Why are so many people hung up on the porn issue?

[Hello_Kitty]

I'm reading posts all over GD and other areas of DU where people are complaining about the inclusion of the issue of porn in the mission statement and how that's exlusionary and this group is a bunch of fundamentalists. I think a lot of them are unaware of what exactly led to the porn statement and that's understandable but jumpin jeebus on toast points is that what it boils down to for a lot of people?!

I've yet to see a single post in this group or the Women's forum by anyone claiming that pornography (at least that which involves consenting adults) should be banned. And if someone did post that, so what? It's not a position I agree with but they are entitled to hold it.

Here's a little gem I came across in another group

I like to consider myself a man friendly pro sex feminist.
Why can't we have equality love and sex too? Most men I've known are really well intentioned good people. I think a lot has changed for the better and perhaps we should work towards more progress with a little less rage? I think that it's odd when pornography is listed in the mission statement. Female Genital Mutilation, honor killings, burkas, international sex slaves, the continued attacks on reproductive rights, scientific research for female health, and domestic violence are all very important women's issues but what do they mention? Filmed boobies and those who like them. When I tried pointing that out I was met with close-minded fundamentalism.

Now this was a thread started in another group by someone taking me (I wasn't identified but I was the offender) to task for pointing out that she posted in that group. She was upset that I did that and I realize that I did invade her privacy by doing so. This is exactly what I'm talking about, though. Notice the false comparison of concern with pornography with that of other types of brutality against women. Like if you think porn degrades women then you are not concerned enough with those other issues. Personally, I can actually think about more than one thing at a time and I'm capable of recognizing degrees of importance. And it's not the women in this group that are obsessed with porn. After all, we're not the ones who keep bringing it up, are we? (OK, I know I brought it up on this post but you get my point.)

[Finder]

1. I think it is certain members...

edited typo


who some feel are militant anti-porn/sexuality combined with the mission statement mention of it that dissuades them. Only time will tell, but hopefully that will not be an issue we constantly have to deal with in here.

[PassingFair]

2. Talk about your strawmen!

I have been posting on DU for a LONG time, and I have NEVER seen a post by a female DUer that even REMOTELY resembled something that might fly from the fingers of a Phyllis Schafly.

I don't think that porn should be illegal.
BUT, I am happy with the xxx. prefix that is going to be mandated for porn sites.

As I once told my husband, "I reserve the right to reject any erection not raised by me". And I mean it.

Strippers or porn stars won't get flamed by me, but I wouldn't want my daughter to be involved in it. And I would rather muck stables than exploit myself for monetary gain, let alone for someone else's gain.

[Eloriel]

23. Finder -- a personal request

When I read this statement of yours:

"I think it is certain members..."
who some feel are militant anti-porn/sexuality...

I feel offended -- and confused -- because it appears you are supporting the old canard/lie/strawman that anyone against pornography is against sex and sexuality. It couldn't be further from the truth.

Just as "supporting our troops" isn't the same thing as supporting this (or any) war, neither is being anti-porn the same thing asn anti-sex or anti-sexuality.

Could you please either clarify what you DID mean if my reading isn't accurate or refrain from using anything approaching that construct in the future?

Please read my several additional posts in my thread on PostModern Feminism, where surely I reveal that I am pro-sex/sexuality enough for anyone, if you doubt my claim that *I* am not anti-sex and in fact being anti-porn isn't the same thing as anti-sex/uality.

Thanks in advance.

[Finder]

25. I wasn't singling you out.

I was offering my opinion about what other's perceptions were. I agree with you as far as the "supporting the troops" analogy but I think the pro-choice/pro-life issue is more analogous due to the passions involved.

I have read your other posts but I think we will need to agree to disagree on our definitions of "healthy sexuality."

I think it is a postive thing that we can discuss our different perceptions and hopefully find compromise so we can get some much needed work done by the movement as a whole.

[geniph]

3. I think the vast majority of porn sucks (yes, pun intentional)

It's awful. It's lame. And some of it is very exploitative indeed. But I don't believe in banning it for SEXUAL content. Porn that breaks the law is another matter entirely; anything nonconsensual, anything involving children, stuff like that, is just criminal. THAT should be banned.

On the other hand, I'm very sex-positive personally. I do not believe ALL porn is necessarily exploitative and/or degrading. But some of it sure as hell is.

