Quotable Quotes: Take Back the Night: Women on Pornography

See our earlier post, Hall of Fame: Take Back the Night

Here are two great passages from the book to get you started. The first addresses the charge that “anti-porn feminists are puritans,” and the second explains how the trend of increasing sexualization of violence and of children has been going on for decades, with Playboy leading the pack starting in the 50’s.

1. From the essay, “Questions We Get Asked Most Often”, by Diane E.H. Russell with Laura Lederer. The questions and answers in this piece were compiled after a series of speaking sessions by the group “Women Against Violence in Pornography and Media” (WAVPM, Wikipedia link) , when they noticed that many audiences had similar questions.

Q: What about films which have sexual scenes in them – are you saying that ALL films and pictures showing explicit sex have a destructive effect?

A: Not at all. WAVPM has no objection to explicit sex, nor do we object to depictions of nudity per se. [....] Pornography is not made to educate but to sell, and, for the most part, what sells in a sexist society is a bunch of lies about women and sex. Women are portrayed as enjoying being raped, spanked or beaten; tied up, mutilated, or enslaved; or they accept it as their lot as women to be victims of such experiences. In the less sadistic films, women are portrayed as turned on and sexually satisfied by doing anything and everything that men order them to do, and what this involves is for the most part totally contrary to what we know about female sexuality; that is, it is almost totally penis-oriented, often devoid of “foreplay,” tenderness, or caring, to say nothing of love and romance. In short, pornographic movies, pictures and stories are a celebration of male power over women and the sexist wish that women’s sexuality and values be totally subservient to men’s. (Take Back the Night, pg. 27)

2. From “Why Playboy Isn’t Playing: An Interview with Judith Bat-Ada”

LL: You talked about a trend from ‘38D’ to ‘pedophilia.’ Can you explain that?

JB: Saturation with straightforward female sexual stimulus leads slowly but inevitabley to the need for, and the acceptance of, such things as child molestation, incest, and sexual violation. Hard-core pornography is like any other marketed product – it needs to be revamped periodically to stimulate flagging sales. We have made women easy and accessible targets for sexual violence so there are very few final taboos left to break – children and incest are the last.

The American media have moved into an acceptance of pedophilia, and are progressing very rapidly toward the endorsement of incest. I believe the final taboo now being breached is child sadism. For example, a recent edition of Forum magazine [this is in the late 70's], published by Bob Guccione of Penthouse, carried no less than twenty accounts of adult-child sex (the children being from eight to twelve years of age), in the first quarter of its pages. The issue them moved on to incest, which it has cozily familiarized under the title “Home and Family Sex.” Forum claims it is simply reflecting readership views, but I think the selling of incest is part of a process whereby a particular kind of pornographic imagery percolates through all the media until it has saturated them, and then a new level of degradation begins to become acceptable. (Take Back the Night, pgs. 122-123)

Hall of Fame: Take Back the Night: Women on Pornography

“How can we stop rape and woman-battering by staffing rape-crisis centers and refuges when there are thousands of movie houses, millions of publications, a multibillion-dollar business that promote the idea that violence and the rape of women is sexually exciting to men, and that we like it too?”

- Diana E.H. Russell, giving the concluding speech at the Feminist Perspectives on Pornography conference in 1978, published in “Take Back the Night: Women on Pornography”

Take Back the Night: Women on Pornography is a compilation of essays and interviews edited by Laura Lederer and released in 1980. 28 years later, it’s as valuable and relevant a read as the day it was released. When I first read it in the late 80’s, I was amazed at how many strong pieces were in the book. The essays were as readable as they were revolutionary, thorough and researched without being boringly academic. Two pieces in particular, “Playboy isn’t Playing: An Interview with Judith Bat-Ada” and Helen E. Longino’s “Pornography, Oppression and Freedom”, have stuck with me to this day and are central to my understanding of pornography’s place within American rapist culture.

Anyone looking to understand why pornography is so bad for women (and everyone else too) should read this book a.s.a.p. It addresses all of the popular questions and criticisms leveled at the feminist anti-porn movement, so if you have any questions, suspicions or doubts, get them addressed here! These would include the caricature of feminists as “anti-sex” or “repressed” or “puritanical” in their condemnation of porn. As the various writers make clear, the complaint is not against sexuality but of the eroticizing of male power and female degradation, of the reduction of women to sexual objects, and of the sexualization of violence and children.

The book’s title? Many people have heard of Take Back the Night marches and vigils, and the book notes how that slogan was first used in the U.S. for a protest march down San Francisco’s pornography strip.

From Lederer’s introduction to the book:

“The title of this book, Take Back the Night, refects this growing realization of the links among crimes against women. The pollution of our media with sexist articles, programming and advertisements, and the increasing amounts of pornography readily available, are hardly questioned. Rapes, muggings and sexual harassment of women at all times, but especially at night, are the norm. That we have been unable to walk the streets after dark without a male to protect us from all the rest of the men has been assumed in this society for so long that people can hardly imagine a culture in which this would not be the case.” (Lederer, 19)

Next up: some quotes from the book to hold you over until the copy you’re about to order arrives!

The Depiction of Whores, pt. II

See our earlier post, “The Depiction of Whores, pt. I

For our second post on the topic of pornography, I’d like to get into the real problem here, why porn is such a “big deal.”

First Amendment vs. Women's RightsTo start, I’d like to note that we’re talking about porn in 2008, not nudie pics stashed in a closet, but freely available hardcore internet porn, available to kids and adults 24/7, including tons of porn involving the degradation of women and girls and the sexualization of children.

