Sasha Grey takes lead in next Steven Soderbergh movie

In what is sure to be denounced by the usual sources as another symptom of "the mainstreaming of porn", Sasha Grey has been cast in the lead role in Steven Soderbergh's The Girlfriend Experience. As is obvious by the title, the movie is about high-end escorting, but I'm not clear whether its going to be a sexually explicit porn/mainstream crossover along the lines of Shortbus or Nine Songs. In spite of being a relatively low-budget film by Hollywood standards, its a big role for a porn performer, who in most cases find themselves excluded from more mainstream roles, even when they have some decent acting talent.

Such crossover success has been happening for a few years now in Europe, such as French model and actress Dany Verissimo, who got her start as porn star Ally Mac Tyana. And, of course, porn stars crossing over into indie film has been going on for a long time now, for example, Marilyn Chambers lead role in Cronenberg's Rabid, Rebecca Lord's supporting role in I Am a Sex Addict, not to mention Nina Hartley's featured bit part in Boogie Nights. These movies unfortunately did not bring about more mainstream roles for the actresses in question, and time will tell whether or not the same will be true for Sasha Grey.

In any even, its great seeing a talent like Sasha Grey get this kind of recognition. In a recent column, Violet Blue sends out suitably mad props to Sasha and her cohort of upcoming, stereotype-busting porn stars:

For me, Grey occupies that hyperpublic, female-sexual-power groundbreaking space shared with young female porn performers such as Lorelei Lee (articulate eloquence embodied), Dana DeArmond (vanguard realist), Kimberly Kane (cutting-edge visionary), Ashley Blue (powerful muse), April Flores (playful agent of change) and Madison Young (soft-spoken shock troop of female sexual power). These women are my heroes, and they are not to be trifled with. Like her amazing colleagues, Sasha Grey is articulate, smarter than the journalists and pundits (and pud whackers) that record her every move, and she more than sees the forest for the trees when it comes to sex work and porn. Third gen feminism? Try screw-your one-size-fits-all feminism, or fuck feminism altogether and watch me shred your quaint old notions of female sexuality into pure feminine power and the redefinition of sex and gender roles — and porn.
(more)

I guess anybody can be a pornographer now....

I was rather amused to see that I've shown up on the radar of "feminist law professor" Ann Bartow. In a post about Wikipedia she writes:

To take just one example, the entry about Melissa Farley has been heavily edited by a pornographer who sometimes uses the pseudonym Iamcuriousblue. He also shows up numerous times in the edits to the Catharine MacKinnon entry and virtually every place feminism is mentioned. That any judge, or anyone generally, would think these accounts of feminism are unbiased or authoritative is truly scary.
(more)

I'll take on the stuff about Wikipedia later on my own blog, since that's kind of peripheral to the subject here. (But I'll just say that I'd be happy to scrutinize my record of writing balanced entries and general adherence to the rules of Wikipedia, particularly compared to the past contributions of Nikki Craft, whom Bartow posits as being driven away by the evol anti-feminists who inhabit the Wikiverse.)

I think what is interesting, though, is that she calls me a "pornographer". Not that I find that an insult – I'm honored by the label, actually. However considering that I've never shot a single sexy photo, or a single minute of porn video, or even published or posted an erotic story in a public forum, I'm afraid I have to decline that title.

Then again, as we discussed in a recent entry or two, high-falutin feminist academics aren't always known for getting their facts straight.

The Price of Pleasure now viewable online

Here

Low-rez, watermarked, and mosaicked, but, hey, nobody's viewing it for the visuals.

(I was thinking of embedding it here, but seeing as several writers here have been complaining about their utter lack of 2257 compliance, I'd rather just keep that shit on their site.)

Addendum 8/12/09:

A DVD-quality copy of TPoP is available via BitTorrent (you'll need to use a piece of BT client software like LimeWire, Vuze, µTorrent, etc) if you want to see this thing in its full glory. Link here. The torrent is linked through the anarchist site OneBigTorrent.org and I'm not sure if its "authorized", however, regarding copyright issues around TPoP, I'll just note that I have as much respect for copyright as TPoP's producers and leave it at that.

Zack and Miri Get Banned in Philly

It seems that shooting porn has been a popular comedy theme over the last few years – The Amateurs, Slippery Slope, and I Want Candy all come to mind. Kevin Smith adds his contribution with Zack and Miri Make a Porno, coming out at the end of the month.

