MaggieH, it isn't porn that's being defended. I've not watched porn since I was a teenager and I probably wouldn't bat an eyelid if it was removed.

There are wider issues of free speech here. It's not the removal of porn that I object to, if people did that willingly I'd think it was a good thing.

But I am absolutely vehemently opposed to any moves to restrict it.

Let me put it this way - the other night, I watched the film 'Mr Brooks.'

The movie is about a serial killer - and I thought it was quite a good film. But like the other tens of thousands of people who will have watched it, I abhor the idea of serial killers, and I'd be quite offended if anyone suggested that because I enjoyed this film, I would in any way condone murder.

How is this different? Pornography and action movies both can contain things that wouldn't be legal, were they not merely depictions.

As I see it, there are only two avenues that you can argue a point of difference upon:

1) Issues related to sexuality are somehow different to issues of mere entertainment.

2) The negative social issues mentioned by other posters, which often accompany the production of pornography.

In relation to point 1)
You can't determine whether or not people watching these movies are going to undertake violence, what's more, that's not up to you or anyone else.
It's likely that unbalanced people would watch a movie about serial killers too, but not everyone is.
Regardless of how you feel, outside of child porn which necessitates production involving people under the age of consent, it isn't up to anyone to judge the entertainment people consume.

You. Have. No. Right. Nor does anyone else.

In relation to point 2) I'd say that just because these things often accompany production, you can't outlaw it. They're separate issues. Drugs and matters of coercion are already illegal. This point is an argument for greater transparency and more regulation and observation of the pornography industry.

Pornography is sexualised violence against women and it desensitises men to women’s full humanity - it advertises misogyny, and it works the same as any other advertising campaign. Porn as we know it is in frenzy, it is pure and unadulterated woman hatred and young men are absorbing the message via porn that women are purely here for male pleasure and that we enjoy being hurt, degraded and humiliated. That girls ordeal was straight out of a pornography narrative, where women are seen as not fully human…is it any wonder these men have problems relating to females as anything else but receptacles for their eroticised hatred

eye of the newt,

I humbly suggest that you have only knowledgeable a limited range of this genre and you have converted these specific examples to universal instances. In other words, you're engaging in a bit of a fallacy. May I suggest you broaden your horizons a bit; to paraphrase Annie Sprinkle, the answer to bad porn is more good porn - and if you think there is no such thing, then you're not anti-porn, you're anti-sex. Just try not to impose that particular taste on others, OK?

MaggieH,

I have, and not for the first time, reviewed your website. Contrary to what you claim, your conclusion was cleary reached prior to the gathering of the information. In other words, you're suffering from confirmation bias - as you clearly state. You will only accept negative viewpoints of pornography. I do note the site is extremely thick on rhetoric and extremely thin on material with large scale empirical evidence. I think I know why as well.

Interesting though, on the definitions page there is an attempt to distinguish between pornography and erotica. The former is described as sexualised images created under conditions of slavery and the latter as that created freely. If that is the case, then surely the nearly all of what most people call pornography, including yourself, is actually erotica, regardless of how distatesful you may find the particular content?

Dear Caroline Norma,

In case you read here, I wanted to let you know that your article is unbelievably courageous and I just posted about it on my blog (where porn apologists cannot roam free -- they can go defend their woman-hating propaganda material elsewhere). I've not got any time to waste in arguing with people who value hate material over women and girls' lives.

Pro-porners have corporate media, lobbyists, lawyers, managers, marketeers, industry analysts, paid writers of “opinion” and “journalism”, money, publicists, etc. to defend their fallacious arguments supporting this misogynistic industry.

There is a clear link between pornography and sexual violence against women:

http://www.againstpornography.org/effectsandharms.html

http://www.dianarussell.com/porntoc.html

And thank you so much, Ms. Norma, for pointing that out. Your article is great! And please don't listen to what pro-porners are saying.

Lev - to use the "anti-sex" rhetoric is extremely lazy and suggests the absence of any constructive analysis or argument.

For example I may critique 'junk food' a la "MacDonald's" style. Does this suggest that I am "anti-food" no of course not just anti-trash food. OK?

Also please remember that porn is NOT sex.

Lev, you said: "I have, and not for the first time, reviewed your website. Contrary to what you claim, your conclusion was cleary reached prior to the gathering of the information. In other words, you're suffering from confirmation bias - as you clearly state. You will only accept negative viewpoints of pornography. I do note the site is extremely thick on rhetoric and extremely thin on material with large scale empirical evidence. I think I know why as well"

I completely disagree with you. Maggie's website is a great, amazing website and a well-researched one. (Non-porn apologists: see for yourself: http://againstpornography.org/ )

As a feminist (who responeded on MaggieH's blog) said in response:

-- "Where would those men have got the idea to plan the thing so efficiently, and then act out something seen so often in porn? There's no way anyone could ever convince me that bukakke is a natural thing and the drive to do it comes from biology. It's totally a learned thing, and we don't even need to ask the question "where would they learn this from" because bukakke only appears in porn."

Couldn't agree more. I also agree with eye of newt.

Keep up the good work, Ms. Norma. You are very brave. Feminist critiques of pornography are becoming increasingly rare. Anyone interested in the research that has been made on pornography, anyone interested in seeing what is usually censored from mainsteam media (which is tied to the porn industry): please visit this comprehensive website http://www.againstpornography.org/ for more information.