This interview originally appeared in the Ms. Magazine Blog and is re-posted with permission.
Move over dot-com, dot-org, and dot-gov. There’s a new domain on the block: dot-xxx. With 370 million sites and $3,000 spent for online porn every second, the industry’s revenues surpass earnings by Microsoft, Google, Amazon, eBay, Yahoo, Apple and Netflix combined.
This is author Gail Dines’s point: Porn is about profit, not pleasure. Some people make a buck; many more are harmed, argues Dines in her new book PORNLAND: How Porn Has Hijacked our Sexuality (Beacon Press).
Gail Dines calls herself an anti-porn feminist, but she is quick to clarify that she’s not anti-sex. Unlike Dines—and in the interest of full disclosure—I am not anti-porn. I oppose censorship and unproductive arguments pitting sex-positive feminists against anti-porn activists. This keeps rival groups in far corners of the Sex Wars boxing ring. We need more conversation—not less—which means asking tough questions across ideological divides. To that end, I interviewed Gail Dines, curious about our agreements and differences on The Porn Question.
Ms./Shira Tarrant: You wrote Pornland for a mainstream audience. What is your primary hope for this book?
Gail Dines: I wrote Pornland to raise consciousness about the effects of the contemporary porn industry. Many people have outdated ideas that porn is pictures of naked women wearing coy smiles and not much else, or of people having hot sex. Today’s mainstream Internet porn is brutal and cruel, with body-punishing sex acts that debase and dehumanize women.
Pornland looks at how porn messages, ideologies, and images seep into our everyday life. Whether it be Miley Cyrus in Elle spread-eagle on a table dressed in S&M gear, or Cosmopolitan telling readers to spice up their sex lives with porn, we are overwhelmed by a porn culture that shapes our sexual identities and ideas about gender and sexuality. Pornland explores how porn limits our capacity for connection, intimacy and relationships.
ST: What is it about Miley Cyrus in S&M gear that bothers you? Is it her age? Or simply that she’s wearing pseudo-bondage gear?
GD: The problem is that women in our culture have to conform to very narrow definitions of femininity and it’s defined by porn. Miley Cyrus’s performance is not about creativity but dictated by capitalism. She aged out of Disney and this is the carefully planned-out launch of the new Miley Cyrus.
My issue is about the market and about how pornography frames femininity. Women are either fuckable or invisible. Miley Cyrus wouldn’t make any money [with an unfuckable image].
ST: Are you opposed to consensual BDSM sex in real life? Or do you see this as a harmful and exploitative relationship?
GD: What people do outside corporate forces, or outside capitalism, is none of my business.
I’m critiquing the commodification of sex. That gets confused with the idea that I’m telling people what to do in the bedroom. It’s a much easier argument to make [but] it’s a refusal to take seriously a radical feminist critique of the culture.
ST: Some people working in the business argue that porn is a legitimate way to earn a living. I know you disagree, but that keeps us stuck in an us-versus-them sex war. Do you see a way to move past that stalemate?
GD: The industry frames the work as a choice, because otherwise that would ruin porn. Choice is built into the way men enjoy porn. Men I interviewed are convinced the women in porn really choose this and enjoy their job.
Increasingly, women are drawn to porn by the glamorization of the industry. Some women have made porn work for them—Sasha Grey, Jenna Jameson. Jenna Jameson was on Oprah, who was gushing about her. Oprah went to her house and showed the audience Jameson’s expensive cars and private art collection. This looks attractive to women with limited resources. Capitalism can only succeed if there are people around who will do the shit work. Women with law degrees are not lining up to do porn. The vast majority of women doing porn don’t make it and don’t get famous. They end up in low paid work as well as the brothels of Nevada.
We need a world where women have real options to make a living. This is a class issue and a race issue. To talk about choice is to ignore how people are constrained by their social and economic situations.
To be continued in Part II …
Above: pornographic film set, 2007. Photo by Larry Knowles for The Naughty American website licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic.
Comments
Kristy — March 1, 2011
Nice article, I am looking forward to reading part 2. I struggle with this issue myself, feeling women should have the choice to engage in this work if they desire it while knowing that clearly many of them do it precisely because they feel they have no choice.
Tom Hymes — March 1, 2011
Not a big fan of Ms. Dines, to be sure, but that's not why I am commenting. Rather, I feel the need to correct a glaring error. There is no possible way that "industry’s revenues surpass earnings by Microsoft, Google, Amazon, eBay, Yahoo, Apple and Netflix combined." It is not even in the remotest realm of possibility that this is so. The sources that make these claims are utterly bogus, but the mainstream has got a hold of this fiction and will not let it go.
