Porn, porn, porn, porn

[bloom]

Since we have the porn ad that has everyone thinking about porn - heres' a thoughtful piece about the subject of porn, liberals, and media...

Treating Porn Like Every Other Media
Posted by Ampersand | December 7th, 2005

On Z Magazine's website, Gail Dines and Robert Jensen are criticizing the left's attitude towards pornography:

Pornography is fantasy, of a sort. Just as television cop shows that assert the inherent nobility of police and prosecutors as protectors of the people are fantasy. Just as the Horatio Alger stories about hard work's rewards in capitalism are fantasy. Just as films that cast Arabs only as terrorists are fantasy.

All those media products are critiqued by leftists precisely because the fantasy world they create is a distortion of the actual world in which we live. Police and prosecutors do sometimes seek justice, but they also enforce the rule of the powerful. Individuals in capitalism do sometimes prosper as a result of their hard work, but the system does not provide everyone who works hard with a decent living. Some tiny number of Arabs are terrorists, but that obscures both the terrorism of the powerful in white America and the humanity of the vast majority of Arabs.

Such fantasies also reflect how those in power want subordinated people to feel. Images of happy blacks on the plantations made whites feels more secure and self-righteous in their oppression of slaves. Images of contented workers allay capitalists' fears of revolution. And men deal with their complex feelings about contemporary masculinity's toxic mix of sex and aggression by seeking images of women who enjoy pain and humiliation.

I think they make a good point. Partly, perhaps, as a result of the polarization caused by the "porn wars" in the 1980s, and the desire to avoid even a hint of censorship, lefty defenses of porn sometimes seem more knee-jerk than thoughtful. But you don't have to endorse censorship to critique the sexism, misogyny and racism found in a lot of porn.

Where Dines and Jensen fall down, in my opinion, is in not providing a working definition of what pornography means. The truth is, porn - like "partial birth abortion" - is one of those terms that is used so loosely, it has become impossible to be sure what any particular author means unless they explicitly define their terms.

For myself, I think "pornography" is any media produced with the intention of being used as a masturbatory aid by the audience. But my definition of porn includes material that contains no violence and is not degrading in any obvious way (for example, Colleen Coover's comic Small Favors), while Dines and Jensen's analysis doesn't even seem to acknowledge that there could be such a thing as non-degrading, non-violent pornography. Does this mean that they see all sexually explicit materials - even something like Small Favors - as degrading and implicitly violent? Or are they not counting such material as "pornography" at all?

Two cover-my-behind points. First of all, I'm not denying that there's a lot of porn out there that is disgustingly violent, and disgustingly misogynistic. Just clearing out my spam makes it clear to me that porn makers believe they can generate a lot of business by appealing to misogyny: "come see this bitch get nailed!" is if anything a mild example of the misogynistic language typical of much porn advertising. Assuming that market incentives work, the high prevalence of this sort of advertising indicates that there is considerable profit for porn producers who make direct appeals to woman-hatred. And there seems to be a similar, although perhaps slightly smaller, market for overtly racist porn.

Secondly, just because a piece of porn is not overtly misogynist or overtly degrading, doesn't place it beyond feminist criticism. For instance, a lot of porn (such as Playboy-style naked posing) endorses not only very traditional ideas of what is or isn't attractive, but also implicitly endorses the idea that sexuality is something possessed by women, which men must pry out of women. To me these ideas are problematic; they support a narrow and limiting idea of sexuality, which I think is harmful to society. However, this isn't a problem with porn qua porn; the same harmful ideas I dislike in even "non-violent" porn, are also found in abundance in non-porn media like "women's magazines," "men's magazines" and popular sit-coms. So although I think this is a legitimate critique of a lot of porn, it doesn't make sense to single out porn in general for this critique, since these flaws are evident in virtually all of pop culture.

Regardless of what definition of porn Dines and Jensen are using, or if they're overlooking the existence of non-degrading porn, it's clear that their critique is applicable to a lot of the porn out there - and that there's no reason that leftists should give racist and misogynistic porn a pass, when we don't give racism and misogyny in non-porn media a pass.

http://www.amptoons.com/blog/archives/2005/12/07/treating-porn-like-every-other-media/

[joefree1]

1. Show me a country where they outlaw porn

And I'll show you a country with forced prostitution and/or misogynist trends.

[bloom]

7. Are you saying there isn't

"forced prostitution and/or misogynist trends" here?


DId you read the OP?

[Ian David]

10. MSNBC To Flood Internet With $1M Ad Campaign...

MSNBC To Flood Internet With $1M Ad Campaign...

