(h/t to Ernest)
Gail Dines, a sociology professor at Wheelock College in Boston, is co-editor of the book "Gender, Race and Class in Media." She is a co-founder of the recently formed Stop Porn Culture, a feminist anti-pornography movement.
She is also just shocked and livid that a top gun at Vivid has been invited to speak at Yale Sex Week, and she (nor any other anti porn advocate) hasn't.
Now see, this irony is too rich for me not to point out and bask in. Dines, a user of pornographic images in violation of 2257 and with no thought as to how the performers in those images feel about the issue and without their consent- via the Wheelock slide show, is upset at Yale. Dines, who runs the Wheelock Stop Porn Culture events, for which college credit can be gained, has utterly ignored the requests of non-anti porn people and groups, as well as sex workers themselves, to be given a chance to speak at Wheelock at any of her events and offer "their side of the story"...I know, we petitioned to have such an inclusion- request denied!
Yet she is pissed when the same thing happens to her? Aww, tiny violin, Gail, tiny violin. If, perhaps, Prof. Dines did allow other voices at her events, I would be upset at Yale for inviting Vivid and not inviting anti-porn people to provide another opinion, but as Dines does not allow such things at her own events, I can only find it amusing, ironic, and...
filed under typical!
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
30 comments:
Totally agree about the irony of Gail's making this complaint, as she's not one to talk about silencing the other side.
I do agree with this portion of her article though: "One of the highlights of Sex Week is the contest "Who Looks Most Like a Vivid Girl," to be judged by two of the women on contract to Vivid. Women go to college for many reasons, but for most, it is to get an education and position themselves for a professional career." To the extent Yale Sex Week focuses more women rather than men as sex objects and female students are treated differently from male students in this regard, I have a problem with that.
That said, Gail's got some nerve. I think someone should be making this point, above, but she's the wrong one to do it.
But you know Octo, none of the Yale girls are FORCED to participate in that contest. They can if they choose to do so.
heh.
True. But college is an impressionable time. 18-year-old girls being encouraged to rate each other by porn standards, in some cases by men -- where no similar contest is being had involving men? Not cool, IMO. Certainly, freedom of expression and all that, but if I were dean, I'd have made a different choice.
Now, in Hollywood every year there's a sex-related event featuring toys, strip clubs doing shows, porn performers signing autographs and speaking, etc. That, I have no issue with, and also see no reason why anti-porn folks should be invited to it. But a porn event focusing on women involving a porn-ready contest on a college campus?
Octo, I agree w/ what you are saying here:
To the extent Yale Sex Week focuses more women rather than men as sex objects and female students are treated differently from male students in this regard, I have a problem with that.
However, I am bothered by Dines' statement:
Women go to college for many reasons, but for most, it is to get an education and position themselves for a professional career.
This statement carries an assumption that working in the adult industry does not constitute a "professional career." This view perpetuates the idea of sex work as being not really work, and hence fosters a space that permits the continued stigmatization and silencing of sex workers.
Octo: 18 is old enough to BE in porn...sigh.
I'm odd like this...I tend to believe a lot of 18 year old women are not nearly as impressionable as everyone seems to think they are. The students of Yale *yale, mind you, were pressure is high, educational excellence is stressed, so on so forth, arranged this event. I assume female students were IN on that.
And, as if there was something wrong with a woman who thought it might be interesting to be in such a contest, or gasp, in porn!
Porn is a job like any other, women in porn are women, like any other.
Age is just a number. And while obviously you have to have a number to delineate legal vs. not, the reality is people's maturity level and impressionability will vary greatly from individual to individual. When I was a teenager I used to bristle at any suggestion that I was "impressionable" or not smart enough to make my own well-thought-out decisions. There were many people the same age for whom that was true, but when I was 18, I *knew* what I wanted sexually and didn't need anyone telling me otherwise. Ten years later, there are still people my age who are immature and impressionable. There are also people twice my age and half my age on both ends of the spectrum, and everything in between.
