Last week a reader we’ll call Xavier emailed me with some thoughts about getting off to pornography. Please read an excerpt of his message which is reproduced here exactly as I received it:
I don’t care why the women on Voyeurweb or Redtube or XTube or whatever are on there. I’m using them for my own purposes, whether they’re trying to pay for drugs or college or simply to feel loved after a lifetime of abuse.
And when I think about the fact that I have daughters and a spouse I have to admit that the “use” I’m making of women in porn or women I’m fantasizing about is completely not what I would want for them, my wife or daughters.
When I think of all the feminists I’ve read, I’m doing exactly what they are concerned about, I am taking women, women with loves and fear and joys and concerns and I am turning them (or at least complicit in) into objects to be “useful” in my masturbation sessions. I’m objectifying real people.
As a professional in “the industry” now. Have you ever thought about these issues? As a parent of a growing girl, how do you understand issues of porn and objectification and positive sexuality?
Click the link below for more…
Dear Xavier,
While I appreciate your concern for the performers you watch, I believe your worries are largely misguided. I took the liberty of sharing your letter (anonymously, of course) with a few other bloggers whose responses will appear alongside mine below.
First, I find it interesting that you mention only female performers. Does your worry extend to their male, transgender or queer counterparts? If you are concerned about your objectification of women then you should be equally concerned about what goes through my mind when I watch a hot man — or a pair of hot men — performing. Let me assure you that I’m not thinking about anything other than what it would be like to take part in the scene.
Perhaps you should worry even more about men, considering that they often earn less than their female co-stars and have to deal with such things as holding ultra-challenging positions, maintaining an erection throughout countless stops and starts and orgasming on command.
Next, you’re making a pretty big assumption when you worry that female performers are only financially motivated. I’m not sure that this is valid. Who doesn’t work at least in part because of the financial incentives? Can you name anyone whose job is done for altogether altruistic reasons?
Open your mind to the possibility that many performers work in the adult industries because they want to. Alexa from The Real Princess Diaries says, “Many people who do this kind of work get off on knowing that other people do use it as masturbatory fodder. Some consider it performance art, and the joy it brings to the viewer is no different than a performer who produces or participates in any other artistic video creation.”
Others appreciate the chance to live out their fantasies with the best practitioners in the business. The reasons for working in porn are multitudinous. Don’t assume that everyone is working for drug money or as a reaction to childhood abuse.
You say that you’d hate to see your own family members involved in the adult industry. I’ve thought about this question in regard to my own children. I can certainly imagine worse careers for them. I wouldn’t want them to be air traffic controllers because of the stress, or commercial fishers because of the danger, or police officers because of … well … what I know from watching Law & Order. I want my children to behave ethically and to feel fulfilled in whatever careers they pursue, and I think this is absolutely possible if they choose jobs in pornography.
Debauched Domestic Diva adds this:
As a mother do I want my children to be porn stars? No. But I also don’t want them in the middle of a war or working for minimum wage at McDonald’s. There is just as much stigma working for minimum wage at a fast food restaurant as there is for sex workers. It is a different type of stigma but still just as degrading to that person.
If one of my children did decide to go into sex work I would support and love them the same as if they choose to be a doctor, lawyer or auto mechanic. Their life and their choices are theirs to make and I can only guide them and offer my support as they find their way in life. My only heartache would be knowing the struggles and stigma they would always face with their choice.
Alexa from The Real Princess Diaries says:
If it was my non-minor daughter, I’d expect her to formulate her own views on [working in porn], and if she elected to do the same type of thing, so long as she was being safe about it, and I was sure she was making the decisions with a full understanding of what she was doing, then that’s her call.
Tomorrow we’ll continue on with Xavier’s letter and further discuss his concerns about objectifying the actors. But for now, readers, it’s your turn. Does Xavier use women in an objectionable way when he masturbates to their images? Should he feel the level of guilt demonstrated in his letter?
Sound off in the comments below.
I’m trying hard to understand what’s objectionable about the “use” described here. How is this different from our “use” of any other actor? I could equally write, “I don’t care about Mel Gibson’s family dramas, his alcoholism, his Catholicism–I don’t care about why he makes movies. I just “use” him in order to see stuff get acted.”
It seems to me that if (and this is a big if) people in the adult film industry have decent working conditions, then it’s the problem with porn (if there is one) is NOT that the viewer gets enjoyment from it. Generally, that is the purpose of entertainment.