The New York Times | Posted December 12, 2005 11:47 AM
READ MORE: NBC

The MSNBC cable network plans to flood the Internet this week with its largest concentrated online pitch, running advertising on hundreds of Web sites and blogs. The cost of the campaign, to promote three prime-time programs, is estimated at just under $1 million.

MSNBC, owned by Microsoft and the NBC Universal division of General Electric, will promote the shows - with their hosts, Keith Olbermann, Rita Cosby and Joe Scarborough - in ads that are to start appearing tomorrow and continue all day Wednesday. Some ads will promote segments on the shows about life online, like how marketers sponsor "viral" video clips that consumers can forward to each other.

More:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2005/12/12/msnbc-to-flood-internet-w_n_12133.html

[bloom]

12. there you go...

it's a million dollar flood.

[bleedingheart]

2. Bread and Circuses - Talk about Porn and Ignore Poverty and Healthcare

[bloom]

5. Feel free to go post on this thread...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5576990&mesg_id=5576990

- if you want to discuss war and peace among countries. This thread is more about war and peace among individuals.

Do you have a "Poverty and Healthcare" thread that is being ignored?

[bleedingheart]

19. I find the media's fascination with porn right now to be really ironic

the very same media that during this "holiday season"...where they are asking "important" questions about "the war on christmas"...is now focusing on porn....during the very christmas season that perhaps should make us reflect more upon the less fortunate than on what people are doing to get off at home...

pornography has been around since the first artist could draw sex acts and then progressed to the excesses of ancient Rome and to the modern web cam...what is interesting is how views on human sexuality have developed....what has made some groups more prudish and others more promiscuous

[bloom]

22. You wrote:

"what is interesting is how views on human sexuality have developed....what has made some groups more prudish and others more promiscuous"


That's actually similar to what was in the OP:

"Secondly, just because a piece of porn is not overtly misogynist or overtly degrading, doesn't place it beyond feminist criticism. For instance, a lot of porn (such as Playboy-style naked posing) endorses not only very traditional ideas of what is or isn't attractive, but also implicitly endorses the idea that sexuality is something possessed by women, which men must pry out of women. To me these ideas are problematic; they support a narrow and limiting idea of sexuality, which I think is harmful to society."

[JPZenger]

3. I'm Curious About How Porn is Affecting Relationships

I'm curious about how all this easy access to porn is affecting relationships. Are there young guys out there who aren't bothering to chase women? There are plenty of stories about how all the access to porn has affected marriages.

I'm also concerned about the impacts upon a young woman who lets a boyfriend take explicit photos of her, and then finds them all over the internet after they break up.

[bloom]

4. It does seem to be one of those things...

While I've heard some argue that a relationship that falls to porn wasn't much of a relationship anyway - it also stands to reason that porn would be quite an easy way to escape from having a relationship. And is indeed used that way.

[JuniperLea]

28. There's a lot of research out there

More attention now is being spent on how porn creates an emotional divide between "just sex" and "an act of love". Sad.

[bloom]

54. I did a search on - porn, relationships, study

to see what came up. Some interesting things. It's pretty funny how opposite of takes there are on the subject - depending on ones POV - biases or whatever.

This was a sad quote that I noticed from a review of the book, "Pornified":

...one user's comment: "I don't see how any male who likes porn can think actual sex is better, at least if it involves all the crap that comes with having a real live female in your life."

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0805077456/102-6796439-3512163?v=glance&n=283155


:(

[bloom]

55. .....

[bloom]

56. .....

[sexybomber]

8. It doesn't affect mine.

I love porn. I also love my girlfriend. The former can't hold a candle to the latter, but keeps me sane when we're apart. My girlfriend knows this and is comfortable with it.

[JuniperLea]

60. I bet you feel there isn't a chance your gal is going along with it

for the sake of not rocking the boat?

[bleedingheart]

15. here is a link

http://www.asc.upenn.edu/usr/chunter/porn_effects.html#conclusion

here is the conclusion...

"Conclusion

This paper has provided an overview of the limited effects - powerful effects debate about pornography. From this presentation, it should be clear that just like debates about television violence or the effect of the mass media in general, there are no clear answers. As such, it would seem that the best conclusion one can reach about the effect of pornography is that it "does not serve as a necessary and sufficient cause of audience effects, but rather functions among and through a nexus of mediating factors and influences (Klapper, 1960)." Thus bringing us full circle, back to the limited effects conclusion that sparked pornography research in the first place.
"

Personally I think that how we are raised in our culture/family/religion affects who we are sexually and it may determine how we react/interact with pornography.