And it also seems that some of the advertising for Zack and Miri is now the latest battle in the new porn wars. Apparently, billboards for it have been banned in several places and a number of newspapers are refusing to carry the ads. So is the ad really raunchy or something? No, actually the ad only contains stick figures, with no added naughty bits or suggestive positions. It seems the big problem is the title of the movie itself, which contains the word --gasp-- Porno.

According to "child development expert" Diane Levin, the simplicity of the ad is part of the problem, since the fact that the ad contains stick figures means that its being marketed to children and is trying to sell them on the idea that "porn is an acceptable occupation". In case anybody is wondering who this person is, she's none other a Wheelock College professor (yes, that Wheelock College, which must have its own Department of Anti-Porn studies), and fellow footsoldier of Gail Dines and Jeane Kilbourne in the "progressive" battle against smut. Levine is co-author of "So Sexy So Soon", the latest in the century-old tradition of "lock up your daughters" lit, and in general is somebody who is milking the scare over "the sexualization of girls" as a stick to attack adult media. She's particularly off base with this one, as whatever you want to say about the inappropriateness of Bratz dolls and the like for young girls, Zack and Miri is clearly not being marketed to children, nor is mere exposure to the word "porno" going to damage them.

Now I will note that I actually have some sympathy for the idea there's some things you just shouldn't put on billboards displayed to the public, who are in most cases, not a voluntary audience. Time and place restrictions are acceptable under a general climate of free expression, and, in the case of private companies, they can refuse to carry whatever they want. (I'll leave the more radical question of who owns public space out of this for the time being.) A few years ago, the "torture porn" movie Captivity crossed what I think is a definite line when they put out some extremely disturbing ads on public billboards, and a lot of people have big problems with American Apparel billboards for analogous reasons. However, I am also against the total bowdlerization of public space – one cannot possibly remove from public display all things that are going to possibly be offensive to somebody, and in fact, that kind of bowdlerized public space would in turn be equally offensive to many others (like myself, for instance).

Its especially problematic in the case of newspapers that won't carry this ad, because they almost certainly will carry news stories, often very salacious ones, about porn. In these cases, its really amounts to point-of-view discrimination – Zack and Miri present making porn as lighthearted, comical, and, in some ways, normal. That's a view that clearly clashes with a moralistic view that porn is a road to ruin or "unacceptable". Of course, people have every right to that view and they have every right to push it (and, boy, do they), but trying to suppress the opposite point of view from the marketplace of ideas is wrong and unworthy of a news organization.

Ultimately, however, I'm not too worried about how Kevin Smith and his film will do. Smith is no stranger to controversy – some feminist and lesbian activists got their knickers in a twist over Chasing Amy, and the Catholic League went after Dogma, and both movies actually benefited from the controversy. Kevin Smith actually scored a minor propaganda coup when he showed up at a Catholic League protest against Dogma and helped them picket his own movie, apparently without being recognized. If Zack and Miri is the new front in the porn wars, I say, bring it on – lets expose the antis for the pinched humorless scolds that they so often are.

(H/T to The Legal Satyricon.)

And this just in...

Anti-porn activists PROFITING from the "fair use" of non-2257 compliant materials? You know, making MONEY off the images of these exploited, degraded women?

Say it isn't so, Ren!

It is so.

Now, look at that. Please tell me no one is considering showing this in HIGH SCHOOLS.

"Dear DoJ-....."

Enter Jensen, Right On Cue

Here's the latest bilge from Usual Suspect Number One

You'll note how once again he cherry-picks some three-year-old comments from dubious sources to present as actual data in support of his contention that porn is ever more about brutality.

Will this guy ever lay off? Not while MSM continue to lionize him, treat him as a crusader for the good and never question his claims to expertise in an area about which he has far more opinions than actual knowledge.

Follow the link if you want to really make this a monday:

http://www.adultfyi.com/read.php?ID=30799

Ahem

The first amendment is not a goddamn suggestion!

Okay, I'll answer Anonymous...

Anonymous:

Ernest, far as I know, is working a lot this week, thus, he is busy. However, I’m chillin’ with a messed up toe not doing much of anything, so hey, I’ll give it a shot!

