Pornography

Sep 2, 2016 //
0

Imagine imagining having basic, vanilla sex. Now imagine seeing that basic, vanilla sex performed in front of you, and what the sight of that sex would create in your brain space. It’s pretty much the same mental image. If I look at a dog, it makes me think of a dog. Visual cues simply lead to thoughts that we might normally have on our own anyway if we had the time or inclination. The visuals merely help to keep focus. Broadly denouncing pornography as immoral or oppressive then essentially brands the thoughts of sex as the same. If one considers the health benefits of masturbation, such as a boosted immune system, stress relief, improved sleep, etc., then condemning pornography as the means to which most men masturbate is not only demonizing their sexuality but also creating barriers to their overall well-being (especially given the shame that can develop when confronted with a society’s hostility). That’s it, blog over, right? Wellllllllll……

Many see pornography as objectifying to women. This is a nonsensical statement, and I’ve already explained why. However, I’m going to look at it again. Why is pornography objectifying women, but sport is not objectifying men? Professional athletes create body images impossible to match through normal means with the help of drugs and hormonal supplements, and engage in impossible lifestyles given the permanent damage their bodies endure in the process. These athletes are only ever considered in relation to their sport, save when scandal strikes, in which case news coverage explodes with how this will affect their team’s season. This wouldn’t be a problem if male physical prowess wasn’t overly saturated in all other depictions of masculinity. Oh wait, it is. However, when people discuss the demerits of sport and its potentially unhealthy impact on the psyche of men, it is the zeitgeist of masculinity within sports that is addressed and not sports themselves. Sport in its purest form is the honing of skill and self using the whetstone of competition to achieve extraordinary feats of physical prowess, either for personal fulfillment or for the amazement of others. I’ve always found the Olympics to be the perfect example, as most athletes maintain unflinching respect for their competitors, knowing first-hand the hardships and sacrifices they’ve made on their own path to Olympic glory.

This leads to the logical conclusion that it is the culture that is infused in modern pornography, and not pornography itself, that is culpable for things like teenage boys seeking sex and nudes before they seek intimacy and kissing. Part of this particular problem stems from a lack of role models displaying proper intimacy in other areas of a youth’s life, and the improper teaching of sexual education, but the type of pornography a young boy is going to consume is also, quite predictably, going to lead him to make unhealthy assumptions regarding sexuality given no other determining factors. This is not new, as the media one consumes in any medium, be it explicit or otherwise, informs the worldview of the person consuming it.

So why not create a worldview espoused through pornography that is beneficial to the sexuality of everyone involved? Feminist porn is a revolutionary idea that would exemplify the women in pornography as collaborators in sexuality rather than its conquest. This practice would incorporate not only healthier social attitudes toward sex, but also toward women in general. While I do not agree with everything the linked article suggests (I disagree that being able to import one’s self into the fantasy is detrimental to that fantasy; sexual fantasy typically is an expression of that individual’s sexuality, not a voyeuristic inquiry into the sexuality of others), whereas some objections, such as violence being committed against women within the realm of dominative sexuality without explicit consent and respect, are obvious to anyone with a sense of decency. Regardless of what I think, dialogues surrounding the damage that pornography most definitely inflicts onto the minds and bodies of both men and women should centre on the distinct changes that would need to occur within porn, rather than simply and ignorantly calling for its abolition.

Unfortunately, this isn’t the end of the blog either, as how one consumes porn is now found to be as destructive as the typically misogynistic content of contemporary porn. A Nielsen study cited in The Dumbest Generation by Mark Bauerlein describes the way the majority of the population reads on the internet. In short, they don’t. Text is typically scanned with one’s eyes glossing over the page in an F shape, with headlines and keywords being the only information that is consumed. The illiteracy of web users leads to the success of listicles, as anything more difficult or complex is simply passed over. Beyond this, websites are viewed in a flow. People click in and out, back and forward, through their browsing instead of finishing a website in a single sitting. For those reading this, how many times have you clicked back into your Facebook page or some other site since you started reading this blog? A normal attention span is non-existent when browsing the web, and the same pattern carries over into porn.

Gary Wilson delivers a Ted Talk wherein he describes this phenomenon as it relates to porn, and describes how it hinders us even further than the degradation of literacy that online browsing delivers on its own. Wilson describes the biological effect of seeing potentially new genetic partners in several different windows and tabs, clicking in and out and masturbating to a flow of pornography rather than a still image or single film, consuming more beautiful women in an hour than our horny ancestors would see in several lifetimes, all in an unending search for novelty. Unending novelty, of course, creates tolerance levels, leading to a dependency on further expansion and exploration in a binging cycle akin to traditional drug addiction. Addiction never ends well for anyone, and erectile problems related to excessive porn use is becoming more and more common. Interestingly, older men who give up pornography recover their libido more quickly than their younger counterparts, and this is almost certainly due to their relatively new access to high speed internet pornography compared to the young who have grown up with it. Again though, this is not due to the intrinsic nature of pornography, but the method through which one consumes it.

