#challengeporn and my experience with feminism.
This is one of those rare occasions where I post something that isn’t fandom-related. This is a double-whammy, as it is also about feminism and my negative experiences with it. If that makes you annoyed, read on—maybe we can have some polite-if-passionate discourse. If you’re going to get nasty and belittling, go away. Admittedly, this has been building for close to a year, so please prepare yourself, as this is pretty TL;DR.
@@@
For those of you who have Twitter and follow anyone related to feminism or anti-pornography, you might have seen the hashtag #challengeporn on December 3rd, which was inspired by a conference of feminists in the UK who disapprove of pornography and what they describe as “porn culture”.
I personally found the hashtag by following a rather notorious anti-feminist called Quiet Riot Girl. I’ve been following her for more than a year now (although I can’t remember for the life of me how I found her in the first place), and I find her funny, insightful, and knowledgeable, although her tactics can be aggressive for my taste.
Let me be clear. I am not a feminist. Sadly, to many self-proclaimed feminists, this automatically puts me into the “anti-feminist” column. I don’t reject feminism out of any distaste for women’s equality—in fact, being a woman, I’m a big fan. I more reject what feminism has become, and I choose not to use the tag that is associated with what I believe is a misguided ideology.
Truthfully, I’ve had a problem with certain aspects of feminism since I entered my first year of art school and a girl in my class nastily put down any woman who chose to be a stay-at-home wife and mother as weak and unambitious, indicating that she must be suppressed and had been “forced” into it somehow.
I immediately contradicted her, shocked that a woman who called herself a feminist would actually have such cruel judgment about another woman’s life choices. I thought feminism was supposed to be about equality and freedom or choice! Since then I’ve been touchy around the word “feminist”, but it really came to a head shortly after graduation, when I started following a different classmate on Twitter.
She was also a very vocal feminist who tweeted regularly about her family and how they unknowingly upset her delicate expectations on the daily. The first time I noticed it, she had called out her family as “patriarchal misogynists”, when they called the female form “unique and special”.
I immediately felt my dander go up—why is this offensive? It IS unique and beautiful! What feminist would take issue with someone praising the female body?
But this girl was also where I learned the terms “othering” and “privilege”. When I read on, she reasoned that calling the female body unique and special was “othering”, and was being defined by the male body because of the comparison.
Does anyone else find this, frankly, stupid? The fact that acknowledging the difference between two bodies automatically infers a negative blows my mind. I looked up the term “othering” after seeing it there, and found the proper context for this situation in relation to Simone de Beauvoir. The concept of the ‘female Other’ assumes that all comparisons made between men and women must be negative towards women. Putting aside the fact that this concept is 60 years old, this assumption is simplistic and nonsensical in the context of this argument, where the woman is the one being uplifted! And as far as I can tell, mens’ bodies weren’t even mentioned! (To be fair, I wasn’t there, I don’t know the actual words exchanged.)
She put the cherry on the cake by snarking about what a bad person her (presumably male) relative is because he might appreciate more sets of boobs than the one he’s married to. Gee, what a scandal. People (male or female) appreciating the attractiveness of another person they aren’t romantically involved with. Now, I’m an engaged person. My fiance and I take no issue with admiring the assets of other people. Have I seen gorgeous guys and appreciated their attractiveness? Of course! But I’m sure I wouldn’t be called a “patriarchal misogynist” (or the equivalent) for that fact, would I? I didn’t think so.
The above experiences showed me how a feminist reacts to A) women who didn’t follow the approved feminist guidelines for how to live one’s life, and B) people who didn’t tiptoe gently around ANY topic that might point out women’s differences from men in any way, positive or negative, because it will ALWAYS be negative. (I observed later on that if you are a feminist making the comparisons, men are nearly always cast in the negative light.)
I’ve done a lot of reading and observing since then, and I can say that there are certainly feminists who uphold a woman’s choice to be a stay-at-home mom, unlike my classmate from the first anecdote. Sadly, most of them are more like her and like the second classmate. I’m sure there are all manner of beliefs from active feminists that contrast with the examples I’ve been given, but the most prolific and vocal tend to be the sort who find offense in essentially harmless situations.