I am in the UK and therefore have had no opportunity to see this documentary. I do, however, have some questions for you Ernest which I hope you will have time to respond to.

I’m not Ernest, but hey, a visitor from the UK here at the BPPA? Let’s roll!

You state that 'not all pleasures are positive, healthy or morally defensible'. Could you give some examples of these?

Some people get off on murder (thrill-killers). Some people get off on having sex with children. Some people enjoy truly torturing animals and people. Some people get off on stalking people. Some folk enjoy some really vicious mind games. Some like orchestrating the social destruction of others. I think all these examples qualify.

I noted that you feel unable, as a white man, to offer any opinion of gangsta rap. I'm wondering why this same criteria does not apply to your critiques on pornography and it's impact on women. Is it your position that women do not face sexist discrimination and inequality?

Racism and sexism are not the same thing. Both exist, but they are different. Also, if (or any other person) is not versed in gangsta rap, it’s hard to talk about it from a place of authority on said topic. Ernest is partnered with and involved with women in the sex industry on a daily basis, he hears and speaks to them. He is not involved with rappers on a daily basis, and thus has no idea where they are coming from. Nor is he black. Me as a white identified woman, I don’t think I’m really an authority on gansta rap either. Yet I can still say this- I may not agree with what is said in a lot of gangsta rap songs, but the right to say it? Why yes, I absolutely believe they have that.

You make reference several times to POP being propaganda. Would you say, as someone who has made a living from the pornography industry for 25 years, that you are immune to engaging in propaganda to promote and defend your work in that industry and the money you make from it?

POP is propaganda, pure out. Now, I’ve not been in the porn industry for 25 years…I’ve been in the overall sex industry for almost 20 years, and yep, I’ve done and made porn, and absolutely believe people have a right to make and perform in porn, however…what I do not do (nor does Ernest so far as I’ve ever witnessed) claim to make something that is fair and non judgmental, as well as an unbiased look at top selling porn made in the year 2005, then fill it with porn that is not at all representative of top selling porn made 2005, spend the majority of the time speaking to known anti porn advocates and scant seconds talking to people actually involved in the industry- leaving much of what they’ve said on the cutting room floor, try to pass off people who are not industry insiders as such, or dramatically edit and film things with a decidedly anti porn stance. I also don’t make “documentaries” filled with 2257 non compliant images and use images of performers without their knowledge or consent. Do I engage in propaganda? Only if talking about my experiences, feelings on it, and taking issue with a lot of anti-porn stuff counts as propaganda.

You also express concern at the impact this propaganda could potentially have, stating 'collateral effects are far from funny'. Given the proliferation of pornography, might that not have some collateral effects also?

Of course it could. The difference is, pornography does not pretend to be anything but what it is. This film claims to be fair and non judgmental, unbiased, so on, in other words, the truth. And it isn’t. It’s not the truth at all. It’s a huge smear on the industry, and the people in it.

Other mediums being as bad as or worse than pornography also appear frequently in your writings here. I am aware of feminist critiques of wider media and culture as well as those on pornography. What is your position on the impact of media on culture and society? I ask because I am confused by your dismissal on the one hand of hypersexualised culture but your concerns about the potential influence of POP and other such critiques of pornography on the other.

Other mediums are discussed. Occasionally. They are given about .10 the attention that porn is given. I read a lot of feminist writings, a lot of them. There are the occasional discussions of music, or Hollywood films, or mass media, however they are not, at all, given the attention porn is. And porn is supposed to be entertainment for adults. Flat out. However, extremely violent television is accessable to anyone. Brutal rapes and murders are depicted on network television every night. I have yet, actually, to read a feminist critique of Law & Order SVU, or CSI, or The Sopranos. Do you truly think more people, even more young people, are watching porn, or mainstream nightly television? Porn has never caused a school shooting. Truthfully, the people who do bad acts are the ones who should be held responsible, but are you ready to go after Marilyn Manson because he’s been implicated in a reason teenagers shoot up schools or kill themselves or do drugs or worship satan? I’m not. How about other “bad influences”? More people have been hurt and killed by alcohol related things than by porn…yet…booze is still out there and abused heavily…most people can enjoy a drink harmlessly, but…? How about all religions? More people have been hurt by or killed in the name of God than anything in history. Yet the idea of policing it is something that chills most people and as seen as a huge violation of their rights.

