There’s an annual conference happening in Massachusetts this coming weekend called Stop Porn Culture – the aim of the meeting is in the name. The conference is organized by notorious anti-porn feminists and women’s studies professors Gail Dines and Donna Hughes (there’s plenty about them online, google to find it because I don’t want to link to them). Violet Blue has rallied the pro-porn troupes to speak out against the conference with a website, video, and contest: check out her Our Porn, Ourselves project.
Part of the reason that arguments about porn, sex work, and sexuality are infinitely exciting and drama-producing is because they sit at the nexus of several issues that get people very wound up about: sexuality, representation, and the business of sex. These seem kind of similar, and they do overlap but it’s also important to unpack and distinguish between them:
- Sexuality: I’m using this word to refer to desire and the pursuit of sexual pleasures.
- Representation: The outrage about images and “the gaze” are all about how these things contribute to the objectification and debasement of cis female bodies and acts of sex.
- Business of Sex: The combination of sex and money is volatile stuff that is often abstracted in conversations about sexuality & representation. In discussions of porn, the oft-quoted, never confirmed “$11 billion a year” adult industry focuses on porn companies and producers who benefit from porn. The rights of porn performers, as workers, are almost always left out.
I have critiques of this current anti-porn/pro-porn dust-up on a few different levels: the contents of the argument itself and the specifics of what are and are not being discussed, and the choice to engage in this argument (because what’s the fun of semantics without a little meta for good measure?).
I think both sides of the pro/anti argument are missing the mark somewhat. Anti-porn feminists focus mostly on the harm that watching porn and visually consuming cis women’s bodies has on the individual psyches and sexualities of the people who watch the stuff. In the anti argument, porn is an evil monolith, full of grotesque heterosexual acts that debase female performers. There is a lot that is awful about porn, but most of the representational stuff is a matter of taste. There simply isn’t much of an evidence-based correlation between porn consumption and acts of physical violence. Pro-porn feminists use the argument that female viewers exist as evidence of the notion that the consumption of porn can be a feminist act – again, a matter of taste. In accordance with the “taste” argument, feminist porn viewers also point out that there is porn that is produced by and for women and queers (meaning cis dykes, female-bodied genderqueers, and trans men).
Both sides are all over the sexuality and representation aspects of the conversation, but are missing a critique of the business of sex and the working conditions under which porn performers do their jobs. To me, good and bad porn is not so much about what it looks like, but the business transactions and pressures happening behind the scenes.
To this end, I wrote a post a few years ago called Why Porn Companies Are Like Clothing Manufacturers. Here’s the crux of it:
It’s often hard to tell just from looking at a visual representation whether or not the performers are being placed under duress or if their working conditions are bad. Can you tell by looking at a tee shirt whether it was made by workers in ethical working conditions? Nope. Not unless you look at the label and then do your homework on the company.
Sometimes when I present the idea that its not the aggressive anal/choking/cum splattering that makes porn unethical or unfeminist, but the conditions under which the performers are doing said acts, people say things like, “its impossible to know what the working conditions are.†It isn’t impossible – it just requires some research. Just as people research textile factory conditions and then put pressure on corporations to have better practices – the same could happen with porn.
Violet Blue is entangled with this debate on porn as a critic – this is an important fact. She’s never produced porn or (to my knowledge) taken money from the mainstream porn biz. She’s actively posed as a nude and fetish model in her own creations and the creations of her friends and colleagues. She’s been a vocal advocate of women’s rights to consume porn, as well as a harsh critic of a lot of the truly awful porn that the mainstream industry spits out. This is important because there are plenty of people involved in the mainstream hetero porn world who are proponents of free speech being generously applied to the adult industry (dicey legal construction of “obscenity†be damned!), but their commitment to free speech is more about protecting their business interests than being renegade First Amendment advocates. Violet is very much not one of the motivated-by-porn-profit people, her interest in porn is actually about having an interest in the sexualities of women. But I would love to see her, and the other folks who are standing up and proclaiming themselves to be pro-porn, to incorporate a critique of the awful stuff in porn, especially the business practices that put performers in risky work and sex situations.
Now for the meta layer.
I started tinkering with a post about this pro/anti stuff last week when the Our Porn, Ourselves project was still in the Twitter outrage phase of things (one of my fave things about twitter is seeing ideas and projects evolve in real time).
I made a few comments on my twitter that I want to expand on here:
Sometimes fighting the opposition is worthwhile. Sometimes fighting extreme stupid is just stupid, and your time could be better spent.
WRT to last tweet, thinking in particular about people mobilizing around feminist anti-porn conference. what can be gained from that convo?
More generally, maybe fighting with self-righteous feminists is stupid (but can be good fun, if you’re feeling feisty).
Going head-to-head with the likes of Hughes and Dines seems like a bad idea to me. At the moment I can’t think of an instance in which I would accept an invitation to debate those ladies – and I’ve been invited to do so on a number of occasions. It’s not worth the stress and strain. I understand and appreciate the concept of public debate, but since I’m not a politician that format just doesn’t have a lot of sway in my world. Why engage in fiercely oppositional arguments, when people on either side aren’t going to shift their positions? Who does that benefit? I would much rather spend my time openly and respectfully discussing nuances of the issue with thoughtful people who might not be clear on their position with respect to the sex industry, but are curious and interested in listening. I’m interested in coalition-building, and forming alliances with people who are concerned about creating spaces for healthy sexual expression and support the economic and bodily autonomy of people in the sex trade.
12:46 pm
Excellent and much needed addition to the ‘debate’ (or maybe ‘arena’ would be a better term, to bring in a Roman Gladiator image of pro/anti porn fights!)
I have in the past referred to drinking coffee as an analogy for consuming porn, but the clothes industry is a much better one, due to the representational aspect of clothing, and the necessity of clothes as opposed to caffeine intake). Because at even just the most basic procreational level, sex is ‘necessary’ for humans. So we have to deal with it and all its trappings if we want to continue living on this planet.
I’d love to be joining you in person in your coalition-buiding but for now my solidarity has to remain virtual!
Quiet Riot Girl/Elly
http://www.quietgirlriot.wordpress.com
12:50 pm
…But the coffee metaphor enabled me to write blogposts with cool titles like ‘Pimp My Latte’ ! : )
1:53 pm
I can agree with most of what you say, Dacia…but I disagree on some things.
First off….to say that “pro-porn” people are merely motivated by profit and that they should be more critical of what you consider to be the “awful” content and the conditions of the industry is to basically give way too much ground to the anti-porn side. Just because something is done for a profit doesn’t make it necessarily bad or evil; and many on the “pro” side — including active performers and producers — have been more than critical of some of the more openly misogynist and extreme content. What more should they say…that they should simply throw basic rights of free sexual expression and the right to self-defense against the efforts of the State and certain “feminists” to wipe them off the map under the bus?
Secondly…engaging with and debunking SPC’s claims is decisively NOT a waste of time or effort, in my view. Frankly, I’m not too concerned at all about changing their minds, since it’s obvious that they are as stuck in their opinions as many of us on the pro side are. But, considering that the anti position is seen as the default “feminist” and “Left” position in the absence of any principled and organized critique and defense from the “pro” side, I consider it to be very much important to engage the debate, if only to show that there are other points of view out there, and that Dines et. al. just can’t smear everyone without a response.
I do agree wholeheartedly with your point, though, that the pro side should become much more engaged on the issue of workplace treatment of performers…though I still don’t think that mandating condom usage is the cureall that some would make it out to be. Allowing performers the choice of using rubber?? Absolutely. Not punishing those performers who do choose to wrap up?? Hell to the YES. Merely imposing mandatory condoms on all porn sets without the consent of the performers? That’s where I would draw the line.
A small difference of opinion to an overall splendid post.
Anthony
1:57 pm
Also, here’s a link to a post I did at my blog stating my concerns about OPO and its stand for porn:
“Our Porn, Ourselves”: The Definitive Counter To “Stop Porn Culture” BS….Or, Is It?? (The SmackDog Chronicles)
Anthony
2:15 pm
Thanks for posting. It seems the eternal urge for simple, binary, polar positions gets most of the attention yet perhaps the majority sail the big sea in between. yes aspects are bad, terrible indeed, yes aspects are good, empowering, even.
It’s so much harder to state one’s position when it is in the grey between black and white, but it’s perhaps the only sensible realm for debate.
But what of the growing user-generated porn world? Fetish communities seem full now with women wanting to be photographed and men wanting to film, and their collaborations are shared online. Does the removal of money take away the seediness, or does it open the door for an even greater exploitation (eg. uploading that video seemed fun at the time, but ten years and a divorce later, and it just won’t go away!)
4:16 pm
[...] to the debate however (an excellent discussion of these can be found on Audacia Ray’s blog here) and I don’t have the knowledge or experience to address most of them. I can only speak [...]
5:26 pm
You know, this situation is similar to something that happened to me and a friend a few days ago. We attended a play that was put on by a local “anti-sexual exploitation” group that was supposed to be a horrifying expose of the lives of prostitutes and the men that use their services. Afterward, there was a “talk back” with the cast and writers of the play, as well as some anti-trafficking organizers. We voiced our concerns with some of the play’s content (which was full of inaccuracies) and some of the statistics that were shown on screen at the end of the lay, one of which said “100% of prostitutes have been kicked, punched, and raped.” Our comments were shot down by the organization’s founder and our comments were blown off. We were told we “could have that discussion at another time” since we were in clear disagreement with the content that was presented at the play.
However, after the audience cleared, two of the actors came up to us and engaged us in conversation, asked questions, and thanked us for attending. They realized that the panel had just silenced two “actual prostitutes” when the goal of the organization and the play was to sympathized with their light. The next day I received an email from one of the play’s writers asking to engage in a discussion about prostitution. Even though we’ve been somewhat “at war” with this other organization in some ways, we got through to some of these people who realize that its somewhat hypocritical to “speak about us, without us.”
Obviously, this situation is a bit different, but I think some progress can be made by engaging the opposition at times. You may not change their minds, but sometimes you make their followers and supporters look at the issues a little differently. Sometimes.
7:17 pm
Well, its all well and good to talk about picking your battles, but the fact is, when you look at the agenda of this conference, and more particularly, the agenda of the feminist/right-wing alliance “Coalition For the War Against Illegal Pornography” (google it – your comment software considers the link “spammy”), of which the Stop Porn Culture group and conference is closely tied into, its quite clear that they have a legislative and law enforcement agenda, both in the US and globally. That is a battle that needs to be engaged in, both on a cultural and legislative level, just as FACT successfully stood up against a similar alliance 25 years ago.
(cont)
7:18 pm
Well, its all well and good to talk about picking your battles, but the fact is, when you look at the agenda of this conference, and more particularly, the agenda of the feminist/right-wing alliance “Coalition For the War Against Illegal Pornography” (google it – your comment software considers the link “spammy”), of which the Stop Porn Culture group and conference is closely tied into, its quite clear that they have a legislative and law enforcement agenda, both in the US and globally. That is a battle that needs to be engaged in, both on a cultural and legislative level, just as FACT successfully stood up against a similar alliance 25 years ago.
No, you’re not going to change the minds of Gail Dines and Donna Hughes, but you can help sway the larger public and legislators who make the laws. And the guaranteed way to lose the battle is to simply not engage in it.
(cont)
7:22 pm
Well, I had quite a bit to say about this, but frankly, fuck your comment-screening software in a big way. (Sorry if that’s not polite, but neither is the software.) Its quite intent on blocking practically anything I post. I’ll post a longer response to my own blog and then attempt to link to it later.
9:42 pm
[...] But the real answer is in the fact that for the first time in history, the Internet has allowed us to have our own voices and speak for ourselves. The woman they’re trying to “save” from the alleged harmful effects of watching porn? Now thousands of her have a blog and will tell you exactly how porn affects them. The sex worker who was allegedly abused as a child and are such helpless victims they need someone to speak on their behalf? Hundreds, if not thousands of her, now have blogs and tell you exactly what their work is like. A great example is Audacia Ray’s post today Picking Your Battles, Going the Distance: Pro-porn and Anti-porn Feminisms. [...]
10:41 pm
IACB…No need to flame Dacia over her comment screening software; it was causing problems for me as well. It seems to be working now…at least for me.
