Rape culture + pornification (pt. II)

Just to address some things lingering like a bad smell from the previous post (I know, I know - shoulda done it sooner):

I got this dumbass comment from Alex:

But at the end of the day, porn is nothing more than a genre, and it's silly to bemoan the general pornification of society in the same way it'd be silly to bemoan its scifiification or actioncomedification.

What would Michael Kyle say? 'Ah... nah.' This is an utterly false comparison - porn is not used in the same way that other genres of film are. Most people (especially on the Internet) don't sit down and watch a snippet of oh, I dunno, Star Trek with the express aim of *ahem* 'interacting' with what's on the screen, now, do they? Even if you watch a film for the car chases, you're usually going to have some interest in the overall story. Usually when people do get to the stage of putting up their 'favourite scenes' or whatever on YouTube, it's because they've watched the film or series episode enough to be able to isolate a particular section.

Whereas people don't watch porn for the storyline, they watch it because it turns them on. Why else do mainstream porn TV channels keep promising 'more fucking' and less storylines? Because it's the SEX that people want to see! I have a tendency to pay proper attention to porn sometimes, and it is usually a terrible mistake:
'Oh my God, that man is so tanned he looks like beef jerky, and he is wearing tinted swimming-goggles - wait, are those sunglasses? And why do all the European actors wear those weird little necklaces? Haha!'

Paying attention to porn actresses' expressions (facial and verbal) tends to make me burst out laughing and completely kill my horn. The huge amount of ridiculous pouting and very obviously fake arousal usually provokes hilarity, but sometimes makes me quite depressed, that some men can be so thick (or jaded) that it gets them going. Especially common is the businesslike efficiency of so many porn actresses which, I'm sorry, often makes me think of seasoned prostitutes.

Let us not forget that the Internet has developed on the advance that porn studios discovered with DVDs: people can now slice out, tag and distribute individual scenes involving this or that actress/actor or this or that sex act, tweak the angle/lighting/whatever they want, and so there is even less need to care about the background information. You want a POV scene of Jenna Jameson masturbating? You got it! You don't need to remember that film's title and watch it until you find the right scene unless you're absolutely hell-bent on it - a quick search of a porn site will often point you in the right direction without too much fuss.

No, the only other entertainment form that porn can remotely be compared to (given the way that it is designed to be used), is gaming. It's interesting to note too how much the 'do video games cause violence?' debate mirrors the 'does porn cause rape?' debate, as the more astute among you have hopefully already realised.

This brings me to my other point: a few men (surprise!) immediately leaped on the 'you can't assert a causal link between rape and porn usage' bandwagon, both here and on PP. Erm, no - my wording maybe wasn't unambiguous enough, but I said that I know there's no evidence for it, and I don't believe it. When I said that they were linked, I meant that there is a similar attitude inherent in both. Rape, and the overwhelming majority of porn, reflect a male desire for absolute dominance, translated into a desire to totally dominate women. Just because you and I use it doesn't mean that this can be denied. I'm not going to get into the debate over whether porn can be made feminist or whatever, but I am also not going to be disingenuous and deny what goes on in most porn. It's not a coincidence that women in porn are almost always completely submissive. It's not a coincidence that porn's representations of lesbian sexuality show a form of lesbianism which is all about women wanting to be men, with the strap-on cock and the dildo and when these aren't present, the women are usually young and nubile and conventionally attractive. Just because the cock is not there doesn't mean that the cock can be forgotten! God forbid that porn should show a lesbianism that isn't all about male desire and 'manliness' (read: penises) in some way.

Morons may say (as one did in fact on Pickled Politics):

One genre omitted was the ‘Bend Over Boyfriend’ stuff which features a woman with a strapon subjecting her boyfriend / husband to some rough play.

i.e. 'What about when men are getting fucked? Isn't that, like SUBVERSIVE, and also possibly feminist, because I am a scroteburst and don't understand feminism or feminists?'

Well, now. If you've got the time and the inclination, I would say head over to Bitchy Jones's blog and read a whole lot of posts, starting with the Best Of. It's certainly not for the faint-hearted though. I am just going to quote from a couple of posts: 'subs are not meant to secretly run the show. That’s a lie. If the sub is in charge you’re doing it wrong.'

*All* the femdom porn out there is squarely aimed at sub men. Now, I don’t mind some or even most of it being aimed at sub men. I get the economic argument. Subs spend money on porn and wank like monkeys. We know this. That’s why we *have* to tie you up sometimes for your own good. But all of it! Hey, no fair. I mean, I know for a fact that there are a few other dom women out there, how come we get nothing?

I thought this was all about *my* pleasure, *my* needs. Well, could someone tell the porn site makers that please.

As Bitchy so astutely observes, even porn which pretends to be about female domination (i.e., giving women the power of the penis) is not really, because it is aimed at satisfying male desire, just like the rest of porn. The depictions of femdom in mainstream porn are obviously going to adhere to this, but she notes it in the dominatrix industry and 'proper' BDSM femdom porn as well:

Dominant women are beautiful. And that’s why the guy gets on his knees. That is what he worships. Her beauty.

I don’t just mean in porn – I mean the whole ’story’ of femdom runs along these lines.

It’s pretty interesting that, where men have decided to allow women to have ‘power’ for their own wanky needs, that this is the kind of power they choose to give her. The power of being desired. A completely passive power.

And I’ve told you before dominant sexuality is all about *desiring*. Dominant sexuality is active – not passive.

*Wanting* not being wanted.

*Demanding* not being demanded.

But the beautiful Amazon thing is woven into the fabric of femdom (black PVC – since you ask).

This is my major problem with porn: it's all about men. Even when they're the ones being fucked, the focus remains on satisfying male desire. I hate the way it makes me end up feeling like I have some sort of sexual split-personality disorder. You're always led to identify with the penetrator - the man, or the male-proxy lesbian - yet as a woman, you know deep down that you're supposed to be the penetratee (yup, not a word, don't care). Where the man is getting penetrated, I just find myself agreeing with Bitchy and thinking 'But I don't want to screw a man! It might turn him on, but it doesn't turn me on! And it doesn't turn her on, either, by the looks of it.' This takes me back to why feminist porn may not be possible; like Simone de Beauvoir, I fear that 'the women's effort has never been anything more than a symbolic agitation. They have gained only what men have been willing to grant; they have taken nothing, they have only received' ("Introduction" to The Second Sex (1952), p.19).

Let us not forget that the greedy hand of mainstream porn has reached into BDSM culture and taken practices which usually occur after much discussion between sexual partners, and stolen them. Your average hardcore porn video does not show the man asking the woman if she is really, truly, 100% OK with any form of auto-erotic asphyxiation, the couple establishing any safe words or limits, or anything such. In short, mainstream porn removes all the pesky 'responsible behaviour' that actually underpins any extreme sexual practices and just hands you the sexual practices on a plate. This is yet another example of heteronormativity in action. Extreme sexual practices were roundly demonised and ignored by the heterosexual majority for ages. However, now that heterosexual culture is 'bored' and needs novelty, it has 'graciously' decided to legitimize BDSM, sort of, by stealing from it. Only, conveniently enough, it ends up making BDSM look worse because it does away with the whole 'safe, sane and consensual' ethos that distinguishes it from actual rape, torture etc.! God forbid that 'vanilla' heterosexuality ever be seen as anything other than THE true and right way (because of course, y'know, the majority have vanilla heterosexual sex, so anything else is weird and probably evil). Anyone who thinks I am on that conspiracy shit wants to remember that the majority of porn users in America belong to, that's right, the bullshit party (who make it their business to argue against ALL sexual activity that isn't 'Christian') and that in the UK, you can now be prosecuted for being in possession of 'extreme porn.'

Ultimately, I'm finding that I've come full circle - I'm doing my best to stay away from Internet porn and just occasionally watching some of those cringeworthy erotica films that come on certain Sky channels late at night. These still promote female stereotypes and female sexual stereotypes enthusiastically, but at least they hold back from the violence that is implicit, and becoming increasingly explicit, in so much porn. They also often try to connect sex and love to some extent, by putting in some kind of romance. Loving couples can have good sex too, you know! While I understand that the fantasy of completely no-strings/anonymous sex is exciting - SOMETIMES - porn is OBSESSED with it, and it gets really boring.

The repetitiveness of porn is damaging, but for a critical mind, it is also revealing. Most porn consumers want to be the 'daddy' fucking girls old enough to be their daughter (eww) or they want to fuck their mums (eww), or both. All very Freudian and distinctly pathetic. It's no secret that they are largely insecure and unattractive (often, but not always, physically as well as emotionally) men, compensating themselves by being able to get their way all the time and 'have' anyone they want who wouldn't normally look twice at them. They don't want to be anyone's beloved equal, they want to be SPECIAL SNOWFLAKES, goddammit! Me, me, me! Bor-ing - and this is precisely the message we DO NOT need young male teenagers high on hormones to be embedding in their already self-centred brains.