Now, how does this relate to #challengeporn? As some of you may know, there are two schools of feminist thought on the subject of pornography. One school says that porn is simply an expression of sexuality, often positive female sexuality, and we shouldn’t be ashamed of it. Plenty of women enjoy porn, act willingly in porn, and even produce it themselves! This philosophy bridges over into sex work, where the pro-porn feminists believe that sex workers should have the freedom to pursue their chosen careers legally and with the benefit of legislation to protect them.
The anti-porn school of thought believe that porn and prostitution are industries that utterly demean women. The sex industry destroys intimacy and offers society unrealistic ideals about women’s bodies, and promotes dangerous ideals about how women should behave sexually.
I believe both schools have great points. I don’t take any moral issue with porn as an avenue for sexual expression for the performer or viewer, provided the actors and viewers are all adults and truly willing. I do believe there are unrealistic expectations set up by porn, and that it affects how men and women see sex and intimacy, particularly since porn is so readily available at such a young age and parents are often too bashful to speak frankly about sex to their kids (but that’s a whole other entry). I also believe that if you choose to spend your money on porn and enjoy it by yourself or with others, that is entirely your choice, your money, your business, same as if you hire a prostitute and the prostitute is willing. If you choose to be a prostitute, that is also your business, your choice, etc. (Let me say that I largely read discourse from UK feminists, where prostitution is legal—although being a pimp/madame is not.) I wouldn’t choose it for myself or my potential daughters, and I probably wouldn’t encourage it because of my personal moral ideas, but that has little to do with the choice of a stranger who would pursue it.
ChallengePorn, as I mentioned before, was a conference for many anti-porn feminists to come together and discuss their views, and to apparently live-tweet them. But when I clicked over to the tag to see some of the arguments, I was disappointed to see how much of the messages were attacks on men for the crime of enjoying porn—as if women never have! Kat Banyard in particular had some nasty things to say:
“The men who use women in prostitution are the ones who have the real choice.”
This statement contends that women basically have no agency of their own, and must have been lured somehow into their profession. Don’t get me wrong—I completely acknowledge that there are prostitutes who ended up in the job for less-than-pleasant reasons and would rather not be doing it. I’m speaking from a US perspective, where these people are often poor young women who feel they have no other choice, and end up under the control of their pimps. (It is understandable why the UK outlaws pimps/madames.) But there is a difference between a streetwalker and a call girl, as Brooke Magnanti (aka Belle de Jour) is fond of saying, and this tweet completely disregards that difference.
“Why isn’t basic human empathy killing men’s erection when watching sexual torture?”
Because women NEVER watch/enjoy violent porn (and they do mean porn, as in fake.). NO ONE has EVER gotten off on sexual violence before. Not like there isn’t an enormous subculture BASED on that concept. Of course the parties in the movie should be willing and comfortable, this is a given. But the statement just screams sensationalist nonsense.
“Direct actions against men fuelling prostitution industry. Spray painted ‘johns’ on buyer’s cars”
Nothing like some light vandalism of private property to get your point across. Let’s shame men into regretting their sexual expression, and by proxy, shame the women who don’t follow our strict guidelines!
“Denmark now campaigning to criminalise demand for prostitution & decriminalise women”
This makes about as much sense as allowing the selling of heroin to be legal, but to criminalize the purchasing of it. Also, are we now denying that there are also male prostitutes? Transexual prostitutes?
“Western capitalism depends on women hating their bodies”
And this old standby. This concept does not single-handedly keep Western economies afloat. I so believe there are unrealistic ideals put out. I also believe there are some positive, realistic ideals out there now that outweigh the negative. I also believe that we could benefit (especially in the US) from some inspiration to be fit and healthy. Seeing a slender woman on the screen or the page does not always have to be a negative reflection upon the woman viewing it, or on our society’s ideals! Seeing a muscular man on the screen or page does not suggest the man viewing it is inadequate. (But of course men never have societal pressures, not at all.) Being a healthy person it not an unrealistic ideal. I personally disagree with the concept that we should tell every person, regardless of their weight or health, that they are perfect just as they are. I’m hardly saying they aren’t worthy of love and affection, and I’m also not saying that every person has control over their size, but it’s simplistic and indulgent to let a person be unhealthy to simply spite “society’s ideals”.
“Nell Beecham from York uni: battling club nights offering women drinks in exchange for making out with each other”
Ah, again with the denying of agency. Is the behavior of this club tasteless? Absolutely. As is the behavior of the girls who went along with it. This dovetails nicely with the message from str_angela_nd, who writes:
