Research: Physical attractiveness and desirability.

From the New York Times:

So You’re Not Desirable ... By Paul W. Eastwick and Lucy L. Hunt

It is one of the hard truths of romance: Desirable people attract other desirable people, while the rest of us — lacking in attractiveness, charisma or success — settle for the best partner who is willing to consider our overtures. In the scientific literature, this idea is enshrined in the concept of mate value, which determines who gets to mate with whom. In popular culture, it is reflected in the choice of comely contestants to vie for the equally comely spouse-to-be on TV shows like “The Bachelor.” Pairing off, it seems, is just one more example that life isn’t fair.

But is this cynicism justified? In a paper that we published this month in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, we offer evidence for the seemingly naïve notion that in most romantic contexts your unique appeal is more important than your mate value.

Mate value is predicated on people’s ability to reach some degree of consensus about one another’s desirable qualities. (Rarely do people achieve perfect consensus on anything, but they reach some degree of consensus, for example, that ice cream is tastier than cottage cheese.) If women agree that David has high amounts of attractiveness (or charisma or success), that Neil has moderate amounts and that Barry has low amounts, then David, Neil and Barry have high, medium and low mate value, respectively.

Psychological research on first impressions has shown that men and women do in fact reach some degree of consensus about each other in precisely this way. During an initial encounter, some people generally inspire swooning, others polite indifference and others avoidance. Desirable qualities like attractiveness, charisma and success — the features that differentiate the haves from the have-nots — are readily apparent.

Yet alongside this consensus is an equally important concept: uniqueness. Uniqueness can also be measured. It is the degree to which someone rates a specific person as lower or higher than the person’s consensus value. For example, even if Neil is a 6 on average, certain women may vary in their impressions of him. Amanda fails to be charmed by his obscure literary references and thinks he is a 3. Yet Eileen thinks he is a 9; she finds his allusions captivating.

In initial encounters, consensus and uniqueness are in tension. Which ultimately prevails?

Read the rest here.

A school trustee addresses some of the myths about the new sex ed program in Ontario

From Jake Skinner's site:

The 2015 Sex-ed Curriculum

On Monday 23 February 2015 the new sex-ed curriculum for Ontario was released. The physical documents are available at www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum. This post includes a myth/fact document provided to school trustees which I am passing on to you. I will continue to add to this blog post as more resources become available for parents concerned about how the new curriculum will address the question of health. I appreciate that this is a sensitive topic and there are some strong views but let's keep the comment section civil.

Myth vs. Fact

Release of the revised curriculum for Health and Physical Education, Grades 1 to 12

Myth: Students will be learning about having sex in Grade 1.

Fact: In Grade 1, students will be learning about anatomy, personal hygiene (e.g. hand washing), and how to interact respectfully with their peers. Young children need to be able to identify the correct names for their body parts in order to communicate clearly and get help if they need to in cases of abuse, illness or injury. They start to learn about expressing their romantic feelings in Grade 5, and only start to learn about sexual activity in Grade 7.

Myth: Students will be learning about masturbation in Grade 6.

Fact: While the concept of masturbation is included in Grade 6 curriculum, it is mentioned in an optional prompt. It is there to support teachers in responding to student questions that may arise. Teachers have repeatedly stated that students often ask questions on this topic, and they need guidance on how to answer in a factual and consistent manner. This is not a mandatory learning expectation. Experts have also pointed out that many children in fact start masturbating before puberty begins.[1]

Myth: Students will be learning about anal and oral sex in Grade 7.

Fact: In Grade 7, the curriculum expects students identify ways of preventing STIs (including HIV) and/or unintended pregnancy. It talks about delaying intercourse and other sexual activities until a person is older, and using condoms consistently if and when they become sexually active. Oral and anal sex are included as topics for discussion to ensure all students are aware of the risks associated with any form of sexual behaviour. Many students believe oral and anal sex are safer alternatives as they cannot get pregnant, but Public Health Agency of Canada data tells us the rate of chlamydia and gonorrhea has been increasing since the late 90s and mostly affects teenagers and young adults. From 2002 to 2011, Ontario’s reported chlamydia rate has increased by 81% while the reported gonorrhea rate has increased by more than 20%.[2]

Read the rest here. The comments are worth reading, too, if you want to get an idea of how polarizing the debate is.

Meet a very successful cam model.

Watch the clip first and see what comes up for you. I've added some commentary below.

