Monday, April 14, 2008

I really need to toss out my porn collection

And pick up more books like this, this and this. I remember when I tried to be a sex-poz feminist who argued for the legalization of prostitution and that pornography was OK. I was certainly not alone in that philosophy and after reading this article on feminist porn awards, I have to ask myself: "What the fuck were you thinking?"

I read and re-read this article that speaks with "filmmakers" about their feminist porn. It's funny how they try to justify their films as feminist. They try rationale like: let's not even define feminism. Or: I mean...what is feminism exactly? I think that is different for everybody.

I especially like the woman who reasoned that facials in her film were OK because, well, the female actors choose to have men ejaculate on their face. You know, because that was explained in the ultra-feminist interviews contained in the movie.

"But even with all the context and consent in the world, some sex acts are just more contentious than others. Perhaps the best example is the "facial," the ubiquitous mainstream porn moment in which a man ejaculating onto a woman's face or into her wide-open mouth. Some argue that if you're going to peddle facials in your film, you might as well forget about calling it feminist. Others argue that facials reflect the authentic sexuality of some women, and that in fact it's impossible to call any sex act inherently nonfeminist. Says Ray, "It makes me angry when people makes lists like, 'Oh, a woman receiving cunnilingus is feminist, but a woman receiving a facial is not feminist.'" Taormino felt strongly enough about the image to leave facials out of her Expert Guide to Oral Sex instructional sex videos, but subsequently decided that her performers' ability to make their own choices and contextualize them onscreen was more important than axing any one image, and thus facials make an appearance in her reality series. Whether specific sex acts can be considered feminist or
nonfeminist is, simply, murky territory."


Whoever needs to watch an instructional video on how to perform oral sex shouldn't be having sex if you ask me. Watch a video OR ask your partner what feels good to them?

And this snippet is nothing short of sickening:

This win was, to put it mildly, unprecedented. "Gonzo" technically refers to a style of porn that places the camera directly into the scene, but in recent years the term has become shorthand for films that depict women being choked, insulted, spit on, and worse. "It's essentially become an antiporn feminist's worst nightmare come true" says Taormino. "I've always made the joke that if you're going to go to all the trouble of sticking my head in a toilet -- a dominant image in some gonzo porn -- at least I better get a really good orgasm out of it. But we're seeing this pent-up aggression and hostility towards women; [there's] rough sex, but it's not clear that they're consenting to it, and it's clear that they're not getting off on it, because we never get to see their pleasure."

And with titles such as Attention Whores 6 ("We are just sex toys sent here for your amusement") and Teens for Cash 7 ("Nothing can stop these dirty old men from finding dumb and desperate teens who will do anything for a little bit of dough") competing in the same category, it's pretty easy to imagine Taormino's film sticking out. "It was truly, truly shocking," she laughs. "It was a surprise to everyone in the industry."


I can't even answer the question of whether there is a such thing as feminist porn. My inclination is to say that there is no such thing. But like the existence of God, it will continue to be a debatable subject with many sides and perspectives. Of course, whatever side I am on is right.

No comments: