Where it gets complicated
When choosy-choice libertarian “feminism” meets Porn Culture Today – and the result is hipster bullshit.
Can a feminist have rape fantasies?
According to feminist pornography producer Pandora Blake, who runs the fetish porn site Dreams of Spanking and frequently portrays fantasies of “non-consent”, the answer is a no-brainer. “Absolutely.”
The general consensus in the feminist porn movement is that no fantasy, no matter how anti-feminist the subject matter appears to be, is off limits. To tell a woman what she is and is not allowed to be turned on by is just about as anti-feminist as it gets.
No, it really isn’t. We know the advertisers and marketers and porn producers want you to think that, but if we think really hard we can come up with a reason for that that’s separate from “because it’s true.”
First, “allowed to” isn’t the issue. That’s where the bullshit comes in – it’s dishonest. Saying X isn’t feminist does not equate to saying X isn’t allowed, much less you’re not allowed to X. None of this has anything at all to do with permission or commandment.
Second, it’s possible to be turned on by something that makes you feel uncomfortable to be turned on by. Third, it’s ok to talk about that, in fact it’s good to talk about that. Feminists have been trying to figure out the guilty pleasure of rape fantasies since forever. Trying to figure it out is one thing, and claiming it’s obviously and “absolutely” feminist in itself is another.
Feminists routinely fight for sexual agency – a woman’s right to make decisions about her own sexuality, including when and with whom to have sex, and when, if ever, to get pregnant. Feminists traditionally rebel against the forces that would hem in these rights: the puritanical voices that say that a woman who enjoys sex is a slut, that would restrict access to contraceptives, that claim that dressing provocatively is inviting rape.
Following that logic, feminists argue they shouldn’t invoke shame around the sexual fantasies of others – even if those fantasies include images of kink and domination, or even rape.
But not invoking shame is one thing, and celebrating is another.
“There’s a clear distinction between fantasizing about being coerced, and actually being coerced,” Blake says, explaining that just because she has (and depicts) dark fantasies doesn’t in any way mean that she’s endorsing real-life nonconsensual sex acts.
Wait. They keep sneaking extra claims in here. Having fantasies is one thing, and depicting them (and distributing and profiting from the depictions of them) is another.
The feminism of Trouble and Taormino’s porn isn’t limited to the content – they are also strongly committed to a safe and comfortable work environment, fair pay, and a creative voice for their actors. This behind-the-scenes work is especially important for porn like Blake’s. While Blake doesn’t believe that the content of her work is at odds with her feminism, where it gets complicated, she says, is in portraying and sharing those fantasies without promoting actual violence toward women. In a world where porn is the de facto sex education for any teenager with an internet connection, socially responsible producers have to think not only about what will get people off, but what people will learn.
Well exactly. So why begin the piece with all that dishonest blamey crap then?
Because it’s hotter that way, I suppose.
(Psst. You forgot the link.)
Whoops! Thank you.
The referents of “it” and “that” in this paragraph are tripping me up a bit. From the context of the quote, resolving “it” in “No it really isn’t” would seem to give: “it really is not anti-feminist to tell a woman what she is allowed to be turned on by”. And by extension, “it’s anti-feminist to tell a woman what she is allowed to be turned on by” is the “that” in the thing that “advertisers and porn producers want you to think”. But then, what’s the “that” for which you proclaim there’s another reason for “that”. And what’s the “it” in “because it’s true”?
Gramatically, I’m getting, “X is not true. Advertisers want you to think X is true. But, separate from the fact that X is true, there’s another reason advertisers want you to think X is true.” Really not aiming for pedantry here – this is one of those subject matters where I am aiming for “shut-up-and-listen”, and I’m just not getting a clear sense of what is being said, relative to the quoted text.
Kevin, the way I’m reading it is that the “it isn’t” refers to the statement that the answer is a no-brainer, and is Absolutely. I may be mistaken here, but having read Ophelia for quite some time, I don’t imagine she is saying it how you read it (though I do see how it can be interpreted that way, in context). I think the problem is that she was addressing the first paragraph with that no it isn’t, but because she included the second paragraph in the quote, it sounds like she’s talking about that. In that case, it might be a case of slightly sloppy editing, and not claiming it is feminist to tell other women what to be turned on by.
I could be wrong. But that seems to make more sense to me, in the context of what Ophelia usually says.
I find it interesting that sexual fantasies are discussed in terms of rights. Everyone has the right to their thoughts. We have limited control over them anyway. The right to freedom of thought exists in law but it’s not all that interesting by itself. It’s the manifestation of those thoughts that people fight over.
It bothers me that the focus is on whether the thoughts are feminist, as though that is all that matters. As though that is the only ethical problem when it comes to pornography. It bothers me that a left-wing newspaper like The Guardian does not even consider the economic factors and takes at face-value the claims that the backstage filming shows what things are really like. Would they say the same if a corporation published footage of happy workers and claimed it as evidence that there were no bad practices at their company?
“Sex positive” campaigners often ask why sex work is still considered shocking, implying those who disapprove are prudes. I wonder why prostitution and pornography are so often exempted from the ethical considerations that are normally applied to commercial transactions.
Given that our sexual behaviour is largely innate, don’t these fantasies have some basis in biology? If you can’t help but have “rape” fantasies, or you are compelled to look for a partner who will spank you, or whatever, how can all this be related to politics? I find this difficult to get a grip on.
What reason is there to think that sexual fantasies are innate?
justinr #6,
I don’t know why we should accept your premise, but leaving that aside, no, they do not. Our culture eroticizes domination. Since we all grow up in this culture, it’s hardly surprising that some of us get turned on by rape fantasies, but none of that is “biological.”
I would also point out that culture can be changed, which is what needs to happen here. There’s no reason we should accept a culture that normalizes sexual violence against women.
justinr: In addition to Cressida’s point, there’s also the difference, highlighted in Ophelia’s original post, even, between ‘having a fantasy’, ‘acting out a fantasy’ and ‘depicting that fantasy for others to consume’ (and then, on that last one, depicting a fantasy for money, which usually means it’s probably not your fantasy to begin with). Each step in that chain is a different beast, entirely, and conflating it all as one big happy ball of sex positivity is a deliberate attempt by porn producers to add legitimacy to their activities.
Having a fantasy is fine. Acting out that fantasy, in a safe fashion with a trusted and consenting partner, is fine.
Depicting it for others, however, creates the impression that this is what sex ~should~ be like. That has a massive implication that needs to be examined, addressed and challenged.
For a non-pornographic version of how much consuming media can influence a culture, go back and watch 1984’s Revenge of the Nerds. This ‘comedy’ is commonly cited as a cornerstone of modern nerd culture, coming as it did during the formative years of the current 35- to 50-year-old set. I see it come up in conversations in forums for comics, computer games or tabletop role-playing all the time.
In it, the protagonists commit virtually every form of misogynistic behavior we’ve seen take a rise in the internet age: Stalking, voyeurism, revenge porn and hey, even rape (which is totally forgiven because the ‘hero’ is so good at sex). (We also get a hefty side-order of the ‘struggles’ of white male nerds being compared to that of African-Americans, because why not?)
[…] a comment by Freemage on Where it gets […]
Hey Pandora Blake, I am a feminist who has rape fantasies. Fantasies that end in a very violent and gory way for the rapist. Want to make a film based on that?