Pornography by itself is not a great evil nor a threat to the moral standing of a society that allows it. It benefits the mental and physical wellness of those who consume it as it relates to masturbation, as well as contains the potential for proliferating healthier attitudes toward sex and women as an addition to the feminist revolution rather than its obstacle. That isn’t to say its current incarnation is benign, as content and practice are crucial issues that need to be addressed. Is body-positivity and consent-based analog pornography the utopian ideal to which all pornography should strive to emulate? Who’s to say. This is a conversation that is just beginning, as too often the dialogues of the past have hinged on the equally ignorant poles of the moral binary between of abolition and lascivious infatuation.

Tags , ,
Categories Gender and Sexuality

Understanding Consent with David Hume’s Is/Ought Problem

Aug 26, 2016 //
0

Picture this scene. Tony is a 22 year old man from the city who is in his third year at university, working toward an economics major after having traveled for a bit after his high school graduation. He’s been having a hard time with women after his high school sweetheart dumped him for his best friend, but is now at a place where he is comfortable moving on. Susie is a 20 year old woman who transferred to the same university because of its successful economics program, and is on a full scholarship. She has had some boyfriends in the past, but never anything more than fling or a passing crush. They met after having been assigned to work on a project together, and ended up going on a date where they discussed the economics of Star Trek over coffee and greatly enjoyed each other’s company. The second date went equally well. They are now on their third date, and after watching a movie at her place, they begin making out. Tony begins to undress. In this situation, Susie is morally obligated to:

a) Put out

b) Cut his dick off while screaming misandrist nonsense about the Patriarchy

c) Susie is not morally obligated to do anything

If you picked C, congratulations! You understand consent and have disproved morality! Hume’s Is/Ought problem refers to the impossibility of drawing a moral imperative (an ‘ought’) from any given situation in the world (an ‘is’) without an outside value influencing that decision.

Here’s a question: What if the sign said, “I am asking for it!”? The answer: There is still no moral obligation to fulfill the sign’s request.

This has further implications outside of sexual consent, however. If one looks at the world and sees poverty, injustice, and despair, there is no ‘ought’ that can be derived from that scenario. One can certainly say that if one values equality, then an ‘ought’ is derived. Alternatively, if one values self-preservation, a significantly different ‘ought’ is derived. This turns morality into an “If value X then…” situation which creates problems of relativism and subjectivity that must be acknowledged.

If you want to blame feminism for breaking morality, don’t, because this problem was introduced in 1740 CE, well before women even had the right to vote. How does one behave ethically if an ‘ought’ cannot be derived from an ‘is’? I’ve already written a blog about it, where, hey guess what, I conclude that having a conversation is what drives moral behaviour.

Tags , , , ,
Categories Gender and Sexuality, Philosophy

Don’t Be An Ally

Aug 24, 2016 //
1

Being an ally is so important to the progressive cause that I literally own two copies of the book Becoming An Ally by Anne Bishop, purchased for my social work courses. I had to move out of town, and I left my first copy at my parents’ place in ignorance of it being required reading for another course. Whoopsies! I know my prof would be absolutely thrilled that I have two copies that I can refer to whether I am at home or visiting my folks, but here I am writing a blog saying not to be an ally, so I guess it evens out. Sorry! I promise I have reasons!

Being an ally is being a member of the dominant group that is supportive of the oppressed groups. A huge part of that requires listening to and then trusting their feelings. However, what about the Christian who claims that “Happy Holidays” is oppressive? It’s not, but why not? The argument that the sheer number of Christians in North America makes oppression impossible is a false one; there are more women than men, but few people would argue that that delegitimizes their claims of discrimination. The reason “Happy Holidays” is not oppressive is because #AllHolidaysMatter is inclusive whereas #ChristianHolidaysMatter is not. It’s like greeting everyone, “Hey, Steve!” It’s really only relevant to people named Steve, and alienates those who are not. Saying the intent lies solely in the greeting ignores the fact that you’re still calling that person Steve. I’ve heard the argument that it is the expression of one’s own holiday, and that somehow makes it better, but that would be like me saying, “Hey, Dan!” to everyone. The problem is still there.

