”

    Agreed that it is not the same, the two are not equal things, but there is absolutely a real effect. People assume you are lying, think they can decide when you have been raped and countless other things that do actually matter, at least to some of us. NO, it is not the same thing. An effect however, absolutely.

    • Nine Deuce December 8, 2009 at 10:06 PM #

      Even in a state in which ND was the supreme ruler of all things, and in which the presumption of innocence was not automatic in rape cases, I’m pretty sure the issue of who has or has not been raped would always be up to the victim to decide. If I theoretically think that some practice amounts to rape and an individual who has experienced it does not think so, the real life effect is zip, other than that person maybe thinking I’m an asshole. But there are, in fact, a lot of cases in which rape has occurred and the victim does not look at it that way — think about how many women believe their sexual assaults were their own fault. Still, it’s always up to the victim to define her experience as a rape. My goal would probably be to convince women of their own worth so that we wouldn’t have young girls hanging themselves because they feel like they’re at fault for teenage assholes passing nude photos of them around without their consent, and to make sure that women, once they feel empowered to call sexual assault what it is, don’t have to deal with a bunch of asshole men and women who make it impossible to punish a rapist. How does that apply to you? It doesn’t, because in that world in which women were convinced of their worth as human beings, if you still got off on what you get off on, then it’d be your deal and not mine to decide.

  31. James December 8, 2009 at 10:00 PM #

    I think the issue of a woman NOT enjoying herself and pretending she is is far more problematic than someone who is enjoying herself. If she enjoys it, woohoo. It doesn’t matter what any of us think.

    Obviously, I disagree with none of this. Pleasure is not a problem.

    If she does not, and she’s being abused, that actually does matter.

    I don’t really see why this is held in contrast to someone experiencing pleasure. That also very much matters, only it’s a positive thing rather than a negative one. Pleasure matters.

    A woman in fake pleasure/real pain is a fucking tragedy, and if we deny it, we’re culpable.

    You accepting it as a tragedy, though, does nothing to stop it. I think that people place too much weight on caring about things. Awareness is neccessary for action, but it’s no substitute.

    A woman in real pleasure is usually a good thing, and if we deny it, there is no real effect. Your attempt to equate those two things is offensive.

    The wording above was “equally spurious”, not “of equal significance.” In both instances people are deciding for other people how they feel, due to some misguided sense of general authority. What they should be doing is listening.

  32. Faith December 8, 2009 at 11:11 PM #

    “Even in a state in which ND was the supreme ruler of all things, and in which the presumption of innocence was not automatic in rape cases, I’m pretty sure the issue of who has or has not been raped would always be up to the victim to decide.”

    While I agree with this in general, there actually -are- women out there who have been raped who do not understand this fact. They do not understand this fact because they have never had anyone to explain to them that they have the right to sexual autonomy. Fundamentalist christian women, for instance, who believe that men have an absolute right to sex with their wife at all times, whether she wants it or not.

    So, yes, in general I don’t believe it’s a great idea to go around telling women they’ve been raped when they believe otherwise – whether that woman engages in sex work or not. But it’s actually not anywhere near as black and white an issue as Ren has made it out to be. It’s also not as black and white an issue as Miss Andrist has made it out to be either.

    • Nine Deuce December 8, 2009 at 11:13 PM #

      I don’t disagree with any of that.

  33. buggle December 9, 2009 at 1:43 PM #

    Oh, so there is a way that I can see some of your porn? How do I go about doing that? What is this mysterious way of asking that I must do? I’d like to see it.

  34. lizor December 9, 2009 at 2:27 PM #

    I second that. I was raped at fifteen when I got drunk at a party held by a 34-year-old photographer. The host took “artistic erotic” pictures of young women and promising untold delights if I stayed after everyone else had left, he raped me.

    It was a solid ten years before I could ever admit that what he did was rape, mostly because I was so ashamed, because I thought I was just too ugly for him to want to be kind and gentle with, because I thought that that was what “sophisticated” sex was and that it was my fault that it was so physically painful and humiliating, because I was just “too inexperienced” to get it right.

    It took a therapist who repeatedly told me that what happened was rape for me to begin to come to terms with it. Now I find it painful to remember my denial and the way I rationalized my dissociation and/or panic attacks that occurred during sex for years afterwards.

    Rape culture normalizes rape to such a degree that a victim like me could not name it, and this was years before high-speed internet and it’s barrage of porn-o-rific images. Humans can rationalize and adapt to many adverse conditions. I believed at the time that “grown-up sex” was something essentially painful, humiliating and distancing, that this was just a cold hard fact of life and I had to make the best of it.

    I am happy to say now that I have healed and I enjoy a wonderful, varied, delicious, creative and orgasmic sex/love life, but it’s been a hell of a journey to get here.

    We all need to have the courage to name rape and rapists where we see them.

  35. James December 9, 2009 at 5:31 PM #

    Try emailing her, buggle.

  36. buggle December 9, 2009 at 6:14 PM #

    Lizor, that is so awful. I’m so sorry that happened to you. What you say about not defining it as rape is sooo crucial! I was raped twice in college but I still have a really hard time calling it rape- I was drunk, I was fooling around with the guys, it wasn’t violent, they did stop when I pushed them off me (2 separate incidents, almost identical). I feel almost guilty calling it rape, when I compare what other girls and women have gone through! It took me probably 10 years as well, to call it rape. And like I said, I still feel like a faker or something, cause it wasn’t this brutal experience.

  37. Ren December 9, 2009 at 9:04 PM #

    Very well then, buggle. mizevolution@gmail.com. However, as you once declared my blogs porn sites, I would think they easy enough to find.

  38. hexyhex December 10, 2009 at 12:06 AM #

    I can’t help but compare this to the schism within feminist discourse over the “important issues” contained in reproductive freedom and justice. Yes, access to abortion is a vital issue, but for many demographics of women access to abortion is a non issue compared to the way they have historically been denied fertility. I’m presuming we’re all aware of this internal breakdown.

    I see this the same way. Yes, it is absolutely very important to note that some women are pressured/conditioned to not view their rapes as rape, and to focus a lot of attention on what is happening them and attempt to prevent it continuing. But denying the right of some other women to self-define pleasure is NOT a tiny issue to be pushed into the background, and this comment, ND:

    A woman in real pleasure is usually a good thing, and if we deny that it is occurring, there is no real effect. Your attempt to equate those two things is offensive.

    … really overlooks the historical oppression of some women in terms of being denied the right to pleasure, the right to sexual autonomy, and the right to be considered capable of consent. There is a very real effect to considering it OK to tell some groups of women that they are not experiencing pleasure when they claim they are, and it’s something some groups of women experience as very real oppression and stigma today.

    I’m not just talking about sex workers, either. Once again I find myself noticing that the entire history of women with disabilities (who are often sex workers) is completely lacking a place in your analysis.

