Does porn exploit women and is it abusive and misogynistic?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Part of the exploitive nature of porn is due to the attempts to suppress it by legislation, usually backed by religious hypocrites who get horny like normal humans. If a hot school teacher could get a legitimate summer job job making sex tapes without the community going hermatile the underworld aspect of the industry would shoot become irrelevant.

[Audley Strange]

Well certainly the long term prohibition of it makes it a traditionally organised criminal activity, exactly like prostitution.

I think we can see a pattern, that is, prohibition for moral reasons leaves that which is prohibited in the hands of the amoral.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Well certainly the long term prohibition of it makes it a traditionally organised criminal activity, exactly like prostitution.

I think we can see a pattern, that is, prohibition for moral reasons leaves that which is prohibited in the hands of the amoral.

"If fucking is outlawed, only outlaws will fuck."

[Thinking Aloud]

You can't tar all porn with the same brush. No doubt there are studios and producers who are genuine scum, dealing in the misery of their 'stars' to make money; on the other hand, there are clearly studios and producers who are as above board as it's possible to be, in an industry that has to hide in the shadows. And then there are people who make their own porn, privately or as their own business. Are they exploiting themselves?

I accept that a lot of current porn seems to be very debasing in its "storyline", and personally I don't have much time for that, so I'll look for something more genuine and pleasant. As I understand it, the whole industry is suffering at the moment due to the loss of hard-copy sales and the increase in streaming , so whether it will survive as we see it now remains to be seen. For the scum end, if there's no money, they won't do it.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

You can't tar all porn with the same brush. No doubt there are studios and producers who are genuine scum, dealing in the misery of their 'stars' to make money; on the other hand, there are clearly studios and producers who are as above board as it's possible to be, in an industry that has to hide in the shadows. And then there are people who make their own porn, privately or as their own business. Are they exploiting themselves?

I accept that a lot of current porn seems to be very debasing in its "storyline", and personally I don't have much time for that, so I'll look for something more genuine and pleasant. As I understand it, the whole industry is suffering at the moment due to the loss of hard-copy sales and the increase in streaming , so whether it will survive as we see it now remains to be seen. For the scum end, if there's no money, they won't do it.

Homemade porn, to satisfy some exhibitionistic fantasy perhaps, would most likely be 100% consensual. Extend that to people who like to fuck in public and enjoy the idea that many unknown people are going to be fapping to the images and you have a segment of the industry that isn't coercive at all, but actually desirable to the participants.

And that brings up the need to think of "coercive" as opposed to or in conjunction with "exploitive".

[Thinking Aloud]

Yup.

A couple of months ago, I read an interesting blog by a successful porn actress, who was discussing the differences between her 'real life' sex life, and the roles she plays on screen. Porn is starting to be dictated by the credit-card operators who handle payments, and who don't want to be associated with particular depictions on screen - one that springs to mind is that her particular studio no longer allows a person receiving oral sex to place their hands on the head of the giver, lest it be seen as 'forcing'. And so on, particularly with anything that might be considered forcible. So the 'reputable' end of the spectrum is having bits of its output 'cleaned up' for it by the money-changers, at the expense of genuine passion on camera, if her comments were anything to go by (she enjoys a bit of rough!).

Of course, the number of successful female porn stars is relatively small, compared to the number of women in porn, so one gets a biased view of the industry when reading accounts from those who've done well in it. Nevertheless, it's maybe a useful indicator of trends.

[Coito ergo sum]

Where a person abuses another person it's abusive.

Porn qua porn is not abusive, but it can be abusive if in the porn a person is abused.

whether the abusive nature of something is something that ought to be prohibited legally is another thing altogether.

The primary definition of "abuse" is to misuse -- to use improperly. That is to say, in porn to "abuse" a person would be to use her improperly. This seems a very vague and difficult to control quality which boils down to propriety. Proper porn or improper porn, or is all sex on film "improper" and therefore an "abuse?"

A secondary meaning of "abuse" is to treat in an harmful, injurious or offensive way. Well, "offensive" of course is in the eye of the beholder. Some people think Playboy magazine is offensive. Harmful and injurious? I fail to see how sex is per se harmful or injurious to women, and therefore the act of having sex on film would also, per se, not be harmful or injurious. I think what people really mean when they say that porn is abusive is that it is harmful and injurious to women in general, as a sex, because it somehow encourages hatred of women or discrimination against women by men. This I take issue with as not being supported by any evidence. It sounds good - like the allegation that violent video games cause people to act violently -- well, there is no evidence for that at all either.

So, in the end -- I would say that porn is abusive where a person involved does not consent to the sex or the filming. The lack of consent is an injury and harm to the person involved, man or woman. However, sexual interactions are complicated - some people engage in "degrading" sexual interactions in the bedroom and you'd not know it from their public life -- like the CEO who wants his cock stepped on or to play diaper role-playing games in the bedroom. Is he being "abused" if someone films or entertains these fantasies? I don't think so.

