Feminists on Porn (not as fun as it sounds)

The following is a paper I wrote for my Sexuality class during the completion of my Psych B.A. If you intend to reference it, please contact me for documentation specifics.
Feminists Against Feminists: The Pornography Debate November 2006 There is no doubt that feminists, a potent subgroup of the population, are often involved in social and legal controversy. When someone thinks of feminism, certain words typically come to mind: angry, activist, equal rights, and man-hater, for instance. Though all feminists certainly have the common goal of liberating women, they can differ greatly on the visions they hold as necessarily leading toward that goal; no ongoing debate makes this fact more obvious than the sex wars. This essay will focus on the feminist-versusfeminist battle over pornography, from its very purpose and existence to its potential in the liberation (or not) of womens sex and sexuality. For the sake of this paper, pornography will be distinguished from erotica, in which males and females are portrayed as equals in sexually arousing material; pornography, on the other hand, is often violent, degrading or dehumanizing. Both men and women are consumers of pornography; however, the industry is undeniably male-oriented, and the most common users of pornography have been found to be traditionally gender-typed, masculine males and androgynous females (Hyde, DeLamater and Byers, 2006). Despite the fact that controversial issues constantly surround it, pornography is a booming industry, bringing in between $4 and $10 billion per year in the United States (Hyde, DeLamater and Byers, 2006). The pornography debate has been raging for over forty years and still remains a focal point of discussion. Feminists have had a strong influence on academic interest in sexuality since the 1970s, when Catharine MacKinnon and Andrea Dworkin proposed an ordinance to outlaw objectionable pornographic images (those which could be proven as causing harm to an individual, whether male or female). This resulted in the first large divide among feminists, when feminists against the anti-porn movement (representing the anti-anti-porn side), such as Ellen Willis (1983), argued that pornography could be experienced by women as sexually liberating (as cited in Chancer, 2000). The two basic positions being argued to this day are dichotomous, emphasizing either the sexual colonization and victimization of women (anti-porn, sexualsubordination, or victim feminists side) or the sexual repression and passivity of women (anti-anti-porn, sexual-pleasure, or power feminists side) (Russo, 1987; Chancer, 2000). The resolution of this debate is of importance beyond the direct goals of feminism; not only has the recurrent divide unintentionally weakened the movement from within (Chancer, 2000), but it threatens to undermine the progress of other subgroups which have struggled for acceptance in society by denouncing their freedom of speech where sexually explicit material is concerned (gay and lesbian communities, women). Schaeffer (2001) explored the works of MacKinnon, a feminist intent on changing the social conditions that prevent women from being independent individuals. According to her, a stereotype becomes what is real