    It’s said so often that it’s becoming a cliche, but the issues of white, educated, able-bodied, cissexual women does not make up feminism alone.

    • Nine Deuce December 10, 2009 at 1:06 AM #

      My comment wasn’t in reference to myself, it was in reference to the commenters who have expressed doubt as to whether someone can enjoy a certain act (I’ve never done that). I already said that it’s a problem to deny women the right to sexual pleasure. That leaves a lot of issues aside, though. I have to decide what I think is the most pressing issue at hand, and right now it isn’t coming to Ren’s defense when someone says she doesn’t think she can enjoy act X. Ren can take care of herself, as can you. I’m more worried about women who are being abused and don’t have the support they need to realize it, name it, and put a stop to it. Of course there’s something wrong with one person assuming they know better than another person what is best for that person, but I don’t think that me saying rape is a more pressing problem than some commenter disbelieving some other commenter’s claims about what gets her off amounts to that.

      But what groups of women are you talking about that those claims hurt? Disabled women? I can’t talk about that because I don’t know enough about it. I think that’s better approached by someone who can speak of it with authority. Me not being presumptuous enough to talk about those issues does not equal me saying they don’t have a place within feminism. I’m not as blind to these issues as people want to claim I am or as my purposely inflammatory writing style might suggest, and I kind of resent the implication that I’m completely privilege-blind because I don’t make it my business to get involved in debates I’m not qualified to participate in.

  39. hexyhex December 10, 2009 at 12:09 AM #

    And Lizor, I am sorry to hear about your horrible experience. I’ve been somewhere similar myself.

  40. hmmm... December 31, 2009 at 8:28 PM #

    what about romance novels i.e. “women’s pornography” that objectifies men as success objects, commonly ending in marriage, sometimes against the man’s will?

    Is this not dissimilar to “until she chokes”, an “until he says I do” theme that pervades the majority of books sold in America?

    What are your thoughts on this?

  41. Grafton January 1, 2010 at 1:08 AM #

    Huh? There are romance novels that end in genuine shotgun weddings?

    I thought they usually followed a plotline wherein the protagonist, a woman, finds a good-looking man who is a lazy, shiftless gadabout and an arrogant bastard, and by virtue of her hawtness and charm, changes him into an attentive suitor who is very pleased to devote himself to her forever and after.

    If this were a discussion of the notion that porn causes men to have unreasonable expectations about what sexual relationships with women are like, well, that aspect of romance novels might be relevant.

    Except that I doubt it’s working that way, since I am lazy, shiftless and arrogant (though not interested in gadding) and pretty good looking if you don’t mind short, but women who read romance novels have as of yet failed to try to recreate that plotline with me.

    Not relevant anyway. Causing somebody to have a change of heart (and of personality) is just not very similar to choking somebody.

  42. Grafton January 1, 2010 at 2:26 AM #

    Personally, I think all men will rape if given perfect chance. All men DO fantasize about it.

    No. It’s not the least bit appealing.

    But I have a neurological disorder and you’re welcome to claim that it explains my distaste for sexual coercion and violence, if you want.

  43. polly January 1, 2010 at 11:07 AM #

    what about romance novels i.e. “women’s pornography” that objectifies men as success objects, commonly ending in marriage, sometimes against the man’s will?

    Is this not dissimilar to “until she chokes”, an “until he says I do” theme that pervades the majority of books sold in America?

    What are your thoughts on this?

    Better wed than dead are my thoughts on that. You can always get divorced. Death isn’t usually reversible.

  44. polly January 1, 2010 at 12:56 PM #

    I see this the same way. Yes, it is absolutely very important to note that some women are pressured/conditioned to not view their rapes as rape, and to focus a lot of attention on what is happening them and attempt to prevent it continuing. But denying the right of some other women to self-define pleasure is NOT a tiny issue to be pushed into the background, and this comment, ND:

    A woman in real pleasure is usually a good thing, and if we deny that it is occurring, there is no real effect. Your attempt to equate those two things is offensive.

    … really overlooks the historical oppression of some women in terms of being denied the right to pleasure, the right to sexual autonomy, and the right to be considered capable of consent. There is a very real effect to considering it OK to tell some groups of women that they are not experiencing pleasure when they claim they are, and it’s something some groups of women experience as very real oppression and stigma today.

    In the past women were told that if they desired sex they were mentally ill. Now they are told that if they do not desire sex they are mentally ill.

    It’s one thing to acknowledge the past, but another to live in it, the fact that something happened in the past does not mean it is currently culturally relevant.

    Yes there are still some women today (notably those with learning disabilities) who are subject to beliefs that they cannot consent to/enjoy sex. Another such group is lesbians – there seem to be folks around (usually heterosexual males) who don’t want to believe that woman who are exclusively sexually attracted to women exist. Lesbian desire is commonly culturally denied.

    However this is all part of a continuum of male construction of female sexuality. That is the issue here. Now is is more probable that the main consumers of porn of the type described are all in consensual BDSM relationships, or just common or garden porn consumers who are turned on by rape?

    I find it hard to believe that this porn is produced with the sexual pleasure of females as its chief object.

  45. hexy January 2, 2010 at 8:11 AM #

    It’s one thing to acknowledge the past, but another to live in it, the fact that something happened in the past does not mean it is currently culturally relevant.

    I used the term “historical” to imply that this is something that has occurred for a long, long time and is still on going, not to imply that these things happened in the past and do not any more. I’m not really sure why you’d make the above comment and then follow it with:

    Yes there are still some women today (notably those with learning disabilities) who are subject to beliefs that they cannot consent to/enjoy sex. Another such group is lesbians – there seem to be folks around (usually heterosexual males) who don’t want to believe that woman who are exclusively sexually attracted to women exist. Lesbian desire is commonly culturally denied.

    …?

    Don’t these examples indicate that you don’t believe this is an issue of the past and that it is still absolutely currently relevant?

    However this is all part of a continuum of male construction of female sexuality. That is the issue here.

    Indeed. And that entire issue deserves to be recognised and opposed, not just the bits that are main priority for a certain group of women while those that affect other groups of women are dismissed, even in casual language.

    Now is is more probable that the main consumers of porn of the type described are all in consensual BDSM relationships, or just common or garden porn consumers who are turned on by rape?

    I don’t really see how that’s relevant to my comment. Or, come to think of it, the comment that you’ve used to segue into it.

    I find it hard to believe that this porn is produced with the sexual pleasure of females as its chief object.

    … is anyone trying to make you believe that? I certainly don’t think it’s the case and, while I might have missed it, I didn’t notice anyone else saying that either.

  46. polly January 2, 2010 at 5:03 PM #

    I don’t really see how that’s relevant to my comment. Or, come to think of it, the comment that you’ve used to segue into it

    It’s what the piece is about, that’s why it’s relevant to the comment. If you’re claiming women’s sexuality is being stifled, the question is how is Nine Deuce’s post, or her comment, contributing to that? If you just want to talk generally about women’s sexuality being stifled, why not write a post on your own blog?

    Nine Deuce’s assertion is that those who enjoy this type of porn are turned on by rape. Now since there’s plenty of this type of porn out there, and therefore plenty of propaganda for the idea that women do enjoy this type of activity ‘enjoy’ it, I don’t see how Nine Deuce suggesting that women (in general) don’t enjoy these type of activities in real life is somehow suppressing women’s sexuality, in the face of the mainstream idea, promoted from romance novels right the way through to hard core porn that women enjoy being dominated. Unless Nine Deuce secretly HAS become supreme leader of the universe since the last time I logged on to this blog.

    Any more than at the present bit of human history, we have to worry about women, as a class, being told they shouldn’t want sex (which was my point about living in the past). Certainly women are told they should only want certain types of patriarchally approved sex, but we aren’t being told that women shouldn’t want sex full stop. Which was my point. It helps to read my comments in the order they’re written, with one paragraph frequently relating to the preceding one.

  47. Grafton January 3, 2010 at 10:27 AM #

    Certainly women are told they should only want certain types of patriarchally approved sex, but we aren’t being told that women shouldn’t want sex full stop.

    Are you told you should want sex, or are you told you should want to consent to sex because that leads to the patriarchally-approved action of pleasing men?

    I get the impression that maybe it’s really the latter, because the cultural imagery of women’s sexuality so rarely, if ever, seems to include women who both initiate sex and direct the activity to suit their own sexual desires. It’s depicted as being about pleasing men or manipulating men. I think?

    Seems to me that the emphasis on images of women as submissive and/or passive (or raped) must stifle everybody’s sexuality, by uh, normifying (is this a proper word?) a particular brand of lousy sex.

    The whole dominant-submissive active-passive agent-object thing doesn’t strike me as any more natural or fun or emotionally satisfying than the ‘historic’ business of giving her a quick squirt through a hole in a sheet.

  48. David January 18, 2010 at 2:43 PM #

    So if porn is rape….

    Is masturbation?

    Are masturbatory fantasies rape?
    Perhaps it depends on what the fantasy involves? Same with porn surely…

  49. Laurelin January 18, 2010 at 4:31 PM #

    David: porn involves real women. Y’ know, flesh and blood human beings like yourself.

    Fantasies are just you, your unimaginative brain, and your cock.

    End of.

  50. David January 19, 2010 at 2:55 AM #

    Why my ‘unimaginative’ brain?

    So is cartoon porn not rape then? Being not flesh and blood

  51. isme January 19, 2010 at 4:10 AM #

    On a related note, under Australian law, cartoon child pornography counts as child pornorgraphy, possession of which carries a prison sentence.

  52. Laurelin January 19, 2010 at 8:57 AM #

    Male fantasies are fundamentally banal and unimaginative.

    In cartoon porn, no human being is being raped, no. However, cartoon porn is still an expression of violent misogyny and contributes to the normalisation and eroticisation of violence against women. Many women and girls have suffered as a result of cartoon pornography. Many women and girls have been raped and abused in the making of pornography.

    On my blog, on the right hand side is a section entitled ‘anti-porn links’. You will find there many links to sites in which women describe their abuse as part of pornography. (This includes women who have been in pornography, prostituted women, those who have been shown in as a child by abusers, etc.).

    I’m not going to have a long discussion over how bad various types of porn are. The bottom line is that pornography is violence against women.

  53. truthvscompliance January 19, 2010 at 10:36 PM #

    Isn’t it completely irritating that fantasy has gone from imagination to blankly staring at a 2 dimensional screen?
    One comment for David – Scum Manifesto. haha

  54. David January 25, 2010 at 9:21 AM #

    “However, cartoon porn is still an expression of violent misogyny and contributes to the normalisation and eroticisation of violence against women.”
    - “However, masturbatory fantasys are still an expression of violent misogyny…”?
    Or is it because the fantasy is internal, and not shared with the world, that it is not an _expression_?

    “Male fantasies are fundamentally banal and unimaginative.”
    - Are you saying that there is something in the male biology that makes this so? Are males also fundamentally banal and unimaginative lovers?

  55. Laurelin January 25, 2010 at 3:45 PM #

    David: see my previous comment.

    “Are you saying that there is something in the male biology that makes this so?”

    No.

  56. Laurelin January 25, 2010 at 3:47 PM #

    “Ones that watch porn are.”
    Hell yes! You can tell the pornified ones a mile off. Clueless and aggressive. No fun at all.
    Life’s too short to sleep with the pornsick. I’ll stick to the competent, thanks ;)

  57. kristina January 25, 2010 at 4:40 PM #

    “Ones that watch porn are.”

    Yeah, it’s pretty easy to know the basic mechanics of the sex with someone like that…about the same sex you get with almost every guy. There’s bang in the shower, there’s bend over and butt fuck, doggy-style, give me head, get head, sex in public place (the total eww for me…I mean how is that a turn on…yeah the thought of getting arrested makes me hot…*rolls eyes*) then there’s of course the standard steps to turning on a woman that are very similar to tuning an old tv set… just play with the nipples a little bit, put fingers in pussy, and all the usual spots that men’s magazines claim all women have as g spots…. I am so sick of my nipples being played with…it does NOT feel good!!! God learn something from a real woman not men writing about what spots they THINK women love being touched… Some women may like it…but not ALL it is not an all around magic button to press to turn your woman on… nor is the clit

  58. Laurelin January 25, 2010 at 6:05 PM #

    kristina- exactly!
    What is the deal with the ‘sex in a public place’ thing? I’m starting to think that certain men are into that because they want someone to see them fucking a woman. ‘hey look, I’m getting laid!’. Yeah well done mate, your medal’s in the post *rolls eyes*. Actually, that probably has a hell of a lot to do with porn- sex as spectacle for others, etc.

  59. Laurelin January 25, 2010 at 6:18 PM #

    Random un-filtered thought:

    The defence of porn-consumers is often along the lines of ‘I have the right to privacy, I am allowed to enjoy porn in private, no matter if women were abused in the making of it, no matter what the effects on women as a class, blah blah blah’. Yet the thing about porn is that it is *not* private. There’s a set, a man with a camera, people looking on. Porn itself has fuck-all to do with privacy, and everything to do with spectacle and public humiliation/ public triumph.

    That people can yoke porn to the concept of privacy shows a fundamental lack of perception of 1) the conditions under which porn is made, and 2) women as human beings who have the right to physical integrity and privacy.

    Am mulling this over now; would appreciate input.

  60. Faith January 25, 2010 at 7:13 PM #

    “So if porn is rape….

    Is masturbation?”

    Only if the person masturbating didn’t consent to themselves masturbating themselves. And while I have had masturbatory sessions that felt like borderline rape to me because I didn’t really want to do it, but I did anyway, I’m pretty sure that it’s at least next to impossible to rape yourself. You could be forced to masturbate by another person, of course. But then the other person is the perpetrator of a sexually violent crime, not you.

  61. David January 26, 2010 at 11:26 PM #

    My point re: porn/masturbation was more:

    Often when a guy masturbates – he pictures a woman (including women he knows from real life) doing whatever – is this objectification? Is it thus rape?

    And how is one creating an image in his head – fundamentally different to one creating that image on paper? – Is it because the paper image can be shared, that it is wrong?

    Would similarly – telling an erotic story to a friend be contributing to misogyny?

    The reason I find this angle interesting, is because feminists/sexual-rights/whatever seem to condone masturbation, probably out of a reaction to Christianity. Perhaps you should ‘man up’ and say that men masturbating is also wrong.

    Laurelin – So if it’s not biology that causes the unimagination – then how is it _fundamental_?

    • Nine Deuce January 27, 2010 at 12:53 AM #

      We won’t say masturbation is wrong because we don’t think so. We don’t condone masturbation as a way to differentiate ourselves from fundies, we do it because we don’t think sex or masturbation are dirty or shameful. The difference between mental fantasy and porn is that no actual person is exploited in your mental fantasy. They aren’t there because they need to make ends meet, because we live in a culture that tells them that they are only sex, they aren’t really actually there, hence no one is actually harmed, save maybe you if your fantasies are fucked up. Porn users like to conflate porn use and masturbation, but that’s absolute bullshit and it’s a tactic meant to misrepresent anti-porn feminists and our arguments. Nice try.

  62. David January 26, 2010 at 11:28 PM #

    Note: Faith – The issue isn’t really the masturbation – but the fantasy that accompanies it.

  63. David January 27, 2010 at 5:08 AM #

    Nine Deuce –
    Sure – I accept the argument that ‘Women are being exploited in the production of pornography’. (see tangent at end of post).

    But then it comes back to the cartoon pornography again. Women are not exploited in the production of cartoon pornography, any more than they are in the the production of a masturbatory fantasy.

    As Laurelin said: “In cartoon porn, no human being is being raped, no. However, cartoon porn is still an expression of violent misogyny and contributes to the normalisation and eroticisation of violence against women. Many women and girls have suffered as a result of cartoon pornography.”.

    I just want to see some consistency here.
    I think what I’m getting at – is that it’s the _content_ of the image, whether cartoon, real, written, or imagined, that determines it’s moral status, not just that it’s of a sexual nature.

    Tangent: porn/prostitution and exploitation.
    Yes – this arguement is also used by socialists/etc arguing that factory workers etc are ‘wage slaves’. IMO this is a pretty fair point. Essentially then – your argument against pornography is part of the larger argument against a generally exploitative society. (or course, porn/prostitution is of a sexual nature, and could be conceived as ‘fundamentally worse’ exploitation.).
    (Argh – this tangent becomes quite big – because I suggest that even though it’s exploitation – the factory job still needs to be done – which suggests that I’m arguing that prostitution is also a job that ‘needs to be done’… – It’s not so much that it ‘needs’ to be done – but it’s a luxury item that there is supply and demand for. But talk about ‘need’ is kinda irrelevant anyway – some factory jobs don’t ‘need’ to be done, they are producing other luxury items.).

    Another point: so what about amateur pornography? Is it rape?
    What about sexy flirty texts?
    Where does one drawn the line?

    • Nine Deuce January 27, 2010 at 5:46 AM #

      Does the content of your individual fantasy affect the behavior of other people? Does it contribute to social misogyny? If it does, then it can only do so through your behavior, and it is your responsibility to address that. Cartoon porn and live action porn do both, and hence the people who make them are morally in question here.

      As for pornography being just like any work, it’s not. Sure, I’m not a fan of capitalism, but most jobs don’t require one to allow themselves to be penetrated by people they wouldn’t have sex with if they weren’t getting paid to do so.

      Your call for consistency is either disingenuous or foolish. The world is not as simple as that, and a neat little theoretical package that applies the same answer to a huge variety of problems is not going to work. No one is calling all instances of ____________ rape, unless we’re talking about all instances of rape. What I’m saying is that most porn is 1) anti-woman propaganda and that 2) a lot of harm to women occurs in its production, and that it is thus ethically unsound, provided what we as a society care about what happens to women (not that I think that’s the case). Cartoon porn may not fit 2, but it does fit 1. If whatever you were to think about while masturbating fit either of these two criteria, it’d be a moral problem. But if I had to put live action porn, cartoon porn, and some individual’s misogynistic fantasy on a continuum, I’d say they decrease in negative social effects from the former to the latter, and so I’d prefer the latter. I also think that if the first two didn’t exist, the last one might be less likely to, and that person might just be having fantasies in which everyone is treated like a human, which would negate any possible social ill resulting from male masturbation. Ah, if only the world could be free of the social ills caused by men’s need to ejaculate! But alas…

  64. David January 27, 2010 at 5:30 AM #

    https://www.againstpornography.org/definition.html

    Ok – So I’ve so I’ve been reading the above link on the defintion of pornography, and I think it’s the very crux of the issue.

    This page argues that there is a difference between ‘porn’ and ‘erotica’.

    I argue the problem really is, the typical lay person, is going to see it all as ‘porn’ – (hey it’s all naked people having sex yes?).

    Essentially the content of erotica and porn is the same – people having sex. It’s the nature and intention that differs.

    And that’s where it gets difficult.
    For example: some people are into bondage and discipline, we can argue that the man tying her up and whipping her, is an expression of love. (or are you opposed to this kind of sex?). If they were to film it, according to the definition, this would erotica, but it would most probably be perceived as violent pornography.

    It’s all very grey.

    • Nine Deuce January 27, 2010 at 5:47 AM #

      It’s a very strange world in which whipping someone is a sign of love. Think about it a little harder.

  65. James January 27, 2010 at 9:18 AM #

    What kind of a pretentious idiot still thinks the porn/erotica dichotomy still has any heft whatsoever? The distinction is delusional class-centred wedging, pure & simple.

  66. Faith January 27, 2010 at 12:24 PM #

    David,

    What ND said.

  67. lizor January 27, 2010 at 6:48 PM #

    Anyone operating under the delusion that porn and prostitution are “career choices” should watch this. In fact, everyone should watch this video and support, wherever possible, this group’s efforts to protect women in the sex “industry”.

    http://www.womenlobby.org/site/video_en.asp

    Cartoon or not, porn creates Johns which creates a marketplace for modern slavery. Pornified fantasies are both a reflection of and a reinforcement of the illness of patriarchy that creates the conditions resulting in the stories and conditions discussed in this video – and on this forum.