Is one viewing the entertainer or performer as a “thing” different from or than her “real” self? Maybe, maybe not. That’s a pretty deep philosophical question having to do with what’s reality and what’s artifice.
Maybe the claim is the one that’s often made about visual media (as opposed to say, the written word). While we can’t imagine ourselves, really, “using” Dickens for his page-turning qualities, we much more viscerally use an image (of breasts, cocks, cunts) because of the deep impact on us. But again here, the same problem crops up in other types of photography. What are the ethics of us using a photograph like this one for our own purposes?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:TrangBang.jpg
If porn objectifies, does this?
Everyone treats other people, at some point, as useful creatures. My waitress is useful to me because she brings me food without me having to get my fat ass up and do it myself. That doesn’t mean I’m objectifying her, necessarily.
I do think that some types of porn objectify the people depicted in them, just as some people objectify their waitresses (for instance, by calling them “honey”, condescending to them, and generally being an ass). But that’s different than saying that porn in general objectifies, or even that enjoying porn’s erotic charge is inherently objectifying.
I’ll be mentioning the objectification of waitresses and other service people tomorrow. You read my mind. :)
Outstanding post, AAG…and my answer to Xavier can be reduced to five words: OH, HELL TO THE NO.
I guess that he is entitled to his own feelings and his own guilt, and he has to face his own emotions for himself…but he no more speaks for most men or can prejudge women in porn than I can speak for every single man.
Perhaps there is some bit of objectifying going on when we masturbate to seeing sexy women and men engage in consensually pleasurable activity; after all, we don’t watch porn necessarily to see the settings or analyze their speaking lines (though a good plot or a comfortable setting can go a long way in enhancing arousal). But, as long as all the participants, the exhibitionist performers and the voyeuristic consumer, share in the mutual pleasure, then I see no reason for objecting.
The one factor I see in Xavier’s letter (other than the self-denial of acknowledging his own pleasure) is that he seems to have internalized all the old saws about women in porn being automatically “degraded” or otherwise sullied by being in porn…as if performing sex on screen or on the Internet is considered to be “the bottom of the barrel” as far as professions go, and that only “losers” or drug addicts or rejects from Hollywood ever go down the path of doing explicit sex videos. Obviously, he is so wrapped up in this fantasy of “lower class” girls that he can’t see for himself that perfectly middle-class, intelligent, “normal” women are just as capable of doing porn for their own reasons…and that they can be just as sexually aroused and motivated as any man can.
And as for the “financial motivation”: well, for many women, the possibility of a quick and easy paycheck can be more than enough motivation…but it still takes a lot of determination and desire (especially sexual desire) to become skilled enough to earn that paycheck. It is certainly a lot more than just showing up behind the camera, dropping your panties, and sitting on any man’s hardwood…it does require real skill and grace and even some athleticism to be a successful sexual performer. That we get to come at the end is a special additional bonus to seeing a beautiful pro (or even amateur) show herself off. To ignore their humanity and disrespect their efforts is far, far more degrading to me than any of the sex acts they perform.
And no, it’s not for anyone off the street to be an explicit sex entertainer/performer; certainly, I’m sure that the majority of women in porn probably wouldn’t want their daughters to have the experiences they have had. But then again, if their daughters are adult enough to make informed decisions about getting into porn, then who am I or you or anyone else to say otherwise?
I see no problem whatsoever to masturbating to porn performers entertaining me and pleasuring themselves, because I consider them to BE human beings rather than just “objects” of my desire. A vibrator or a blow up doll is an object, a living, breathing, moaning, pulsating, gyrating human being in the midst of a multiple orgasm is still…a human being. Some of us are capable of understanding the difference.
Mutual “objectification” for mutual pleasure is perfectly OK by me…it’s all about the pleasure.
Looking forward to Part 2.
Anthony
I think you make a really good point bring about guilt.
Anything any of us take in is first absorbed through the filter we bring to it. If we have antiquated notions of sex and morality, therefore, or issues surrounding these things, we will necessarily taint what we take in with these predispositions. That’s the truly unfortunate part. For someone to experience a sense of guilt over sexuality like this ISN’T about the sexuality being consumed…but about the person consuming it.
I narrow it down simply-if my children choose sex work as their passion, I’m happy they found a passion.
When you get down to it, we objectify even our regular partners sometimes-I believe it comes with the territory. But consenting adults are just that.
I think what’s interesting about the letter is the level of cliche’ about people who act in porn movies – they do it for drugs, they had abusive childhoods, etc. As you remarked, there are people who WANT to do it and like doing it, so…?
