(no subject)

[novapsyche]

There's a really interesting discussion about prostitution and pornography over in feminist. I haven't added to the conversation yet, but I probably will.

Comments

[sarahmichigan.livejournal.com]

My problem with any kind of black-and-white, non-nuanced condemnation of porn is that people don't seem to understand is that "Sexy movies and pictures *I* like are erotica, and stuff that squicks me is porn."

where do you draw the line? sure there's disgusting, exploitative porn out there. It's bad porn. If women are against porn that degrades women, they should make more woman-affirming, woman-produced porn.

[sophiaserpentia.livejournal.com]

Well, in a way that just begs the question: Is it even possible to make woman-affirming porn, or is the medium of pornography inherently anti-woman?

Personally I think it is possible to make woman-affirming porn.

Even so it's worth asking whether or not the process of commodifying sex is itself inherently harmful to women, and whether the often harmful effects of pornography and prostitution are caused by those things directly, or by the way this society values those things.

[sarahmichigan.livejournal.com]

Are fine art paintings of naked women or sexual acts pornography? How about sex films that are about teaching couples to have better sex? It's all about how you define pornography, which is my point. In my opinion, there's just "pictures and movies with sexual content" and "porn" is a judgement call about whether that sexual depiction is respectful or not.

On a side note, it always boggles my mind that the fact that there's a ton of gay male porn out there complicates the issue that "porn objectifies women" but it's often left out of the discussion (just like discussions of race in America are almost always black/white and don't consider other ethnic groups).

[techno-shaman.livejournal.com]

I thought it unfortunate none of the women debating there seemed to have any personal experience with prostitution.
I saw alot of real misconceptions both about what prostitutes are/do, and the nature of how they get into it.
Definately interesting stuff though.
~Zephyr~

[simianpower.livejournal.com]

Wow, was that ever a one-sided discussion!

They're complaining that, for example, strippers have to compete for better times and aren't paid except for tips. Never mind that the tips are more than most professional models make! Never mind that competition, even with those in the same company, is a part of almost ANY business. Car salesmen compete with one another on the same lot; stock brokers, scientists, and so on have the same situation.

They complain about lower-cut outfits being correlated with better tips for waitresses. Well, sex sells. Duh! It's been that way since the dawn of time.

They complain that porn is male-centric blahblahblah. Well, if there's really a market out there for woman-centric porn, why not MAKE some and prove the point? This is a capitalist society; if there's an untouched niche market, tap into it, get rich, and shut up! Since that hasn't happened, no matter how much bitching goes on, I must assume that this niche market either isn't there or isn't interested in doing more than complaining. Side note: there is also a lot of softcore erotica on stations like Skinemax that WOULD quailfy as "woman-centric porn", even though it isn't sold in dedicated porn stores. So maybe the definitions need some work.

They complain that men are getting rich from the actions of women, examples cited being porn store owners, pimps, strip club owners, etc. Well, either the men are intrinsically better at business skills (a thesis I don't support), or the women are again not tapping into the market. When I used to go to strip clubs or buy porn I never even cared who owned the place, let alone knew them. It wouldn't have made any difference to me if the owner was a woman or a muppet. I didn't go there for the owner. So, again, the answer is to stop whining and open your own joint. As an aside, the owner/controller of lots of brothels are women (i.e. the Madam), so the initial complaint isn't even valid.

That whole thread sounded like a lot of sour grapes, a lot of "why isn't this more the way *I* want it to be?" Well, my response to the root question is "why don't you (collectively) DO something about it?" If women would take a more active role in the MANAGEMENT of the sex industry there would be more of a chance to change things to the way they like. As it stands, the very same women who do all the complaining look down upon the sex trade and want no part of it themselves. It's like people who bitch about government and then don't vote. You cannot change something unless you take an active role.

[sarahmichigan.livejournal.com]

I thought it was actually pretty balanced compared to some discussions of porn and prostitution I've seen in feminist circles. Almost all the women thought that sex work should be legal but regulated, and thought it wasn't inherently bad, just bad the way it's currently being done. I think that's a fairly reasonable, moderate, sex-positive approach.

You're seeing bitching from women who worked as strippers bitching about problems with the industry. You'd see similar bitching about working conditions in a customers_suck community on LJ, too.

[sarahmichigan.livejournal.com]

argh, one too many instances of "bitching" in that last paragraph. . .

[simianpower.livejournal.com]

I didn't keep track of who complained about what. I don't have any problem with legalization and regulation (and taxation) of sex work. That's a great idea. I don't, however, think that either the simple act of putting women in charge will magically make everything better OR that the act of regulating it SHOULD necessarily automatically mean women are put in charge of it. I am against "quotas" of whatever sort. If a woman qualifies for a sex-management job, and is a better candidate than anyone else regardless of gender, then she should get it; same for a man.