I've had arguments with other feminists about it, because there is a (small but vocal) element in the feminist community that does think all porn and all sex work is necessarily exploitative of women. However, being something of a fan of gay porn, I'd have to disagree with that. ;-)

I will admit that one statement in the group's rules gave me a teensy bit of pause, though, because I am decidedly not anti-porn. I'm anti-LAME-porn. I'm anti-TYPICAL-porn. It sucks.

[Finder]

4. Need a high five emoticon. n/t

[lukasahero]

5. I'm sorry the statement gave you pause

There was a point to including it and that was to allow this kind of conversation to take place. Remember, all the statement says is "- If you believe that women who have concerns about the prevalance of pornography in our society are uptight, sexually-repressed prudes who need to be enlightened to the "facts" and "realities" of the sex industry, this is not the group for you."

You may be unfamiliar with the history of DU and especially the WR&I forum but without this group and that statement your statement "I do not believe ALL porn is necessarily exploitative and/or degrading. But some of it sure as hell is." would have resulted in a major flame war. The statement was deliberately crafted to be moderate. It does not say you have to believe porn is horrible and should be banned to be welcome. It simply talks about the personal attacks on people who may not think all porn in every aspect is absolutely the best thing since sliced bread.

I'm really glad you got past it and joined in the discussions. I wish others out there would take time to consider the context and history behind including it.

[geniph]

8. I do have to point out one thing

because you said this: "You may be unfamiliar with the history of DU"

Um. No. ;-) I'm one of those who joined a month after the sElection of 2000. February of 2001 was my first post.

And yep, I've seen the porn wars come and go, again and again and again. I think they're deliberately used to try to drive a wedge between feminists, threads about porn and/or sex work. See, my big thing is that I don't believe in most absolute statements (note I even stuck a "most" in there - I hate generalizing). I did say I had a "teensy" bit of pause. And here I am. So obviously I didn't have a huge issue with the statement the way it was phrased. But I did have to look at it a few times to make sure we weren't just going to do a blanket condemnation of all porn. Because there's some of it that's pretty damn good. Damn little of it, but there is SOME. (Candida Royalle rocks in my book.)

[lukasahero]

29. My apologies, sincerely

I didn't look at your profile and shouldn't have suggested you were unfamiliar with DU history. That was an unfair judgement on my part and I'm sorry. I admit I am sensitive to the uproar that particular statement has created.

I agree with you wholeheartedly about "absolute" statements. I consider myself "moderate in all things" (even moderation ;)) and find extreme and absolute ideologies limiting to discussion. Very little in life is all good or all bad but that's how so many things today get sorted and I think it's that "good vs. evil" mentality that is truly threatening this country and women's rights in particular.

In fact, that is what struck me most in my recent reading of "The Handmaid's Tale": the idea that women were either mothers or whores. (There's another category in there that warrants it's own discussion but they basically fit in the mother category for purposes of this thought.) It was the "extreme" elements on either side who ended up giving men the power in the book to enslave and define women in only those terms. I want to make sure the scenario remains only on the page and doesn't venture it's way into my life. ;)

[geniph]

36. No apology needed

;-) just wanted to point out that I'm definitely not a newbie on DU. I haven't been on the forums all that much the last year or two; kind of burned out on it for awhile before the election. The ideologically precious were making me very, very tired.

[Chovexani]

7. What you said. (n/t)

[Eloriel]

24. As I said in another thread --

I don't think you like some porn, I think you like "erotica." :party:

[Chovexani]

6. Lack of reading comprehension

I see nothing in the mission statement of this group that is exclusionary toward sex-positive feminists. I'm one, and I feel comfortable here.

The reason there is that line in the mission statement is because there were a couple of individuals who were hell bent on hijacking pretty much any thread to attack feminists who were concerned about porn. I lurked a lot on the other board and to be frank, it was impossible to have any discussion about the issue and from what I saw, that was a big part of the impetus for creating this group...having a safe space to talk about these things without constantly having to fight. It's not about how you feel about the issue, it's about how you treat people who feel differently about the issue than you do.

[geniph]

9. Well put

and can I just say, I'm really enjoying your posts here? I think that's one of the things I'm liking about this group - it's not so noisy in here that we are unable to hear each other, even those of us who ordinarily don't dominate the conversations in the other forums.

[Chovexani]

15. Aww, thanks

I'm enjoying yours too. :hug: The "coziness" of this group is cool. In the other forums I don't usually talk too much, except to post smart-ass one-liners and stuff, hehe.