You mention that you've never been invited to a secret gathering where sexist ideologies are formulated to guide the making of pornography, I wonder if you believe yourself, or individuals in general, then, to be immune to the influences of society at large; that socialisation has no impact on who we are or how we develop; that we are not influenced or impacted by our relationships with family, friends, lovers, partners. Is there no cultural hegemony?

I for one absolutely think all people, to some degree or another, are influenced by culture and society. I also think even amid that, most people can make their own decisions about things and exert some sense of individuality and reasoning. And once again, porn is far less prevelant and influential than a great many other forms of media out there. I suspect more girls end up with eating disorders due to the images presented in high fashion magazines than from porn. People are not immune to anything, but is the answer to get rid of everything…and I mean everything…which might influence them in a negative way? That would leave us with nothing. No form of art, or entertainment, or politics, or…anything.

On a related point with regard fantasies.. Do you think we pop out of the womb fully formed as.. sadists, say, or subs?

I think some people do, actually, if not fully formed- like Athena out of Zues’s head- with definite leanings. People start to develop sexually very early on, people have fantasies and such early on in sexual development. There are people who are into kink or what have you in societies where there is no pornography, and people had them long before pornography was prolific at all. What I do not believe is that porn or media can “make” anyone do anything.

You regard the statistics presented in POP as junk social science. Could you present more accurate figures on which titles and genres are most popular, including the internet? Pirates is mentioned frequently, I'm interested in figures for that but would like more general stats.

Pirates is the highest grossing porn film of all time. Other features like Island Fever and Bloodlines (a vampire themed porn feature) were also very high selling films. Feature films in general outsell gonzo films. The fact that the POP researchers had to go to like number 125 on the film list to find a title they could highlight says something. As for the net, that is harder to tell. I think it was once said on NBC that Playboy.com gets millions of hits a day. I seriously doubt “Women in Pain” rates nearly that high.

You question the categorization of violent acts by the researchers. Could you give your definition and, given your experience and knowledge of pornography, your own perspective on the prevalence of violence in pornagraphy.

Depends on the porn. Will there be more “violence” in BDSM or gonzo themed porn than feature films? Yep. Feature films, you might see a bit of hair pulling, a bit of spanking, and some hard…well…fucking. (things that people actually do in their own bedrooms). You will see more in gonzo and BDSM porn. However, you know what I did not see in POP? At all? Not once? A single female dominant in any of the BDSM clips, and within the subgenera of BDSM porn, women as the dominant figures is pretty popular. Yet, this was totally ignored. I also did not see a single female as a dominant figure in any of the gonzo clips, which also happens. It was also totally ignored. In all the BDSM footage they used, not a single female Top…which is not at all reflective of the BDSM porn out there.

Girls Gone Wild is mentioned as a 'favourite punchbag' for feminists. Isn't this, in part, because a prominant player has been accused of rape? Why is it ok for industry insiders that you mention to be critical of this and not feminists? You state that women are 'certainly more jovially mocked' in GGW than male participants in jackass. It appears that not only are they more jovially mocked but are raped and sexually assaulted too. What are your thoughts on why this might happen?

Joe Francis is an asshole and belongs behind bars (IMHO). He is also not every pornographer in the business.

Chyng Sun asked "Don’t you think, that much of the enjoyment of pornography comes from watching the woman’s pain and humiliation?”

I missed your response to this and am interested in hearing it. What is your take on, for example, why men are aroused by woman being ejaculated on her face by multiple men and then consuming it or having another woman consume it?

Do some men get off because it can be seen as humiliating, sure. Most men, no. And of course, not even a nod towards women who watch pornography in this film, but that’s nothing new. But to break it down…why are men aroused by a woman being ejaculated on (on her face)…the answers to that are legion. Vicarious thrill of having achieved an orgasm? Marking behavior? Thrill in the thought that a woman enjoys “wearing the evidence”? It’s sort of strange and thus there is a novelty factor? Why multiple men? More semen, bonding experience, the idea of sharing? Why consumption by one woman? Not sure really, still haven’t figured that one out enough to have a theory, and have not really asked. It’s neater, for one I guess. Why another woman? Well, hum, as many average hetero dudes enjoy watching girl on girl, two women making out/licking eachother with no semen involved, I doubt the enjoyment of watching that with semen involved lessens.

What is your take on the reasons why degradation, of women usually, comes to be eroticised and fethishized?

I am so the wrong person to answer that question. Yet, I note, very little concern on wondering why women might get off on degradation. Funny that. Once again, I will bring up the large subset of femme-dom porn that apparently does not exist (which hey, could have fooled me considering what I’ve seen out there in the porn shop and on the net!)

You state that 'anti porn cultists' are fixated on sex. Is your basis for this purely the one element of their lives - anti pornography activism - that you are aware of? Given your objections to what you see as poor research and generalisations on their part isn't this a questionable assertion to make?

I’d say their fixation on what is watched and goes on in other peoples bedrooms is a big indication. The mere idea out there that no woman, out or in porn, can actually enjoy giving a blow job, or anal sex, or group sex, or BDSM says a lot about that fixation too. Also, the fact that so much time, engery, money, and ink is devoted to porn, rather than videos of people being beheaded in Iraq or violence in mainstream media also indicates they are a bit fixated on sex.

'..it is not beyond the realms of possibility that performers like to play dirty..' - what percentage of women would you say are in pornography because they love sex/enjoy the sex acts on screen versus those there for a paycheck (and the other reasons they ended up in pornography).

”It’s nice to get paid for what you enjoy doing”. I’d say at least half. And yeah, the money matters, sure. However, when a woman says that, like Jessie Jane did in the film, they are not believed. When Joanna Angel, who started up her own company (a grad from a prestigious university who certainly had other choices) talks about her feelings on it in the film, she’s slaughtered. Truth is, any woman who says she’s in it for anything but the money or because she was abused speaks, she’s not believed and her words are twisted or ingored. I know that one from personal experience.

You opine that skull fucking to gag point is minor in comparison to some violent acts portrayed in mainstream shows. Can i ask if you see any differences in how violence against women is represented, why that might be, the cultural meanings behind it? Certainly my own critiques of pornography do not happen in isolation. Nor are those of any radical feminists that I know or have read. It is placed in the context of society and the world at large; the role of poverty, inequaltity and power.

Okay, skull fucking in porn. I do that, as the fuckee. I’ve consented to do it, I don’t mind doing it, I walk out with a pay check. A point is made often when making porn to talk to me (or whatever performer) before and after the scene to insure why yes, I’ve agreed to do this. Yet, I was watching one of my favorite TV shows the other day…Heroes. I love Heroes. Heroes is very popular with a lot of viewers, including teenagers. Now, on Heroes, I’ve seen several female characters get the tops of their skulls sawed off (male characters too), there have been some steamy sex scenes, and some allusions to rape and molestation/abuse. One of the most off-kilter, screwed up, appears to, at heart, be a villain characters is, of course, the stripper/net porn performer. The main heroine is a teenage cheerleader who gets chased all over the place and subjected to incredible violence, in her cheerleader outfit. Or, I also watch Law & Order, where weekly I can see dead sex worker of the night. And brutal rape scenes. And violence against women, gays, and minorities. Or, I can turn on the Investigation channel, where I can spend five hours watching shows about serial killers (who are almost hero worshipped by some elements of society) who prey on sex workers, gay men, children, and women. And these shows are far more popular and generate more money and ratings than porn. Yet these things rate as practically nothing with a lot of folks as opposed to pornography. Also, people forget, male performers in porn make a fraction of the money female performers do.

Thanks for reading.

Anytime.

I know, I know...

I know I shouldn't look. But it's just a horribly grim fascination. Why yes, some people just loooove TPoP! They probably even think it's fair and honest and unbaised and whatnot.

Ah, crusaders...

You know, I am sure some people would say the same thing about me, that I'm some sort of sellout black knight fighting an unholy war...oh, wait...but you know, there is a huge difference between myself and a whole lot of these folk. A huge one.

I am not telling anyone they should view or participate in pornography. I'm not telling anyone they have to like it. Nor am I afraid to look outside my own sphere and see what other people are saying, to hear and read their experiences.

I also, ahem, do not stack my data, misrepresent the findings of various studies, or use material made 2-3 decades ago.

Or flat out lie about the most popular porn of the year 2005. Ahem.

Let it never be said I ever told any person what to do, what to feel, how to think, and used underhanded -and illegal- means to make my point.

That, I think, is a major difference between us and them.

The Price of Pleasure Deconstructed - Part 4

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.