It also depends on what kind of stuff he’s watching, too. There’s some stuff that creeps me out, and so I don’t watch it. I stay away from that corner. But most of the porn stars that I enjoy are people who look like they’re having fun doing it. I will more than likely not get to make it with Alix Lakehurst, but I do appreciate that she decided to put her gorgeous self on the Internerd, and yes, I do the expected things sometimes while viewing her pics/vids. But to me it’s nothing to be guilty about. If she didn’t want to do it, she wouldn’t, and there wouldn’t be photos and there wouldn’t be a site. And I would assume that she knows that people are going to wank over her pics, to be blunt about it. So she either doesn’t care or she finds the idea kind of fun.
Objectification is a huge word and it’s ill-defined, and if I want to let it be defined by people who may have agendas for imposing their definition to it – for example, sex-phobic religious nuts who steal the terminology to exert mind control over their followers – I could let myself be guilted to death over just about everything. You have to decide these things based on your own ethical system, not someone else’s.
The first thing I picked up on – I don’t know if I’ve read this right or not – is that he has asked you, AAG, as a professional in “the industry”, on your views. I took “the industry” to be “the porn industry”, as that is the subjec of the letter. It seemed odd to me to lump an actor/actress in a porn video in with a sex blogger. Surely “the sex industry” is a very wide scale, and not all parts of it can be taken as ‘porn’ in the same way. Or does writing about sex almost default into the porn category, if only because it is about sex?
I agree with pretty much all the views stated in the comments – it’s really interesting to read a conversation where porn can be discussed objectively and sensibly, without stereotypes unquestioningly being accepted. Looking forward to the next post!
If I can take a different angle on things for a moment…
There’s an industry magazine called AVN (Adult Video News) that I read as soon as it lands every month, as well as its novelty/toy counterpart issue. In one of the last issues, there was a very intriguing story about what tube sites (i.e. red tube, x tube mentioned by your reader there) are doing to the adult industry..essentially what torrent sites did and continue to do to the mainstream movie and music industry.
So, the person-ethics of the quandary aside, yes – he IS using these women on some level because he is frequenting a place that has been consistently and unabashedly called out for offering clips they have neither purchased outright or paid a royalty for. To an extent, it would be akin to someone bemoaning that sex workers are all ‘damaged goods that need to be saved’ and then turning around to enthusiastically accept a free blowjob from aforementioned ‘fallen angels’.
I find it interesting that someone is having a crisis of ethics about the subject matter of a video seemingly without pondering how said video got onto his computer in the first place.
I didn’t understand his conflict to be over watching “free” porn but instead to be over watching *any* porn.
But I think you are totally correct. One way to assuage guilt would be to support (ie, BUY) porn that is made responsibly.
When you get down to it, we objectify even our regular partners sometimes-I believe it comes with the territory.
This is an interesting point, and one I think deserves some further exploration. In my e-mail conversation with AAG when she was writing this, I made the point that every one of us objectifies even the people we’re in committed, monogamous relationship with when we have sex with them to an extent. For example, when you’re on your way to an orgasm, your partner (like it or not) becomes nothing more than a masturbatory object to you – you use them, their body, to achieve orgasm. You’re not the least bit concerned about their individual humanity at that particular point. Is that objectification objectionable as well? Of course, it won’t be to the anti-porn crowd because it doesn’t fit their agenda. In fact, they’d ignore it altogether. That doesn’t negate the fact that it is just part of the way human beings deal with sexual arousal and release.
I think the broader issue is the objectification of women (or, more broadly, people) in general. Some people (of all genders) are unable to see other humans as anything other than objects – they fail to connect with their humanity. These are typically sociopaths (though that’s not always the case, of course). And this exists independent of any issue surrounding pornography. It speaks to a character or emotional flaw rather than any direct conscious or subconscious attempt at minimizing another person’s (or groups of people’s) humanity as the anti-porn crowd likes to suggest.
I’m including much more of our conversation in tomorrow’s post. :)
I think if he was doing this to ‘normal’ women, there would be a problem. Like say going around taping people walking, or following a woman doing something, and then getting off to that. One that’s creepy. And two that’s imo real objectification. Girls in porn (I sincerely hope!) understand what they’re doing and are fine with it. Same as I understand that in some of my modeling pictures, people will obviously make me into an object for their viewing pleasure, I knew that going in and I don’t really care.
It’s an ‘as long as all parties involved understand and are okay with it’ thing, to me.
So does that mean it’s not okay to fantasize about your hot co-worker while you wank since they haven’t explicitly consented?
d
It happens, and I don’t think it’s necessarily bad, but there’s a huge difference between a coworker who just happens to be scorchingly hot, and a woman you happen to work with, for whom the only use you have is jack off material.
Can you help me understand the difference you see between those two cases?
D
The difference being, the coworker who happens to be scorchingly hot, is a coworker first, and hot second. Meaning, imo, that you respect her as a coworker and respect her intelligence and abilities. Whether an individual jacks off to her in this case, is irrelevant, because while she is an object for the time he’s jacking off, she returns to coworker status the next day at work.
The woman you happen to work with, for whom the only use you have is to jack off to, I would say you don’t respect her as a person, you have no use for her presence, ability, mind, or anything else. The only purpose this woman has in your life is for you to fantasize about later on while you’re jacking off.
The first isn’t an object because she has uses other than jack off material. The second is, because there’s no regard for her at all, other than to jack off to. Which also happens, but that’s when I would call objectification.
I know AAG doesn’t mind if I suggest you check out one of my recent posts on lusting after people in your real life: http://thesspot.org/?p=2414
^_^
Of course I don’t mind hunney bunney. I lurves ewe. :) –aag
I actually like that Xavier is at least thinking about this. I spoke to a man recently who admits to liking and using porn but is also struggling with the lives of the people he’s watching. I think that implies a thoughtful component that shouldn’t be devalued, although I also think it’s the wrong perspective. Still, the fact is that a *lot* of people in the sex industry (whatever form) are there for reasons other than purely financial or pleasurable. Many are drugged out, under duress or being used. BUT A LOT ARE NOT, and that’s for sure, and also, I think, part of your point.
Now, having said that:
I write erotica for profit. I enjoy what I do because I enjoy erotica and also enjoy the idea that someone else might be getting off to it. I love making money off of something I truly enjoy doing. I’ve also watched and enjoyed porn. I don’t watch super hard stuff, but still, not once have I castigated myself because of the potential horrible lives of those I’m watching. Porn isn’t really about that, I don’t think. It’s escapism, it’s fantasy — it gets us out of that headspace, or should.
I’ve made sexy videos for (and with the) men I dig. I’ve watched them watch it and it gets me off, knowing they love it. I could see myself branching out into other areas involving exhibitionism for profit. And I *know* myself. I’m not drugged out, oppressed or any such thing. I’m just digging it.
The sex industry is like any other industry, IMO. You’ve got people who are there for the wrong reasons, or who aren’t loving it, or who consider it drudgery, or who’d rather be in Seminary. But it’s my belief that you’ve got a LOT of people there making good money, enjoying themselves and the scene, as well as earnestly deriving pleasure from what they do. And people should be allowed to do that, if you ask me.
I’ll say this, AAG, it’s never dull here. Thanks for kicking off such a multifaceted discussion. I’m reminded of the Hustler billboard I once saw in Cincinnati – ‘Hey, it’s just sex’.
Okay I’m outing my blog. :P I didn’t write much, because I am emotionally exhausted from more conversations like this than I can count at this point, but the small bit I did write is here: http://amberrhea.com/2009/07/03/throwing-things/
You rock, AAG. Thank you for your voice, wisdom, and fighting the good fight, always.
objectification is seeing someone for what they do (or do for you) and not as an individual, an equal in a relationship/transaction with rights and input into the relationship/transaction. I would argue that porn doesn’t classify as objectification (porn where all parties are aware of and consent to its production) because both parties in the transaction (the performers and the viewer) are aware of and agree to the purpose of it.
Real objectification would be occurring if Xavier viewed all women he interacted with as merely sexual objects, or as objects for his exploitation in general (housework, child-rearing, etc). He would not be aware of nor treating them as individuals, equals, in whatever relationship or transaction he entered into with them. The same thing applies if the individual being objectified sees themselves as merely an instrument of someone else’s ends with no consent or input into that relationship.
When you get down to it, we objectify even our regular partners sometimes-I believe it comes with the territory.
Yes, I agree with this. When we’re honest about our interactions, we do use people as objects (a means to our ends), even those closest to us. Xavier’s question and many people’s responses are (apologies for going philosophical) quite Kantian in their moral thinking.
In short, Kant thought that immorality was marked by actions where a person treats another person merely as a means to an end. Using our waitress/waiter example, what would it look like to treat this person merely as a means to our obtaining food? I think if we swore or otherwise spoke to the person in an inhumane manner (perhaps by refusing to tip simply because we’re not required to, even though we know s/he makes less than minimum wage and relies on the tip to make ends meet), this would be treating them merely as an object–as objectifying him or her.
But what about remote persons, people like porn actors and actresses who we’ll never have an opportunity to treat as human, as more than an object of our pleasure? I have a possible answer, but I’ve definitely written enough as it is. Looking forward to part II tomorrow.
p.s. – to Xavier.. there are many feminists who would disagree with your suggestion that all feminists are anti-porn.
The Dalai Lama, I believe in “The Art of Happiness” points out that the Tibetan language has no word for guilt. (They make restitution, the concept of feeling bad for a transgression is beyond their ken.)
Guilt is taught, it’s not a natural emotion.
It sounds like this person was unfortunately taught to associate certain feelings with these images.
Hopefully your wonderful reasonable response will help him see earlier teachings aren’t accurate or justified.
Hopefully in the future fewer people will teach their children needless self harmful things like guilt.
There is also a KEY difference between using an object, a video recording, for self gratification compared to treating the director of photography, choreographers, lighting grips, editors, marketing departments, distributors and performers as “objects”…
I sincerely doubt were he to meet one of the performers, heard/saw her natural responses instead of stage voice/reactions, he’d feel they were objects.
OTOH, some times it can be enjoyable to feel objectified…
PS: As I reread his letter, he seems to not understand objectification. Masturbating to material produced for that purpose is not objectifying someone. Treating someone without respect, as if they are nothing more than an object is. Since he recognizes that the performers are wives, mothers, children, loved ones, he’s completely failed to objectify them imo.
When you get down to it, we objectify even our regular partners sometimes-I believe it comes with the territory.
I believe it goes further. I’ve always thought some of the point of sex, whether masturbatory or otherwise with a partner, was not only to objectify the partner, but to objectify the self. To erase much of what exists in one’s mind, in order to become one’s body — as a route to physical pleasure. (It is not all that happens in sex, of course, which also involves crucially imagination and a connection to the internal feelings of the partner, but this happens in a environment where the physical object — the body — is raised to heightened importance.)
So I think the word “objectification” is a misleading one. What I think feminists object to, rightly, is when the sexual objectification of women spills over into becoming the only way women are allowed to be perceived. And that happens sometimes – but to my way of thinking, mainstream advertising culture is more at fault than is porn.
The first part of his letter really bugged me- “whether they’re trying to pay for drugs or college or simply to feel loved after a lifetime of abuse”. Nice stereotyping (and not that other parts didn’t bug me, this just stood out for me). Is submitting to Voyeurweb that much different than what many of us do every Thursday when we publish our HNT posts? My wife and I participate in HNT because it’s fun, we enjoy taking pictures together, it’s a rewarding challenge to come up with something artistic each week, we appreciate the kind comments we get in return, etc.
Why can’t others, who chose other amateur (or not) forums to show themselves, have similar motives?
I don’t get the sense that Xavier feels real guilt – rather that he thinks he *should* feel guilt because of “all the feminists he’s read”. Which leads me to believe that he has some inner conflict about viewing/enjoying porn and he wants you to absolve him. I think he needs to get clarity about where this conflict is coming from and then make an informed decision about whether viewing porn is in alignment with his values or not.
As to your question about my children (and I have 3 daughters and one son)I would like to think that I’d be okay with any of them deciding to go in to sex work as long as it was a well thought out and informed decision and they were following their hearts. This is the same criteria that I would use for selecting *any* career. Recently, my son was exploring going in to the military which was extremely hard for me from a selfish perspective. I had to realize that my issues were my own and not his and allow him to follow his heart. I would like to think that I would have done the same if he’d said that he was going in to porn.
Actually, now that I’m thinking about it….going in to porn would have been easier for me to accept.
Dee
I never understood what it means to “objectify” someone. People aren’t objects and objects aren’t people. Arousal doesn’t turn someone into an object. I guess someone could be the _object_ of my arousal, and that could be considered “objectifying”. But someone could also be the _object_ of my affection, which wouldn’t be considered “objectifying”. Someone please explain.
As a lady in porn I say to Xavier I do not need your protection or pity. I am an adult making informed choices. Your question may have been well intended but it is really rather offensive, insinuating that people in porn only come to it because they are damaged. For me my porn work is a compelling mix of the personal and the political. I do it to stretch the boundaries of my concepts of desire, intimacy and exposure, not to feed some imaginary needle habit. All you need to do is search out ethically produced porn and pay for it.
Thanks for such an interesting discussion.