  68. Laurelin January 30, 2010 at 11:30 AM #

    Thanks for posting that, Lizor. It’s something everyone needs to see.
    It really says it all.

  69. David February 5, 2010 at 1:37 AM #

    So simple question:

    Do you think amateur pornography and sexting is rape?

    • Nine Deuce February 5, 2010 at 1:40 AM #

      Jesus Christ, leave the dead horse alone. If the amateur porn is something a couple made that one person is sharing without the other’s consent, then the one sharing it deserves to go to prison. If someone shares a private “sexting” message, same deal. If anything non-consensual went on, it’s rape. How hard is this shit?

  70. Laurelin February 5, 2010 at 1:41 AM #

    David: follow instructions in my previous comment. Educate yourself.

    And quit asking stupid questions. I’m embarrassed for you!

  71. David February 5, 2010 at 6:44 AM #

    I’m thinking of things like exhibitionism.

    Plenty of people put their videos online for the whole world to see, just for the thrill of it I suppose.

    Or couples swap videos with other couples.

    I don’t really get why you are getting worked up. I think it’s a fairly reasonable question, and it’s a new angle.

  72. isme February 5, 2010 at 3:31 PM #

    “Do you think amateur pornography and sexting is rape?”

    At the risk of annoying people, I’m going to assume that was just very poorly phrased and based on a misunderstanding, rather than simple trolling.

    Without wanting to put words in anybody’s mouth, when people speak of rape and abuse in porn, that’s exactly what they mean. Not that the production of porn inherently is indistinguishable from rape.

    Hypothetically, if rape and abuse could be eliminated from the production of porn, it would presumably trouble the anti-pornography people far less, because it is a reason, not a justification, for that attitude.

    I hope that is helpful.

  73. doodette February 5, 2010 at 6:03 PM #

    David – when I was in highschool, I made a sex tape with my boyfriend of two years – he went behind my back and showed it to all of his friends without my permission. I imagine this happens more often than not. Thankfully – it was on a VHS tape and he didn’t have two players – so he couldn’t make copies. I ended up ruining and it’s history. This experience is EXACTLY what first made me anti-porn.

  74. David February 6, 2010 at 5:34 AM #

    Isme – Yes – I agree than porn and prostitution are rampant with dodgy practises/abuse/etc, (there are other industries that are the same (especially in the 3rd world)). I would argue here, that it just involves cleaning the industry up. But it seems that some people are arguing that they are _fundamentally_ wrong.

    Doodette- Sure – sharing a tape is a breach of trust, and thus wrong.
    But would you say that boyfriend that doesn’t share the tape, but watches himself, is participating in the objectification of women, or ‘rape’ etc?

    • Nine Deuce February 6, 2010 at 6:24 AM #

      How, exactly, would you clean these industries up? How do we make sure rape is not occurring? In what kind of world would women fucking for money pose no ethical problems? Did it ever occur to you that if someone has to be paid to allow something to be done to them sexually, that what is occurring is pay-for-rape, as in she doesn’t actually want to do it but is allowing it to occur for money? Tell me, what industry requires its employees to allow themselves to be penetrated vaginally, orally, or anally by people they don’t actually want to have sex with? I’m familiar with a lot of industries, but I can’t think of another one besides the porn/prostitution industry in which that is part of the job description. The reason you’re getting the idea that people are saying porn and prostitution are fundamentally wrong is because we are saying so. We should not live in a world in which women’s bodies and sexuality are commodified and sold. That you are trying to come up with some kind of scenario in which doing so is OK shows that your real concern is protecting your access to porn, not protecting human beings from being dehumanized.

      Obviously someone watching a sex tape is participating in the objectification of women. How could it be otherwise?

      Do not put rape in quotes again on this site. I will ban you immediately if you do so. In fact, I’m not really planning to approve another of your comments. You’re bringing up tired issues that have been addressed in my porn series (start here, if you haven’t seen it, then read this one) and in countless other places.

  75. Fede September 14, 2010 at 10:38 PM #

    The fact that so many people equate sex with porn is at the heart of the problem.

    Mainstream porn is about the erotification of the dominance-submission paradigm, not about sex per se. It does not depict sex acts between human beings of equal worth, but rather a supreme pronger pronging one or more subordinate prongee(s). The prongee’s lack of humanity and dignity is not a coincidental side effect, but rather the very point of the exercise.

    Too often, the type of domination acted out in porn is physical violence, pure and simple. The more degrading, the more arousing.

    When a person is relentlessly subjected to the pornulated image of ‘sex’, there are several possible outcomes, but it is not possible to go through life unaffected by porn culture.
    It is far from impossible that she (or he: the sex of the person does not matter as much as the gender) may develop a fetishism for being physically coerced or in other ways degraded during sex.

    Porn apologists will use this example all the time in order to acquit themselves for using the depiction of a woman’s suffering to get off. If she likes it, it must be ok, right? But the point is that if she really does happen to like it, she must conceal that fact, because the sadist’s arousal is predicated on the notion that she does not like it!

    It is far out to believe that there is nothing worrying about a majority of men being trained through porn to need the appearance of non-consent in order to be turned on.

    The fact that masochists exist does not let anyone off the hook for being a sexual sadist. If you think the representation (or the actual presentation) of a rape is hot, there is something wrong with you. It may not be entirely your own fault, but there is.

    I am not saying this to condemn anyone, by the way. I myself have both masochistic and sadistic tendencies, but I don’t kid myself for one moment that they are benign, or that they are an expression of my ‘choice’ – nor that they are ‘hardwired’. I have been brainwashed by mainstream society into having those inclinations, but my sex life has immensely improved since I began to see them for what they are: the fetishisation of violence, and to go against them.

    The masochist is a product of patriarchy, and so is the sadist. When the great majority of porn consumers are turned on by the depiction of violence, it spells trouble.

    Another popular argument in favour of porn, no matter how violent, is the supposed dichotomy between fantasy and reality. To that I say Oh, please! What turns you on is part of your personality. If you are turned on by child pornography – even if you consume only ‘victimless’ graphical representations of the rape of children, and even if you have never harmed a living being – other people are justified in not wanting you to be around children. If you are turned on by depictions of women being degraded, other people are justified in not wanting you near women. And women are justified in not liking you. It’s that simple, buddy.

  76. Fede September 14, 2010 at 10:45 PM #

    Oh, and because I am a rude bastard, I have already posted a couple of comments on this blog without saying THANKS for a great site! I just found it and am so happy. Your writing is excellent!

    Kris, a new fan

  77. lizor October 30, 2010 at 9:18 AM #

    I would post this in more of the porn series discussions, but I’m on the run.

    This is a new feminist anti-porn site started by some young men in the U.K.

    http://www.antipornmen.org/

    Some of the porn apologist trolls on these threads should take a look.

  78. Johnny November 18, 2010 at 5:47 AM #

    @ Yulia
    “Personally, I think all men will rape if given perfect chance. All men DO fantasize about it. They want to ruin us, period. I don’t know if I despise or pity women who act in porn voluntarily.”

    WHAT!!!! Did I just read that?!

    No. Just no, that is so very, very wrong. That is one of the most fucked up things I’ve ever heard. I do NOT fantasize about rape, the only people who want to rape are sadists who like to see other people in distress. I am not a sadist. I would never rape in my life, never, ever. Most men agree with me.

    That is fucked up.

  79. Fede November 18, 2010 at 10:15 AM #

    Johnny, next you’ll be telling us that we should care whether or not we can convince you that water is wet. Have you asked yourself why you feel the need to come in here and be wilfully obtuse?

    I don’t think you have acid for blood. I am, however, beginning to think you have shit for brains.

  80. Johnny November 18, 2010 at 1:21 PM #

    “Ah, if only the world could be free of the social ills caused by men’s need to ejaculate! But alas…”

    Nine Deuce, could you explain to me what you mean by that? Are you now saying that men simply ejaculating is bad? Because if you are, that is absolutely ridiculous.You wouldn’t be here if men didn’t ejaculate. Ejaculation isn’t a misogynistic creation of the patriarchy, it’s a natural bodily function like sneezing. Yeah, porn is bad, porn is a human invention…but ejaculating is a natural thing. It doesn’t harm anyone.

    Next you’ll be telling us that men have acid for blood.

    • Nine Deuce November 18, 2010 at 1:28 PM #

      I didn’t sat that, but no it does not mean men ejaculating is bad. What it means is that most men in the history of the world have considered their desire to ejaculate more important than women’s human rights. See porn, prostitution, the history of the institution of marriage, the sale of women and children into sex slavery, etc.

  81. Nine Deuce November 18, 2010 at 1:32 PM #

    Wait, I guess I did say that. It’s been awhile. Still, you should be able to tell what it meant. Do you really need that spelled out for you?

    You’re looking for people who are anti-porn. Well, you’ve found them. It isn’t my fault if you don’t like the reasoning we’ve used to reach our conclusions even though it’s completely sound. Why are YOU anti-porn?

  82. Johnny November 18, 2010 at 3:53 PM #

    Right, okay…but you did actually say you hate men so what do you expect me to think? You’re calling me annoying because I had a problem with you blaming all men for the actions of a few, do you expect me to just go “yeah, it is my fault” when it isn’t? Condemn the dunces who partake in the misogyny but don’t be silly and tar billions of people with the same brush, that’s not too much to ask.

    • Nine Deuce November 18, 2010 at 8:53 PM #

      It’s not a few, it’s most.

  83. Bluecat November 18, 2010 at 3:53 PM #

    @Johnny:

    9 out of 10 (87%) young men (individuals aged 18—26) reported using pornography. -Generation XXX: Pornography Acceptance and Use Among Emerging Adults. Journal of Adolescent Research 23.1 (2008)

    I know of at least one study that found men between 25-44 are the greatest consumers of porn, so that would mean 90-100% of men between 25-44 use porn.

    Your anecdotal evidence doesn’t trump statistics.

  84. Johnny November 18, 2010 at 5:22 PM #

    I’m actually anti-porn for a lot of the same reasons you are, but some of the things you say are very unusual.

    The sentence before you said “which would negate any possible social ill resulting from male masturbation”…how can masturbation cause society any harm? I’m not talking about porn here, I’m just talking about masturbation. Yes, prostitution is wrong. Yes, porn is wrong. Yes, sex trafficking is wrong. They are detrimental to the people involved and society as a whole…but how is masturbation bad for society?

    “You’re looking for people who are anti-porn. Well, you’ve found them. It isn’t my fault if you don’t like the reasoning we’ve used to reach our conclusions even though it’s completely sound.”
    But it’s not really sound, is it? You’re a self-proclaimed sexist. I just don’t understand how you can be arguing against sexism while at the same time actually being sexist. Your stance confuses me. being anti-porn is great but you’ve mixed it in with a load of misandric bollocks.

    • Nine Deuce November 18, 2010 at 5:34 PM #

      There’s nothing wrong with masturbation, as long as no one is hurt in the process as happens in porn. I’m not a sexist, I just see that most men do something harmful to women and acknowledge that I see it. You can call it misandry, but it doesn’t matter much when I’m not out sticking foreign objects into men’s orifices while shoving their heads in toilets and calling them names and making a profit off of doing so. You see, misogyny actually affects people’s lives. Misandry doesn’t, unless you’re a porn user who plans to off himself if a radical feminist doesn’t like him.

  85. Bluecat November 18, 2010 at 5:23 PM #

    No. Just no, that is so very, very wrong. That is one of the most fucked up things I’ve ever heard. I do NOT fantasize about rape, the only people who want to rape are sadists who like to see other people in distress. I am not a sadist. I would never rape in my life, never, ever. Most men agree with me.

    You assume we have no idea what we’re talking about. Au contraire, Johnny. You may have successfully manged to distance yourself from the toxic sludge known as porn, but there are those of us who have spent vast chunks of our lives surfing for it, downloading it, sharing it, and even becoming addicted to it. You may be unaware that most porn (80-90%, according to different studies) contains misogynistic themes, i.e., women’s pain/humiliation/exploitation/degradation. In my past life as a porn addict, I’ve seen pretty much everything there is to see out there, and I have disagree with the studies; I would say at least 99% of internet porn contains misogynistic content.

    If most men use porn (and they do), that means most men are fapping away to porn with misogynistic content. That these themes have proliferated over the past decade says to me that men prefer their porn with a side of female suffering.

    I’m sorry, Johnny, but the fact is, your sex kind of sucks. Oftentimes, it sucks a lot. Good for you for being an exception to the rule, but denying the reality of socially constructed masculinity and its detrimental impact on the female half of the population isn’t going to win you any friends here.

  86. Johnny November 18, 2010 at 6:19 PM #

    Nine Deuce, if you hate men, you’re a sexist. If you’re sexist, your argument is obsolete.

    Yes, porn is misogynistic, that’s obvious, but not all men watch porn. As well as myself, I know a lot of other guys who don’t watch porn, what is your justification for hating those men (and me)?

    • Nine Deuce November 18, 2010 at 6:34 PM #

      I don’t hate you. You’re very annoying, but I don’t hate you (yet). If I choose to, it’ll be because you’re a presumptuous bore, not because you have a wang.

  87. isme November 19, 2010 at 1:30 AM #

    “Nine Deuce, if you hate men, you’re a sexist. If you’re sexist, your argument is obsolete.”

    Surely the argument stands or falls based on its own merits, not the person who created it?

