Misogynistic porn

[Tubbsalot]

My point is that the misogyny in question is the part that I described as "to do things with your own body and image you don't want to". They are forced to an extent, by life conditions, and the message it passes is surely not one of sex equality and sex-positiveness.

Right, and these are all complaints you could level at any job, because generally people are required to do things they don't like in order to continue living. That's certainly unfortunate, but it's not inherently worse than other cases.

If it is misogynistic, I'd rather say no, but if it is sexist... Surely is! Everything can be tainted by sexism in the way of celebration of male privilege and machismo to various degrees.

...that's blatantly untrue. Whether the content is sexist depends on the content. It's not an inherent attribute of all porn.

[IshCong]

There's certainly misogynistic porn out there but the solution is to fight misogyny, not to fight porn.



That's a good thing, unless by gay porn you mean either male solo porn or lesbian porn (which absolutely should not be a mostly male-oriented thing).

What's wrong with a guy getting off looking at two women doing it?

I'm inclined to say that they were trying to say that the problem arises if most of the porn of two women doing it is directed towards men. Not that it is inherently wrong for any porn involving two women to be directed at men. I imagine the reverse, two men doing it, is directed at women with some degree of frequency.
...
Based on yaoi, I'd actually be pretty dang sure of it.

[Occupied Deutschland]

Bit of a side-note, is there a 'union' at all for pornstars?

I was about to google 'pornstar union' but then kind'a reconsidered.

[Ponderosa]

Sometimes, I guess...?

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

Posted this in the other thread before realising this existed. Annoying.

Just because they consent to it, doesn't make it degrading as a whole. Just because someone like being degraded doesn't mean the way women are portrayed by the porn industry isn't degrading to women. Consent and degradation don't have anything to do with each other.

Ridiculous. Women aren't degraded by the mere existence of porn in which women are degraded. There's plenty of porn where men are degraded by women, but you'd have to be a fucking zealot to claim that it somehow damages the entire male gender.

This is pornography produced by consenting actors for consumption by individuals who enjoy it. The content is irrelevant. It doesn't matter whether a movie contains Nazi roleplay or whatever. It's just catering to fetishes. It's no more objectionable than regular porn.

Eh?!

I find Encyclopedia Dramatica and Portuguese Uncyclopedia more objectionable than English and Spanish Uncyclopedia because the first uses racism, sexism and homophobia and the second homophobia for humour purposes, while the latter do not.

I would be glad if I'd have a certain category of porn where straight sexuality is portrayed in a nice, realistic way, where both enjoy each other with respect, but it is kind of focused in men. Average straight porn is many times more crap than gay one and in up to 30% of cases I've come across I feel freaked out by the way woman act or men make them act, and would be glad if such kinds were regarded as extreme. In the same way most porn video sites censor videos with gay and bi content from the general search without the option for us opting out of it.

But then in the United States this is impossible, since all of the industry is just the government pretending it is a couple using the services of a certain firm to film their sexting.

[Warda]

Bit of a side-note, is there a 'union' at all for pornstars?

I was about to google 'pornstar union' but then kind'a reconsidered.

They prefer adult film star. But yeah

[IshCong]

Posted this in the other thread before realising this existed. Annoying.


Ridiculous. Women aren't degraded by the mere existence of porn in which women are degraded. There's plenty of porn where men are degraded by women, but you'd have to be a fucking zealot to claim that it somehow damages the entire male gender.

This is pornography produced by consenting actors for consumption by individuals who enjoy it. The content is irrelevant. It doesn't matter whether a movie contains Nazi roleplay or whatever. It's just catering to fetishes. It's no more objectionable than regular porn.

Eh?!

I find Encyclopedia Dramatica and Portuguese Uncyclopedia more objectionable than English and Spanish Uncyclopedia because the first uses racism, sexism and homophobia and the second homophobia for humour purposes, while the latter do not.

I would be glad if I'd have a certain category of porn where straight sexuality is portrayed in a nice, realistic way, where both enjoy each other with respect, but it is kind of focused in men. Average straight porn is many times more crap than gay one and in up to 30% of cases I've come across I feel freaked out by the way woman act or men make them act, and would be glad if such kinds were regarded as extreme. In the same way most porn video sites censor videos with gay and bi content from the general search without the option for us opting out of it.

But then in the United States this is impossible, since all of the industry is just the government pretending it is a couple using the services of a certain firm to film their sexting.

I'm not sure whether you mean the actions of the individuals creep you out, or the acting in general creeps you out. Either way 'creeps HIRdJ out' doesn't mean much, but if it is just the latter, porn actors aren't usually the best actors. That much seems constant, at least.

[Nailed to the Perch]

http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-what-female-porn-stars-get-paid-for-different-types-of-scenes-2012-11

Huh.
As a side note, this seemed interesting to me, "upward of $350,000 a year, while top male performers can make more than $100,000 annually."
Seems to imply male porn actors make far less than female porn actors.
I wonder why that is.

Supply and demand. The fact that straight men are by far the largest market of porn consumers should make it fairly obvious why the demand for specific female porn actors exceeds the demand for specific male ones.

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

My point is that the misogyny in question is the part that I described as "to do things with your own body and image you don't want to". They are forced to an extent, by life conditions, and the message it passes is surely not one of sex equality and sex-positiveness.

Right, and these are all complaints you could level at any job, because generally people are required to do things they don't like in order to continue living. That's certainly unfortunate, but it's not inherently worse than other cases.

If it is misogynistic, I'd rather say no, but if it is sexist... Surely is! Everything can be tainted by sexism in the way of celebration of male privilege and machismo to various degrees.

...that's blatantly untrue. Whether the content is sexist depends on the content. It's not an inherent attribute of all porn.

They shouldn't even do it because pornography is not exactly legal in the United States. The compensation should be standard in such cases.

I was not saying every porn is sexist. I was saying that porn that thinks women getting screwed up badly in degrading ways is a celebration of the phallus as a symbol. It is not wife-beating, woman-hating or woman-mocking, but it still is sexist in the definition of a lot of people. And pretty common sense among all minimally intellectualized people in my highly left-leaning coutry.

[Threlizdun]

See, the problem is that you, as well as many other people, think or come across with this mentality that somehow porn that displays something that you do not condone is somehow the death of the universe and you shame those women who actually engage, voluntarily, in said acts as well.

I agree with you in principle about the forced people in it, and it should be reformed that part. It does not mean, however, that women who consensually enter such a contract to be in a porn flick of such nature should be ashamed because you think they are promoting sexism, while they are doing what they enjoy.

I doubt that "porn star" is the desired career path of most of these people. They are given a choice of either acting out the misogynistic role or finding employment elsewhere, which again is probably difficult for most involved in the industry. I also am not sure how appropriate it is to talk about the "pleasure" they are experiencing. Those involved don't always see to be particularly enjoying themselves that much (unless their expressions of pleasure honestly do sound like terrible acting). In fact, many positions used for their visual appeal for an audience often offer very little pleasure to anyone involved. Yes, it is their choice to be in porn, but that doesn't really diminish the poor effort on the industry's part to appeal to women.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

-snip-

As someone who frequents Encyclopedia Dramatica, it isn't like they are doing a bad job at satire.

I mean, if you look at it, the entire site is a big fucking joke, which is its appeal, and there is nothing wrong with it as long as you remember it isn't meant to be taken seriously or that the ideas in the site are not held by the authors.

[Aurora Novus]

My point is that the misogyny in question is the part that I described as "to do things with your own body and image you don't want to".

That's not misogyny. That can be considered exploitation, oppression of the working class, or whatever terms that apply to working men and women in a Capitalist system. But that's not misogyny, and to call it such cheapens the term.

They are forced to an extent, by life conditions, and the message it passes is surely not one of sex equality and sex-positiveness.

I fail to see how it does not convey those messages. It woud seem any system which creates and encourages the production and openness of sexuality, is both sex-positive, and allowing sexual equality.

If it is misogynistic, I'd rather say no, but if it is sexist... Surely is! Everything can be tainted by sexism in the way of celebration of male privilege and machismo to various degrees.

I again, fail to see the problem of people making, and other people purchasing and getting off to, fantasies which involve dominant males. This hardly seems like a cause for moral outrage. At best your only serous complaint are working conditions, and whether or not porn stars really want to be doing what they do. Which again, leads only to criticism of the economic system we find ourselves in. It does not in any way broach upon social justice matters, in particular, sexual discrimination.

Just because to the average person it doesn't seem an equivalent of wife-beating, it doesn't mean it can't have a certain bias, and that this bias is to a large degree unjustified and that we should control it because just as in TV, we can't have every kind of shit being held as acceptable by our average person.

Every kind of shit (provided all parties consent) should be acceptable though. It's not immoral to enjoy a particularly dark sexual fantasy. I mean, hell, I describe myself as asexual (in that I'm not particularly attracted to any sex, or the human body), but I have a fetish of my own, and it's a lot fucking darker than "man slaps a bitch and fucks her". And I wouldn't ever dream of calling it sexist.

The world of fetish surely can go without those influences feminist denounce.

I disagree entirely, because the "influences" feminists denounce more often than not translate out to attempting to shame and control sexual fantasies they don't personally enjoy, which is disgraceful in my opinion.

As a male, I think it would make straight porn actually a lot more enjoyable.

As a biological male, I don't particularly find straight porn enjoyable at all. Sex itself is rather disgusting.

[IshCong]

Huh.
As a side note, this seemed interesting to me, "upward of $350,000 a year, while top male performers can make more than $100,000 annually."
Seems to imply male porn actors make far less than female porn actors.
I wonder why that is.

Supply and demand. The fact that straight men are by far the largest market of porn consumers should make it fairly obvious why the demand for specific female porn actors exceeds the demand for specific male ones.

But that's of porn consumers. If we're going by supply and demand, then there would have to be way more male actors in porn than female actors for them to be paid very much less. If I'm following you right.
Specific actors don't seem to be what this is referring to, so much as averages and general wages.

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

Eh?!

I find Encyclopedia Dramatica and Portuguese Uncyclopedia more objectionable than English and Spanish Uncyclopedia because the first uses racism, sexism and homophobia and the second homophobia for humour purposes, while the latter do not.

I would be glad if I'd have a certain category of porn where straight sexuality is portrayed in a nice, realistic way, where both enjoy each other with respect, but it is kind of focused in men. Average straight porn is many times more crap than gay one and in up to 30% of cases I've come across I feel freaked out by the way woman act or men make them act, and would be glad if such kinds were regarded as extreme. In the same way most porn video sites censor videos with gay and bi content from the general search without the option for us opting out of it.

But then in the United States this is impossible, since all of the industry is just the government pretending it is a couple using the services of a certain firm to film their sexting.

I'm not sure whether you mean the actions of the individuals creep you out, or the acting in general creeps you out. Either way 'creeps HIRdJ out' doesn't mean much, but if it is just the latter, porn actors aren't usually the best actors. That much seems constant, at least.

Gosh, did you ever watch gay porn?

The whole thing is different. It actually looks like two people fucking instead of two people being paid to make perverts' subconscious BDSM fetishes come true.

Straight porn male actors are pretty damn good and often much sexier and better than those on the gay scene, it is just that the project of the film is wholly wrong and what in real life would be the exception, in a world driven by the rules of the market is just the mainstream and those who don't like may not opt-out.

And then you guys come and say we are freaking out, that it is not because we live in a society where it is correct to use female-domination as a mean of appeal to male audience, or that this fact doesn't make it sexist in any degree, and/or that showing sexism in my screen is right because people are paid and pay for it (I didn't, and I surely know that many of the actors in the porn scene would make it in a way that is less freaking or just disgusting).

[Nailed to the Perch]

...because those of us who are decent people would prefer to live in a society in which sexism is not condoned and encouraged, seeing as we recognize that women are human beings? I'm a little staggered at the idea that "so why is sexism a problem?" is a serious question that requires addressing.

That's not what I asked.

I asked why this specific form of "sexism" that you've pointed out, is a problem.

Because media shapes society. Media that is sexist, racist, homophobic, or otherwise bigoted shapes society in ways that are sexist, racist, homophobic, or otherwise bigoted.

[Vazdania]

That's not what I asked.

I asked why this specific form of "sexism" that you've pointed out, is a problem.

Because media shapes society. Media that is sexist, racist, homophobic, or otherwise bigoted shapes society in ways that are sexist, racist, homophobic, or otherwise bigoted.

I'd say teen culture affects society, not media, while media may have an influence, Its what the Teens want that drives society.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

I doubt that "porn star" is the desired career path of most of these people. They are given a choice of either acting out the misogynistic role or finding employment elsewhere, which again is probably difficult for most involved in the industry.

I also am not sure how appropriate it is to talk about the "pleasure" they are experiencing. Those involved don't always see to be particularly enjoying themselves that much (unless their expressions of pleasure honestly do sound like terrible acting). In fact, many positions used for their visual appeal for an audience often offer very little pleasure to anyone involved. Yes, it is their choice to be in porn, but that doesn't really diminish the poor effort on the industry's part to appeal to women.

I doubt it as well, however this is what I am pretty much against, and indeed it should be reformed.

And yes, I do agree that the porn industry is doing a piss poor job at appealing to women, which should be rectified as well. I am not disputing any of that.

Also remember that not all women think in terms of how honorable is their job, oftentimes some women also think about exclusive monetary terms, and some even would do porn for a living seeing it can make more money than most things they would be doing. I am not saying it is right, but there's that consideration to make as well.

[Nailed to the Perch]

...because those of us who are decent people would prefer to live in a society in which sexism is not condoned and encouraged, seeing as we recognize that women are human beings? I'm a little staggered at the idea that "so why is sexism a problem?" is a serious question that requires addressing.

See, the problem is that you, as well as many other people, think or come across with this mentality that somehow porn that displays something that you do not condone is somehow the death of the universe and you shame those women who actually engage, voluntarily, in said acts as well.

I agree with you in principle about the forced people in it, and it should be reformed that part. It does not mean, however, that women who consensually enter such a contract to be in a porn flick of such nature should be ashamed because you think they are promoting sexism, while they are doing what they enjoy.

Snort. I love when people project made up arguments onto me. It's extra funny in this case, when you've inadvertently picked quite possibly the single most inappropriate poster on this site to accuse of shaming women who enjoy acts that could be construed as degrading.

Perhaps, rather than telling me what I do, you should try reading what I actually say. It's crazy, but it just might work!

[Occupied Deutschland]

That's not what I asked.

I asked why this specific form of "sexism" that you've pointed out, is a problem.

Because media shapes society. Media that is sexist, racist, homophobic, or otherwise bigoted shapes society in ways that are sexist, racist, homophobic, or otherwise bigoted.

So we must ban/disapprove of porn that's too 'extreme', stand-up specials that feature any kind of stereotypes, and every Richard Pryor movie ever made?

What a dull, soulless world.

[Tubbsalot]

I find Encyclopedia Dramatica and Portuguese Uncyclopedia more objectionable than English and Spanish Uncyclopedia because the first uses racism, sexism and homophobia and the second homophobia for humour purposes, while the latter do not.

Yeah, but sex is different from a lot of other content. If you prefer black people, normally that's considered racism; in the context of sexuality it's more like an aesthetic preference, and one which isn't condemned.

If you find that such content makes you uncomfortable, quite reasonably, then feel free to not read/watch it. That's not much of an argument for eradication, though.

I would be glad if I'd have a certain category of porn where straight sexuality is portrayed in a nice, realistic way, where both enjoy each other with respect, but it is kind of focused in men.

Most porn is male-focused, therefore you, a male, don't enjoy much of it?

Are you sure you've correctly identified the issue here?

They shouldn't even do it because pornography is not exactly legal in the United States. The compensation should be standard in such cases.

I was not saying every porn is sexist. I was saying that porn that thinks women getting screwed up badly in degrading ways is a celebration of the phallus as a symbol. It is not wife-beating, woman-hating or woman-mocking, but it still is sexist in the definition of a lot of people. And pretty common sense among all minimally intellectualized people in my highly left-leaning coutry.

Doing porn is illegal in the US...? I'm... pretty much 100% certain that's not true.

Again, if you find that "celebration of the phallus" or sexist tones in porn aren't something you agree with, feel free not to watch it. Unless you can come up with a more compelling reason than "I don't enjoy it" you're not showing that it's undesirable in any other way.

[Nailed to the Perch]

Because media shapes society. Media that is sexist, racist, homophobic, or otherwise bigoted shapes society in ways that are sexist, racist, homophobic, or otherwise bigoted.

So we must ban/disapprove of porn that's too 'extreme', stand-up specials that feature any kind of stereotypes, and every Richard Pryor movie ever made?

What a dull, soulless world.

Please link me to where I proposed banning porn, stand-up specials, or Richard Pryor movies.

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

-snip-

As someone who frequents Encyclopedia Dramatica, it isn't like they are doing a bad job at satire.

I mean, if you look at it, the entire site is a big fucking joke, which is its appeal, and there is nothing wrong with it as long as you remember it isn't meant to be taken seriously or that the ideas in the site are not held by the authors.

I seriously imagined that.

I used this as an example for the average person to understand my point.

If we can have something without the questionable content that is regarded as equally good or even better for most people, why can't we just get rid of the questionable content? It doesn't make sense.

Even if the mentality of the consumers is that I find weird, they would understand sooner or later if they compared and look for their niche where they would still find the ol' good phallus cult to the most questionable levels that "makes feminists offended" (their common sense).

[Occupied Deutschland]

So we must ban/disapprove of porn that's too 'extreme', stand-up specials that feature any kind of stereotypes, and every Richard Pryor movie ever made?

What a dull, soulless world.

Please link me to where I proposed banning porn, stand-up specials, or Richard Pryor movies.

Hence why I added in 'dissaprove of'.

[IshCong]

I'm not sure whether you mean the actions of the individuals creep you out, or the acting in general creeps you out. Either way 'creeps HIRdJ out' doesn't mean much, but if it is just the latter, porn actors aren't usually the best actors. That much seems constant, at least.

Gosh, did you ever watch gay porn?

As a heterosexual, though I often come across gay porn, I almost never view it. =T

The whole thing is different. It actually looks like two people fucking instead of two people being paid to make perverts' subconscious BDSM fetishes come true.

Straight porn male actors are pretty damn good and often much sexier and better than those on the gay scene, it is just that the project of the film is wholly wrong and what in real life would be the exception, in a world driven by the rules of the market is just the mainstream and those who don't like may not opt-out.

So, you're saying you think the actual acts they undertake are creepy? That's highly subjective, you know. I'm pretty sure the people who like that sort of porn don't find it creepy.

And then you guys come and say we are freaking out, that it is not because we live in a society where it is correct to use female-domination as a mean of appeal to male audience,

It's also used as a means to appeal to female audiences. Likewise, domination of men is used to appeal to both female and male audiences. I'm not seeing the problem here. Rape play isn't rape. Domination play isn't domination. Consenting adults who aren't being coerced really aren't being dominated.

or that this fact doesn't make it sexist in any degree, and/or that showing sexism in my screen is right because people are paid and pay for it (I didn't, and I surely know that many of the actors in the porn scene would make it in a way that is less freaking or just disgusting).

It could just be the late hour, but I'm honestly not sure what you're saying here.

[Aurora Novus]

That's not what I asked.

I asked why this specific form of "sexism" that you've pointed out, is a problem.

Because media shapes society.

Yes and no. It's more of a mutual thing. Society shapes media, which can shape society in return. It's not one-sided.

Case in point: If people did not already like certain kinds of sexual expression, that kind of porn wouldn't be being made.

Media that is sexist, racist, homophobic, or otherwise bigoted shapes society in ways that are sexist, racist, homophobic, or otherwise bigoted.

Your point falls apart however when you realize billions of men and women enjoy porn you would label "sexist" or "racist", or what have you, without actually then using those ideas as a judgment of objective reality and goodness in day to day life. A person, for instance, who enjoys rape fantasies, and watches rape porn, doesn't necessarily mean they are about to go ou and rape someone in real life.

People have the capability to differ between fantasy and reality, and most of the time, do.

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with any form of sexuality. Any fetish or orientation is amoral, and as such, pandering to those fetishes and orientations by means of visual stimulation, is equally amoral, in of itself.

If someone enjoys "sexist" porn, and someone enjoys making "sexist" porn, and so they engage in a trade with one another, there has been no harm committed, and harm only enters the situation when another party (you) attempts to shame them and others for this. That is immoral.