It's like you can come in here, take your shoes off, flop on a bean bag and just chat. :D

[Eloriel]

26. re: Coziness

There is nothing in this world that makes me feel more at home than the company of women, preferrably "strong" (read: feminist) women. Nothing. I yearn for it, and there is something soul-satisfying in it that I can get nowhere else.

It's also been my observation that women are prone to and capable of creating "community" amongst ourselves as a matter of course -- our automatic and routine way of being, in a sense.

I also believe that the infamous so-called rivalry or competition between women is due to the objectification of us as a class and especially the necessity in former years to compete with one another for our very economic and physical survival: some man to marry and take care of us since we for the most part weren't allowed to do that ourselves (few "career" choices to start with and no ability to continue working once pregnant or AFTER -- that leaves taking in ironing and doing domestic work, neither of which are particularly remunerative and both of which can be demeaning and unpleasant enough to MAKE women want to compete with one another for the eligible men).

[Scout]

41. not to single you out Chovexani, but i really hate this term: "sex-positive feminists"

i'm not a sex-negative feminist. i don't care for porn, and i wonder about people who use it a lot, but i've never called for it to be banned.

i just don't think we need to "divide and conquer" our sisters by saying we are sex-positive or sex-negative.

i know you didn't invent that term, and i see it used a lot and elsewhere than here--your post just made me think of the comment :hi:

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

10. I'm a bit torn on the porn issue

I respect a woman's right to engage in and participate in porn, but I've also KNOWN porn stars with SERIOUS self esteem issues..particularly AFTER they are deemed too old to participate in the industry.

I really don't favor objectifying women and think porn exists (but for gay male porn) almost SOLELY to do that..OTOH, I believe there were studies done in the 70's (don't know how true they were or if they held up) demonstrating that societies where porn was completely legal had FEWER crimes of violence against women...So..again..I am torn on the issue.

[chicaloca]

11. yeah, that's understandable....

But as far as the less violence thing, I really have trouble believing that more porn actually causes less violence. The whole correlation vs. causation thing. Here's a post of mine I copied from the WR&I forum that addresses this (it's a bit combative because of the context, but I don't have time to rewrite it all, so just know that the combativeness isn't directed toward you!). :)

Some more info...
since I just happened upon this today. Your assertion that countries where porn is more available have less violence against women is based on a study by Berl Kutchinsky, who claimed that the number of reported sex crimes dropped after legalization of pornography. But in his study, it turned out that his definition of rape included some lesser sex crimes as well as homosexuality, which police stopped reporting after legalization. So obviously, those rates would have gone down. But actual RAPES increased in number after legalization of porn in Denmark.

Also, when South Australia liberalized its porn laws in the 60s and 70s and Queensland didn't, Queensland saw no increase in sex crimes, while South Australia had a sixfold increase.

Furthermore, your asserion assumes that wide availability of porn is the ONLY factor in preventing violence against women. But as we saw in this country in the 70s, just as the women's movement got big, so did the porn industry, possibly as a counter-response to women's increased rights. (Kind of like what we see today -- as women have made gains in the workplace, conservatives try to restrict our rights elsewhere.) I would tend to hold the women's rights movement more responsible for ending rape than magazines like Hustler and Playboy, which regularly run comics ridiculing rape and rape victims.

I also think one answer to the porn issue was addressed very well by Sut Jhally (who I hope to one day marry) in his Dreamworlds video, when he said the answer to demeaning images of women in music videos and other media are best addressed not by more censorship, but less. (Note that I'm saying censorship here, not regulations on treatment of workers!) Right now, only certain people who have a lot of money -- i.e. white men -- have the power to make or promote highly successful music videos as well as porn. If more people of all backgrounds were allowed into this elite boy's club, I think you'd see both music videos and porn change a lot for the better. But right now it's mainly one group of people, with the occasional woman, who have control over these media, and a lot of them could give two shits about women's rights.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

12. Great points and thanks for the reference

That was the study I was thinking of

[Hello_Kitty]

14. Less censorship IS key

Naomi Wolf discussed how pornographic images of women, particularly those found in the "soft core" publications like Playboy are a form of censorship in themselves. When the same skinny, young, women with huge breast implants are shown over and over again and then their pictures are further cropped and airbrushed it becomes the "official" line that shuts out everyone who deviates from it. Frankly, women's fashion magazines are just as bad about promoting their own limiting form of propaganda.

In another thread someone mentioned how Europe was much more open about nudity and you see a lot more of it on television. From what I've seen, that's true and it's a lot more egalitarian than the nudity you see here. Men are naked on screen more often and you see more people of both genders with average, unretouched, and un-surgically enhanced bodies. It's interesting to see it as an American. My initial reaction is usually shock to see a normal-looking person naked, as I've become so accustomed to only being allowed to see the official body here. After a while, though, I get used to it and they look perfectly allright. Amazing, ain't it?

[DoveTurnedHawk]

20. I Read a Survey Once on Porn Stars

I can't vouch for methodology or sampling (it was listed in a magazine article, it was not an online poll), but in the survey I saw, over 90% of respondents had been seriously abused physically and/or sexually.

I've personally known three women who were in various types of porn movies, and all of them had been sexually abused when they were younger.

The thing I have a problem with is the exploitative nature of the whole industry. It's mostly men profiting by the use of women (often vulnerable or otherwise susceptible to this type of behavior) designed for the consumption of men. I have the same types of problems with prostitution.

If the women involved in these industries had true self-determination over their own bodies, destinies, and profits, and there were no men producers/pimps involved in the process, I think my problems with all of it would decrease significantly, if not entirely.

DTH

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

21. Lots and LOTS of drug abuse in porn stars too

Porn defenders always like to cite one incredibly rich woman, but she is in a sea of males

[Eloriel]

27. Well said

And let me expand a point (I think this is included in what you said): "self=determination over their own bodies, destinies and profits" would include never having been abused as children. My contention is that if you come to any decision that wounded, or wounded in that way (sexual abuse especially), it certainly erodes your full agency. In some individual cases, it erases it completely (e.g., teens running away from abusive situations at home who turn to prostitution).

[Bunny]

13. To be honest, I never thought much about porn as a women's issue.

I've used porn, I've owned porn, I always figured as long as it was between two consenting adults, what's the big deal?

It's only after reading the many powerful opinions, expressed by the women here, that I decided I'd better pay more attention to the issue. Most of the powerful opinions were written in response to mongo, so: thanks for that mongo! :thumbsup:

[Kathy in Cambridge]

16. Same here, Bunny

I didn't have a strong opinion toward porn one way or another, until I read some dissenting opinions. With the exception of some really sick stuff, it has never really bothered me.

[beam me up scottie]

17. Thank you.

I try NOT to think about porn, as often as possible.

I am capable of discerning the difference between the fabulously liberal sex shops in Montreal and the disgusting web porn with the dignified and mature theme "Lets get a dumb coed drunk and film the other guys fucking her before she sobers up".

I resent having to delete it out of my email accounts and I resent the hell out of finding in a women's forum on a supposedly progressive web site. Or any liberal forum.

If somebody wants to start a thread about the "good" porn-some call it erotica, that's great. But how long before it was hijacked by people who cannot comprehend why we find the other type of porn offensive?

I would never even attempt to post on such a thread if one existed.

Who would?

[Warpy]

18. It's rather like religion, isn't it?

I mean, either you get it or you don't. There's little middle ground. People who don't get it are often offended by it. People who do get it think the people who don't are terrible prudes.

It never did a thing for me, but I consider it the price we've paid for a free press (which we used to have). The only porn I'd object to are the types that require a human being to be hurt for the entertainment of others. That means violent porn and kiddie porn and coerced porn. That's where my line is.

I'm defining porn here as most erotica. The male variety with it's repetitive and clinical descriptions in prose or pictures of sex acts and the female variety exemplified by the romance novel. Neither did a thing for me, but I don't judge people who do like it.

I just don't happen to get it.

[Senior citizen]

19. You may be defining porn as erotica, but that doesn't make it so.

And since we no longer have a free press, there is obviously no longer any reason we have to keep paying a porn price for it.

[Warpy]

22. Whether it's porn or erotica

is entirely in the eye of the beholder. There are no hard distinctions.

I don't like liver and Brussels sprouts either, but I won't condemn anyone who does.

[Eloriel]

28. I think it's time we forced a distinction

Really, I do. See my posts on my Post Modern Feminism thread (I'm too tired to repeat any of those thoughts).

[lukasahero]

30. I agree wholeheartedly

I think the lack of distinction is part of what causes the "all or nothing" wars. I'm going over to your other post now to see where you take the idea.

