•November 9, 2010 • Leave a Comment

First and foremost I’d like to apologize for an unexplained abandonment of this blog on my part. Due to the fact that some personal endeavors are taking most of my time, it has become rather hard to update this blog periodically. Hopefully, however, I will be able to bring a bit of my opinion to all of you, as well as any updates I get from Dr. Sun.
A few days ago, at ungodly hours of the morning, an e-mail asking to moderate a comment was sent to me. This comment made my colleagues and I think about the way that we are portraying our work to the public, while it also managed to spark new threads of thought in our research.
I feel some things should be clarified. First of all, the documentary was all of Professor Chyng Sun, Michael Picker and Robert Wosnitzer’s work. My colleagues and I (Olivia and Joanna) had no part in the making of the film, nor were our ideas in any way part of it.
Secondly, the purpose of the film was not to credit or discredit porn. Instead it meant to explore porn, and show those of you who may be interested, a side of it that most have not seen, or refuse to see. While it’s understandable that the film can show porn in a negative light, nothing in the film was untrue. If this is the depiction that the viewers get from it, there’s nothing that we as researchers, or the producers and directors of the film can do about it. They simply interviewed the willing people involved in the business and gave the public what they got from it.
Our intention isn’t to halt porn. That would be as ridiculous as trying to halt prostitution. What we’re trying to explore and share with the world is the ways in which contemporary pornography portrays gender roles and stereotypes, and how this mainstreaming of certain male chauvinistic behaviors is changing the expectations from and of both genders in a courtship or relationship.
The information disseminated in the film, blog, website, etc, is information that we have gathered from various populations. These range from the porn loathing feminist, to the porn addict, to the porn entrepreneur, to the porn star -male or female.
I can speak for my behalf when I say that although I don’t watch it, I don’t find porn itself gross or wrong or demeaning. What I find demeaning is the way that the rather violent, and even demeaning, ways in which women are treated in mainstream porn has become a must have in each respectable porn ever made.
I beg all of you who think we’re a bunch of feminists in renaissance era garb to ponder how you’d feel watching a porn in which the demeaning of a male is the norm. It isn’t a matter of gender equality or the discrediting of porn; we simply question: why is it that a cum shot to the face and gangbanging of a woman is appealing and expected? How this is changing the ways in which we interact intimately and socially?
Now, if my training doesn’t impede periodic updating, you all can expect to hear more from me promptly.



•April 26, 2010 • 5 Comments

Some see it as a harmless guilty pleasure, while others see it as a moving force in our culture. Pornography has been around for quite a while, and while some will say that they don’t see the harm in looking and not touching, others think just looking can make a difference.

People like the NYCNow Task Force are those kind of people, and they have worked for decades to raise awareness in controversial topics such as sex trafficking, prostitution and -you guessed it- pornography (keep in mind the keyword here is awareness). NYCNow has their reasons for focusing on these specific subjects -which I will discuss later- however, now they hit a road bump. Some of their own members (who happen to be pro-porn) have demanded that ‘pornography’ be removed from NYCNow Task Force’s title, and instead be replaced with “media objectification”, on the grounds that NYCNow isn’t full of a bunch of “prudes” who blush and freak out over seeing a “nude body”.

Wait, last time I checked porn was more than just looking at nude bodies. But maybe that’s just me.

Best part of everything is that not content with duping NYCNow Task Force into removing porn from the title and changing it with something that doesn’t fully address the issue, these pro-porn women also brought prostitution into the mix and started talking about legalizing it and how much better the world would be for the (nonexistent) majority of “free” women who “chose” selling sex as their way of making a living.

Now, I’m all about open-mindedness, but I feel there’s a bit of a line between being open-minded and flat out denying facts. Also, I’m aware all of this stuff may sound biased right now, and maybe you’re right in thinking it IS biased, so please, by all means, don’t just take it from me -do some research on this stuff. Speaking of research, studies (done not only by women, but also by non-feminist dudes) have shown that porn today isn’t just two naked people getting it on, but that close to 90% of the scenes had some form of aggression (verbal or physical) directed towards the women -who are depicted as ready and willing to all of this stuff. On top of that, if you compare today’s studies with studies done in the 80’s or early 90’s, the porn then wasn’t as aggressive as it is today, nor was it as readily available (hello internet!).

Now, the people who say that porn is awesome and we’re making a storm in a glass of water say that there’s no factual proof that this so-called aggressive porn makes men rape women, and in a way they’re right. However, while no pure saint man who withstood his first-ever session of hardcore porn left the building to rape the first woman he saw, there is a chance that he became more desensitized to the aggression he saw in the porn since in this depiction of sexual acts, the woman enjoyed the aggression thus “rendering violence invisible”. (And- not to toot our own horn- but most of this stuff is shown in The Price of Pleasure film- just in case you’re interested).

So now that I’ve spoken my piece on why the NYCNow Task Force was all hellbent on the whole “pornography” being part of their purpose (and why now that the word has been taken away from their title the organization is pretty much defunct), let’s go back to my keyword. So, part of the reason they removed porn from the title and purpose of the task force was because the pro-porners were making it seem as if the Task Force was out to outlaw porn. Problem with this is, they weren’t. All they want is for people -audience and porn industry alike- to realize the effects porn has had in culture. What’s this called? AWARENESS. Not outlawing. Basically, have your porn, but just stop portraying masochistic women as the norm.

So, there it is, the NYCNow porn controversy (from the view of yours truly). What is your take on it?

The Price of Pleasure Blog – First Post!

•March 4, 2010 • Leave a Comment

Hello to all; fans, followers and just curious onlookers of The Price of Pleasure.

Our goal is not only to inform you, but also to hear from you. Tell us your thoughts, ideas, suggestions, comments and questions regarding the porn movement. We want to know what porn means to you.