"My job is... not for everyone." (Some content is NSFW) Check out more awesome BuzzFeedYellow videos! http://bit.ly/YTbuzzfeedyellow MUSIC https://soundcloud.com/cma-music/youre-not-alone-original-mix FEATURING Ashe Maree Instagram: https://instagram.com/kittenisodd Twitter: https://twitter.com/ashemareexoxo Tumblr: http://ixnay-on-the-oddk.tumblr.com GET MORE BUZZFEED: www.buzzfeed.com www.buzzfeed.com/video www.youtube.com/buzzfeedvideo www.youtube.com/buzzfeedyellow www.youtube.com/buzzfeedblue www.youtube.com/buzzfeedviolet www.youtube.com/buzzfeed BUZZFEED YELLOW Tasty short, fun, inspiring, funny, interesting videos from BuzzFeed.

So, thoughts?

Three things stuck out to me:

1. She notes that there is a subgroup of men who troll and harass her, and presumably say some nasty stuff. Why is this the case? What is going on culturally that there are men who feel entitled to demean, belittle, and harass female strangers on the web, especially those who do this type of work? I suspect it's because there's a group of sexually/romantically disenfranchised men who have been hurt or rejected by women, or who feel powerless and unattractive, and as a defense mechanism or to communicate their upset have become callous, mysogynistic, nasty, and abusive. You see this in the Pick Up Artistry scene, and in places like the RedPill on Reddit. They externalize their pain and suffering, and then create an entire ideology to support it.

2. She talks about body image and her struggles with her weight (in her case, being thin because of an illness). In some types of work, body appearance is a critical part of success (e.g., modeling, being a server in a restaurant, being a fitness/personal trainer, being in the media, etc.) - this has been an issue of much debate and concern. In camming, body appearance is also very central to success. So there is likely increased risk of body image dissatisfaction doing camming, which is tied to lowered self-esteem. It sounds like it is a real struggle for her, which might be worrisome. But, it's not for us to say, I suppose.

3. She mentions that she has lots of young followers, in particular female followers. I'd be a little worried about how these followers see her, and if they understand what camming and fantasy is about. Hopefully in her interactions with them, parts of her other than her sexuality become apparent. In other words, hopefully her followers can celebrate her sexuality, but also recognize that she is much more than simply a physically attractive object of desire (which actually increases her attractiveness to her fans - personality and interactions with fans play huge roles in cam models' success).

Battle over comprehensive sex ed in Ontario.

The provincial government of Ontario has announced that it is going ahead with a beefed up new comprehensive sex ed curriculum, starting next fall. Children will learn the proper names for their genitals and sexual orientations in elementary school, among other things. In middle school, they'll learn about masturbation as a means to explore their bodies. And by high school, they will get a complete package of comprehensive sex ed. There has been fierce opposition to the new program. From the CBC, in its entirety (read the comment section for good examples of opposition):

New Ontario sex ed curriculum ready for September Children to be taught dangers of sexting

The Ontario government says its new sex education curriculum, which will start in Grade 1 and later involve discussions on the dangers of sexting, will be taught starting in September.

Education Minister Liz Sandals unveiled the new curriculum at a news conference Monday, saying the government won't back down in the face of criticism as it did in 2010 when religious groups complained about proposed revisions.

Sandals said she anticipates some criticism, but the new lessons are key to keeping children safe.

"This will be the curriculum that is taught in Ontario schools in September 2015," Sandals said, noting training for teachers has already been scheduled.

Sandals said many aspects of the curriculum, like telling children they have the right to say no to unwanted touching, remains the same. However, due to public health data that shows children are experiencing puberty earlier, some topics are being introduced at earlier ages.

"We need to deal with the fact that our kids are starting to go through puberty much younger than they used to," said Sandals.

The new curriculum, which marks the first time sex education courses in Ontario have been updated since 1998, also includes more information about the role technology plays in youth sexuality.

Sandals said she hopes frank discussions about the risks of sharing explicit content online will cut down on the inappropriate material children are sharing online.

Children have questions about sex: experts

Many people who work in the sexual education field praised the changes on Monday.

Lyba Spring, who has worked as a sex educator with Toronto Public Health for some 30 years, said Ontario’s curriculum is the oldest in Canada and 16 years out of date.

Spring said the number 1 issue the curriculum needs to address is consent.

Currently, she said, "there’s no encouragement to really think through what one is willing to do."