If a person is taken advantage of where he or she is on drugs or is not in their right mind, and the filmmaker knows it, and plays on their weaknesses to make them do something they would not otherwise want to do, well, that too can be harmful and injurious, although difficult to identify in some circumstances.

[Coito ergo sum]

As for as "exploiting" women -- well, yes, in the same way it exploits men, who are as often depicted in the acts on film as women are. And, it's the same exploitation as an actor or actress in a mainstream movie or tv program. The actors are being exploited to make money. If an actor or actress, porn or otherwise, will not help generate a profit, the filmmaker will want to use someone else. So, it's an exploitation.

I think the word "exploit" is sometimes used, however, to mean "unfair" exploitation -- in other words, if they're paid well, it's not considered exploitation anymore. Well, that may be -- but, the fact is that in porn women by and large make much more than men, and nowadays there are women in the power positions in porn companies. Jenna Jameson, one of the big porn stars of the 1990s, reports never having been abused as a porn star, and she ended up owning a studio and making millions. Are there women (and men) who starred in porn movies that paid them very little -- certainly. That's like any other industry, though. Some people just settle for less money because of need, lack of sophistication, lack of intelligence or savvy, etc. So, whether someone is being treated unfairly in the porn industry is about the same as in any other industry. It can't be generalized.

And, then too about the misogyny. Watching porn and enjoying it does not mean the viewer is misogynistic. People can love and respect women and get off on porn just as much as they can love and respect men and get off on porn. Misogyny being the hatred or fear of women -- I fail to see how porn in general -- sexual depictions in the media - constitute in and of themselves "misogyny." That one I'd need to see explained. I think the people who call it misogyny have an unhealthy attitude toward sex in general in that they think the acts of sexual contact themselves are misogynistic and male dominated, or that male sexual fantasies are somehow hateful toward women or invalid by nature. Some probably are as the range of sexual fantasy is nearly infinite - some people get off on hurting people or treating people badly -- and those viewers may be misogyniistic. However, the porn itself is not misogynistic.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I saw a short on one of the video channels the other day that reminded me so much of encounter nearly thirty years ago that I almost freaked. It was a good thing, and I'm glad it was out there.

[Robert_S]

Yup.

A couple of months ago, I read an interesting blog by a successful porn actress, who was discussing the differences between her 'real life' sex life, and the roles she plays on screen. Porn is starting to be dictated by the credit-card operators who handle payments, and who don't want to be associated with particular depictions on screen - one that springs to mind is that her particular studio no longer allows a person receiving oral sex to place their hands on the head of the giver, lest it be seen as 'forcing'. And so on, particularly with anything that might be considered forcible. So the 'reputable' end of the spectrum is having bits of its output 'cleaned up' for it by the money-changers, at the expense of genuine passion on camera, if her comments were anything to go by (she enjoys a bit of rough!).

Of course, the number of successful female porn stars is relatively small, compared to the number of women in porn, so one gets a biased view of the industry when reading accounts from those who've done well in it. Nevertheless, it's maybe a useful indicator of trends.

I've noticed a lot more rough stuff over the years. So, are people being pressured into rough stuff by producers and/or the marketplace or do more women like it rough than we once thought?

I once heard a woman on another radio program say that she didn't like porn because it seemed women didn't have as much to offer any more. If a man can be more satisfied by porn now that there's an endless variety and availability, does that mean that women have less sexual power over men? If so, could that be part of the reason some women disapprove of it?

[En_Route]

its impossible to suppress or modify the demand, so the topic is largely academic.

[mistermack]

I would never pay for porn, no matter what the situation.
I'll have a look if it's free.

That's partly because I'm mean with my spending, but also it means that it's impossible for me to be complicit in any foul practice.
There would be very few people abused, if nobody paid. There would be a lot less porn and it might be a lot more amateur. But that's a good thing, and more of a turn on anyway.

[Beatsong]

I think "mainstream" porn is exploitative and debasing.

What does that last part mean, in this context?

[Pappa]

I think "mainstream" porn is exploitative and debasing.

What does that last part mean, in this context?

I agree with some sentiments expressed earlier in the thread about office work (or whatever) being exploitative. I also think porn is only a special case because of the lingering prudishness in our societies.

Having said that, I still think porn can be considered exploitative and debasing because of the content of most mainstream porn, and how it's so contrary to how I assume most of these porn starlets would like to behave. The general pattern is that either some muscular hunk or some fat old dude gets sucked off, he deep-throats her almost to the point of vomiting, he bangs her for a bit, she rides him for a bit, he fucks her from behind, fucks her in the arse, she sucks him off, then he comes on her face.

[Beatsong]

So do you mean "debasing" in terms of its effect on the actress's own state of mind? And what does that then mean - that she loses self respect, or what?

Or do you mean "debasing" in terms of the effect upon the people who watch it?

Sorry I don't mean to be obtuse. It just seems like a very vague word carrying a lot of moral assumptions.