    In any case, you are hardly the first male to come to the site, and end up completely ignoring the discussions about men’s overwhelming hatred of women (which happens to be what the site is about) in favour of complaining that some women have begun hating men back.

    This has failed to garner much support in the past, and really isn’t why people come to read and post here.

  88. Hecate November 19, 2010 at 4:09 PM #

    I’m in agreement with ND. I happen to think that no matter the argument, actions top words every time. If I want to know if someone is really ‘hateful’ or not, I am going to look at their actions long before considering gossip, opinions or the words coming out of their mouths or from their fingers on a keyboard.

    If women don’t have the right to say they don’t like what men are doing to them, what rights do they have at all at that point? If they say they hate what the men are doing and even hate the men themselves for doing it, so what? Nothing has ever ‘happened’ in the name of ‘misandry.’ Men are not paid less because of it, they are not in any immediate physical danger because of it and they most certainly are not treated as second class citizens as a result of it, if in fact it exists at all.

    When you have no evidence as to any actions taken, you’re putting yourself in danger of looking not just ignorant, but very likely insane. What are you going to do, scream that our words are literally ‘killing’ you? That’s the definition of coward if ever there was one.

  89. Bluecat November 20, 2010 at 1:32 AM #

    Adding to the brill commentary that surely should not be necessary, but most unfortunately is and probably always will be:

    @Johnny:

    There is no such thing as “reverse sexism”. That’s like saying a POC is capable of being “reverse racist”. Non-marginalized groups cannot be discriminated against.

    When a woman says she “hates men”, she’s using universally-understood-by-all-women code that encapsulates years, if not decades, of frustration with the institutional and culturally pervasive discrimination and mistreatment of women. It has nothing to do with individual men, it is not a blanket condemnation of every penis owner that ever has or ever will walk the earth, nor is it an airing of grievances with former lovers or relatives. It literally means “I hate patriarchy.” Because patriarchy was established for the benefit of men, to the detriment of women, and continues to flourish because of men, it is sometimes simpler and immensely gratifying to summarize: I hate men!

    When POC say, “I hate white people!”, level-headed, non-reactionary white people do not automatically assume that they, themselves, are the target of bigotry-fueled righteous indignation, do they? I suppose you might react defensively if you had a guilty conscience. I always imagine that men who misinterpret women’s legitimate outrage as a personalized attack, or, worse, frame it as a “gender war”, are probably the biggest purveyors of sexism/misogyny. If you aren’t part of the problem, then there’s no need to get your boxers in a wad.

  90. Bean November 22, 2010 at 2:19 AM #

    When POC say, “I hate white people!”, level-headed, non-reactionary white people do not automatically assume that they, themselves, are the target of bigotry-fueled righteous indignation, do they?

    Really? In my experience Bluecat, practically every damn time.

    Treating that kind of thing as an individualized comment/personal attack is privileged behaviour, full stop, and all privileged groups do it.

  91. Bluecat November 22, 2010 at 5:58 PM #

    Really? In my experience Bluecat, practically every damn time.

    Then you happen to know a hell of a lot of overt/covert bigots. Why are you hanging around with people like that? Unless someone has a nefarious hidden agenda or is stupid enough to believe they’re living in a post-racism utopia (and I’ve yet to meet a racism denialist who isn’t at least a little bit racist), you aren’t going to meet a rational, social conscience-having homo sapien who’s incapable of deducing: racial minority member + heinous racist shit racial minority member has been subjected to = “I hate white people.”

    Treating that kind of thing as an individualized comment/personal attack is privileged behaviour, full stop, and all privileged groups do it.

    We aren’t in disagreement here, the only difference being our social groups, since it appears that you’re almost exclusively surrounded by bigots, whereas the people I elect to associate with – i.e., the ones who look like me – suffer from “white guilt” and actively seek to correct the racial power differential.

  92. M. November 22, 2010 at 7:13 PM #

    My comment is very obvious and has probably been said already, but I’ll say it anyway:

    Even if the womon was enjoying herself in such sickening porn, it still says something very disturbing about those who would want to watch it [especially since they don't know *for sure* that she's consenting happily].

  93. Bean November 23, 2010 at 2:06 AM #

    Bluecat, I didn’t want this to turn into a lengthy discussion; I just wanted to point out a hole in your argument using a frame of reference I thought you would appreciate. It’s not even like it was a BIG hole, since the point you were making is still a good one; I just think you fell back on an example that didn’t remotely work.

    Yet I get the sense from your comment that you’re trying to make this personal, and I really have no idea why.

    Then you happen to know a hell of a lot of overt/covert bigots.

    No shit? The percentage of white people who “actively seek to correct the racial power differential” is as fucking infinitesimal as the number of MEN who actively seek to correct power differentials based on sex and gender.

    There is no significant difference there in the willingness of the oppressive group to listen, or do the “math” you suggested up there. Because no, most people seriously do not do that math. They certainly don’t do that math when they are reacting in a knee-jerk fashion to someone they believe is unfairly singling them out and being “mean” to them on the basis of something they can’t change (like racial identity).

    Also, I’m not sure what you meant to say by suggesting I “surround myself” with bigots. Even on very strictly moderated “safe space” feminist forums I read, white people’s BUTTHURT over comments like, “I hate white people” comes up over and over and has to be shut down for the sake of the safety of the space. Have you seriously never seen this, or is the only feminist issue you talk about on blogs/forums porn? I’m seriously asking, because I don’t get how you can’t have seen the ongoing issue which is white feminism’s racism unless you were sticking closely to a topic of discussion where racism rarely comes up.

    And tell me, do you live on an all-lesbian radical feminist commune to avoid men and women who aren’t interested in challenging misogyny? If not, your social group must be full of bigots.

    Living “surrounded” by bigots isn’t exactly a personal choice, because the vast, vast majority of people are bigots in one respect or another.

    Oh, and “white guilt” is not something to aspire to maintain. Guilt is a terribly unproductive emotion; one that people often tend to try to rid themselves of by shunting whatever “blame” they can onto others. Guilt also fosters resentment and paralysis. White people who are genuinely invested in supporting anti-racist movements should do their best to move past guilt.

  94. Bluecat November 23, 2010 at 1:06 PM #

    Bluecat, I didn’t want this to turn into a lengthy discussion; I just wanted to point out a hole in your argument…

    What hole? That’s why I qualified my original statement with “level-headed” and “non-reactionary”. I never said, “Show me the white person who would react defensively” because of course they are legion. Defensive sexists/misogynists are legion, too. My argument is that that defensive segment of the white population is overtly/covertly bigoted, in the same way that dudes who get all testerical when a woman expresses her contempt for sexism in a generalized way (“I hate men”) are getting testerical precisely because of their sexism/misogyny. The guiltier the conscience, the more likely a person is to have a knee-jerk NOT ME! moment. It’s just human nature. Whenever I overhear/read derogatory comments aimed at whites, I feel saddened and ashamed of my genetic association with the oppressor. I think it’s the only decent human response in such a situation. I’ve never known a non-bigot to flip their lid, just as I’ve never known a non-sexist to flip their lid over criticism/condemnation of their sex.

