Lots of guys say that they only look at free porn online, and they object to being lumped in with those who use cash or credit to buy access to sex. But of course, virtually all “free” porn sites are supported by advertisers who often pay based on web traffic. Each visit is monetized one way or another; anyone who thinks he isn’t contributing financially to the industry because he isn’t paying doesn’t understand the economics of the web.
The historian Edwin Black recounts, “It was not unusual for Virginia to use its Colony for Epileptics and Feeble-minded as a dumping ground for those deemed morally unsuitable. Classifying promiscuous women as morons was commonplace.” Dr. Albert Priddy, superintendent of the Virginia Colony during the years in question, acknowledged this openly: “This admission of female morons to this institution has consisted for the most part of those who would formerly have found their way into the red light district and become dangerous to society.”
Ewen & Ewen on the use of “intelligence” tests, institutionalization, and forced sterilization to control “immoral” women. (From Typecasting: On the Arts and Sciences of Human Inequality, pg. 297)
…someone liking their work does not make their industry immune to criticism. From a socialist feminist perspective, we ALL live in contradiction…simply by participating in the world food system, I am screwing over other women every day who have lost their land and subsistence to corporations marketing goods to the developed world. I think when we OWN our contradictory and complex positions in global capitalism and are seen working to emancipate ourselves and not just working to “save” other people, we gain trust. I don’t think anyone can empower someone else – we have to work on our lives, challenge social structures and act as allies to facilitate change.
Joanne Costello, quoted in “The Pornstitution* Debates” by Meghan Murphy.
In terms of addressing arguments around ‘feminist pornography’ I’d like to point out a couple of things that frame my argument. As pointed out by Andrea Dworkin, the root of the word pornography means ‘the graphic depiction of whores’. The vast majority of pornography is made for heterosexual men and is sexist. Therefore, the term ‘feminist pornography’ in my opinion, is an oxymoron. Pornography isn’t feminist. There is such a thing as feminist erotica, feminist depictions of female bodies and lives and sexualities, but ‘feminist pornography’? It not only doesn’t make sense but, if we have decided that there is indeed such a thing, it exists as such a tiny minority within the vast sea of misogynist pornography that it couldn’t possibly counter the impact of ‘Pornography: The Industry’. The exception is not the rule. And the rule is that pornography is made for men and prostitution exists because of male buyers. The few odd women who have paid for sexual services exist (yes, they do exist, I acknowledge this), but do not come anywhere near floating the industry. Never have, never will.Prostitution has never been about female pleasure or female empowerment. The vast majority of buyers (of men, women, and children) are men.
Meghan Murphy, “The Pornstitution* Debates”
“Feminist arguments against pornography focus on its role in reinforcing sexist views and attitudes, which, on one level, simply fail to treat women as serious human beings and, on another level, sanction and perhaps promote violence against women. These arguments reflect and are part of a broader attack on the character of sexual relationships in sexist societies. The arguments do not presuppose that sex is necessarily degrading or dehumanizing. Feminist criticisms of pornography instead focus upon its ideological role in maintaining gender relations that harm the status of women generally as well as the individual women victimized by the violence that is sanctioned and encouraged by pornographic materials.”
Hoffman, Eric. “Feminism, Pornography, and Law.” U of Pennsylvania Law Review. Vol. 133 No. 2. Jan. 1985: 497-534 (498-499). JSTOR. Web.