[JuniperLea]

31. This research is 20 - 40 years old

There are many studies that were done between 1995 and 2005... why not site those?

[blogslut]

33. you mean like this one?

Porn 'does not make sex objects'
From: AAP
By Vera Devai

November 24, 2005

AN Australian study has cast doubt on the commonly held view that pornography shows women as nothing more than sex objects.
The study, to be published in the noted international Journal of Sex Research, analysed 50 of the bestselling pornographic videos in Australia to find out whether people were represented as sex objects.

Queensland University Professor Alan McKee, who led the study, said researchers compared the way women and men were represented in each video.

They noted such things as who initiated the sex, whose pleasure was paid attention to, whether people in the videos got to speak about what they wanted during sex and whose perspective the videos were presented from.

"We were surprised at just how active and in control the women were in these videos," Prof McKee said today.

"This study suggests that mainstream pornography in Australia doesn't represent women as sex objects, it shows them as active sexual agents."

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,17352073-29277,00.html

[bleedingheart]

38. you are reading the quote in the Conclusion....the paper is recent

look at the top....didn't you read the link????

The Dangers of Pornography? A Review of the Effects Literature
Copyright © - All Rights Reserved
March 2000

by Christopher D. Hunter
Ph.D. Candidate
Annenberg School for Communication
University of Pennsylvania
[e-mail]
http://www.asc.upenn.edu/usr/chunter/

[JuniperLea]

40. Yes, I read the link

The paper is recent, but if you read the link, you will see it was derived from studies raninging from 1964 to the mid-eighties.

[bleedingheart]

41. some references are from the 90's

however that being said I don't know that much has changed but then again human sexuality isn't a topic I research.

the cynic in me thinks that not much has changed even in the past 100 years....whether we like to think that way or not...

[Ian David]

6. GOP Donors drip with hot, sticky porn money

GOP Donors drip with hot, sticky porn money
Topic started by IanDB1 on Dec-22-04 11:11 PM (6 replies)
Last modified by Moderator on Dec-23-04 12:30 AM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=1093853

[seabeyond]

9. ah hahaha and coors ran in colorado, using soft porn for his beer

commercials, but wtf, dobson in colorado springs supported him and coor made a snide comment about kerry and family values.

but really i am not playing in this thread. already had my say about porn in another thread

[bloom]

11. That's an interesting angle also...

Typical of the comments was this one from Arizona: "I do think the Democrat Party is identified -- justifiably -- with much of the vulgarization so prominently displayed by many celebrities, particularly those in the entertainment industry. Hey, we pick our friends."

You do have to wonder if that is part of the point of the porn ad - which just happens to be on all of the liberal blogs that run the liberal-blogads...

It figures if there's money in it the GOPers would be there...

"The General Motors Corporation, the world's largest company, now sells more graphic sex films every year than does Larry Flynt, owner of the Hustler empire. The 8.7 million Americans who subscribe to DirecTV, a General Motors subsidiary, buy nearly $200 million a year in pay-per-view sex films from satellite, according to estimates provided by distributors of the films, estimates the company did not dispute.

"EchoStar Communications Corporation, the No. 2 satellite provider, whose chief financial backers include Mr. Murdoch, makes more money selling graphic adult films through its satellite subsidiary than Playboy, the oldest and best-known company in the sex business, does with its magazine, cable and Internet businesses combined, according to public and private revenue accounts by the companies.

"AT&T Corporation, the nation's biggest communications company, offers a hard-core sex channel called the Hot Network to subscribers to its broadband cable service. It also owns a company that sells sex videos to nearly a million hotel rooms. Nearly one in five of AT&T's broadband cable customers pay an average of $10 a film to see what the distributor calls 'real, live all-American sex -- not simulated by actors.'"

Last year, Murdoch won controlling interest in DirectTV from GM.

Since 2000, Murdoch and family members (all executives or shareholders of the News Corp., Rupert's parent company) have contributed at least $100,000 of their personal money to the Republican Party, its candidates and right-leaning political action committees, according to the nonprofit Center for Responsive Politics.

Since 1994, General Motors Corp. has given all of its $53,850 in political contributions to the Republican Party.

AT&T, which sold its broadband cable system to Comcast a couple years after the Egan story ran in The New York Times, has given 54 percent of its $19,672,908 to Republicans. AT&T continues to own Liberty Media, which is the principle owner of On Command, a Denver-based company that is one of the two largest providers of pay-per-view movies to hotel chains.

