Lumby’s article The Ethics of Porn on the Net examines how the Internet has changed many aspects of porn, namely its producers, performers and consumers, and how these changes may have altered the ethical status of pornography. With a particular focus on amateur porn, the author examines how amateur Internet porn challenges the stereotypes of mainstream porn, particularly the restricted representations of beauty, and how in doing so, it provides a forum for those with alternative sexual desires to not be excluded from sexual experimentation and enjoyment.
Lumby begins with an examination of the traditional opposition to porn. This includes religious/conservative objections which view pornography as immoral because of its representations of sex that extend beyond the acts of private, heterosexual married couples, and can be seen to incite masturbation. Marxist/feminist objections to pornography include the exploitation of sex and women’s bodies for money, as well as the perpetuation of stereotypical female and male forms, as represented in traditional porn.
The remainder of the article discusses such issues as the rise in amateur porn production on the Internet, and how and why individuals are producing their own. These reasons include the ease and relatively low cost of home made porn, and the dissatisfaction with existing traditional porn productions that do not encompass alternative forms of sex and sexuality. Lumby examines how these new forms of porn are challenging exiting stereotypes, particularly the restricted representations of female sexual beauty in porn. The author notes that much of the appeal of amateur porn lies in either the ‘ordinariness’ of its actors, or its gratification of fetishes, such as sites dedicated to hairy women or amputees.
Finally, the author examines whether Internet porn has “ethical sensibilities”, as it portrays a diverse range of sexuality and beauty that is not confined to mainstream stereotypes. Also, many of the websites have “internal guidelines, rules and etiquette” (p.207), which are open to debate and can be altered according to consensus of participants.
Do you agree that these new sorts of porn “relax some of our anxieties about the dangers of cybersex and cyberporn” (p.209)?
Does Internet porn really succeed in offering an alternative from of sexual beauty than the ones depicted in traditional porn, or is it still a form of objectification, just on different grounds?
In her article, Lumby includes part of her research interview with “Craig”, a webmaster who feels that Internet porn has enabled women to “feel safer and more confident in their experimentation with alternative sex practices” (p.200). At his parties Craig places webcams in certain rooms, and warns participants not to enter if they do not want to be filmed. He is quoted as saying “There’s something about having the ability to let your hair down and just for once in your life, you know, do some amateur porn on a camera or jump around pretend you’re a stripper or something like that” (p.200-201). Perhaps I’m being a little conservative here, but I don’t consider stripping on camera as an “alternative sex practice” for women; we’ve been doing it for decades.
I think the real question here is why these women would be doing these things (particularly stripping on camera) in the first place. If they are doing so because they get great sexual satisfaction from doing it, then by all means, but personally, I think many would be doing it from a post-feminist perspective of “sex is power”, and misinterpret this exploitation of their bodies as a means for power and equality.
What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Lumby brought up the concept of porn in the home a number of times and I found this argument to be vital in whether or not internet porn "relaxes our anxieties". The fact that is is not invasive - the computer can be turned off and all evidence of porn is removed I think makes it more acceptable. I think people would be more likely to watch internet porn than buy a magazine especially if they are in relationships. The fact that the person does not have to physically go into a shop and buy it which I think most people find embarassing (I know i would be!) is a huge factor in the rise of internet porn. I think the internet is a huge avenue for bisexuality. Something that may not be accepted in offline life is certainly accepted online. This is because people can join online communities where people are the same as them. They are free to do whatever they please.
As Lauryn said, in regards to bisexuality- those desires/fetishes/sexual preferences which may be considered "abnormal" or weird in the offline world are given a second chance online. Yet it extends past bisexuality to any and every “unconventional” sexual taste/appearance.
The internet's expansive landscape offers a space for those who feel as if they are alone in their sexual tastes to become part of a community, or to create their own community. I think that this is a positive thing, as it undoes the damage done when society tends to outcast things which are not the norm sexually. Internet porn can therefore overwrite the rules about what is conventional/unconventional in the sexual domain, by uniting large groups of people with similar tastes. The internet renders those desires which are seen as taboo in the offline life acceptable. (Lumby, p200)
I enjoy the idea that internet porn expands our society's perceptions of what is sexy and what isn't. I for one think that the traditional "porn star" ( fake, overly tanned, blonde etc etc etc) is a terrible misrepresentation of sexuality. And in conjunction with this, I think its great that the Internet provides a platform for "real people" to become sex symbols...as it may help to instill realistic expectations in the (male?) population. (Apart from the natural “ordinary” people which have been discusse, Lumby’s examples of alternative sexual beauty also include but amputees, hairy women, larger women etc) So in this sense, I feel that Internet porn definately offers us an alternative form of sexual beauty than the ones depicted in traditional porn.
From this point onwards, though.....
Joanna, you asked whether it is still objectification, but just on different grounds. And after careful thought, I still can't help but find this question slightly problematic, as there are cases for both sides of the argument. On one hand, Lumby talks about how Internet porn can “encourage not just tolerance, but celebration and eroticism of women’s ‘normal, natural’ body” (p205). Yet, the women in the images are still undoubtedly being objectified… so I’m at a loss at how to answer you here. Surely the individual cases must be investigated to make a decision on whether objectification is to the same degree as that of trad. porn. or not.
All in all, a very interesting read !
I think it is amazing that today debate is concentrated more on WHICH women are portrayed in pornography rather then HOW, although Ellery does make extremely valid points for both sides of the arguement.
I agree with Joanna in that the women involved in 'Craigs' homemade porn may have mistaken exploitation for power and sexual freedom yet I am starting to think that if everyone's truth and reality are subject to their context then there is little room for us to make excuses for their behaviour or justify it with naivety on their behalf. In a situation like this Lumby highlights the main problem which is "what definition of 'ethics' one chooses"(p206). We could debate this until we are blue in the face but it comes down to the ethical standards of such an undefined industry. In this sense I feel there would be a discrepancies and perhaps harm done to the freedom of the porn industry and variety of sexual fetishes that have changed the notion of the 'perfect' woman.
I think it is amazing that today debate is concentrated more on WHICH women are portrayed in pornography rather then HOW, although Ellery does make extremely valid points for both sides of the arguement.
I agree with Joanna in that the women involved in 'Craigs' homemade porn may have mistaken exploitation for power and sexual freedom yet I am starting to think that if everyone's truth and reality are subject to their context then there is little room for us to make excuses for their behaviour or justify it with naivety on their behalf. In a situation like this Lumby highlights the main problem which is "what definition of 'ethics' one chooses"(p206). We could debate this until we are blue in the face but it comes down to the ethical standards of such an undefined industry. In this sense I feel there would be a discrepancies and perhaps harm done to the freedom of the porn industry and variety of sexual fetishes that have changed the notion of the 'perfect' woman.
Lumby’s article constructs amateur internet porn as a liberating experience for women. She comments that internet sex sites allow women to “feel safer and more confident in their experimentation with alternative sex practices” (p.200). I feel that Lumby depicts a naïve view of amateur sex sites as she neglects to consider some of the harsh realities and consequences that arise from home made porn. Lumby assumes that all participants are willing to be filmed and neglects to consider the experiences of women who have been filmed without their knowledge or consent. I would imagine that women who have been in such a situation would be incredibly anxious about the dangers of cyberporn. Although amateur internet porn is represented as instilling women with a sense of freedom in can conversely instill those (who were unknowingly filmed) with shame, anxiety and embarrassment.
Generally, amateur porn can be seen as a positive development for all of the reasons that Ellery mentioned: reducing marginalisation and changing conceptions of beauty, etc.
What I struggle with are those who are still disempowered. I found this article while researching an essay: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/love-sex/sex-industry/lights-camera-exploitation-940041.html
It looks at some of the problems with the professional porn industry.
It makes a really strong point: it is impossible for the average viewer/user to know the context in which the porn was produced. How do we tell the difference between liberation and exploitation? So in this sense our anxieties (or at least mine) are not relaxed.
In many ways, porn is about objectification. A few people may be subjects, some will be objects, and those who are neither don't exist (such as those who didn't traditionally fit the 'beauty' stereotype). So although we hate objectification, it may be the first step to empowerment...
Thanks for your input girls, it certainly is an interesting topic!
With regard to the question about objectification in alternative forms of porn, I can see how Ellery-Jane found it difficult to answer, and i dont really know where i stand on the issue either. I guess i have never really been that fond of porn - whether a girl is being drooled over because she has massive breats or is missing a leg, in my view, she is still being used for someone else's sexual gratification. But then again, arent we all just animals with basic instincts?, and there is nothing wrong with appreciating the human form.
I'm conflicted, because I feel that so often when we vilify pornography, we take away something from women and their right to sexual enjoyment.
In 'Princess and Pornstars; Sex, Power, Identity', author Emily Maguire raises some intesting points regarding women and the porn industry. She also examines how a reconstruction of sex education in Australian schools can benefit both boys and girls, by teaching them that sex is something can be enjoyed by both parties, rather than something that girls have to "give up" and something boys have to persuade them to give.
Its an easy read and very insightful, if you're intersted.
I am quite late in responding but thought I would put my two cents in anyway. I think that it is very easy to judge another person who chooses to 'objectify' themselves by taking part in amateur pornography but I think we need to look at the bigger picture here. In the past women were absolutely nothing else besides for the object being taken adavantage of and now the role that women play in pornography is looked upon in a veyr different light. Now a woman's sexuality and her desire to explore it is not as taboo as before and I agree that internet porn provides an outlet for sexual frustrations which may not be considered normal in society. It also allows people who are embarrassed to explore other sexual avenues to do so in anonymous manner. As Lauryn said, most women would be mortified to have to walk i
Post a Comment