For as long as we’ve been enjoying sex and porn, we’ve also had to listen to people telling us that there’s a ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ way to enjoy it. These two posts highlight the problems with this.
Get stuck in.
The good: calling out double standards in sex and porn
This absolutely cracking blog post about Emma Watson’s porn comments, by @waitingirl13 is well worth a read. This week Emma Watson said that she’d like to see ‘feminist alternatives to porn.’ As opposed to just, you know, feminist porn – of which there is absolutely shitloads, by the way. It’d be great to see Watson championing some of the producers who are working hard to disrupt the mainstream porn industry rather than implying that all porn is bad by default.
@waitingirl13‘s blog post dives right into the crappy double standard we seem to have that some kinds of porn are acceptable (erotica, for instance) where others are wrong.
“Romance is acceptable, in the way erotica is acceptable, and porn is not. Porn does not tell the big lies. Oh it tells little ones, that there is never shit after anal, that no one has fanny farts, that people with dicks get hard in seconds, and that people with vaginas never need lube, but it does not tell the big lies, that sex means love, that having sex with someone means they will love you, that the kind of sex you have determines your moral worth.”
You should also check out Ms Naughty’s blog: ‘If only there were feminist porn.’ Ms Naughty is a feminist pornographer, so you can imagine how unchuffed she is with Watson’s comments.
The bad: porn bollocks again
Beware before you click this link – DoNotLink is down at the time of writing so this goes straight to the source. Tracey Cox wrote an article in the MailOnline – Does your man prefer porn to you?
There are so many things that are horrible about it I can barely list them all. For starters it’s framed entirely as if porn is a ‘male’ phenomenon, and not something women watch (this is not true – women watch a lot of porn). It lists reasons why men might watch porn. Reassuringly, she explains to wives/girlfriends that it’s probably not their fault, but then blows it with:
“Don’t get me wrong, if you’ve dramatically changed appearance or been a right so-and-so, it might be you.”
She also lists the ‘dangers’ of porn:
“It goes without saying that sex involving children or violence not only warrants a confrontation but a possible call to the police.”
A ‘possible’ call to the police? If there are kids in it, you definitely call the police, mate. What’s more, lumping ‘violence’, which could include consensual BDSM, with actual child abuse is just… holy shit.
Other dangers?
“But there’s also danger if he’s focusing exclusively on one particular area – even something relatively innocent like women with enormous breasts.
“If that’s all he watches, he’ll train his brain and his penis to only become aroused with a certain stimuli.”
Consider the implications if this were actually true: you could shape someone’s entire sexuality with some Clockwork-Orange-style brainwashing.
But the bit which made me saddest was this:
“Even if he’s living with you or married, there’s still a certain amount of cajoling, kissing and foreplay before you deliver the goods via oral sex or intercourse.”
‘Cajoling’? ‘Deliver the goods’? Why would you be a sex writer if you hate sex and porn so much? What message are you giving people who read this – that it’s acceptable to ‘cajole’ your partner, and you have to ‘give up the goods’ if they do?
Get all the way to fuck and stay there.
13 Comments
Anything ever written for ‘Femail’ or the Mail in general as something in the guise of female empowerment is, without fail, anything but.
Ah, yeah. Thing is though, the person who wrote this isn’t just a journalist or what have you – she’s apparently a ‘sex advice expert.’ Which makes it more frustrating I think. Like, how can you be a sex advice expert and still believe such weirdly Victorian things about sex within marriage? Or that porn literally alters your brain?! Grr.
Well the image of someone trying to change someone’s sexual preferences with a Clockwork Orange style brainwashing routine is rediculous. It’s just a pity that some ‘Gay treatment centres’ in America do exactly that, forcing young people who come out to watch shed loads of heterosexual porn in an attempt to ‘Cure’ them.
Unfortunately our attitudes to sex are still shockingly Victorian and I don’t doubt this scaremongering bollocks will have a bunch of people writing in either to agree or ask for help wih their Husband/Son’s addiction. People love to place blame for their own issues anywhere else and things like this are just the latest. I don’t doubt some pillock a century ago was arguing that women showing an ankle in public was destroying marriages by tempting husbands to stray.
I tried surprising the postman last week, in my ‘tight but about to fall off and tits flop out’ dungarees but he gasped in horror and ran off……………damn those porn vids!
On a serious note – how can she write ‘possibly warrants a call to the police’ – come on, it doesn’t ‘possibly’ it DOES need a call to the police. Porn is enjoyable for all those (legal age and up) but once those boundaries are illegally broken, it’s a whole different ball game!