What if a man brings up that 92% of workplace fatalities are men? And then defends the wage gap by suggesting that men earn more money to accommodate their riskier employment? Seems reasonable that someone who risks death as a firefighter or a coal miner should receive appropriate compensation compared to a teacher or librarian who faces comparatively little risk of danger. However, this assertion ignores the disproportionately fewer women in the higher paid management positions and the fact that women make up 62% of minimum wage earners, which are equal if not greater contributors to the wage gap than dangerous employment. I don’t want to get into the social value of employment, but that also comes into play. The feelings of oppression, even when backed up with some degree of evidence, must always be scrutinized with all the available data. To assume that the traditionally oppressed groups are simply more trustworthy than men or Christians would be incoherent. Everyone should be listened to, of course, but for those who claim that feelings hold greater weight than facts, I refer you to this interview with Newt Gingrich.

Being an ally also requires that the ally identifies as, and comes to grips with, intrinsically being an oppressor. This is problematic. The first problem is that this makes change impossible. If white people are oppressors no matter what they do, then no matter what actions they take, they will never not be oppressors, no matter how many generations unfold. It’s entirely defeatist. How is the loop broken if no one can get off? I’m reminded of a meme I saw that said, “Brock Turner isn’t a swimmer who committed a rape, he is a rapist that can swim well.” Brock Turner is a human being who is a rapist and who can also swim well. The instant we define anybody as other than human, we’ve locked them into that role for life. If we apply that to a group of people, we only encourage reverse-discrimination without addressing any of the real problems. An individual may have privilege, but they are not their privilege nor are they the system which enables them to possess that privilege. To make such an assumption is to equally claim that someone who suffers oppression is nothing outside of their oppression.

A white person merrily greeting a non-white person in the street is not oppressive. A white person passing over a non-white person for an employment opportunity is. Making oppression about the group of people rather than the acts themselves is misleading, and distracts from the reality that racism is a systemic problem that anyone can either reinforce or resist at any given moment. Bill Cosby infamously gave a speech that was widely panned as being anti-black. It is not a question of identity or markers, but of acquiescence. It might be easier to acquiesce when one benefits from the privileges of oppression, certainly, but demarcating entire groups of people as villains does not help the cause. Even Martin Luther King said that there must not be a distrust of all white people; it only serves to alienate that group.

There is also the issue of allies keeping silent, unless specifically requested to speak. The theory is that the voices of the dominant group hijack the discourse when it comes to the experiences of the oppressed. One can never speak to the experiences of another, certainly, but I’ve already written an entire blog post about why the voices of the dominant are crucial to progress, so I won’t repeat it here. The gist is that if the dominant group is the one that needs to change, then more voices from the dominant group need to be heard because they are the ones most relatable to others from the dominant group.

Further problems with being an ally arise when one realizes that oppressed groups don’t unanimously agree on issues relating to their group. Bishop acknowledges this which makes the concept of an ally better in theory, but nonsensical in practice. This article raises the issue with prostitution, with the interviewee (a former sex worker) claiming that the voices of sex workers should not necessarily be listened to due to the necessity of outside critical thinking and the collection of relevant data, reasons I’ve already established in this blog. If one asserts themselves as an ally of prostitutes, and is either for or against the practice, they will find plenty of sex workers who support each choice. It no longer becomes a question of being an ally, but of projecting one’s own view into the realm of oppression. Bishop claims that, to be a successful ally, one cannot fall into the trap of thinking they know what’s best for an oppressed group. When discussing such a polarizing topic as prostitution, however, one will invariably choose an outlook that knows best for one group or the other. Either for or against it, one is patronizing those of the dissenting opinion by claiming to be an ally to *all* prostitutes. If one is only an ally to certain prostitutes, that might actually be worse. Better to drop the term altogether and focus on achieving a just outcome.

Think of the Latinos in America. It seems pretty straight forward to claim to be their ally against Donald Trump, the man who declared that illegal immigrants from Mexico are all rapists and murders, and yet there are Latinos who support him. To claim ally-ship to this group in this context would be disingenuous because it homogenizes a vastly multifaceted ethnicity into a singular extension of the preconceived perspective of that so-called ally. One can certainly claim that No One Is Illegal, and I would back them up to the best of my intellectual capabilities, but when projecting a viewpoint onto a people it can only ever be naive self-righteousness that makes that claim. If you want to change the world for the better, and I sincerely hope you do, pick issues, not identities.

The most important part of being an ally is likely to reside in personal relationships, but even there I believe it falls flat. If someone trusts you enough to unburden themselves of an oppression they are facing, listen and respect what they’re saying as a friend. To approach a situation like this as an ally would reduce them to their marker, and the interaction is devolved into a member of the dominant group conversing with a minority, rather than two human beings seeking kinship and refuge in one another.

Bishop does raise good points in her book, and I’m certainly not disparaging her overall message. However, being an “ally” seems more involved with properly identifying oneself as a member of the progressive movement rather than actually making progress as a movement. Don’t bother being an ally. Learn about the issues, listen to the perspectives, make your own conclusions, and affect change as best you can.

Tags , , ,
Categories Social Criticism
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »