The number one question I get asked in pornography debates is “what about feminist porn?” Everyone else seems to know about the existence of these unicorns, but I am completely unable to find any examples of feminist porn. What would that even look like? Given that we live in a society where women are valued for their appearance and sexuality above all else, it’s hard to imagine any kind of visual representation of female sexuality that doesn’t in some way pander to patriarchal standards and further, if nothing else, the idea that women exist as one-dimensional sexbots. Because we do not exist in a vacuum I struggle to imagine any kind of visual representation of female sexuality that doesn’t neatly package her sexuality for male consumption. Since women are already assumed to be in existence to service men sexually, even the most compassionate, respectful porn featuring the least conventional women would further the idea that women exist for male sexuality, rather than for their own. It is for this reason that any visual representation of female sexuality is problematic in a patriarchal society. But like I said, even before we get to that part of the argument, I have yet to see anything that could even begin to qualify as feminist.
Yet it is argued that feminist porn exists currently, and that people love it. In fact from how often this argument is made you’d think that “feminist porn” was the most popular genre, that everyone was watching it, and all of us cranky radicals had somehow just missed it in our research and writings. However as Nine Deuce said in her post on “janitor porn” there is very little out there even labelled as feminist porn. The vast majority of what is out there is not meant to be “female-friendly” in any way, let alone feminist. The VAST majority of porn out there depicts violence against women, which cannot regardless of label, be argued to be feminist. You can call the white horse purple, but that doesn’t make it true.
Further, this stuff with these labels of “feminist” is not what is primarily consumed, and certainly not by men (who are overwhelmingly the main perpetrators of sexual violence, meaning the ones who are most dangerous when affected by violent sexual imagery). When Ana Bridges conducted a study examining the content of the most popular pornography she wasn’t picking pornography from the most violent, brutal, horrible niches. She picked from the AVN most rented/watched/bought in a random pattern. What she found was that on that list was not “feminist” porn or “female-friendly” porn but overwhelmingly violence against women. In fact close to 90% showed violence, almost exclusively against women. The ones that weren’t blatantly degrading were still completely directed at men. Not only not feminist, but mostly violent, degrading, horrific things. Given that rape and violence against women are still happening on an epidemic scale, there is no possible way associating violence and arousal can be a good thing. So while 90% of porn consumers may claim to watch things that are made by female/feminist directors and not violent, the statistics say they are either lying or so brainwashed that they can think violence is normal sexual behavior (if it’s the latter we are in serious trouble).
But if I was to take this “feminist porn” seriously, where is this stuff? I tried to find some and in order to find any I had to search for several minutes and wade through many pages of cum shots and crying and rape to find anything labeled as “for women.” And this was searching for a very specific director who I had been told to look for due to her “wonderful” porn. In other words even knowing EXACTLY what I was supposed to be looking for, I could barely find it among the hundreds of rape porn sites. What I saw were extremely thin conventionally attractive blonde women with huge breasts roughly penetrating themselves with large dildos and giving a come fuck me look. As well there were images of the women being spanked, threatened, and in some cases choked as well as roughly penetrated by strap on dildos. The only difference I saw in this porn was that the violence was done by other women rather than by men. When Ana Bridges did a study on this she came to the same conclusion. That female directors are MORE likely to use violence against women than male directors, but that the perpetrators were more likely to be female than with a male director.
Seriously, stop with the “feminist porn.” It a) doesn’t actually exist, and b) it’s not what most people (even women) are watching and c) even pretending it exists, it’s just as violent as mainstream and therefore its existence is irrelevant since the two are just variations on different ways to treat women violently and as objects. Given how little “impact” this non-existant porn has on the industry and people in general, it’s clear that this question is purely a red herring designed as a way to justify a person’s individual use. No one wants to think of themselves as enjoying the suffering of women, so they pretend the group doesn’t include them by creating an imaginary category of “feminist porn.” Also it is clear that this “category” is so incredibly small that when we bring up a discussion of pornography, directing the conversation to the absolute smallest “niche” on the market ignores the reality of the 99.999% of what’s truly out there. Even if there was some tiny amount of “good porn” out there, no one is watching it. So whether it exists or not is irrelevant to the content of mainstream porn.
Comments on: "What About Feminist Porn?" (7)
The myth that there is even such a thing as ‘feminist porn’ is designed to derail the central issue which is malestream porn is made by men for men’s consumption. The fact a tiny percentage of women directors also produce porn does not in any way make it ‘feminist.’ What these female directors are doing is reproducing malestream pornography and calling it ‘feminist.’ It is not feminist when women are filmed being subjected to degrading sexualised torture and attempting to portray themselves as liking being subjected to such degradation.
Remember Audre Lorde’s piece of wisdom: ‘the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.’ That is why feminist porn is a unicorn – it has never existed and will never exist because feminism is about challenging and working to eliminate the notion that ‘sex is never sex unless one or persons (primarily male) are sexually dominant and the other person(s) (primarily female) are subordinate/masochistic and passive.’
Given pornography is now malestream we have become desensitised to the filmed images of male sexual violence being inflicted on real women by real men and instead prefer to bury our heads in the sand and claim ‘such films are fantasy not fact!’ I wish!
By the way it makes no difference if it is a woman inflicting sadistic sexual violence against another woman because this is the same misogynistic porn as the porn avidly consumed by men. It is still overwhelmingly men buying female on female pornography because what gets these men off is the eroticised sexual violence inflicted on women. However, as I said above the numbers of women directors involved in porn are miniscule compared to the men and we must not ignore fact only reason these women directors are making porn is profit – profit is the motive – not pseudo feminist porn. We don’t want ‘feminist porn’ we want an end to the global male sexual exploitation of women and finally a recognition that filming men subjecting women to sadistic sexual violence is not fantasy or harmless entertainment – it is cold-blooded male hatred and male contempt for women. But of course women are not human so therefore no human was harmed in the making of porn!
This whole post is so on point. It’s especially annoying when people are bringing up “feminist porn”, when they don’t even watch it. What director were you recommended, by the way?
So true. So true. I think people try to get away with the label “feminist” because some women become physically aroused by that vile imagery, so it’s gotta be feminist if it is experienced by a woman, right?
I also think that women direct and use (or claim to use) porn as a survival mechanism. Sort of like cutting – like if I am doing this, if I am victimizing myself and my sisters, then I am not being victimized by the P.
Great piece as usual, elkballet! Even men who watch supposed “feminist porn,” which appears absolutely mainstream to me, also watch porn without a feminist label. Honestly, the “feminist porn” argument is just meant to distract us and keep us arguing with other women, just as with the “amateur porn” argument. Go to an amateur porn site and you’ll most likely be bombarded with ads for other porn sites.
On another note, lizor, I think all of your points are excellent!
Excellent post elkballet. Covered all the ground.
Yep. Got as much chance of finding “feminist porn” as three headed unicorns. Probably more chance finding the unicorns…
“Feminist porn” is a three-headed unicorn that poops rainbows and glitter. The only thing I can think of that sort of/kind of/if you squint comes close, is the Crash Pad series. Though I haven’t looked at it in years, so who knows what it’s like now. It’s probably trans-ed out by this time.
[...] sex, with abuse shouted at women scattered throughout. In response to the popular question, “What about feminist porn?,” Dines asked if we would consider a small worker owned co-op to be undermining capitalism? [...]