Thanks.

[noamnety]

31. I don't think Barbie dolls should be illegal

But I recognize that they contribute to girls developing a negative self-image, and an unrealistic idea of what their bodies should look like. Likewise, the porn industry affects both men's and women's attitudes toward women's bodies. Recent surveys have shown that men who regularly view porn are more likely to ask their partners to get cosmetic surgery.

It also affects both men's and women's views of women's place in society.

"In a widely cited experiment, Zillmann and Bryant (1982) explored the consequences of continued exposure to pornography on beliefs about sexuality in general and on dispositions toward women (p. 13)." In this experiment, 80 male and 80 female participants were randomly selected into one of four conditions. In the massive exposure group, participants watched 36 erotic films (roughly 5 hours of film) over a six week period. In the intermediate exposure group, participants saw 18 erotic films and 18 non-erotic films. The no exposure group saw 36 non-erotic films, and finally there was a control. All pornographic films shown were deemed nonviolent. After exposure, participants were introduced to a rape case and asked to recommend a prison sentence for the offense. Participants were also asked to indicate their support for the female liberation movement on a 0 (no support) to 100 (maximum support) scale.

The massive exposure group was found to have recommended significantly shorter prison terms for the rape case than all other groups. This was the case among both men and women. From this, Zillmann and Bryant conclude that "such exposure, it seems, made rape appear a trivial offense (p. 16)." The massive exposure group was also found to be significantly less supportive of the women's liberation movement.

In the Donnerstein and Linz (1985) desensitization study mentioned earlier, participants attitudes towards rape were also measured. After exposure, participants saw a documentary reenactment of a real rape trial, and were then asked to asses the female victim. Participants who had seen the R-rated slasher films found the victim to be more responsible for being raped, more worthless, and her injury less severe. Results were largely the same for participants who had seem the X-rated violent films. However, unlike Zillmann and Bryant's finding, participants exposed to nonviolent pornography showed no effects."

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

Porn is used in our country in deliberate ways to shape men's minds to connect women with violence. All you need to do is google football + porn + coach to see what I'm talking about - coaches show porn to raise testosterone levels before their football players are sent out to tackle the other team.

I'm not in favor of banning Barbie dolls, but it's ignorant to think that there are no consequences to having children constantly exposed to unrealistic visions of what their bodies should look like, as well as being exposed to the idea that a productive and healthy way for boys (GI Joes) to spend their time is by shooting things, or for girls (Barbie dolls), changing from one outfit with high heels to another.

As far as porn goes, I'm like the crowd who personally opposes abortion while being pro-choice - they don't believe banning it for everyone is an appropriate response to their own disapproval, but they work to reduce the underlying causes for it (access and cost of birth control, education, etc.).

It would be great if some women didn't feel resorting to the porn industry was the only way to afford college. It would be great if teaching paid as well per hour as taking off my clothes and shoving my ass in some stranger's face. It's a matter of what is valued in society, and if you look at the financial aspect, it would certainly appear that women are more highly valued as pieces of naked flesh for guys to get off on, than they are as skilled members of the work force contributing in other ways to society. Of course that's a concern for feminists.

[Ripley]

32. Excellent Post.

I think the biggest problem in the porn debate is this: Use of porn as an occasional stimulant (for both men and women and couples) seems to be a healthy part of sexuality for some people as long as it is not based upon torture, rape and violence.

The problem seems to be the addiction to porn or the "overuse" of porn. Not that I would in any way want to limit how many times a person can watch their porn tape at home... :eyes:

But it is clear from studies and my personal experience as well as many others I have known, that when most men view massive amounts of porn it usually becomes a cascading event. They need more than just regular sex to get them off....often this leads to the backroom porn which is the violent, pedophilia shit. Even if they don't cascade into the dark stuff, it severely affects their interaction with females in the real world.

I would apply this to guys who visit strip clubs daily, too. Have you ever been to a strip club? I've been to both extremes. Once near Philly I went into one with a male friend, just looking for a beer. It was the most depressing place I have ever been in and it was in a very middle class area. The two women on the dance poles looked so zombied out and used, they were hollow women to me. Their bodies and eyes did not connect to a living soul inside. The men also looked depressed. Drinking beer and without even smiling occasionally looking at the jiggling and grinding. As if to remind them what a female was supposed to look like.