[mongo]

16. Porn is a TINY portion of all these companies profits

and they will not be destroyed by going after the porn industry.

It will be Larry Flynt and Phil Harvey, both very liberal people who will be destroyed, not GM

This whole theme of trying to connect the REAL adult industry to repubs is dishonest and repugnant.

[bloom]

25. For people who want to avoid

lining the pockets of Murdoch and friends - it useful to know about.

The article did seem to mostly discuss access from TV and Hotels - not videos and the internet.

It's mostly about the fake image that Republicans like to try to win voters with.


And it's interesting that it is MSNBC (GE) that is running the provative ad on liberal blogs.

http://www.cjr.org/tools/owners/ge.asp

[mongo]

14. Still passing this BS around?

That article was about CABLE companies -- not the adult industry.

GM owns direct TV -- is GM part of the "Adult" industry?

[bloom]

17. The article says...

"Last year, Murdoch won controlling interest in DirectTV from GM."


And I would consider Murdoch to be part of the "Adult" industry - and the industry of mind pollution in general.

[mongo]

23. It won't be Murdoch who goes down

in a sweep against the adult industry you are ACTIVELY HELPING to bring about.

[Ian David]

39. I support the adult industry one hand at a time. n/t

[Hypatia82]

13. First off...

Playboy isn't porn, it's erotica. Totally different animal. Also about 25% of the subscribers to Playboy are women. Nevermind just focusing on the spreads is to miss what else there and what has made Playboy get the esteem and longevity it has. Also Playboy has been ahead of the curve, showing non-white women way before anyone else. The magazine has even twice featured paraplegics in nude spreads. Yet again ahead of the curve, a curve no one has caught up with, and only had about 20 years now.

[bloom]

20. Do you sell porn, also?

Just curious.

Seems like the majority of the porn defenders around here make it or sell it.

[RagingInMiami]

21. Or like me

Just simply view it.

[Hypatia82]

26. Nope, don't make it, don't sell it...

and I don't see Playboy as porn. Been reading it for a bit over 9 years, bit off and on the first few years, and been a subscriber for a bit over 5 years now. Had to wait to turn 18 to subscribe to it. Even fancied trying to be in it. Though wouldn't take that to get me to pose naked. There's a site called Suicide Girls which has a rather interesting roster, all the women have tattoos and many have various piercings. And some are just drop dead gorgeous. Site doesn't have any sex, just the women in various states of dress. Besides getting some of my dollars I've thought perhaps getting on their just for kicks. It's a very nice photographic erotica site and part of me would love to do something like that.

[bloom]

35. How do you feel about

the wackyrape cartoons that Playboy runs.


http://www.oneangrygirl.net/wackyrape.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5577573&mesg_id=5578588


To me it's like joking about lynching. I don't get it. I don't think I'm supposed to "get it".

So it also says to me - that women are not welcome - women are not seen as people, etc.

[Hypatia82]

42. Those are misleading...

the actual rape one is from Penthouse. What Playboy runs are cartoons of situations that could happen, even perhaps do, but they're not rape. And no they're not always comfortable little sexual quips, but then, they're not supposed to be. What's in Penthouse or Hustler is a whole other ball of wax. As for Plaboy, one of the first articles ever written on sexual harassment appeared there well before anyone at Time or Newsweek thought it was worth writing about.

[mongo]

44. What about the photoshops of Abu Graibe pictures

that show up here? Should we ban those also?

Wow, you found some cartoons from who knows when? The 70's?

Sometimes humor is used to create thought and discussion about an issue. Richard Prior is a fine example of this. But we should destroy all copies of him performing because of the "N" word, right?

[bloom]

51. I think there is a big difference

between Richard Pryor bringing up issues that show white audiences how racist they are - watch/listen to Democracy Now today for examples - and rape cartoons in magazines for men.

The corollary to Richard Pryor would be if WOMEN comedians joked about men who think that rape is funny - so that such men might see how misogynistic they are.

[unpossibles]

30. I disagree

many people view/read erotica and pornography, and they are from all walks of life. While some people have problems with it, I fail to see any statistic that says it is evil or bad. Even the ones which try to link it with violent crime fail to do so.

[mongo]

43. It is the MAJORITY OF DU that supports the rights of adults

to view the kind of entertainment they see fit in the privacy of their own homes.

[bloom]

46. Poll from yesterday

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=5573478

Last night - the poll was up to about a third of the people having worked in or with porn at some time.


I wouldn't say that people cannot choose their entertainment - that's not to say that some entertainment that people choose is not a problem for themselves and/or society as a whole. Esp. the kind that gets some people "tolerant" of rape and domestic violence. It would depend on how a poll is worded - what kind of results you would get.

[mongo]

47. So what industry to you work in?

Since you are always posting anti-porn articles. What field of study is your education in?

[Loonman]

48. LOL

Methinks {...} is a hit-and-run poster unable to answer pointed questions.

[bloom]

49. heh

I'm an artist.

So as part of my training I've drawn naked men and women. I was drawing naked men in high school - at a community university life drawing class. :)


But no - I don't consider myself as having worked in the porn industry. But I probably should - since that is where the money is - hey?



I have been thinking about going to into media studies - because I am really interested in it - influences and all. That it what the essay I posted is about. Did you read it?

[tyedyeto]

45. Don't sell, make or view it

But I also don't see the graphic as being porn. You can see mud flaps and decals just like it on trucks all around this country on public roads. Would I ever put something like that on my vehicle? NO. But I'm not prudish to suggest the graphic is porn.

[JuniperLea]

52. Mud flaps don't pop up on your computer at work

[blogslut]

18. What about gay porn?

It's a huge market. But then again, bodice ripper books with their rape scenarios are huge sellers too.

[Touchdown]

36. It's degrading to women, because they're not in it.

Just as straight porn is degrading to women because they're in it.

You can't win.;)

[Loonman]

24. Andrea Dworkin is a hypocrite

Figured this would fit in a porn thread, but one of her photo books has nudie pics in it.

[bloom]

27. You know - it figures

that if you are going to educate people about a problem - you might have to have examples - like the the pro-rape cartoons that Playboy and Penthouse run.

At least *I* see it as a problem. Others might just think that it's all so funny.

http://www.oneangrygirl.net/wackyrape.html

[blogslut]

29. don't forget the romance novels

They make meelions of dollars off rape scenarios

[unpossibles]

32. excellent point

Also, it bothers me that the human body and sexuality are vilified so much, yet violence is ok.

Also, as someone else pointed out, how much sex is used to sell things every day, yet porn is evil.

[bloom]

37. Actually

the OP - if you were to read it - says (among other things):

"However, this isn't a problem with porn qua porn; the same harmful ideas I dislike in even "non-violent" porn, are also found in abundance in non-porn media like "women's magazines," "men's magazines" and popular sit-coms. So although I think this is a legitimate critique of a lot of porn, it doesn't make sense to single out porn in general for this critique, since these flaws are evident in virtually all of pop culture".

[Loonman]

34. Way to miss the point

Whatever....

[Ian David]

50. The "Year End Bonus" one looks more political than rape

It's making a political statement about the worker-- especially women-- getting fucked in the workplace.

And the "gang bang" airline flight package isn't necessarily about rape. Some people consent to gang-bangs, I suppose.

But most of those were very distasteful-- especially the first one.

[slackmaster]

53. Porn threads are useless without pictures

I mean, what KIND of porn are we talking about here?

[Cats Against Frist]

57. The OP hits on my objections to pornography

Most of it, even the innocent stuff, reinforces stereotypes and constructs. At best, most fantasy is just some kind of "act-out" of power struggle. Most of our sexual narratives are dull. Those that aren't usually involve violence. Romance is dead.

So, what we have is this same kind of cheesy leather-n-lace sexuality, that's about as interesting as a chicken nugget. And we've built a billion dollar industry on people not being able to relate to people, so they find their outlet in 2-D cheese and ridiculous faux smut. High heels, dildo boots, off-camera voice undressing a "barely legal" model for the pedophile in us all. It's tired, it's a first-class snoozefest.

Porn is a fantasy, yes. It's one more fantasy in our already completely fantastic, America-in-a-bubble, existence. It's the same thing as leather seats in the Lexus. A way to soothe the black fucking hole inside. I've learned. Sex is not the end-all, be-all of existence. It's more important to have flesh-and-blood than fantasy relationships, and just about everything that the porn and romance industries have built around one stick of flesh, poking into another flesh pocket, is so much narrative bullshit.

In other words: porn is boring. And since it does a huge disservice to the ability to see people as humans, and not objects, I'm fully against it.

That said, I'm not for the government banning it. Not one iota. I'm just for trash-talking it, and hoping people find more fruitful ways to spend their spare time.

[bloom]

58. Thanks for reading the essay!!

Yea!

[Captain Hilts]

59. Let's see a neon outline of a penis. nt