Makes you question her ability to judge correctly tbh
Does anyone have a link to Emma Watson’s comments?
Here you are – it’s linked through from @waitingirl13’s piece: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/emma-watson-calls-for-feminist-alternatives-to-pornography-during-discussion-with-gloria-steinem-a6895146.html
Btw, on this one: they should really be called ‘Gloria Steinem’s comments on porn’. I think Watson was being unfairly damned in the blogs linked above. The Independent obviously put her at the top of the piece as she’s much more famous, but the article content suggests it was actually mostly Steinem reheating her familiar rant about porn, while Watson was going “Mmm, I agree”. The only quote from her in the article barely says anything at all.
I don’t want to defend the daily mail. The article is shit. But so was the one attacking and blatantly misrepresenting Emma Watson. It says :
‘The only sex which is acceptable to Watson is something based on warm fuzziness, where you stroke kittens for several hours before the screen fade of missionary position sex where no one every sweats, or swears, or cries or has anything as messy as an orgasm. Emma Watson approved sex sounds like the genuine little death, and, frankly you will have to pay me to have something so dull and patriarchally approved. ‘
But Emma is promoting a site called OMGYes, and specifically it is frank about the female body , contains explicit material , and is all about achieving orgasms. The site doesn’t contain BDSM porn ( you don’t have to like it) but this vicious description of someone as prude and sexless seems to be based on nothing but class prejudice (who cares about some posh girl’s actual views or the efforts she’s trying to make to fight sexism right?). What turns Emma on offends this blogger as dull – but why on earth does she think Emma’s ideas of (dull) sex is patriarchal and boring in a way that porn isn’t? She also conflates Emma’s criticism of porn with sexual acts one chooses to do in private with their own partner(s). Of which Emma expressed no opinion. There’s a big difference for many feminists. You don’t have to like porn to have imaginative and exciting sex. GOTN you frequently suggest people should not criticise other’s sexual desires, but here you are admonishing other peoples sexual desires. You are disingenuously declaring them Victorian or anti orgasm or anti sex, because what? They don’t involve watching porn??! Some might think patriarchal dominance of women and violence against women is Victorian. Just like the stuff you are happy to gloat you fantasise about during sex. Didn’t they invent the cane? But so what? What matters here, is that you have massively over simplified the issue by implying feminists have only two choices if they want to get off – Porn or Disney erotica. I see them as the same thing. Both constrain our sexual imaginations to ideas firmly rooted in the patriarchal oppression of women. And since we can now purchase the 50 shades of grey teddy bear complete with with pink fluffy handcuffs, the circle is complete. Why position monogamous people as more blindly traditional or less emotionally evolved than you anyway? Women can have good sex and not want or condone either porn , sexist themed BDSM or hallmark fairytale ‘erotica’ ( the definition of erotica is no more absolute than porn- much of which you would find repulsive and abusive too- so why make sweeping definitions of one and not the other). What makes you the sex expert? Why attack women who want more ways to think about sex that doesn’t involve violence or daddy rape play or princess fairy tail romances or any other patriarchal bullshit? Even if you think there is such a thing as feminist porn, saying there is ‘absolutely shitloads’ is intellectually dishonest, or perhaps just a case of confirmation bias. Try googling feminist porn then try googling dog porn , or shit porn, or teen rape or feminist bitch gets anal. Here’s someone who’s actually done some research – this author tried to find “feminist porn” online:
http://rageagainstthemanchine.com/2010/12/20/get-on-the-fucking-ball-janitors/
The results are staggeringly different to your claims.
To be fair, that article is now showing its age (it’s from 2010) , but only because things have got much worse. You see, men calling women whores whilst choking them or mock raping teen girls can be feminist now too, and women profiteering from it proves it is feminist ! Much of what most people call feminist porn is near indistinguishable from mainstream video porn, except (possibly) for better working conditions for these women. That doesn’t make it feminist. It still glamorises and glorifies male abuse of women no matter what the intent. Just because it’s feminist for women to be able to choose their own sexual path in life as equally as men can and do, doesn’t mean the choices are themselves feminist. It doesn’t make it harmless to other women when you video and market those sexual behaviours to others. To say women should be free to say, enjoy and do anything they like or it’s not feminism (unless you are Emma Watson) is ludicrous. Many women have had enough of seeing shitty degrading misogynistic rape porn. It’s hard to escape thinking about it even when you aren’t looking for it. We don’t need women to add to it. It doesn’t matter what it feels like on the inside. If you produce porn you are marketing and profiteering from what sex looks like on the outside. And for most of us, it looks and feels degrading. Emma Watson is a tiny voice drowning in a sea of porn. She seems to be trying to think about something different. She deserves the space to try. Porn has had its say long enough.