because women are damaged by it. She defines a true feminist as one who sees the male point of view as fundamental to the male power to create the world in its own image, rather than viewing sexism as a myth to be corrected. Sexism is a conditioned and socialized reality. Among other prominent issues at the time, pornography was identified as a crucial feminist issue because it harms women in three ways: in the making of it, in the perpetuation of the objectification and dehumanization of women, and in the conditioning of users to experience sexual thrills from the degradation of others, thus shaping sexual behaviour. MacKinnon said that, to the extent pornography succeeds in constructing social reality, it becomes invisible as harm (1992, as cited in Schaeffer, 2001). This debate is necessary in order to raise questions about the harm done to women and how it could be rectified without the conflict extending beyond the individual to the state. Hyde, DeLamater and Byers (2006) describe the four basic reasons why some feminists object to pornography. First, pornography debases women and often portrays them as subordinates to dominant males. Second, pornography associates sex with violence, thus contributing to social attitudes that reflect desensitization to violence toward women. Third, pornography shows unequal power relationships between men and women. Fourth, the structure of the pornography industry is such that a significant number of workers within seem to be physically, sexually, and emotionally abused. In these ways, pornography is a likely perpetrator of traditional gender roles. The images presented in contemporary pornography reflect the desires and fantasies of a male-dominated society. Double standards of sexual morality condemn females for certain sexual activities that are socially permitted for men. In a review of men behind the media, Watkins and Emerson (2000) showed that screenwriting is dominated by males, which leads to the proposition that male direction of the camera is so influential that women are socialized into identifying and complying with the very patriarchal values that marginalize them. Both feminist positions in this debate define sexuality as being socially constructed; the difference is in how they conceptualize sexual roles and practices in relation to power, and how they approach the interconnections between sexuality, sexual violence, male domination/female subordination and the pornographic industry (Russo, 1987). Anti-pornography feminists make connections between pornography and the negative treatment of women; their opposition agrees that pornography is sexist and maledominated, but focus instead on the expression of womens sexual impulses and desires, viewing pornography as a vehicle to achieving control over their own sexuality. In some cases, this is shown to be true; Shellrude (2001) reported on the writings of prostitutes who reported that their experience had taught them to have confidence in themselves, their bodies, and their sexuality. Furthermore, these sex workers advised readers to look beyond the demeaning objectification of sex to take charge of their own sexuality. While the anti-porn feminists agree that self-representation is a key part of liberating women from male sexuality, they believe that the intertwining of fantasy and reality in pornography only serve as a medium to condone violence and degradation of women (Russo, 1987). Anti-pornography feminists tend to represent traditionally feminist attitudes, and characterize their critics as male-identified and anti-feminist. They are uncomfortable with pornography because they identify its

function as the perpetuation of male control. It is not the act of sex itself that is discouraged by proponents of this group, but rather the acceptance by women to be victimized by sex in such a way as is demonstrated in pornography. One anti-pornography feminist was quoted as saying that if you do not agree that pornography is wrong, then you are not a feminist (as cited in Russo, 1987). They see women who are proponents of porn as perpetuating the view that females are sexual objects by nature, and as helping to reproduce gender inequality. The main issues for anti-anti-porn feminists are first amendment freedom and the right to sexual pleasure. The function of pornography is to introduce women to, and allow them to enjoy, different ideologies of sex that undermine the traditional values which had previously constrained them, such as purely procreative sex. The basis of their disagreement with anti-porn feminists is that identifying pornography as the enemy will cause shame and guilt among women who had otherwise come to terms with their sexual feelings, repressing women under the guise of feminism itself. This would only perpetrate the victim stereotype that women are innocent virgins who possess less sexual aggression than men (Russo, 1987). Feminists who do not believe in the censorship of pornography believe that if traditional restrictions about sex are removed then women can truly be sexually emancipated (Shellrude, 2001); in this perspective, individual sexual defiance is valued just as much as critiques of sexist institutions. Baumeister and Twenge (2002) performed a thorough literature review to examine and attempt to understand the origins of suppressed female sexuality. It was assumed that socializing influences such as parents, schools, peer groups and legal forces cooperated to alienate women from their sexuality. Two competing hypotheses were explored: either men (male control theory) or women (female control theory) act as the main source of suppression on female sexuality. Other factors were considered, such as the greater cost of sexual mistakes for women (pregnancy), and the idea that women naturally have a lesser sex drive. Before the findings are discussed, these theories will be explored in more depth. Male control theory is supported by the fact that men have held superior political and social power throughout most of history, therefore they could benefit from the suppression of female power in order to maintain their current positions. However, there are other explanations to this theory. Evolutionary theory, for instance, says that men control women because they require certainty about paternity; stifling their mates sexual desire is a small cost for ensuring that they are the legitimate father of their child. Feminist theory states that patriarchal social arrangements reflect the view that women are possessions that must be managed to prevent social chaos, because in fact women have a stronger natural sexual desire and are insatiable. Female control theory is less instinctive because of the inferior positions females have held in the past; however, social exchange theory sets a promising stage to explain the reason that women would attempt to control the sexuality of other women. According to this theory, men desire sex, and so sex becomes a bargaining chip for which women compete to attain desired resources. Women therefore punish other women who make sex too easily available because this lowers every womans value (the author uses an