Spring said classes should also discuss pornography and sexting, and that there should be a section about sexual abuse in the puberty section.

And, Spring said, teachers should be ready to answer questions.

"They're exposed to everything on the internet … but they want to hear it from a teacher," Spring said.

Dr. Miriam Kaufman, the head of adolescent medicine at SickKids Hospital, said it's natural for children and youth to have questions about sex.

"Kids start asking about things very, very early in terms of their own sexuality," said Kaufman.

Those questions shouldn’t be left for parents to answer, she said.

"The parent role is essential … but as parents we're not all that good," Kaufman said, noting that while she's written books on the topic and taught classes, she wasn't good at speaking with her own children about sex.

Parents will get resources, too

The Canadian Press obtained a copy of a "quick facts" guide for parents that outlines some of the changes, including many that relate to technology.

The guide says students in Grades 1, 2 and 3 will learn initial searching skills and strategies for safe internet use, including "how to get help for themselves or others if harassment or abuse happens either face-to-face or online."

The primary grade students will also learn the difference between real and fictional violence, in the media or with online games, and "respectful communications" in the gym, classroom and school yard.

Even some elementary school students have sent sexually explicit pictures of themselves to someone online, while 11 per cent of Grade 10 students and about 14 per cent of those in Grade 11 say they have sent a sext, according to a 2015 study, Young Canadians in a Wired World.

"As students get older, they are more likely to sext," the guide warns parents. "Many students are unaware of the potential effects and consequences of sexting."

For the accompanying video, click here.

Micropenis AMA.

For those of you not familiar with Reddit, it's a website featuring links and content from users. Once something is posted, other users can comment, and comments can be upvoted or downvoted. This means that the best comments move to the top of the thread and the worst comments disappear off the bottom (or are hidden). It's great, in that you don't end up with the trolling and ridiculousness that typically clogs up and ruins traditional internet forums. There are literally zillions of subreddits, or special-interest pages. One of those is /r/AMA. People start threads describing themselves and then do a Q&A. /r/AMA has become so popular that many celebrities and others to whom we look up to (e.g., Neil deGrasse Tyson) have participated. Some consider it a necessary part of their branding and some just do it for fun. Probably the most famous AMA was with Obama.

There was AMA a while back from a guy with a micropenis. The questions and his responses provided an extremely intimate look into how his penis has affected his life, and how he's now come to terms with it. Here are some samples (click to make larger):

Check out the entire thread (with photos and video links)here.

A student last term submitted a link to a site with photos of micropenises. Check it out here.

TED: Cindy Gallop - Make love, not porn

Cindy Gallop isn't opposed to porn, per say. But she does have some concerns about the way it's affecting expectations when it comes to sex. From TED:

Cindy Gallop talks about the personal experiences that led her to launch MakeLoveNotPorn.com in 2009; the extraordinary response that site received, that then motivated her to launch MakeLoveNotPorn.tv; and why her mission is to socialize sex, and make #realworldsex socially acceptable and as socially shareable as anything else we share on Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, Instagram.

[]

More on the double standard.

What do we mean when we say that there's a "sexual double standard" for men and women, and where did it come from?

Women describe their vulva.

These descriptions come from a fun study done by the people that run LargeLabiaProject.org. The sample is clearly not representative, and the study is not peer-reviewed. Nonetheless, they report some interesting findings. The section in which they provide women's descriptions of their vulva is particularly compelling. You can read the whole paper here. And some of he descriptions (check the main document for many, many more):

Page from Labia Minora and Vulvar Appearance

Patrice O'neal on safe sex and the double-standard.

Ethnocentrism and female circumcision (FGM).

There are two main types of female circumcision: clitoridectomy and infibulation. Clitoridectomy is the removal of the clitoris, while infibulation is the removal of the entire vulva and the suturing of the vaginal opening. The procedures are predominant and culturally important in parts of Africa and the Middle East. Both are considered genital mutilation by the World Health Organization (WHO). More information from the WHO can be found here. As Westerners, we are typically horrified by this tradition. The vulva, especially the clitoris, are considered essential anatomy for experiencing sexual pleasure. The procedures seem cruel and misogynistic, and it's impossible for us to imagine how female circumcision could be a good thing, from any perspective.

But, is this a case of ethnocentrism, and should we mind our own business?

In these videos, women talk about the importance of female circumcision, as both a ritual and in terms of women's worth as future brides.

*Disclaimer* I have no idea how accurate the translations are.

Female circumsicion is not just a problem in Sub-Saharan Africa. About 6,000 girls fall victim to genital mutilation every day, that's about 2 million a year. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that between 100 and 140 million women worldwide are circumcised.

A discussion in Ethiopia about the issue of female genital mutilation (FGM). Language: Amharic & Somali w/ English Subtitles

http://www.DRDAPO.COM for more eye-opening content Documentary on female genital cutting

A group of Italian researchers who examined the effects of female circumcision on sexual functioning cautiously reported some surprisingly and remarkably positive results:

The group of 137 women, affected by different types of FGM/C, reported orgasm in almost 86%, always 69.23%; 58 mutilated young women reported orgasm in 91.43%, always 8.57%; after defibulation 14 out of 15 infibulated women reported orgasm; the group of 57 infibulated women investigated with the FSFI questionnaire showed significant differences between group of study and an equivalent group of control in desire, arousal, orgasm, and satisfaction with mean scores higher in the group of mutilated women. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in lubrication and pain.

The entire article can be downloaded here: Catania et al., 2007.

Their results are hard to believe, as the circumcised women reported better sexual functioning than what you'd find in a typical Western population.

The study has been criticized for several reasons, including: poor control group; measures normed for Western cultures; and bias associated with self-reports. However, similar findings have been reported before. In these cultures, it's likely that female circumcision is a key part of women's identities as sexual beings. And perhaps that strengthened identity is associated with better sexual functioning.

Some have suggested that a possible compromise might be genital nicking. Rather than removing the vulva, the vulva are nicked instead. A description and background can be found in this New York Times article.

The New York Times has reported extensively on female circumcision. All the articles can be found here.

The origins of labia insecurity.

There have been several theories proposed as to the root causes of labia insecurity, one being the effect of pornography. This theory is particularly pertinent in Australia, where censorship laws are such that softcore porn cannot display inner labia (which appears to be entirely arbitrary - since when are inner labia more explicit???). Here's a brief clip describing the state of affairs (NSFW): 

Subscribe for more Hungry Beast: http://bit.ly/HungryBeast Theres one part of the female body that most of us have seen more in pictures than in real life. But has censorship skewed our idea of what a normal vagina looks like? And could it be contributing to a new trend in cosmetic surgery?

Tales from the sex ed trenches, via Reddit.

There have been a few posts on Reddit (if you don't know what Reddit is, click here) about funny, outrageous, and hilariously misinformed questions that have come up in sex ed classes. The following are some of the comments from two threads (check them out in their entirety here and here):

East India Comedy: Sex Education in India.

From the description:

The health ministry of India recently [summer 2014] suggested that sex education be banned in the country. We look at India's attitude towards sex through a "government approved" sex education lecture.

The health ministry of India recently suggested that sex education be banned in the country. We look at India's attitude towards sex through a "government approved" sex education lecture. This video is a work of fiction that bears no resemblance to any human being living, dead, or abstaining from sex.

Swinging for Jesus.

From SheKnows:

Christian wife-swapping couple evangelizes by 'swinging for Jesus' by Bethany Ramos

Christian couple vows to spread God's Word through wife-swapping.

It's not every day that you hear about Christians who are willing to do anything, and I mean anything, for Jesus. I say this as a Christian — it is possible to go too far in your attempt to spread the word of the Lord. One Christian couple proves my point perfectly by attempting to run a Christian swingers' social network, all in the name of Jesus.

Oh, boy. I would love to say that this swinging for the Lord site is an internet hoax, but alas, Cristy and Dean Parave are the real deal. This Florida couple has taken up their cross to start a Christian swinging website to spread the gospel and share their interests with other devoted Christians.

What are their interests, you ask? Jesus, wife swapping and bodybuilding — in that order. That's why the Paraves have chosen to name their site FitnessSwingers.com.

There's so much to say about this that I don't even know where to begin. First — and most obviously — what an interesting mix of interests. I'm sure there are other holy-rolling, fitness-loving, swinging married couples out there, but to say that this site is niche would be putting it mildly. I'm no business expert, but I don't see a huge market for iron-pumping sexy swingers who also love the Lord. I could be wrong.

Next on the list, there's the big elephant in the room: Jesus. What does He think about a website dedicated to religious folks who swap partners like used Bibles at a Sunday morning church service? You can put your mind at ease because the Paraves believe that God is totes fine with their lifestyle.

"I don't think God would be mad at what we are doing... Dean and I are both in agreement with this lifestyle, so we're not committing adultery. God put people on the earth to breed and enjoy each other," Cristy told The Daily Mail.

I'm certainly not a hellfire-and-brimstone Christian. I see where Cristy is coming from. God wants us all to enjoy life and have a good time. He's not lurking around every corner to smite us because we make one silly mistake.

But slapping a "for the Lord" label on whatever you do to make yourself feel better about your decision makes little sense. If you want to swing while being a Christian, that's up to you and your partner. If you want to visit or even create a swinger's website to share like-minded interests, go nuts. Get your freak on, have a good time and mix and mingle with other couples — just don't pretend like you're doing it for Jesus.

And a video clip from Barcroft TV:

TEDx: Debby Herbenick on Making Sex Normal.

The belief that human beings -- throughout their lives -- deserve to have access to accurate information about their bodies and sexuality drives much of Debby Herbenick's work. Among her greatest passions is translating sexual science to the general public through teaching, books, columns, podcasts, television, social media, blogging, crafting, public art, and her latest project: Make Sex Normal.

Salt N Pepa - Let's Talk About Sex

A classic from 1990 - this came out while I was in high school. It was super popular but I don't think it had the impact here that it did in the states. There was outrage! But at least the message was received.

Salt N Pepa - Let'S Talk About Sex

Vice documentary: The Japanese Love Industry.

From Vice:

Japan is a country that is dying—literally. A nation that was once considered the strongest economical powerhouse in the world, rivaling the US, has now slipped to second best. Japan has more people over the age of 65 and the smallest number of people under the age of 15 in the world. It is the fastest growing negative population in the world, and that's because hardly anyone is having babies. In these difficult times, the Japanese are putting marriage and families on the back burner and seeking recreational love and affection as a form of cheap escape with no strings attached. We sent Ryan Duffy to investigate this phenomenon, which led him to Tokyo's cuddle cafes and Yakuza-sponsored prostitution.

Some have pointed out that documentaries like this are simply capitalizing on the whole Japan is super weird stereotype. The content of this documentary is not representative of the Japanese culture in general - Vice tends to focus on experiences that are outside of the norm (i.e., cuddle cafes and the Yakuza), as that's what they find most interesting.

Somewhat NSFW (you can also watch a way more NSFW version on Vice.com: link):

Like VICE News? Subscribe to our news channel: http://bit.ly/Subscribe-to-VICE-News Check out more episodes of The VICE Guide to Travel here: http://bit.ly/1id8igT Japan is a country that is dying-literally. Japan has more people over the age of 65 and the smallest number of people under the age of 15 in the world.

Questionable stats in the battle over legal approaches to prostitution.

From the Walrus:

Dirty Tricks Is the anti-prostitution lobby inflating sex-trafficking stats? By Alexandra Kimball

In 2007, a twenty-year-old Anishinabe woman from Garden River First Nation in Ontario quit her call-centre job, packed her bags, and boarded a Greyhound bus out of nearby Sault Ste. Marie. Before the call centre, Naomi Sayers had worked as an exotic dancer; she was heading for a network of clubs in southern Ontario, because another performer had told her it was a good place to maximize hours and profit. She arrived in London, moved into a dancers’ house, and began touring Windsor, Woodstock, and Peterborough. Keeping safe by travelling with other performers, she shared hotel rooms, transportation, and job leads. Her best friend and housemate, who worked under the stage name Alex, showed her the ropes: where to put her stuff, which dancers to watch out for. Sayers’s boyfriend had a car; sometimes he drove her to the club, and held onto her cash when she went in for shifts.

Sex work, she says, was entirely her choice. “Dancing got me out of the Sault,” explains Sayers, who is now a University of Ottawa common-law student and blogger-advocate for Indigenous women’s issues. And yet, she can’t shake the victim label.

As a young Indigenous woman who moved to an urban centre to work in the sex trade—even of her own free will, hoping to better her life—she fits the RCMP profile of a person who is vulnerable to domestic sex trafficking. The Criminal Code was amended in 2005 to make domestic trafficking an offence, and the definition is broad. Victims need not be moved, and while trafficking must contain an element of exploitation (“conduct that could reasonably be expected to cause” someone to fear for their own safety or for someone else’s), the code also states that people need not consider themselves exploited. This means they don’t necessarily get a say in whether they are victims; it’s up to the discretion of authorities.