Wow. I’ve approved your comment only because I’m so surprised. I’ll get back to you properly later
Right, here goes. First thing’s first: most of your comment is taking direct issue with the other blog, so I’m surprised that you’ve written your long screed here yet only a short bit over on the blog you’re actually annoyed about. That’s odd. But let’s get on with this anyway.
– You’ve linked to a blog post that’s over 5 years old which laments lack of feminist porn. You’re right, it’s massively out of date. Here’s a better link: http://www.feministpornguide.com/sites.html What’s more, that blog post is bizarre in the extreme. They googled things like ‘violent porn’ and were surprised that violent porn showed up in the results? I look forward to the news at 11.
– Emma Watson recommended ‘OMGYes’, which is not porn. Nor is it an alternative to porn. Calling it such is an insult to what the site is trying to do, and is patronising *in the extreme* to women – implying that we do not need/enjoy erotic stimulation. I like OMGYes, and I think the site’s doing interesting things. But it is not porn.
– “Emma Watson is a tiny voice drowning in a sea of porn” – no, she is a celebrity who has huge influence. One of the massive massive problems for people who are trying to do genuinely new, interesting, ethical, feminist things with porn is publicity. Mainstream porn (which yes is often misogynist) has huge marketing and PR budgets. So indie porn producers rely on word of mouth. Emma Watson could have used her not insignificant influence to champion some of the people who are making porn that is ethical. She didn’t. And ironically, one of the reasons you might be finding it difficult to *find* the feminist porn that’s out there is because of things like this: people lamenting the lack of it without shouting about the genuinely great alternatives.
– You say the feminist porn you’ve seen “still glamorises and glorifies male abuse of women no matter what the intent.” Why so heteronormative? Some of my best friends make queer porn.
– “men calling women whores whilst choking them or mock raping teen girls can be feminist now too, and women profiteering from it proves it is feminist”
OK, seriously now – what porn are you watching? It sounds like you have – as in the blog post you linked to – googled something like ‘chokefuck’ and then been fucking surprised to find videos of people getting chokefucked. Try searching for something you actually like instead, maybe? I’m also going to take exception to the way you seem to describe any kind of sex which is non-vanilla as if it is inherently bad in and of itself. Maybe you should explore that. Do you have an issue with two people having consensual sex if that sex happens to include choking? Because if so you probably shouldn’t be reading this blog, and I’ve no idea what got you here.
Which leads me neatly on to my final point:
– “Just like the stuff you are happy to gloat you fantasise about during sex.”
Gloat.
*Gloat*
What a horrible word. And weird, too. Why do you think I’d be proud of myself just for having one particular fantasy over another? Is it, perhaps, because you think that *your* fantasies are somehow better than other people’s? Are you here to save me from the horrible consensual sex that I have with other consenting adults?
– I pasted it here to validate your sense of importance? Or mine? OR maybe because you have more influence in the ‘feminist’ porn club (just a guess) OR maybe, given how bigoted the other blogger was, it seemed like a lost cause there.
– You really missed the point. I wasn’t surprised by the number of violent porn hits, I was surprised by the low number of feminist porn hits in comparison. I could have just typed in ‘porn’ but that would, I suspect not help your case. That was the point I was making. Also I recommend this link :’http://www.feministcurrent.com/2015/07/17/so-what-if-your-porn-is-feminist/’ I can’t put it better than this.
– ‘Calling it such [porn] is an insult to what the site is trying to do, and is patronising *in the extreme* to women’
What? Are you gaslighting me? I didn’t say OMGYes was porn. Where did I say that? You’ve missed my point, again. It is something entirely different. I agree. I support what shes trying to do. Its you who said you didn’t: ‘This week Emma Watson said that she’d like to see ‘feminist alternatives to porn.’ As opposed to just, you know, feminist porn ‘ You seem to be saying she should not promote feminist alternatives to porn, but porn. And yet now say you like her site , and also agree its not porn. So I haven’t a clue what you are saying here though I’m glad you have changed your mind if you have . She doesn’t say nor imply women don’t need want erotic simulation. That’s what she thinks her site does. People want lots of stuff. She just thinks that some stuff isn’t ethical.
