I encourage everyone to read this conversation between sex-positive activist Annie Sprinkle and anti-porn radical feminist Mae Tyme. Here's an excerpt, but seriously, read the whole thing.
Annie Sprinkle: To me pornography is any photo, film or drawing that shows hard-core explicit sex. How exactly do you view pornography?
Mae Tyme: As something that is overwhelmingly by, about and for men. It is a world wide industry that generates gazillions of dollars every year from which women do not benefit.
A: In porn films female performers get paid a whole heck of a lot more than the male performers.
M: I didn’t know that. I’ve always viewed pornography as an aspect of oppression of women, not of our liberation. And I view the nuclear family pretty much that too. So I’ve tried to develop a sexuality that isn’t about men or what they want, but is entirely about women and how we relate to each other.
A: Presently I’m actually interested in trying to do the same thing. Would a typical sex magazine just totally turn you off?
M: Yes. I am trying to learn what sex is about for a free and voluntarily participating woman. My view has been that all women that do pornography are either terribly misinformed, or they’ve been enslaved. You tell me that’s not true at all. That being in porn can be liberating and profitable.
A: I agree that we all have a lot of programmed ideas about what is sexy. I get irked. Oh God, not another white teddy. There is plenty of room for porn to be more creative, experimental, feminist, and more erotic for women. But it’s harder to create that than you might think. That’s the challenge I love.
I love that article. What really stuns me about it is Mae Tyme's admission that she's made porn herself. It's like, there I see the tormented ghost of Something All Feminists Can Agree On, which is that it's not the act of filming or illustrating sex that's the problem (if you think it is a problem) with mainstream porn, but the *content*.
ReplyDeleteExcept that it isn't "Something All Feminists Can Agree On". I have seen it argued by some of the more hardcore radfems that any imagery made of a woman for the sexual stimulation of a man is inherently objectifying and degrading, no matter what the context – even if the two are partners. For an illustration of this mentality, check out the exhange between Jack Goff and Delphyne, starting here.
ReplyDeleteExcept that it isn't "Something All Feminists Can Agree On". I have seen it argued by some of the more hardcore radfems that any imagery made of a woman for the sexual stimulation of a man is inherently objectifying and degrading, no matter what the context – even if the two are partners.
ReplyDeleteWell, Tyme's homemade porn was made by her and her female lover, for the two of them exclusively. I wonder if that's why it doesn't count as objectifying and degrading.
but iacb is right: that's EXACTLY what Jack is talking about there (except for he's an ev0l male i guess; then again delphyne is an ev0l het, not that i suppose that'd stop her weighing in on what is and isn't okay for lesbian couples as well), and delphyne, well...was delphyne.
ReplyDeletei mean, there's another woman in that circle who was questioning herself even as she photographed flowers; objectifying, you see. these people are fanatics. they're way in the minority, but boy do they ever leave an impression.
i mean:
ReplyDelete“I don’t get off on degrading my girlfriend, unless you think her nudity degrades her.”
Your sexualisation and objectification (i.e. taking pictures of her to masturbate over) degrades her. It lessens her humanity. Instead of simply enjoying a direct relationship with her you mediate it with photography which you then sexually fetishize.
and
1)Any porn that features a woman sexually is degrading.
Using a human’s being’s body for someone else’s sexual pleasure is degrading, in the same way that using someone is a slave is degrading. Not tautologous.
2)No pro-porn people can come up with porn that doesn’t feature a woman sexually.
They haven’t done so far, and there has been a HUGE amount of opportunity on this thread. So I’d say that was a fact.
3)Porn is misogynistic and any porn user is a misogynist.
Yup. In the same way that someone who reads racist hate literature for pleasure is a racist.
You don’t understand the concept of a tautology.
I still stare in awe and disbelief whenever I see that bit from delphyne. It's like... "Wow, she REALLY said that. And she was totally SERIOUS."
ReplyDelete"Wow, she REALLY said that. And she was totally SERIOUS."
ReplyDeleteYeah, y feeling as well.
couple that with the whole, men are men and women are women! genitals are for procreation! except for the clitoris, that's for fun, winkie winkie (shudder); and, you know, except for actually saying the word "clitoris" and the British accent she could be my incredibly annoying fundamentalist college dorm-mate, who was -very- exercised about all things too sexual, but simultaneously hooted and giggled over such things as "Big Stick" (popsicles). OO ER MISSUS.
ReplyDeletegawd.
oh yes and: i love how the poster who kept pointedly asking her ARE THERE ANY QUEERS ON YOUR PLANET, DELPHYNE? never did get an answer. which, i guess -is- the answer.
ReplyDeleteSee also this IBlameThePatriarchy Forum discussion.
ReplyDeleteI don't think there's a "consensus" kind of sexually explicit material that "all feminists can agree on". Its clear that at least some won't abide by the existance of any, period.
yes that's a good idea
ReplyDelete...................
Suvin
Wow, check out this site called www.fluc.com
. Free SMS and free mobile ads!! Its fantastic