In recent years, sex trafficking has gained attention and resources: the National Action Plan to Combat Human Trafficking commands a $25 million budget and has developed partnerships with several NGOs to raise awareness about the prevalence and severity of trafficking. Non-profits such as the Canadian Women’s Foundation have created their own task forces; CWF released a $2 million white paper on the subject in October.

Yet few can agree on how widespread the problem is, or how best to address it. This troubles former RCMP superintendent John Ferguson: “Are there victims? Yes. Is this a systemic problem? The evidence tells us no.” (Between 2005 and 2009, the RCMP reviewed 242 potential international human-trafficking cases, but made no convictions.) He points to the absence of information: Canada has no standardized system for the collection of such data. Ferguson also points to a 2003 RCMP report that claimed each year 600 women and girls are trafficked into the country for forced sex work; the report has since been discarded by the RCMP itself.

Instead, anti-trafficking advocates such as University of British Columbia law professor Benjamin Perrin rely on anecdotal evidence to bolster their arguments. In his 2010 book, Invisible Chains: Canada’s Underground World of Human Trafficking, Perrin seems to suggest that most prostitution involves coercion and threat; this risks conflating consensual sex work with a criminal offence, and misleads the public into believing that the trafficking problem is more acute than it actually is.

This may, in fact, be intentional.

Inflated or unsubstantiated trafficking stats are often disseminated by the same people who support C-36—the controversial bill that, if passed, would criminalize the buyers of sexual services, as well as third parties who exploit sex workers. In railing against sex trafficking, they can argue against the inherent evils of the sex trade without relying on explicitly moral or religious rhetoric—a useful digression when the public is less inclined than ever to condemn prostitution on moral grounds. (In July, one in five presenters at the Department of Justice committee hearings on C-36 had evangelical connections.)

Read the rest here.

Ethical porn.

From The Guardian:

Is there such a thing as ethical porn? The actors say they’re happy, the makers say it’s guilt-free – but what exactly is ‘fair trade’ porn? We find out By Zoe Williams

[…]

I have confronted my views on porn only once, in 2011, at a UK Feminista meeting, 1,000 women strong. Someone in the audience said, “Exactly what’s wrong with me getting off on Debbie Does Dallas with my boyfriend?” An audible part of the audience was instantly furious: porn was exploitative, it was impossible to make porn without damaging the women who performed in it. Plus, when she said she “got off”, what she really meant was that she’d internalised her boyfriend’s sexual pleasure. I was conflicted: the kind of people who say porn is exploitative, physically and psychologically, are generally the people with whom I agree on everything. Yet, in this one particularity, I cannot agree with deciding women are being exploited unless they say they are. And, much more trenchantly, I cannot agree with adjudicating what someone else gets off on. Even if she is turned on by a fantasy that traduces your political beliefs (and her own), sexual fantasy is a sacred thing; you can’t argue it away, and nor should you want to. And the key argument, that it causes male violence, I don’t buy; what we watch might influence the way we behave, but not in obvious ways that you can map. It was, in other words, a total conflict, and the rogue factor was that I don’t watch porn. So I could just absent myself into neutrality. (I think I was chairing the meeting, so I was meant to be neutral anyway.)

[…]

A common assumption is that “fair-trade” porn is going to be very soft and wholemeal and respectful; some of it is, but most of it isn’t. It does address female sexuality in a way that mainstream porn doesn’t (how you go from “female gaze” to “wholemeal” is, of course, via the misapprehension that female sexuality is really sweet). “This image of ethical porn is pretty and fluffy and storyline-driven, a hardcore version of daytime soap operas or Harlequin romance novels,” says Sinnamon Love, previously a performer, now a “sex educator”. “But a lot of women, especially of this younger generation, are looking for more hardcore porn that’s to their taste.”

[…]

Feminism is not a prerequisite when it comes to making ethical porn, Blake says. “Feminist porn is explicitly focused on women’s desires and sexuality. So, for example, the belt-whipping scene where I got the life thrashed out of me, that I would say is feminist, because it’s about my journey and my sexuality. Whereas I think it’s possible to produce male-gaze porn in an ethical and fair trade way. That means complete respect for performers, for their boundaries and consent. If someone says no, you don’t ask again, you don’t ask last minute in the middle of a scene. You don’t trick them into doing stuff. You pay them. It’s not only all of those principles, but also communicating that to your audience.”

People protesting against porn and sex work take as their opening position that nobody would be doing it if they weren’t coerced, or so desperate for money that it amounted to coercion. Ms Naughty insists that the porn she produces is not done this way: “There’s this urban myth that all of the women in porn are drug addicts or abused and don’t know what they’re doing.” She doesn’t say this never happens, that nobody is ever on drugs; but when you look at what she makes, you’ve never seen couples who look so consensual, so un-ground down by the heel of life.

[…]

Makers of ethical porn believe you can have a violent fantasy, of any kind, and that can be a legitimate part of your sexual identity, one that you have a right to explore. This is the point at which anti-porn campaigners stick. There is a chasm here, between people who think that all violence in sex is the result of a patriarchal culture and will lead to violence in real life, and should be stamped out; and people who think that all fantasy is legitimate, and almost all of it can be legitimately met by porn.

[…]

And perhaps this is the sophistication of ethical porn: without exploiting or harming the participants, it allows you to explore what you’re into. You have a right not to be ashamed. This, says Cindy Gallop, gives us our cue about how to talk about porn: “When you force anything into the darkness, you make it much easier for bad things to happen, and much harder for good things to happen. The answer is not to shut down. The answer is to open up.”

Read the rest here.

And some more related pieces for those interested:

Ethical Porn at the Huffington Post Tristan Taormino Feminist Pornographer as Cosmopolitan The Rise of Ethical Porn at the Globe and Mail

Feminist perspectives on objectification.

Pornography has been criticized for objectifying women, and further that pornography increases male sexual objectification of women in general. As noted in class, pornography is by its nature objectifying, as it features people who are intended to be the objects of our sexual fantasies, at least while we watch. But does this make it inherently problematic? For those of you who are curious to read more, there is an excellent entry in the Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy which provides an overview of objectification in pornography, and whether it is a force of good or bad.

Feminist Perspectives on Objectification

Objectification is a notion central to feminist theory. It can be roughly defined as the seeing and/or treating a person, usually a woman, as an object. In this entry, the focus is primarily on sexual objectification, objectification occurring in the sexual realm. Martha Nussbaum (1995, 257) has identified seven features that are involved in the idea of treating a person as an object:

1. instrumentality: the treatment of a person as a tool for the objectifier's purposes;
2. denial of autonomy: the treatment of a person as lacking in autonomy and self-determination;
3. inertness: the treatment of a person as lacking in agency, and perhaps also in activity;
4. fungibility: the treatment of a person as interchangeable with other objects;
5. violability: the treatment of a person as lacking in boundary-integrity;
6. ownership: the treatment of a person as something that is owned by another (can be bought or sold);
7. denial of subjectivity: the treatment of a person as something whose experiences and feelings (if any) need not be taken into account.

Rae Langton (2009, 228–229) has added three more features to Nussbaum's list:

1. reduction to body: the treatment of a person as identified with their body, or body parts;
2. reduction to appearance: the treatment of a person primarily in terms of how they look, or how they appear to the senses;
3. silencing: the treatment of a person as if they are silent, lacking the capacity to speak.

The majority of the thinkers discussing objectification have taken it to be a morally problematic phenomenon. This is particularly the case in feminist discussions of pornography. Anti-pornography feminists Catharine MacKinnon and Andrea Dworkin, influenced by Immanuel Kant's conception of objectification, have famously argued that, due to men's consumption of pornography, women as a group are reduced to the status of mere tools for men's purposes. Moreover, feminists like Sandra Bartky and Susan Bordo have argued that women are objectified through being excessively preoccupied with their appearance. Important recent work by feminists has also been devoted to exploring the connection between objectivity and objectification. More recently, some thinkers, such as Martha Nussbaum, have challenged the idea that objectification is a necessarily negative phenomenon, arguing for the possibility of positive objectification. While treating a person as an object (in one or more of the ways mentioned above) is often problematic, Nussbaum argues that objectification can in some contexts take benign or even positive forms, and can constitute a valuable and enjoyable part of our lives. In her forthcoming work, Nancy Bauer questions the very idea that it makes sense to specify the marks and features of the term ‘objectification’. Such an attempt, she argues, will only distort the phenomenon in question (2015, forthcoming).

Go read the rest here.