>OK. My interest in the politics of porn is related to its increasing
>legitimacy within mainstream popular culture. On talk radio (Howard
>Stern, Ron and Fez.com, e.g.), on MTV's Loveline, around rock bands
>(Insane Clown Posse, e.g.), on mainstream cable (The X Show), and
>elsewhere, it seems to be becoming legitimate to openly consume porn.
>And what the mainstream is legitimizing is pretty reprehensible in
>general. You say that porn runs the gamut from mob-financed mass pap to
>self-professed feminist fare. But what is largely being consumed? The
>mass pap or the SPFF?
>How many women do you know like to have de rigeur anal sex and end with semen
>landing on their face? I'd guess that the viciousness of contemporary
>mass porn is a sort of compensation for the destabilizing of male social
>privilege in recent years and is related to the weakening of the
>feminist movement.
>The aggressively one-sided nature of
>the sex I've seen in mass porn alienates people from consensual
>sexuality I think and generally serves, more brutally than ever, to
>marginalize women's pleasure and bolster men's (and it strips the
>asshole of its Bataillean potential!).
>
>Still, I am not for forbidding it. But I am against it.
Well, Uday, you said a "mouthful." Clearly you find the mass pap objectionable and demeaning, and in a very large sense I agree with you. Most of it is cranked out with little or no thought given it other than which crude category it will fit into. But like mainstream culture itself, there are items that transcend the common fare, and there are people who are out to do things differently. I won't get too specific (I don't want a bunch of trembling, harumphing economists and academics on my back), but I have consumed more than my fair share of porn -- from the now-quaint films of the 70s to the Golden Age of the early-80s (when production values soared, and the sex dramatized was varied, innovative and at times truly mind-blowing) to the video revolution which, on the one hand, has led to the pap referred to above; but on the other hand, has led to a democratization of the form. Amateur porn has become quite huge, so much so that the papmeisters are doing their own versions (like Bud and Miller producing their mock "microbrews"). Here you find all manner of representation, and there is a growing contingent of female producers and directors who are shaping different fantasies for new audiences. The slobbering, sexist males catered to by the papmeisters probably find this stuff too challenging for their short attention spans and limited staying power. But slobbering, sexist males aren't the only ones who have explicit sexual fantasies, and this new and growing audience (who sometimes participate) is making itself felt, especially on the Web.
Several years ago I got to know Candida Royalle, a former porn star from the 70s (ever see "Pizza Girls"?) who started her own production company, Femme. Candida aimed her films at women, and for a time she did extremely well. I think she was a little ahead of the curve, and don't know what became of her. But I do remember having very serious discussions with her about the representation of desire, and thought at the time that she was opening the door to something very different.
As for women who do or do not enjoy anal or getting facials, well, all I can tell you is that I've met women who do and women who don't. (Indeed, I've been with women who have said and tried to do some of the nastiest shit you can imagine -- and let's just say that I wasn't always up to the task.) It's a big world out there, and not every woman subscribes to the Proper Progressive View of Sex. If you haven't done so, go to Nerve.com, or check out Nerve the magazine. Again, a very successful venture which does not conform to mass pap. Also, Nadine Strossen's "Defending Pornography" is worth a read, especially since you seem concerned with the feminist side of the issue.
DP