    Oh, and “white guilt” is not something to aspire to maintain. Guilt is a terribly unproductive emotion; one that people often tend to try to rid themselves of by shunting whatever “blame” they can onto others.

    I think you might be confusing “guilt” with “shame”. Guilt is earned psychic discomfort resulting from unethical behavior. It can motivate you to better yourself, or you can easily ignore it (many people have perfected the art of guilt avoidance). Not to be confused with the yoke of self-loathing known as shame. I know they’re used interchangeably in the English language, but they exist on different levels conceptually.

    Research into ending racism actually supports the concept of “white guilt”. People who are taught that they benefit unfairly from white privilege are more likely to take action to end racism. People who are taught to view racism as a systemic social problem unrelated to them directly are more apathetic. Privilege isn’t something you can conscionably brush under the rug. If it needles at you, as it should any decent human being, the only way to unburden yourself is to participate in revamping the system that created it.

    Social activism has its roots in guilt (did you really think compassion was responsible?). It’s that gnawing discomfort with the way things are that propels people to help others. If you feel nothing, you do nothing. Happiness breeds complacency, and low-level psychic pain produces action (people naturally seek out cessation to pain…they don’t do shit when they’re feeling fine). White dudes have gotten so very, very far in life by surrounding themselves with guilt forcefields that allow them to feel no pain.

  95. Bean November 25, 2010 at 12:22 PM #

    Oh, fucking please. You said I surround myself with bigots like I have a choice about it, and now you’re backtracking. There are plenty of otherwise “level-headed,” “non-reactionary” white people who’d flip their shit if they heard a comment like that; people seriously involved in anti-racism activism wouldn’t claim otherwise, and wouldn’t try to make it sound like that reaction is only typical of Bad White People instead of practically all white people. So tell me another one.

    And call it “shame” if you damn well want. Whatever you want to call it, the emotion is useless.

  96. Jimmy November 26, 2010 at 1:58 AM #

    Porn is something people masturbate to. How is that inhumane? The pornstars may not like what’s happening to them, but it’s their choice whether or not to remain a porn star. Why is it so bad to WANT sexual stimulation?

    PS: Rape is wrong. Plain and simple. Rape porn is weird, but dominance is arousing for me for some reason… Is that weird??

    PPS: Im 13.

  97. Aileen Wuornos November 26, 2010 at 4:25 PM #

    At first Jimmy’s comment made me laugh, and then I saw the part about him being 13 and realised I (and everyone who reads and posts here and genuinely cares about the well being of womyn) have a valuable opportunity here.

    Jimmy,

    First of all, no-one has said that mastrubation is inhumane. It’s good, easy, free, fun and apparently good for you too. What *is* inhumane however, is mastrubating to images of womyn who are being debased, raped, terrorised and abused.

    Second of all, if you are engaging in ANY sexual activity, and the person(s) who are participating with you, aren’t liking it, then that’s firm and definite indicator to DISCONTINUE. If you continue, you are raping/sexually assualting that/those person(s) which is illegal, immoral, unethical and a hate crime (even if it isn’t legally recognised as one, IMHO it is.)

    Third, often, many womyn and girls who are forced into/”choose” to enter into pornography are often coerced directly and/or indirectly. For example, many are survivors of childhood sexual abuse, or are rape survivors, some may be drug addicts or alcoholics, some may be trafficked as slaves or coerced by an affiliate/aquantince, some may be poor and/or have no “hireable skills” or formal education. Like with abusive relationships, it is not an industry that is easy to leave or stay away from, especially if you have a pimp/boyfriend/rent payment/drug addiction/child to pay for etc etc

    Fourth, even if none of the above were factors, and every single person preforming in pornographic material was there because they really, genuinely wanted to be, you would still be buying and selling human beings. The pornographic “actors” and “actresses” would probably still only receive a nominal, piss poor “service” fee while the producers, pimps and other industry heads laughed their arses off all the way to the bank from royalties and sales.

    Fifth, prostitution and pornography (and I think male-stream modelling too,) are the only industry where womyn earn more than men, what does that say about the way we value womyn in our society?

    Sixth, again, there’s nothing wrong with wanting sexual stimulation. But you must realise, that sexual activity is not a right; that is, no-one owes it to you. Buying a womon a drink, or a dinner or giving her a lift home or having her look at you is not an entitlement to sexual activity on your part. You will not die if you do not fuck.

    Seventh, if you are 13, how old were you when you first looked at pornography? have you ever even kissed someone yet? do you think that looking at such material will pre-determine and shape your ideas and expectations about intercourse and other sexual activity.

    Eighth, if every man or boy who said that they thought rape was wrong actually meant it, we would not need to have this conversation. You have no way of knowing whether or not the womyn in pornography actually wanted to be there 200%, you have no way of knowing whether or not you are mastrubating to a womon being raped. So that doesn’t fly with me either.

    Ninth (and last, jesus, that was long) you say that you think rape is wrong, yet you say that dominance arouses you. Think that one for a while and if you can’t see how the two are contradictory well. Hm. That’s very troubling to say the least.

    Every single question I asked was serious btw.

  98. isme November 26, 2010 at 10:34 PM #

    Also, alot of mainstream pornography isn’t about sex, it’s about degradation and abuse. Even when the content isn’t particularly abusive, it’ll still be much more likely to be labelled something like “Dirty bitch gets pounded hard” rather than “man and woman have sex with each other”.

  99. Jennie November 24, 2012 at 2:34 AM #

    I am truly disturbed and saddened by the way society and the patriarchy hates us women. We are not the ones out there starting wars-senselessly murdering people-on the national sex offender registry-raping-assaulting-being domestically violent to our loved ones-producing and watching child porn and so much more..Who is guilty of these crimes? Men! “A hard cock has no conscience” so they say and I believe a man would rape a woman if he could get away with it. Also-I can’t believe how horrifically violent porn has become. Whatever happened to sensual nudes? These women are being raped for $ just like prostitutes are. And men love this. .Men are dangerous! I don’t trust them at all. Porn will corrupt them and they’ll start seeking out ways to act these violent images out. Fuck you Max Hardcore!! I’d love to chop off your dick and shove it down your throat!!

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Sorry, Men and Fun-Fems: All Porn Is Rape, All the Time (Or, If You Are Watching Porn, You Are Watching Rape) « femonade - October 28, 2009

    [...] to nine-deuce for her most recent and most-excellent posts on pornography here and here. Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)What We’re Reading: The problem [...]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 500 other followers