Debunking The Feminist Porn Narrative

VennerRoadStarred Page By VennerRoad, 6th Apr 2018 | Follow this author | RSS Feed | Short URL http://nut.bz/2l1pzxae/
Posted in Wikinut>Writing>Culture

If you came to this page hoping to ogle pictures of naked women, you will be disappointed, but if you stick around, you might learn something.

Debunking The Feminist Porn Narrative (1)

For decades now, feminist airheads have been protesting against the supposedly evil effects of pornography. They are not the only ones of course, religious fanatics have long attacked not only porn but any display of naked flesh, especially female flesh, as immoral, wicked, yadda, yadda, yadda. The feminist campaign though has been extremely dishonest, nasty, and at times even violent, but by the time you have finished this article you will probably be wondering what all the fuss has been about.

The campaign really started with the rise of second wave feminism, the misnamed women’s liberation. Women taking off their clothes for money was seen as demeaning, at some point the word objectification was brought into play; women were said to have been portrayed as mere sex objects, and that couldn’t be right. The dishonest arguments claimed increased consumption of pornography led to increased rates of sex crime, including rape, while some even claimed it was synonymous with rape. Then there is what has now become the sex trafficking narrative; no distinction was drawn between pornography and child pornography, and the lines were continually blurred in other areas.

Pre-eminent in this nonsense were two American women: Andrea Dworkin (1946-2005) and Catherine MacKinnon, who was born the same year and is still spewing out her poison in the guise of legal scholarship.

Dworkin was a physically repulsive woman, gratuitously so, although she was actually married twice. Her second husband is that saddest of creatures, a male feminist. When she was younger, MacKinnon was far from unattractive, and although she never married, she was once engaged to a male feminist, though it remains to be seen if she has ever had sex. If she has, she clearly didn’t enjoy it.

MacKinnon and Dworkin came up with a novel way of attacking pornography, they would redefine it as sexual harassment. This has been tried more recently by the English feminist Kat Banyard. MacKinnon and Dworkin’s anti-pornography ordinance resulted in American Booksellers Association v Hudnut, (1985), which saw the Seventh Circuit ruling it unconstitutional. (William Hudnut III was the Mayor of Indianapolis). So where do these ideas come from?

MacKinnon is a self-confessed Marxist who has an extreme obsession with equality, in particular sexual equality, whatever that means. Her position is that there can never be consent between two parties - men and women - unless there is total equality. Without this equality, sex is rape. In her 1991 polemic TOWARD A FEMINIST THEORY OF THE STATE, she actually writes (at page 146):

“Compare victims’ reports of rape with women’s reports of sex. They look a lot alike. Compare victims’ reports of rape with what pornography says is sex. They look a lot alike. In this light, the major distinction between intercourse (normal) and rape (abnormal) is that the normal happens so often that one cannot get anyone to see anything wrong with it.” .

It is difficult to know where to begin when arguing against this sort of insanity, but in The New Legal Puritanism Of Catherine MacKinnon - the last sentence, in fact - Dan Greenberg and Thomas H. Tobiason write:

“Professor MacKinnon has offered us a chance to radically diminish our First Amendment freedoms, based on dubious theories of human action. We must politely decline the invitation to join in such a dangerous undertaking”.

Debunking The Feminist Porn Narrative (2)

If the damage to freedom of expression inflicted on Americans by MacKinnon has been successfully overcome, the damage she has done on the pretext of combatting prostitution has not, but that is beyond the scope of the current work. At the time MacKinnon was attempting to destroy the American porn industry and while she was growing up, this industry (and one may call it that) was controlled by a handful of powerful men and corporations, which might just have given her the impression that this was part of the grand conspiracy so beloved of Marxists. Let us go back in time though, right back.

Depictions of the human body, naked or adorned, are nothing new. Our barely human ancestors drew pictures of the naked body, and undoubtedly went about naked for several thousand years until they came up with the novel idea of clothes to protect themselves from the elements. The male body was depicted naked too, for example the famous Cerne Abbas Giant in Dorset, England, a chalk drawing that is embarrassingly male.

As clothing was developed, different societies adopted different dress codes. Islam chose modesty for men and extreme modesty for women. Others, like the Greeks, were totally unabashed with nudity. Throughout the ages, artists - including women - continued to depict the naked human body in drawing, sculpture and fine art. The naked Minerva (above) was painted by Lavinia Fontana (1552-1614) one of the greatest artists of her age. It would take a sick mind to find this obscene.

Along with actual depictions of the human body there is pornographic literature. Like art - erotic and otherwise - this has a long history; the Roman poet Catullus didn’t hold back; the Seventeenth Century saw the publication of Pills To Purge Melancholy, while erotic novels drew the ire of the censor most famously with the 1960 prosecution of the publisher of Lady Chatterley’s Lover, the subsequent prosecution of Last Exit To Brooklyn, and the banning in France, Italy and New Zealand of The Little Red Schoolbook.

It was of course the development of photography and more so the later advent of the moving image that really brought pornography to life, but in a pre-Internet world it was largely photographs (dirty books/porn mags) that were targeted by Christian moral crusaders and shortly by feminists. By the time MacKinnon and Dworkin began preaching their poison, porn films were a big market on both sides of the Atlantic, but it was publishers who were portrayed as the main villains of the piece.

While according to second and third wave feminism, pornography is one long, tortuous victim narrative of men exploiting women, one actress deserves a special mention. Linda Lovelace was the “star” of a 1972 film whose title has become a cultural reference: Deep Throat. This was an off-beat sex comedy; made on a shoestring, it grossed fantastic sums at the box office, and was the peak of an otherwise undistinguished career. Lovelace had a short lived-marriage to Chuck Traynor, and after the limelight faded, she became a drug addict, finally turning on the porn industry with a vengeance, making all manner of allegations against her ex-husband.

The reality is that Linda Lovelace was an extremely depraved individual. Before Deep Throat she made a film in which she had sex with a dog, not simulated sex, real sex. How many women would stoop so low? At first, she denied appearing in such a film, but when it materialised, she could no longer deny it. She died after a car crash in 2002, three months before the older Traynor died from natural causes. Linda Lovelace is perhaps best summed up by the cynical John Lees song Polk Street Rag.

While Chuck Traynor was portrayed as the villain of the Linda Lovelace story, and men as the exploiters of women in the wider world of pornography, there would be a serious fracture in the UK in 1984. Customs officers under the auspices of Operation Tiger raided a homosexual bookshop in London seizing a large tranche of titles on the pretext of its being obscene imported material. Well, not much of a pretext. Now the campaign against pornography, which much of the left had endorsed, was abandoned for the defence of so-called gay rights, freedom of expression, and so on. The utter cant of this hypocrisy was truly sickening. Best not to mention the notorious Kirkup poem blasphemous libel prosecution or the absurd Romans In Britain case.

That being said, the mere existence of homosexual porn either destroys the objectification narrative or extends it to men. Back in the heterosexual world there was “page 3”. In the UK, this is understood to mean a naked, topless or otherwise erotic/sexual/tasteful photograph of a young woman on said page of a tabloid newspaper. This went back to late 1969. A massive campaign was launched against this, which included a dedicate NoMorePage3 website. Airhead Kat Banyard went on TV claiming her ludicrous campaign to “Lose The Lads Mags” had obtained a legal opinion to the effect that the top shelf (ie so-called men’s magazines in supermarkets) constituted sexual harassment, threatening legal action against major retailers. Again we see the feminist tactic of redefining practices to which they object as obnoxious, dangerous, illegal...

Debunking The Feminist Porn Narrative (3)

Although lads mags are now largely moribund if not dead, there is a very fitting reason for this, the explosion of on-line pornography, and where homosexual porn puts the lid on the coffin of feminist nonsense, on-line porn hammers it down, because while big corporations are still making money off pornography, if only by hosting porn websites, the people making the really big bucks, starring in it, and increasingly producing it, are women.

The advertisement above says it all.

The Internet and especially the WorldWideWeb including social media have resulted in a massive explosion of pornography, which is more accurately called the sex industry. Literally all human life can be found within, and as in the sickening case of Linda Lovelace, at times non-human life. In fact the word pornography is far too generic to have any meaning when discussing this subject, a bit like referring to Japanese knotweed and cauliflowers as plants. You probably wouldn’t want the former in your garden, and you certainly wouldn’t want it served for your Sunday dinner with roast beef.

While some pornography is extremely depraved, some is mildly tittilating, and much of it is hardly recognisable as porn at all. We need not list all the depraved categories here, but the aforementioned Linda Lovelace video shows a practice that is illegal in most countries of the world, sadly not all. There is scat, which needs no further description, videos of torture and extreme cruelty, but likewise there are videos and photographs of the “smoking fetish”. At one time, smoking had a romantic image - lovers lighting up in the moonlight. It was de rigueur in film noire for bad guys and good girls alike, but does anyone really find women smoking cigarettes erotic? Apparently.

