25 replies to this topic

[Sammysaint]

Go Floyd

[Punk Rock Geek]

EatShitAndCry, on 29 December 2011 - 08:50 AM, said:

Really? In my mind feminist porn directors aren't "fighting the system", they're making shit that people (women, especially) will want to jerk it to.

Then why are we arguing?  I already agree that "feminist porn" isn't about fighting patriarchy.  The example I used was to show the ridiculousness of this idealism.

But then if we can agree on that much, let's call a spade a spade.  Sammy is using the word feminist loosely, as to mean "made-for-women".  The word she probably means to use is feminine.  It's that difference between feminist and feminine which is being ignored within this topic.  There is nothing feminist about marketing to women.  There is nothing revolutionary about marketing, period.

Quote

Could this be a PR move? I don't know, maybe. But I don't see a huge problem with it even if it is. Porn isn't the same as music. When punk music was co-opted by the capitalists and the market, it was a tragedy because it took something so underground and pure and completely changed it in the mainstream. When feminist porn is co-opted... more people see good porn?

First of all, I am not saying that feminist porn will be co-opted, because that would be to miss the point.  I am saying that feminism itself will be co-opted by the porn industry.  (And in fact, already has been.)  That is, they took something revolutionary, and they made it into a consumer product.

I just want to repeat this for you, because you're onto something, and you don't seem to realize it:  "When punk music was co-opted by the capitalists and the market, it was a tragedy because it took something so underground and pure and completely changed it in the mainstream."

You seem to understand the relationship quite well.

Punk music co-opted anarchism and other revolutionary messages, which later got co-opted again by the music industry itself.  Now really think about what that means; when it's actually a problem, and when it is not:  When the revolution that the punk bands are selling becomes about the look, the style, the character, the human being, then the revolution becomes superficial and the message gets lost.  

The problem is that pornography cannot get away from selling the human being.  It's what the business survives on.  While you can listen to music without ever seeing the people making it, you will not watch pornography if you personally find all of the models to be unattractive (by whatever standard you measure this is irrelevant).  A director who hires too many unpopular porn stars will inevitably go out of business.  This is a direct contradiction:  We have an industry which claims to be feminist, and yet hires on the criteria of attractiveness.  So I ask the simple question: By promoting the idea that more attractive women should earn more money, how is this industry at the same time rallying for the causes of women?  At best, any good it does would be canceled out by the damage it creates.  For a porn industry to be feminist, among other things, it would first need to treat every woman who walks in the door equally, regardless of how much money she brought in or could bring in.  Regardless of how attractive the market found her!  Does that make sense?  

I would say that the basis behind our disagreement, is that you are arguing from the perspective of a liberal feminist, while I am arguing from the perspective of a socialist feminist.
  

Quote

While I agree that marketing a human is deplorable, I don't think we can escape it in capitalism. It happens everywhere. A construction worker gets paralyzed. He can no longer work or support his family, and the company will find someone new. As anarchists, as much as we hate it, we must work within capitalism for the time being. And shit, dude, even EMMA GOLDMAN was a prostitute. Now do you want to tell me that she wasn't enough of an anarchist or feminist or something? Or she should have just quit her job and found a new one (and if you said yes, check yo privilege).

This is the most ridiculous straw-man attack I have yet seen from you.  Where on earth did I ever say that you can't be a feminist if you're in pornography?  I'll do you one better, and quote you the post (it was in reply to you!) where I said the very opposite:

I also recognize that a feminist can work inside of the porn industry, just as a feminist can work in web design. But there's a difference between feminist work, and a feminist who works.

You need to separate the person (the feminist porn director/the prostitute) from the industry ("feminist" porn).  

Secondly, whether or not we can escape capitalism is completely irrelevant to this discussion.  Just because I can't escape doing something does not mean that doing it is feminist or anarchist!

[Punk Rock Geek]

EatShitAndCry, on 29 December 2011 - 08:50 AM, said:

1. Maybe it's not empowerment that seeks market validation, maybe it's "I need money so I'm gonna fuck someone and sell the recording, but let's try to make it look like something I'd want to watch". Also, I find that a lot of feminist porn fucks heteronormative beauty standards and does their own shit.

2. I use Adblock because I think ads are annoying. You boycott porn because you find it offensive (I assume. You may be boycotting it because you don't find it sexy, which is fine). I don't actually have a problem with you not giving them money, I have a problem with the reason you're not giving them money. And working in porn and making shoes for quarters a day in China are not comparable, so don't act like they are.

1.  We are in agreement, minus it having anything to do with feminism.

2.  I don't find it attractive.  Hence, I'm not their market anyways.

I didn't say the acts were comparable.  I said your line of reasoning was comparable, and it doesn't work in either instance.

[Punk Rock Geek]

Kaitlyn, on 29 December 2011 - 07:26 AM, said:

i won't comment on the capitalistic theories because i know too little about it but feminist porn is still pretty much underground anyway.

I agree with Sammy: in feminist porn, the actors and actresses aren't treated like meat. it promotes fun sex and doesn't only consist of the sacrosanct trilogy: blowjob, vaginal and anal penetration (of the girl, that goes without saying).

feminist porn is also more diverse than traditional porn: the actors and actresses represent a broader spectrum of shapes and and gender expression. i find it very empowering to know that i'm also allowed to have sex even if i'm not skinny,pretty, with tight boobs, shaved,very feminine, submissive and willing to have my anus fucked.

and my favourite point: in feminist porn, people actually look like they enjoy themselves!  

also i'm pretty sure this porn is not produced for the mainstream male market but rather in the first place for the queer community.

I am not attacking you.  I am not saying that anyone is a bad person for making pornography, either.  Everything you listed is preferable to mainstream pornography, and I am glad it makes you feel the way you do.

But I feel the word feminist has been thrown around too much. I would not for example, claim that I work an anarchist job--not even if I promote anarchist ideas within my job, because I find wage-labor to be incompatible with anarchism.  And too, I find an appearance based industry completely incompatible with the ideas of feminism, regardless of which types of appearances earn money, and which do not.

[Kaitlyn]

Punk Rock Geek, on 29 December 2011 - 07:24 PM, said:

I am not attacking you.  

why would you need to say that??? this is a conversation, not a fight.

maybe our definitions of feminism differ. for me feminism means empowerment of women and genderqueer people.  what's yours?

[Punk Rock Geek]

Kaitlyn, on 30 December 2011 - 05:23 AM, said:

why would you need to say that??? this is a conversation, not a fight.

maybe our definitions of feminism differ. for me feminism means empowerment of women and genderqueer people.  what's yours?

Because some people are getting offended by what I'm saying, and like you said, I don't want this to be a fight!  

My definition is similar, but I find empowerment to be too broad of a concept in itself.  There are plenty of women who find all forms of pornography to be empowering, so would that make all pornography feminist?  You have made a distinction here between regular porn, and feminist porn, which tells me that you too have criteria for feminism beyond it being empowering to some women.  So I ask you your own question in return.

That there is a market for women does not make the market itself feminist.  It just makes it a typical market, which will attempt to extract profits from as many people as possible.  That women demanded better pay-rates and forced their entry into the workforce was an act of feminism.  That the market responded by selling to women was just rudimentary microeconomics. Similarly, I would say that fighting for better conditions for women within pornography is an act of feminism, but that the pornography itself is not.  For me, feminism is a struggle and not a product.