Anthony
11:37 pm
Apologies to Dacia if it seems like I was flaming her when I was flaming this stupid bot. I actually had a very articulate response put together, and its frustrating to go through the trouble of composing that only to have some unintentionally malevolent piece of software block one’s efforts.
In any event backed up my writing, so at least I’ll be able to put it up on my own blog (I’ll probably expand it into a full post there).
8:31 pm
Why does everyone seem to think this is a “speak about us, without us” conference? If by “us” you mean people who have been in/are in porn and prostitution, your assumption is very wrong.
10:39 pm
Attica:
My question when I hear this kind of assertion is “name three”. Bonus points if one of the three isn’t named “Shelly”.
10:51 pm
Actually, IACB, if I read the SPC itenerary correctly, Shelley Lubben isn’t among the presenters at their shindig…in fact, there is NO active or former performer listed as a speaker for their conference.
Now, Shelley Lubben IS listed as one of the spokespeople for the DC “speakfest” against porn that Dines will attend and speak it the Tuesday following the Wheelock antiporn conference.
Besides that, isn’t it a standing rule of Dines that no critic of hers would be allowed to speak at any APRF conferences (except as bait for their smears), or that they refuse to debate any female who dares to defend their right to porn and/or criticize antiporn feminist philosophy?? So, the question of Attica’s is rather moot, I’d say.
Anthony
9:35 am
I think the clothing manufacturing is a useful analogy.
As a start, an independent, peer-reviewed epidemiological analysis of STD infection rates from AIM’s 10+ years of testing, with a comparison to sexually active, non-high risk group young adults would put the facts on the table, giving performers the information they need to make informed choices about their health and welfare, and viewers the information they need to better understand the human costs involved in manufacturing pornography.
Perhaps your connections through the health advocacy work you’re doing could make this happen?
10:26 am
[...] Audacia Ray’s WakingVixen.com: Both sides [pro-porn and anti-porn] are all over the sexuality and representation aspects of the [...]
6:35 pm
My wife and I have both performed in “porn.” We have met a lot of folks over the past few years who also work in the industry.
We have yet to meet anyone who fits the “abused and/or exploited” stereotype, and the producers with whom we’ve worked an who we have met have all been regular folks. We’ve encountered nothing but professionals.
Even if it’s a result of our having only worked for “niche” productions I would like to point out that not all adult entertainment falls into the scary stereotype, but that those with whom we’ve worked would be negatively affected by legislation and activism allegedly aimed at the “typical porn” purveyors.
cheers,
Matt
12:43 am
[...] Ray, who I very much admire and respect, wrote this in her piece about the current stoush: …there are plenty of people involved in the mainstream hetero porn world who are proponents [...]
12:55 am
[...] Friday, Dacia posted at her blog an essay that, while generally supporting the actions of OPO, raised her own concerns and issues about [...]
12:59 am
[...] written something on the chatter and counter-organizing around the Stop Porn Culture conference. Here's her post that also discusses the pointlessness of debating anti-porn [...]
7:11 pm
Very interesting, thanks. I think that, like most hot-button issues, the porn debate would benefit from a lot less mud-slinging (um…) and less necessity to nail ones colours to a flagpole. Part of the problem faced by people whose sexuality happens not to include using pornography comes from the immaturity of the debate on both sides. People are scared to say that they’re not into it and would prefer a partner who wasn’t either, just as people who are into it are often scared to say so too. A new way of talking about it, perhaps with a few additions to the vocabulary of sexual orientation would be helpful.
Obviously some porn-production is evil (in the colloquial sense), but it would be so much better to view that in the same way as sweatshops and the like, and introduce measures to regulate it and ensure the safety of everyone involved. If porn-producers lobby against such regulation, then I think they are a problem for both the “pro-s” and “anti-s”.
Great analogy, thank again!
3:47 pm
I REALLY love your textile factory analogy (especially because even though we generally think of the porn thing as a sex issue, it’s important to remember it’s also a labor rights issue).
I also like it because I work for a company (fetishannex.com) that makes fairly violent porn, but the company itself feels like a big happy mushy family. I mean, we usually have business meetings over ice cream it’s that mushy. I have no words for how sad I am that so many of my fellow feminists want to “save me” from them, because the company and the work I do for them feels so damn good, and so damn right to me.
thanks for writing the article!
so many kudos! <3