Debunking The Feminist Porn Narrative (4)

Without wishing to advertise any studios or individuals, there is a large genre of fantasy porn/quasi-porn which features women naked, semi-naked or more often dressed in costumes, including the superheroine type. Some of the storylines are bizarre, but much of this material would not offend your great-grandmother.

Men appear in these productions, but the films are dominated by women, some even maintain their own websites, staging the promo photos and writing the actual code. Here is fetish model Odette Delacroix in a 2014 interview. Whatever moral judgments your local imam, the Chief Rabbi, the Pope, or Julie Bindel may make about her, there is no denying this is an intelligent young woman who knows what she wants out of life and is going about getting it forcefully. Note what she says about BBWs. As with the fashion industry, traditional pornography is slanted towards women of a certain type: tall, thin, usually fair skinned. The modern sex industry has a place for women who don’t fit this stereotype, including women who are not generally considered physically attractive. One anti-feminist vlogger - who shall remain nameless - even complained that at one time, fat and otherwise unattractive girls would hone their personalities to make up for their lack of physical charms, but now they have become just as bitchy and entitled as more attractive women because a few thousand or even a few hundred followers on social media feeds their egos.

There is a place in the sex industry even for older women. The photograph above is of Tomiko Madoff, one of the most successful, versatile and hard working denizens of the modern sex industry. She writes and directs many of her own cameos, and has starred in mainstream films. This photograph was taken two years ago, and would you believe she was born in 1967? Other women who are visibly older are also doing well.

Again, these are not “oppressed” women, rather they are empowered. One more example will suffice, some lady bodybuilders become Amazons, earning a living by appearing at events, starring in films and hiring themselves out for personal one-on-one sessions which can include muscle worship, mixed wrestling and female domination. Does even Laura Bates consider this to be sexism? Tracey Seward of Manchester is a spectacular if terrible example of female empowerment. Known as the Stiletto Goddess, this Internet dominatrix had a massive following on social media. Her speciality was “crush” videos. A mother of three, when she decided to get rid of her common law husband, divorce was the last thing on her mind, so she recruited two of her cyber-fans to murder him. One of them came from as far afield as Switzerland. In 2002, she and her two accomplices were given life sentences for this quite callous murder.

There is though another and even more obvious refutation of the feminist pornography narrative, that is the massive explosion of “amateur” videos. While big stars can make big money, the vast majority of men and women who make their own porn videos and “sex tapes” receive no meaningful financial reward, some receive none at all, and doubtless a few are left out of pocket, yet there is never any shortage of girl next door type participants. Nor men, of course! The suggestion that these women are “oppressed”, that they have been coerced or blackmailed into making these films, or even that they are simply stupid, brainwashed flibbertigibbets simply will not fly. Again, whatever moral judgments may be passed on them by the self-proclaimed high and mighty, they are simply exercising their free will, and having fun into the bargain. If Catherine MacKinnon or anyone else doesn’t like this kind of “adult entertainment”, there is a simple solution: don’t watch it!

Regardless of the reality of the porn industry, the moral puritans and feminazis will continue to push for more censorship and preach such nonsense as the objectification of women backed up by ludicrous statistics and the skewed or invented data so beloved of the sisterhood of lies. Politicians of both the left and the right may be taken in by their special pleading, duplicity and at times hysteria, but having read this far, there is no need for you to be.

Behind this narrative is the idea that sex is something men do to women rather than the two do together, and that women don’t enjoy sex. If a woman has sex with a man, it is because she has been coerced, duped, or is granting him a special favour. Without resorting to sweeping generalisations, this is complete nonsense. Most adults enjoy sex at some time in their lives. Obviously as we grow older, our bodies fade if our desires do not. Many women are interested in pornography (however defined) as much as men, although the evidence suggests that women are more interested in pornographic or erotic literature (the written word) than in images.

One final point, it has often been said that men age like wine, women like milk. That comment may sound a trite unkind but the reality is that women’s looks do fade, and time flies quicker than most of us can imagine, until we grow old and look back. There is no reason for any young woman to fall for all this objectification rubbish. If a woman in her twenties finds wolf whistles or even mere compliments offensive, forty years on she will look with envy at younger women who still receive what Laura Bates would have them believe is degrading attention.

moderator Peter B. Giblett moderated this page.
If you have any complaints about this content, please let us know

Comments

Add a comment
Username
Can't login?
Password