Of course 18 is old enough legally to be in porn and not all 18 year old girls are impressionable. I still think the following:
1) the portrayal by Vivid at Yale appears to have been tilted in a specific gender direction
2) 18, IMO, is not an ideal age to enter the porn industry. I see it as a profession like any other, as you (Ren and Amber) do. But it's one in which the performer has fewer remedies and safety nets than others. Doesn't mean I'm against someone opting to do it who chooses to, but I don't think putting it in 18-year-olds faces is well advised. Put it this way: if my daughter, at 18, told me she was entering porn, I'd try hard dissuade her. 25? I'd try to understand her motivations, tell her my views, and then wish her well.
3) Of course smart Yale gals were in on it. I didn't have a problem when Playboy did "Girls of [My Undergrad]" years ago either. All very flattering, and that male attention sure is nice. Doesn't make it a good idea, IMO. Because it's not the guys who are auditioning sexually for us, oh no. If it were a balanced portrayal, that would be another thing entirely.
4) Porn is not a job like any other. It's a job and should be treated with respect, and women who choose to do it should be treated like respect. At the same time, retirement age ain't 65. And "age is just a number" notwithstanding, college girls and guys aren't that savvy about longer term issues. I thought I was amazingly precocious in college and told anyone who questioned my judgment that... well, in fact, many times they were right to do so. Sex work is a profession in which only a lucky few will be able to carve out a long term career without the need to fall back on Plan B, whether that's another field or another person's income. And as much as I believe it's a valid choice like any other, I think colleges which introduce women, NOT men, to professions with a low rate of long term security are doing women, NOT men, a disservice.
"True. But college is an impressionable time. 18-year-old girls being encouraged to rate each other by porn standards, in some cases by men -- where no similar contest is being had involving men? Not cool, IMO. Certainly, freedom of expression and all that, but if I were dean, I'd have made a different choice."
I'll point out that Sex Week at Yale is an event put together by a student group, not the university itself. Rightly or wrongly, they put together this beauty pageant idea. Are you saying the dean should have stepped in to quash this in the name of advancing some noble sociological goal concerning "impressionable" 18-21 year-old students? In Loco Parentis much?
Octo..I see where you're coming from, I do, wrt to Teh Sexaay ain't equal...but...
I was getting naked for money at that age and still managed to get a degree. I really don't think women in Yale are going to dump the ivy in droves to do porn, and if one does, maybe two...I suspect they have the brains to have something to fall back on.
You know...this isn't a conversation I'm going to have right now. It's just not.
This statement carries an assumption that working in the adult industry does not constitute a "professional career."
From what I understand it's not strictly a "professional" career in the same way a doctor/lawyer/engineer is (with professional organisations/code of ethics/duty of care/etc). Although from what I know of the American education system these careers typically need some form of graduate degree and not just a college education. Which means there are plenty of other "non-professionals" coming out of college.
True. But college is an impressionable time.
Yes, we can't let those college students learn something about how things are in the real world.
I tend to believe a lot of 18 year old women are not nearly as impressionable as everyone seems to think they are.
I tend to believe that it's much more to do with experience and exposer. The longer you keep someone 'protected' from something such as sex the longer it takes for them to develop a mature attitude towards it.
Anyway, I should stop thinking about hot college chicks and get back to work...
And I probably shouldn't butt in here either, but I do feel a need to point out that Vivid only contracts female performers, so a gender-balanced contest would not be judged by a gender-balanced panel. Not that the women on the panel wouldn't enjoy it. Knowing them as I do, I'm sure they'd find it a hoot. But there are no Vivid boys as a standard of comparison.
Now before I get jumped here, let me point out that Vivid did take a shot a contracting guys not long ago. It didn't pan out very well because the guys found they could make more money working independently, even at a lower scene rate, and the company found they weren't particularly effective at drawing attention to its products.
But at least they gave the idea a try, and I'm happy to say that guys in porn are getting more credit, and more money, than they did for most of the long years I've spent here.
Those who rant on about the inequalities and exploitation of porn rarely talk about male performers, but until very recently, they had the worst deal of all. They got paid less per scene, had to do a more difficult job under more adverse conditions and received little or no notice for their efforts.
I'm glad the industry has finally awakened to the fact that women do watch porn and that they want to see good-looking guys who bring some style to the work and that guys who meet that description ought to get some credit for their contributions.
That's a little O.T. and I think I'll recuse myself at this point.
desipis, I see a distinction between being exposed to "sex" and having standards for what the ideal woman looks/acts like thrust in their faces.
IACB, if it's not funded or sponsored by the college, then obviously I don't condone anyone big brothering it. But if it's student-organized and college-sponsored, I'd prefer they put those funds elsewhere.
If this had come to my college, I would have milked it, and probably entered the contest. This kind of thing is great for folks with mainstream-type appearance. Not so great for those from a different culture, perhaps, or with a non-mainstream body type. Sure, they don't have to participate. But is it necessary to institutionalize these standards even more than they already are?
I think it's great for college women to earn money doing programming, bartending OR stripping. Kudos to anyone who can make any of that work for them. I have no doubt that intelligent women can combine or sequence sex work and academic work, and have had some hands-on training in that regard. This is no criticism of anyone's career choice.
I'll shut up now, promise.
Ren - I was meaning to send you that link and forgot. Glad you found it!
iamcuriousblue - In Loco Parentis much? Well, yeah. That is actually the job of the university.
Octo,
As I said before, I agree w/ a lot of what you are saying re: the gendered tilt to "sex week" being problematic. In fact, we agree on much more than we disagree on here, so I don't want it to seem like I'm nit-picking. But this did irritate me a little:
And "age is just a number" notwithstanding, college girls and guys aren't that savvy about longer term issues.
Now I realize I have this thing where I personalize everything. I'm not sure how to stop doing that, or even if I *should* stop - but what it boils down to is, when I see a general statement made that doesn't apply to me, a little red flag goes up, because that means the general statement isn't so general. And sure, I could be an outlier, and there is value in speaking in generalities if they apply to a large majority - I certainly understand that. And yet, that statement rankles. When I was in college, I absolutely was savvy about longer-term issues, and I was very annoyed and insulted by people assuming I wasn't, simply because of my age or because I was in college.
I tend to believe that it's much more to do with experience and exposer. The longer you keep someone 'protected' from something such as sex the longer it takes for them to develop a mature attitude towards it.
EXACTLY!!
In Loco Parentis much? Well, yeah. That is actually the job of the university.
What?? It is??
I beg to differ, HIGHLY.
Octogalore writes:
"IACB, if it's not funded or sponsored by the college, then obviously I don't condone anyone big brothering it. But if it's student-organized and college-sponsored, I'd prefer they put those funds elsewhere.
If this had come to my college, I would have milked it, and probably entered the contest. This kind of thing is great for folks with mainstream-type appearance. Not so great for those from a different culture, perhaps, or with a non-mainstream body type. Sure, they don't have to participate. But is it necessary to institutionalize these standards even more than they already are?"
Just to clarify, I have no problem with some person or persons approaching the student group in question with why they think having a beauty contest is problematic, or even doing some kind of counter-propaganda of their own. That kind of back-and-forth, hopefully carried out in a way that actually makes people think, is a very important part of college life, actually.
What's a problem, and I think this is the cause of a lot of the problems in the so-called "political correctness wars", is that when somebody doesn't like what somebody else has to say somewhere on campus, the first recourse is too often to run to the dean of students or some other authority figure and try to persuade them to shut the other side up. That's led to all manner of abuses of authority when the university actually complies in some misguided attempt to preserve some kind of false harmony among students.
Amber in reply to Plainsfeminist writes:
"'In Loco Parentis much? Well, yeah. That is actually the job of the university.'
What?? It is??
I beg to differ, HIGHLY."
Ditto
Also, ditto to everything Amber is saying about age. I never appreciated that kind of paternalism and condescension about sex when I was younger, and I still don't see it as having much value.
I swear, so many people, and, yeah, many feminists, are so hung up on the idea that young people are utterly misguided, disempowered, and generally without a clue about their own best interests that they shouldn't even be allowed to lose their virginity until they're 25. I exaggerate a bit, but the general trepidation about youth and sexuality is very real.
I've been sexually active since I was 14, and to this day, I don't feel like I would have benefited any by "saving it" for later. You could just write that off as a male thing, but I've heard from and read too many women who say similar things to believe that a lot of women don't share this attitude toward their early sexual experiences.
Putting the idea of the university being a parent aside, I guess for me I'd equate to something more like, I dunno, ROTC on campus; or Coca-Cola or some other mega-corp doing a heavy heavy advertising campaign, you know. Or certain religious organizations. Is there a conflict of interest with the purpose of the university, I guess; how much responsibility does it have to making sure the "recruiting" agency is not overstepping its bounds.
I've been sexually active since I was 14, and to this day, I don't feel like I would have benefited any by "saving it" for later. You could just write that off as a male thing, but I've heard from and read too many women who say similar things to believe that a lot of women don't share this attitude toward their early sexual experiences.
*raises hand*
Amber -- I was speaking in percentages. I'm sure there are exceptions. But in designing policy, one has to look at the trend and not the exception. And the reality is that stuff does happen between 20 and 30 maturity-wise, in general. None of this is meant personally.
And I agree with PF. College isn't a focus group. Sure, decisionmakers should solicit student opinion. And then make the best decision.
Paris Hilton said: "my boyfriends say I'm sexy but not sexual." Sex does not equal marketing thereof.
Kudos to all the women who do porn because it's who they are sexually rather than who they think they should be. Some do figure this out in college. Most don't.
I actually wish I'd been sexually active younger sometimes. I was a -very- late bloomer. Stuff like "Sex Week"--well, contests like this wouldn't have been very helpful for me, but for damn sure the general atmosphere on college campuses is more outspoken about -possibilities- than it once was. I mean, Susie Bright came and spoke while I was still in UG, but I was still clueless and scared, there were no Internets, I didn't really know who she was except for my one friend's two lesbian roommates (who were closeted to most people, and I was closeted to everyone) were going to see her.
And in the "it just had to happen" department, Gail Dines gets a shout-out from Dawn Eden:
http://www.dawneden.com/2008/02/yale-sex-week-glosses-over-porns-dark.html
Kudos to all the women who do porn because it's who they are sexually rather than who they think they should be. Some do figure this out in college. Most don't.
I know it's not your intent, Octo, but this is starting to take on the tone of "90%" to me.
No worries, Amber, that is my intent.
Not all percentages are created equal. Just because I'm using stats doesn't put me in Dines' camp. 90% of apples are probably some shade of red -- do you have a problem with that?
I do not believe 90% of women in sex work are coerced/unwilling. I do believe that a majority of 17-19 year old women who go into porn for reasons other than financial need might have a different calculus if they were to graduate, and/or work for a couple of years, and then revisit the scenario.
I do not doubt that there are women who make a well-considered decision to enter sex work young. And I don't dispute anyone's right to make that choice at any time. Does that sound like Dines or Farley, Amber?
What I do have a problem with is a university placing its imprimateur on introducing this choice on a university campus. School's not the place, IMO, to introduce an option that focuses around women and around a career that for most will be short term and for many will result in complications they're not positioned to anticipate.
I respect your right to disagree, but I'd appreciate your not mischaracterizing my arguments just because they involve numbers. Some girls like them... maybe not 90%, of course.
The "Sex Week at Yale" folks explain why they played the porn angle here. Also, SW@Y website here.
I respect your right to disagree, but I'd appreciate your not mischaracterizing my arguments just because they involve numbers. Some girls like them... maybe not 90%, of course.
I wasn't trying to say you're like Dines or Farley. Sorry. I was trying to say that there isn't really any empirical (ugh, I hate that word, but I can't think of a different one) evidence or proof that a certain percentage of young women in college would make a different choice wrt sex work later. To me it sounds like the "what if" game.
In Loco Parentis much? Well, yeah. That is actually the job of the university.
What?? It is??
I beg to differ, HIGHLY.
Um...I'm not arguing for it. I'm saying, literally, that this is the role of the university, and it is stated as such in many, if not most, student handbooks or other written policy. If you object, feel free to draft letters to the institution of your choice.
Post a Comment