"Consent" in pornography: an analogy with combat sports

The economic argument against porn that some people have cited here - i.e. the argument that a woman who really, really doesn't want to do it might feel compelled to do it out of desperation - is the one I have the most sympathy with.

However, the main problem I have with that argument is that porn is not exactly the only job in that field and you can make quite a lot of money just from stripping, so it's not like there's this big leap between convent school and Bang Bros. I remember being linked to an episode of the Tyra Banks show (no, I don't watch it normally) where they had retired porn actresses talking about their regrets, saying they started off as strippers, making thousands of pounds per night, but went into porn because they wanted to make more money and drive around in flashy cars, i.e. they had a free choice in the matter and were not even compelled in economic terms. There is also the fact that genuine amateur porn does exist, and I have even read somewhere (nice accurate citation for you all) that the paid porn industry sees it as a commercial threat.

I certainly think there is a dark side to pornography, but as aikiwolfie has argued, that can be said of many, many industries, and if this is anyone's main objection then I would say the argument is one of regulation rather than principle.

Again,the reason I make the comparison with MMA rather than with male porn stars is people who argue against porn tend to take the view that, because there is more demand for women and they make more money from it, it is far more exploitative of women. I don't personally agree with that but I thought I'd turn the argument on its head.

 

Out of interest, why is the dynamic different with male porn actors?

 

because society and genetics demands a man who sleeps with many women is a stud, whereas a women who does is a cheap tart.

with pornography women are selling there "long term marrigability" for short term cash, which many young girls dont understand untill its too late.
A friend of mine was enguaged to a low level star, and it was the pressure from knowing the media was out there that caused them to split - she was a lovely but very messed up lady.

 

also men get paid less but have much longer work lives, women tend to have short shelf lives.

 

I would add that porn stars also put their health on the line - just not in the same way.

I personally never quite understood much of the fuss that has been made over legal, consenting pornography. For me, if all parties involved are consenting, safe and legal, then it's not my business to get too fussed over it. Claiming it "objectivises women" is just tired old stereotypical rhetoric in my eyes.

 

Men get into the porn industry just as young as the women. There's no difference. I'm a bit confused though you think the military is some how a better cause.

The military: Exploitation of the young sent to die primarily to protect the selfish corporate interests of the western world.

The porn industry: Exploitation of the young for erotic titillation and sexual gratification. Death and suffering are not unheard of but very probably far, far less than those caused by the military.

 

deleted post, I don't even want to be a part of this thread : P

 

I don't think psychologically speaking there is too much difference.

I think a better comparison than MMA would be "Bumfights"; as it exemplifies the kind of dynamic people worry about in porn.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bumfights

In Bumfights you have the kind of scenario that people fear, a person in power with the camera who can use the desperation of his actors in order to coax performances out of them which are degrading etc and then hide behind the most loosely defined conception of "consent" to justify their work.

As Fusen has pointed out however the women tend to occupy a more disposable space in the industry because of the whole slut/stud thing but I don't want to comment too much on that because its an area which I haven't done much reading on. My intuition is that the woman is more likely to end up with the raw deal due to the whole slut/saint thing that can follow her in a way that wouldn't really seem to follow men.

Really the primary way in which porn arguably affects women, in particular, is the objectification of women; in comparison to the men who usually have most of the autonomy and are in "consumption" of the female rather than interaction with the female. Essentially it's that the fact that there are willing females in a film doesn't make that film gender-neutral and entirely equal. See "The Bechdel Test", plenty of films fails this, not necessarily because there aren't any female roles but because those female roles are completely hollow and serve only to prop up the male roles (which are usually the more important ones).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bechdel_test



Is there advantage being taken of young people in other industries?... Sure... but in what world is that argument anything other than a smokescreen that shifts attention away from the way - certain - porn producers will take advantage of people who are either psychologically or economically dis-advantaged?

Note, I'm not implying that people are cynically trying to distract people from the problems with consent and porn (or consent and any, potentially, life-changing activity that one may reasonably come to regret) rather I don't see what is to be achieved, in a practical sense, by pointing out that military organisations also take advantage of people.

Edit: On the topic of "Bra-burning feminists"; it's one of many many myths. http://www.snopes.com/history/american/burnbra.asp

 

both male and female MMA fighters know what they're doing. it involves skill and to the layman it looks like a battering but it's a test of skill like any other sport.

pornography isnt a test of skill and apparently it's rarely enjoyable for either participant - 8 hour scenes, accidental "releases", soreness.

also those that stay in the industry for a long period are there because the stigma of porn allows them little other work.

you could go into MMA as a white collar worker even in HK and no one would think it as odd.
you could retire from an MMA career and get another job no problem if you were at the top levels because likely you're a karate/boxing/wrestling/judo/bjj champ also which are considered normal things like rugby.

actually
what's the difference between rugby and pornography?

its like comparing apples and bread

mma = skilled sport like rugby which is to determine a winner not please the audience
pr0n = "jerking off with someone elses body to please an audience" - randy west (former male pr0nstar)

 

Me neither I wonder if the OP is trying to justify a porn collection, in some way?

 

Yes - that is a much more reasonable comparison.

 

We have to justify it now?

 

I think OP's point misrepresents the arguments against porn. The widely-perceived problem with porn, I think, is not that it exploits those few women who actually participate in it, but that it contributes to the sexual objectification of all women. I've never heard anyone make a coherent argument that the women in porn are being coerced into their occupation.

 

^^ I knew you guys would love that. I presume that 'adult' shops still sell something in paper and dvd format, even if there are free sites like xhamster (so I'm told

^ THIS!!!

 

I've been thinking this for a while through the thread. Thank you for stating it eloquently.

 

Some of them are coerced into it. But again why isn't there a concern for the sexual objectification of all men? Do gay men and straight women not think about sex?

 

Try going to down town Cairo, walk about a bit, then take your sister (if you have one) and leave her alone. I think there will be more than a bit of difference in reaction, sensible clothes and physical attractiveness will mean nothing too. You will probably be fine, she will not.

I've not been to Egypt, but I have been to Jordan which is considered fairly liberal, by Arab standards and that was still a scary experience.

 

There isn't as much of a concern for it because (a) there isn't a worldwide epidemic of sexual objectification of men in culture and commerce and (b) most porn does not objectify men the way it does women.

 

This.

Recently, some people did a couple of tests in a city nearby. for the first test, they dressed a young woman in skirt and top. Nothing indecent or even pushing the boundaries. Just a mini skirt to just above the knees, and something that showed the shape of her breasts without showing cleavage. And then they followed her with hidden camera. Over a short walk through the city, she got a lot of loud comments, a couple of idencent proposals up close, and one time the security crew had to step in to avoid her being harassed physically. This test was repeated a couple of times, with similar results. And many males didn't see it as a big deal. A lot of jokes were made about it.

A different crew tested a sort of role reversal: the put a couple of female construction workers on a scaffold, pretending to do some work there, and they'd shout lewd proposals at passing males. Quite a different reaction, from outrage to embarassment to pure shock, both with the victims themselves and witnesses.

I thought that was interesting. First, it seems that the problem for women is pretty bad, and we (society) are no longer upset about it. And second, when the roles are reversed, suddenly we (society) get upset about it.