1. We’re raising a new generation of rapists.

This quote comes from the book Talking Back to Sexual Pressure: What to Say to Resist Persuasion, to Avoid Disease, to Stop Harassment, to Avoid Aquaintance Rape by Elizabeth Powell. It is seriously one of the most useful books you’ll ever come across. It’s easy to read, it’s comprehensive, and it’s goal is to give readers ideas, suggestions and strategies to take a stand against sexist and rape culture. I would recommend it for every parent and every educator. Five stars out of five.

“A young adolescent male is anxious to learn how to treat a woman. He is more likely to see an attempted rape in our media than see a woman engage in consenting sex. He is more likely to see her mutilated than to see her involved in mutual, erotic passion. At one time, older adolescents indoctrinated younger males to the world of sex in the ‘bull session’; now the pornography and sexual violence that young teenagers consume is their ‘primary sexual indoctrination.’
- Elizabeth Powell, Talking Back to Sexual Pressure

2. We’re changing how men see women and how they treat them.

One of the most popular defenses of pornography, especially violent pornography, is that because these are just images, just fantasies, a person with a need to encounter violent material can fulfill their “needs” through pornography rather than acting them out in person.

There are a number of issues with this belief, including some significant issues that it misses. One of these is the relationship between the man viewing pornography in one minute and then walking out and interacting with women in the “real world” in the next.

In Susanne Kappeler’s The Pornography of Representation, she talks about the men leaving the porn theater and how the viewing has influenced how they see women, and how that is enough to affect action. She makes the connection showing how you see people affects how you treat them, and pornography affects how men see women.

“What the men are doing in the world is continuing to see – to see women as objects of their pleasure and their feeling of life. It is quite enough ‘behaviour’ in my opinion. What the man is doing is watching pornography, seeing, fantasizing, and he is doing this already in the world. And he continues to view in the real, without any difference: in fact, he sees nothing at all except what he represents to himself. Under his aesthetic gaze any woman, known or unknown, turns into the ’stranger’, that object of no interest except for its capacity to stimulate the subject’s feeling of life.

The fundamental problem at the root of men’s behavior in the world, including sexual assault, rape, wife battering, sexual harassment, keeping women in the home and in unequal opportunities and conditions, treating them as objects for conquest and protection – the root problem behind the reality of men’s relations with women, is the way men see women, is Seeing.”
- Kappeler, The Pornography of Representation, pgs. 60/1

3. It’s going to get worse.

This February I saw some posts covering an article on xBiz (a porn industry news site ) regarding a conference entitled “Pornography: Fantasy, Reality and Industry,” which was held at Notre Dame’s Center for Continuing Education, Indiana.

The conference opener, University of Texas journalism professor Robert Jensen, noted that “When one looks honestly at the contemporary porn industry, one sees some disturbing images of where this world is heading.”

From the xBiz piece:

“Jensen cited adult producer’s growing fulfillment of the broad range of marketplace demands as one basis for his opinion; discussing how adult companies need to continually produce “new and interesting products” that have evolved from straight, vaginal sex in the 1960’s and ’70’s, to anal sex in the ’80’s and even more extreme material today.

“I asked one [pornography producer] about the rise of anal sex in the 80s,” Jensen said. “The producer replied that the majority of women do not seek out anal sex, so when men get angry at their wives, they secretly think to themselves that they would like to do that. Since they can’t, they like to watch it.”

Jensen described anal sex as “the sexualizing of male domination and female subordination. [It's] a disturbing mirror for the culture in which we live.”

Focusing on the market demand for depictions of sexual practices that some women may find objectionable along with the desire for profits are leading adult companies down the road to violence and pedophilia, Jensen claimed.

“Where is the industry going, and what could possibly come after this?” Jensen said. “I have asked this to several pornographers. Some will say, ‘I hate to say it, but the only place left to go is overt violence.’ The other place to go is to continue to sexualize youth.”

“The Depiction of Whores”, pt. I

Alison Bechdel - geniusThis week I will be posting about one of the most controversial topics within feminism, pornography, from the Greek pornographia, literally “the depiction of whores.”

The phrase, “the depiction of whores” is a little more charged than “nudity” or “erotica” for sure. This difference speaks to the feminist critique of pornography, which is not puritanical or anti-sex as sometimes claimed, but rather generally anti-degradation, anti-objectification, and anti-dehumanization in goal. 

To start us off, I was recently reading a news item about Alison Bechdel, the genius writer/cartoonist of “Dykes to Watch Out For” (check out her official site here), hands down one of my all-time favorite comics. The item was related to her recent autobiographical comic, “Fun House“, which was pulled from some classrooms due to a few panels portraying lesbian sex.

Here’s Bechdel’s response from an interview, which is just spot-on.

“This sort of bullshit will pretty much permanently fuck up any attempt of feminists to start a reasonable discussion about why so many men are attracted to a flavor of pornography that is as much, if not more, about humiliating and hating women as it is about getting men off. Which is not even all porn, but certainly doesn’t encapsulate novels like this.

Hell, we’re stuck in definitional hell, with the right wingers defining porn as “any material that portrays sexuality in a way that I don’t approve of”, and most everyone else in liberal land defining it as, “sexually explicit materials designed to sexually arouse the reader/viewer”, and radical feminists defining it as “photos and videos where the humiliation and pain of the woman is considered an essential part of the erotic experience for the viewer”. Which is, to be fair to radical feminists, the majority of the material available through your internet channels or “Girls Gone Wild” videos.

I’m not getting into the discussion of censorship from feminists, since it’s a red herring, since the number of feminists willing to talk censorship is a minority of a minority.”

Right on! Stay tuned readers, more on this topic soon!