Wednesday, April 11, 2007

Irony Alert - Anti-Porn Conference Exploits Women

Apparently an anti-porn conference put on a slideshow of images from various porn movies as part of their presentations. Apparently they are now selling that slideshow for $5 on CDs. And apparently they have not gotten the permission of any of the women or men in those pictures in the slideshow from any of that porn, nor have they even blacked out any of the faces.

First, I should say, I haven't looked at the actual slideshow. But then for the purposes of what I discuss here, that isn't relevant.

What is relevant and galling is the pure irony - no hypocrisy of these people who first claim that all porn is exploiting women, despite the consent of women to be in it through a slideshow that was shown WITHOUT the consent of anyone in it.

The irony is that the only ones who were using images without consent in this show were the anti-porn people. The images in the porn itself were made with the consent of the performers who had to sign release forms. The images in the slideshow were used without anyone's permission. So now a show about the exploitatioin of women's sexual images without consent uses as its centerpiece a show that is full of sexual images of women that the conference used without their consent.

I'll give them one thing - they certainly prove the rule that the loudest moralizers are usually the biggest hypocrites. It just usually isn't so freaking OBVIOUS.

4 comments:

LaRae Meadows said...

The pornography industry, in its lust for money, objectifies and exploits men who perform sexual acts on film for their profit. Moreover, pornography exploits the biological sexual weaknesses of the watching man. It is a filthy denigration of the pride of men and their bodies and must be stopped before men begin to believe in the dehumanization portrayed in these films.

Read the rest here:
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/916169/pornography_exploits_men.html?cat=40

MLF said...

Just because women agree to be in porn does not mean they are not being exploited (it's much more complicated than that). My dog likes doing lots of pointless tricks for treats - it's still exploitation when you REALLY think about it.
A lot of women (I've read less on this in terms of men) who are in the porn business (not all) were sexually abused as children, most struggle with drug addictions, many were and are prostitutes... The reality is MOST women ARE in deed exploited - their vulnerabilities are being exploited (drug addiction, PTSD from sexual abuse, poverty).
A lot of women do it because they don't feel like they have any other choice - is it really a choice if they don't have any other real options?
Many want out - but they don't have any other options. And no one wants to help them because they are prostitutes (porn stars are prostitutes - that is my opinion).
I really hate that excuse "it's not exploitation if women chose to do it." - that argument is a logical fallacy and most who use it, know it. People switch the debate from "does porn cause harm" to "Do some women enjoy the work or not?" The fact that a few women do enjoy the work, does not erase the most who don't. The fact that some women actively decide that as their career path does not erase the millions who didn't chose that, who were trafficked into it, who were "tricked" into it.

DBB said...

Just because men agree to be garbage men doesn't mean they are not being exploited. I mean, I like getting a steady paycheck in my own profession, but it is still exploitation when you REALLY think about it.

A lot of men who are now garbage men were sexually abused as children (especially the catholic altar boys). They are being exploited (drug addiction, poverty, the need to support a family, the societal pressure to be a "success" measured by the size of a paycheck). A lot of men work because they have no other choice - is it really a choice if they have no other options?

Many want out, but no one will help them because they are supposed to "be a man" and they are really just prostitutes, working only because they get paid for it.

I really hate the excuse that "it's not exploitation if men chose to do it" - that argument is a logical fallacy and most who use it, know it. People change the debate from "does working cause harm" to "Do some men enjoy working or not?" The fact that some men enjoy being a garbage man or a septic tank man, does not erase the most who don't.

Ok, so now I'm mirrored your argument... but really, what is your point?

I don't think anyone is advocating forcing women to enter porn. And what you said, as I noted above, could apply to ANY profession - I mean, if people really enjoyed working so much, then they wouldn't need to be paid. But wait, we all need to make a living. Or most of us do.

I've seen surveys of my own - that many women who absolutely love sex get into porn because they figure they might as well get paid for it since there is a market for it.

It sounds like you are part of the sexual shaming culture, calling women making sex movies "prostitutes". This is a sexual-shaming maneuver, something I thought was supposed to be part of the evil "patriarchy" - yet here you are using "slut shaming" terminology and methods against women. What is wrong with sex? Or even being paid for it? If consenting adults want to do it, why is it even any of your business?

Somewhere around the world, people are forced as slaves to pick crops. Does that mean we ban farming or just ban slavery? Do you even know the distinction?

I'm all for preventning any women who do not truly want to do porn from having to do it. But that is a separate issue from whether porn itself is exploitive. You are looking at a very old model, too.

Nowadays, with cheap digital cameras and easy internet access, you can become a porn star with worldwide distribution without having to deal with any sleazy producers or really any producers at all. You can film it yourself and post it yourself and collect the money yourself online. And guess what, millions of people are doing it. If anything, the porn explosion on the internet is probably massively reducing the exploitation factor because the old gatekeepers no longer exist or have any power.

But none of this really even addresses my original post, which was about the irony of saying women are exploited in porn and then using their naked images, without their permission, and in some cases, expressly against their wishes.

Ned Dominick said...

Life is easier if you simply use a really high quality filtering program which will block the porn but not the good stuff. I use on called http://www.wisechoice..net but there are others out ther like safeeyes or Hedgebuilders