analogy of the man who does not buy a cow because he already gets free milk). Pornography, as an outlet for a portion of a males desire for sex, threatens a womans negotiating power, so she feels the need to stifle its influence. Female control theory predicts that women would be particularly opposed to pornography; evidence for this is long-standing, and contemporary results continue to demonstrate a fair amount of female opposition to alternative sexual gratification for men. In fact, all empirical evidence in this review repeatedly favoured the female control theory; mothers and female peers were found to be the main sources that teach adolescent girls to refrain from sexual activity, and women tended to support the double standard more than men. In other words, women were the main supporters of a moral system that condemns acts by women more severely than identical acts by men. Male control theory was overwhelmingly contradicted, to the point where any male influence found usually pushed in the opposite direction of predictions (i.e. a boyfriend who pushed toward more sexual activity). What these findings mean for women is that jealousy and competition only results in the suppression of their peers; this could be a valuable lesson for feminists who compete against other feminists, thereby distancing themselves from their goals. The positive side is that Western women have vastly reduced the gender gap, hence their reliance on sex to yield an exchange is lower than in the past, and may decrease favourably in the future. The passion involved in this debate indicates the ever-important role of sex and sexuality in our society. Because of the divisions regarding views on pornography, legal restrictions on sexually explicit material are not the solution. The first step is to outlaw general statements regarding the experiences of women, and start with the experiences of individuals themselves. Shellrude (2001) argues that if people stopped denying that sexuality is a key part of getting what they want, then the stigmatization associated with sex could be reduced. Chancer (2000) suggests that feminists should consider why men are still largely in control of pornographys profits and production. Indeed, the development of a feminist erotica has not only been proposed but has been put into action as female-oriented pornographic videos (directed by women for women) attempt to equalize power relationships between men and women. Hyde, DeLamater and Byers (2006) report on a study in which it was found that both male and female university students responded positively to arousing videos designed for women, while only the males responded in this way to videos intended for men. This is an encouraging step forward for the maturation of female sexuality, and may very well succeed in more female sexual freedom and less perceived victimization. If anything has been demonstrated by this discussion, it is that the division between feminists on this issue is only serving to distract their energy from true progress, resulting in the ultimate weakness of the social movement. Feminists must focus instead on their commonalities, and achieve a middle-ground point of view. In other words, they must target sexism in the pornography industry itself rather than arguing over whether individuals are proponents of it; this debate has led to the illusion of a false dichotomy, as proposed by Chancer (2000). Struggle over sexual oppression and repression is only weighed down by the baggage of labels, when feminists could use their shared interests and mutual respect for individual

diversities to produce social change. As concluded by Shellrude (2001), the best forward-thinking feminism is one in which a womans sex, sexuality, and libido work together with her intellect to transform the world. References Baumeister, R.F., & Twenge, J.M. (2002). Cultural suppression of female sexuality. Review of General

Psychology, 6(2), 166-203.

Chancer, L.S. (2000). From pornography to sadomasochism: Reconciling feminist differences. Annals of the

American Academy of Political and Social Science, 571, 77-88.

Hyde, J.S., DeLamater, J.D., & Byers, E.S. (2006). Understanding Human Sexuality. (3rd Can. Ed.). Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson. Russo, A. (1987). Conflicts and contradictions among feminists over issues of pornography and sexual freedom. Womens Studies International Forum, 10(2), 103-112. Schaeffer, D. (2001). Feminism and liberalism reconsidered: The case of Catharine MacKinnon. The

American Political Science Review, 95(3), 699-708.

Shellrude, K. (2001). Coming between the lines: A fresh look at the writings of anti-porn and whore feminists.Canadian Woman Studies, 20/21(4/1), 41-45. Watkins, S.C., & Emerson, R.A. (2000). Feminist media criticism and feminist media practices. Annals of the

American Academy of Political and Social Science, 571, 151-166.