The other place I went into was a high-end place in Atlanta. The fantasy world obviously catered to wealthy men and a lot of sports figures. It was their personal harem. Most women smiled and seemed happy, except they had a sneer for me and other visiting women. I guess they thought we were lesbians or something. Weird.

In any case, it is too bad so may men and now women attack anyone who questions the industry and it's affects upon our society and how women are treated.

Probably all of us females have had male friends, boyfriends or husbands who used porn and saw it escalate and affect their personality. I personally experienced it with my ex-husband. I directly blame porn for his increased violence during sex (and adultery) and then finally his violence just for the hell of it. I left battered, bruised and degraded, but I survived.

Do I want to ban pornography, sex shops, etc.? No. Do I want a rational discussion about how it affects a lot of men and leads to, if not violence, the demeaning and oppressive conditioning of girls and women in America? Yes. And one only has to look at music videos, computer games, movies, TV shows and clothing on the racks to see that pornography has become so mainstream as to be the rule for how women should behave and look.

[Finder]

33. addiction...

I do think porn can be as much an addiction to some as shopping,DU or gambling or drinking etc. People with addictive personalities will find something to be addicted to. That is an individual's problem not society's.

[Vladimir]

34. I think you hit the nail on the head

when you talked about addiction to porn, and the subsequent degradation in relationships with women. It is something most men will not talk about, not least because society expects us to enjoy porn as light entertainment, but in my opinion it is a huge problem. It can lead to a total disintegration of emotional response when in a real relationship, and thus to a total inability to have healthy relationships. People have talked elsewhere about the line between erotica and porn - and I would say that one useful aspect of the distinction is that porn involves the commodification of sensuality (if that makes any sense to anyone here). Because you are being sold this interaction as a substitute or supplement for your own experiences, pornography is in a sense in competition with these experiences - and this I think is at the root of why some men who watch a large amount of porn find that no real relationship can satisfy anymore.

[geniph]

35. I remember after one of my nephews discovered porn

he started collecting graphic pictures of naked women, and was actually folding them so that only the exposed genitals and breasts showed - no face, no person, just genitals. I always liked what my brother-in-law said to him about that - he said, "you know, Chris, there's a hell of a lot more to a woman than that, and I can guarantee you'll have to learn to deal with it." The disturbing fascination with disembodied sex organs was, fortunately, temporary, but it's something I see in some men (and very rare women) - they never learn to deal with persons of the opposite sex. They, in fact, do everything they can to separate the sex from the personhood, and only deal with a sex object.

Some men never understand why this is objectionable. These are the men who, when they're on an online dating site, will send a woman a picture of their dick and then not understand why that doesn't get an enthusiastic response. I have yet to hear of a woman that actually wanted to receive a picture of a man's dick instead of the whole person, or perhaps his face.

Thus objectifying a person, separating the person's self from their sex organs, is one aspect of porn that disturbs me greatly. Those are the people who can blithely commit violence on another - the ones who don't recognize the other person as an individual human being.

[lukasahero]

37. Kicking this as a reminder of what 'discussion' used to mean...

It does not mean we have to agree, it means we need to be able to speak freely without fear of snide comments and personal attacks - preferably in full sentences and maybe even paragraphs.

Discussion: That which is most prevalently missing on discussion boards.

[Shakespeare]

38. Excellent post, and an important point.

And this thread really reminds me how much I miss seeing Geniph post here. :-(

[Chovexani]

42. There's a hell of a lot of posters I miss.

Eloriel, too.

[lightningandsnow]

39. I think some people are awfully black-and-white about the issue.

And it goes for both sides, for sure.

For example, I know people think I'm some kind of militant pro-porner, but, honestly, I have a big problem with a lot of mainstream porn. The depictions in it are often meant to be degrading - it doesn't tend to show genuine mutal pleasure, and a lot of it is not only sexist but racist as well. So being all "porn, fuck yeah!" kind of ignores the issue at hand, I think.

That being said, I think some people who are very anti-porn may be throwing the baby out with the bathwater, so to speak. I think there are ways of making porn/erotica that is not sexist, shows mutual pleasure, and shows people with realistic bodies. I don't think porn in of itself is the evil - I tend to agree with the definition of it as "The explicit depiction of men or women as sexual beings" - but I don't think mainstream porn is that great, either.

[lightningandsnow]

40. Just realized how old this thread is!

Silly me. :P