– yes she is using her celebrity to promote what she believes in, which his OMGyes. And its a refreshing change from the gazillion celebs who promote sexism and porn for money. Never mind the many liberal feminists like you who also promote porn. So even as a celebrity she is still drowning in porn. I’m glad her voice can be heard. Why would or should she promote stuff she doesn’t like or believe is ethical? And why attack her, shes not cutting into your market? Especially if there is ‘absolutely shitloads’ as you claim. If only someone would! Shes promoting ‘interesting things’ right? . So why not pick on famous man or woman who isn’t, or who does believe in ‘feminist’ porn but doesn’t bother to promote it.
-well blow me, must be because i’m transphobe/queerphobe. Or its maybe because MOST feminist porn I have seen is hetero-normative. Thats like saying ‘why say women are oppressed by men, some of my best friends are men who arent oppressive. Why so sexist? #NOTALLMEN #NOTALLPORN yadda yadda yadda. Also, you think most gay or queer porn isn’t patriarchal and oppressive because its its not hetero-normative? I would describe myself as queer. The LGBTQ community are not all pro porn and many are radical feminists. So don’t give me this shit. Its insulting to them and me.
Ok this stuff exists, I have seen it. You glamorize violent domination and being choked by on your own blog so I’m not going to bother linking. ‘ I’m also going to take exception to the way you seem to describe any kind of sex which is non-vanilla as if it is inherently bad in and of itself’ Wow did you not read anything I wrote, about disney erotica vs porn. What makes you think I like vanilla, whatever the fuck that is. Are you trying to frame me again as a right wing prude because I don’t like or approve of violent porn? And besides why do you insist that what someone does in the bedroom has anything to with approving it in porn. Even if I was having ‘vanilla’ sex or BDSM sex , doesn’t mean I would approve of porn with vanilla or BDSM sex.
Do you have an issue with two people having consensual sex if that sex happens to include choking?
Nope not at all, in the right context. And consent / choice isn’t that simple. I don’t think we need to go into that, because I think (or hope) you already know this. We CAN consent to really really bad shit. I have a shit job, I consent to work there, I even smile enthusiastically. I once consented to taking a drug that nearly killed me. I have consented to BDSM that has caused me mental harm. What got me here? Well, I enjoyed using porn. But as a feminist, I didnt like using it, your site, and others got me into feminist porn and into experimenting with BDSM. And now I regret it. I have since learned a lot more about feminism, and the harm I was doing to others as well as myself, and the harm the industry does to women, and the harm men and women do to women (and sometimes men) because of it. Don get me wrong, I understand the appeal of porn and why people want it. I don’t think you or other feminist porn advocates have any bad intentions (most of them don’t at least) , far from it. I have seen you write some good articles on feminist issues. But I don’t think porn , in any form is good for feminism, let alone violent porn, so I’m going to challenge those it with good conscience. No my fantasies are not better than others, or yours. That’s why I don’t sell them. Im here to challenge oppression of women caused by the porn industry. Just because it doesn’t oppress you, doesn’t mean its not oppressing the rest of society. I was only prompted to comment because I was so annoyed that you think Emma Watson needs to be saved from the sexless, joyless, prudish life you have decided she is having, because of some atrocious and bigoted blog post, all because she doesn’t enjoy porn. I thought you would have more sense.
“I wasn’t surprised by the number of violent porn hits, I was surprised by the low number of feminist porn hits in comparison”
OK, I’m not sure I get it. I thought you were arguing for no porn at all, but then this point sort of implies that you think there should be more feminist porn? I would like for ethical porn to be the stuff which dominates in search. That it doesn’t is one of the things I’d like people like Emma Watson to help change, by championing people who are doing it better, then I’m back round to the point I was making above.
“What? Are you gaslighting me? I didn’t say OMGYes was porn.”
Emma Watson proposed it as a ‘feminist alternative to porn’ and that is what I am objecting to. I think – as I said above – that’s patronising. OMGYes does something pretty interesting, but it isn’t porn. To propose it as a feminist alternative to porn is to imply that women don’t want/need/desire erotic material, and that our sexuality can and should be sated by a website whose purpose is educational. I think that’s bizarre.
To the rest of your comment: I see where you’re coming from, but obviously we are talking from radically different positions here. I can’t expect to persuade you, and I think it’d be a waste of my time to try. But for others who come across this thread, I’d urge you to check out some of the feminist porn here: http://www.feministpornguide.com/ Not all my thing, and not all for everyone, but a good start I think.