Shira — March 2, 2011
Hi Tom,
I'm very interested in making sure the information here is accurate. Gail Dines uses these figures in her (highly problematic) book. In researching, I found these figures cited in additional sources, as well. If you can point me toward better sources with more accurate information, I'll be glad to investigate and make corrections accordingly. Thank you for your comment! -Shira Tarrant
Pam Redela — March 2, 2011
Why is a critique of how capitalist patriarchy shapes our lives, and sex lives, "highly problematic"? Are you THAT inculcated that you cannot see past the structures that surround you? The fact that a few white women have "made it" in the industry while women of color and underage girls and children are routinely degraded should be a red flag for you as a feminist. Does the turn to ever more violent depiction in porn not also signal to you that something has gone awry? Or is this just acceptable "collateral damage" to you as a person with disposal income and time to spend?
Shira — March 2, 2011
As I point out in my review of Pornland published in Bitch Magazine (Fall 2010), Gail Dines raises many important concerns about racism, degradation, exploitation. These warrant attention whether in porn or elsewhere. But the book is problematic. Dines relies on inadequate quantitative data, glosses over inconvenient historical information, never talks about feminist or queer porn. She accuses men of coercing women into watching degrading porn in order to manipulate them into degrading sexual acts. This ignores the many good man who reject nonconsensual domination. It also erases women's sexual agency.
While I can appreciate that you have strong feelings on the subject, I want to caution that ad hominem attacks will be deleted from the comments.
Bridget — March 2, 2011
Can you suggest some other books to read related to this topic? I am struggling to decide what my view point is on the topic of porn. My big worry about it is that porn may make it difficult for men to have sex with women in real life and it makes men only attracted to women with a certain body type (skinny with big, fake breasts). I also feel that because of porn, men may treat women disrespectfully outside of the bedroom because they only see women as sex objects. I don't really know how to move past this view point to see the other side.
Shira — March 3, 2011
Hi Bridget,
You might be interested in Pornography (Debbie Nathan) or Sex for Sale (ed, Ronald Weitzer). Defending Pornography: Free Speech, Sex, and the Fight for Women's Rights is about 10 years old but still has useful information. Also, Seal Press recently published
Good Porn: A Woman's Guide.
I hope others will add their book suggestions!
-Shira
Shira — March 3, 2011
One more title: My focus is on adults. If you're concerned about kids and healthy sexuality, you may be interested in Dr. Logan Levkoff's book, Third Base Ain't What It Used to Be: What Your Kids Are Learning About Sex Today — and How to Teach Them to Become Sexually Healthy Adults.
Chuck — March 5, 2011
Regarding comments 2 and 3: I can't say if the info presented by Dines is accurate, but it is certainly hard to verify. Web searches on the subject all lead back to the Internet Filter Review site, which seems to be the originator of these claims. No definitive sources are identified on the referred to website, just a melange of sources listed, and identified as credible. The claim is also only made for one specific year, 2006. It's easy enough to check the SEC website for the 2006 revenues of the assorted companies. There you will run into the question of using net sales instead of revenues for some firms, and whether to calculate using the company's fiscal year or the calendar year. My own number crunching does not bear out Dines' assertion, but not by much. This leads to the next questionable number, porn revenues. How on Earth were all these figures generated. Does porn include the multi-billion dollar Chinese sex toy industry? What is the definition of porn with respect to the various national outputs? It looks like the author just wanted a snappy comparison to make instead of just quoting dry numbers or saying what we all know already, that a lot of money is involved in the porn industry. Good luck trying to sort this out. - Chuck
m Andrea — March 5, 2011
Lately I am reminded how much the "feminist" blogosphere reminds me of something:
We have already decided that you agree to be sexualized, now we're only haggling over how much.
Elline — March 7, 2011
Thank you Shira for such an interesting interview and raising such important point! Likewise, I already look forward to reading part two. It's a complex subject, clearly one which raises strong feelings. Great work.
gwp_admin — March 19, 2011
Finally got a chance to read this! Looking forward to reading the rest of the interview. I do think it's interesting where we can find points of commonality... I identify as a sex-positive feminist and as pro sex work, but I'm also concerned about exploitative situations, human trafficking, etc. When I was in law school I did a paper from a feminist perspective on how conflating legitimate sex work with trafficking harms women, and I've noticed since then that when I speak with scholars interested in trafficking, they shut down when I want to talk about women who choose sex work and the problems with laws that target all sex work, not just trafficking.
I do think that there is a lot of generalization, where the majority of porn is described as if that covered all porn. I support feminist, sex positive, queer and kink friendly independent porn. There's not enough of it, and I think that having *more* pornography choices would actually solve some of the problems that anti-porn activists point to. A society that is less close-minded about sex could be a friendly place for sex workers to live and work, rather than presumably exploitative towards women. Also, commodification is not necessarily a bad thing if the market ends up supporting porn that treats the entertainers well. I think a big part of the problem is that sex positive/feminist porn is hard to find and expensive, and (just conjecture here) I would guess that a lot of the people who are interested in it might have less money to spend than those who are into mainstream porn.