As a separate issue, I don't think the regulation *should* take the competition out of the job. You may be right that it was only ex-strippers/hookers complaining about that part; I'm not going to re-read it to check. But either way, competition is a part of almost any job, and saying it's the male-sexist pigs causing the competition is crap. Models compete for the best jobs by looking better than their competition. MALE models, too! It's a part of the job description that you have to be hot. For a stripper, that definition is extended to "you have to be sexy", and since sexy varies from person to person the stripper has to be willing to accomodate whatever definition her (or his) client follows, or else turn down the client. The things that male strippers do are often FAR more explicit than acts performed by female strippers. There are a lot of non-sexual jobs that pay really well that nobody likes, and yet do anyway just for the money. Complaining about it doesn't make the job "wrong" so much as just wrong for that specific person. And taking the competition out of the job doesn't even make sense.

[sarahmichigan.livejournal.com]

I don't, however, think that either the simple act of putting women in charge will magically make everything better OR that the act of regulating it SHOULD necessarily automatically mean women are put in charge of it. I am against "quotas" of whatever sort.

I agree it's silly to think that putting women in charge would magically make the porn or stripping or prostitution biz more humane and woman-friendly. Women can be catty and competitive (Showgirls!). However, I DO think that having people who are ex-strippers running strip joints, and having ex-hookers running brothels, and having former porn stars making porn would put a different spin on things. It's not so much a gender issue as "I've been there and I know what it's like."

As a separate issue, I don't think the regulation *should* take the competition out of the job. You may be right that it was only ex-strippers/hookers complaining about that part; I'm not going to re-read it to check. But either way, competition is a part of almost any job, and saying it's the male-sexist pigs causing the competition is crap. [snip] For a stripper, that definition is extended to "you have to be sexy", and since sexy varies from person to person the stripper has to be willing to accomodate whatever definition her (or his) client follows, or else turn down the client.

While I get your point, some of the things they were complaining about were things like ramping up the competition to "take things further" with clients. If a woman signs up to be a stripper being told that she won't have to touch clients, and they dont' get to touch her, but there's an unspoken understanding that strippers who bend the rules get better time slots (not because they're sexier or better dancers, but because they're willing to let men push the line on touching, etc.), then that's problematic and could potentially lead to not feeling it's a safe place to work.

[simianpower.livejournal.com]

I DO think that having people who are ex-strippers running strip joints, and having ex-hookers running brothels, and having former porn stars making porn would put a different spin on things. It's not so much a gender issue as "I've been there and I know what it's like."

I can buy that. That's probably true for most industries. I never liked the idea that a shop of programmers is run by someone with an MBA and exactly ZERO experience in the industry he's running. I've always thought that as small companies grow, the best of their employees should be trained in management and bumped to the top slots. In practice, it's mostly been a question of hiring an outsider with an MBA or bumping up from inside without management training, neither of which works well.

...some of the things they were complaining about were things like ramping up the competition to "take things further" with clients.

I have no problem with that aspect. Taking things further with clients is how one gets bigger tips. BUT!! Being bumped to crappier time slots because you DON'T do that is crap. A few simple changes could clear up that problem once and for all. Starting with having the house NOT take a cut of tips. That alone would make it irrelevant to the owner how much any given stripper makes. I don't really care if the stripper pays a stage fee or if the house pays a dance fee; that can all be taken care of with cover charge or drink charges, and has very little to do with the environment. So long as the stripper is free to choose who to dance for and how far to go WITHOUT the house taking any interest except in her safety (i.e. obvious bouncers, etc.) that particular sort of competition will only be for cash, not for time slot. The strippers would be free to choose which house to work for based on how far they're ALLOWED to go rather than how far they're expected to go. In addition, I think some sort of negotiation should take place between the stripper and client BEFORE the dance takes place. As things stand, there's a flat fee (usually $20-30) that never varies except in the tip. It'd be nice if the client could say "I expect X and Y, and will pay $Z" and the stripper could accept or decline. Or if the stripper could say "I do X and Y, and charge $Z" and let the client accept or decline. That way there are never any false assumptions, no dashed hopes or unexpected demands. I mean, honestly, the strippers are getting naked and wriggly, so what could possibly be embarrassing about setting the limits of that beforehand? It's not like they're shy, shrinking violets!

[novapsyche.livejournal.com]

They complain about lower-cut outfits being correlated with better tips for waitresses. Well, sex sells. Duh! It's been that way since the dawn of time.

So that makes the inherent sexism okay?

They complain that porn is male-centric blahblahblah. Well, if there's really a market out there for woman-centric porn, why not MAKE some and prove the point?

I agree with you to a point. However, as a consumer and not a producer of porn, I should be able to complain that I can't find the products that I want, and manufacturers should respond.

They complain that men are getting rich from the actions of women, examples cited being porn store owners, pimps, strip club owners, etc. Well, either the men are intrinsically better at business skills (a thesis I don't support), or the women are again not tapping into the market.

Ah, but you're ignoring the history and the reality of the sex trade. If you're a streetwalker, you do need protection, because the simple truth of things is that men can physically overpower women. What's the solution? Either you have an extensive network where each client is checked out beforehand and has an understanding of ground rules (call girl/madam prostitution) or you have the pimp system. This is the problem with illegal prostitution in this country. Legalization and/or decriminalization would go a long way to defuse a lot of this. The people doing most of the grunt work (pun intended) should be getting the lion's share of the pay, and that's just not the way it is.

That whole thread sounded like a lot of sour grapes, a lot of "why isn't this more the way *I* want it to be?"

It is a discussion in a feminist community. So you're hearing from feminists who have their own opinions about things.

[simianpower.livejournal.com]

They complain about lower-cut outfits being correlated with better tips for waitresses. Well, sex sells. Duh! It's been that way since the dawn of time.

So that makes the inherent sexism okay?

It makes it human. Women do the same thing. I've fairly often seen groups of women choose which bartender to go to or which waiter's section to sit in based on how he looked. Some things, whether they're fair or not, simply are, and the fact that appearance affects attraction and thus business opportunities is one of those things. If I were behind the same bar as Cindy Crawford, who do you think would get more tips? How about if I were behind the same bar as the butt-nastiest bucktoothed trailer-trash ever rejected by the Jerry Springer Show? People tend to gravitate toward things that are attractive. That's what "attractive" MEANS!

In quite a few jobs, blatant sexism is not only allowed, but expected. For example, I couldn't try out for a Revlon modeling job. The very job DESCRIPTION requires that applicants be not only female, but also pretty. Is that sexist? No, it's what they're hiring. Do people (male and female) use their sexuality to get ahead in careers other than those explicitly requiring it? Of course. It's the way of the world, and complaining about it won't do anything but cause bad feelings all around.

However, as a consumer and not a producer of porn, I should be able to complain that I can't find the products that I want, and manufacturers should respond.

I'm absolutely certain that if the manufacturers got enough complaints/demands, they WOULD respond. They're in it for the money! But the point I was making is that many or even most of the women who complain about the lack of woman-centric porn complain to one another, but don't DO anything. They don't generally complain to manufacturers, they don't make their own and sell it, they just complain to each other about the male bastards running things. And now, far more than in the past, women ARE the ones producing porn. Former porn stars getting behind the camera as directors/producers/writers than ever before. Female photographers and layout artists for magazines, etc. They know both the business and their audience. If they discovered that there's a huge new market fit for the taking, they won't turn their noses up at that market just because it's composed of women. The argument being made is that men are making porn for men, but the fact is that it's men buying! Women are also making porn, but they're ALSO making it for men (primarily) because women tend to not be nearly as large a purchasing force in that industry. If all the women who complain about porn would write to the women MAKING the porn, odds are that those women would respond with porn FOR women.

Re: your point about streetwalkers, I agree. But that's only a small segment of the sex trade, and the thread in question denounced strip club owners in the same sentence as pimps, where the situations are drastically different.

It is a discussion in a feminist community. So you're hearing from feminists who have their own opinions about things.

By posting it to your journal, you drew attention to it and implicitly were asking for comments. My take is that many of the women on that thread were complaining either to the wrong people or about the wrong things or both. There definitely were comments I agreed with, but many of them I didn't.

[novapsyche.livejournal.com]

By posting it to your journal, you drew attention to it and implicitly were asking for comments.

Sure, absolutely. I love discussing porn and prostitution. Whether that discussion happens here or in other fora, that's fine with me. And I appreciate all points of view. If people disagree with me, I don't mind; in fact, I like exploring other perspectives.

So that makes the inherent sexism okay?

It makes it human. [...] In quite a few jobs, blatant sexism is not only allowed, but expected.

Well, that's one way of looking at the world. As a feminist, I do try to look for ways to ameliorate sexism in our culture. Take, just as an example, prostitution. Sexism is basically built into the overall system. That doesn't mean that steps can't be taken to reduce the abject sexism that pervades the industry. There are ways to improve things, but improvement can't happen if one chooses to believe that the world is just the way it is and what point is there in trying to change things.