For men, the meaning of a woman's naked body is life itself. -- Andrea Dworkin, Intercourse

(W)omen ... find gratification in the bodice-ripping romances of popular fiction, which have an overwhelmingly female readership. -- Anne Moir & David Jessel, Brain Sex: The Real Difference Between Men and Women

Traditionally, we recognize only one form of prurient interest -- that having to do with intercourse and orgasm. The problem with this is that it focuses almost entirely on the male gender, on what most men feel they need from women: intercourse and orgasm. Hence, we traditionally define pornography only in this context, with the result that we ignore most female pornography.

Pornography objectifies individuals or acts within the context of gender expectations. If men expect women to provide intercourse and orgasm, what do women, in the context of gender, expect from men?

Most women at some time in their life, and some women all the time, expect the same thing from men: intercourse and orgasm. But in our society, what most women expect most of the time is for men to provide a home, financial support, and status within the community. Hence, where male pornography focuses on female sex objects, female pornography focuses on what Warren Farrell calls male success objects. (Why Men Are the Way They Are, Berkley edition/September 1988, Warren Farrell, Ph.D., p 134)

Pornography for Men, Pornography for Women
Pop-feminists assert there is only pornography for men: "There can be no 'equality' in porn, no female equivalent, no turning of the tables in the name of bawdy fun. Pornography, like rape, is a male invention, designed to dehumanize women, to reduce the female to an object of sexual access, not to free sensuality from moralistic or parental inhibition." (Against Our Will, Susan Brownmiller, pp 443) This is a myth they promote to obscure that there are many ways to objectify someone.

Most pornography for men objectifies women sexually. Typically, you can't buy it at your local grocery store. Most pornography for women, on the other hand, objectifies men as "walking wallets," and women can buy it at their local market in the "steamy" romance novel section, or straight off the magazine rack. What men call sex, they call "romance":

Romance is used to sell women on almost every single product, from cars to food. Romantic love makes the world turn on soap operas and in romance novels, two hugely popular and profitable forms of entertainment that have almost half of America mesmerized -- the female half. -- Women Who Love Men Who Kill, Sheila Isenberg, p 125

What makes pornography for men so unacceptable? Why are so many women disgusted by it? They say it is because the purpose is to ridicule and dehumanize women: "The gut distaste that a majority of women feel when we look at pornography, a distaste that, incredibly, it is no longer fashionable to admit, comes, I think, from the gut knowledge that we and our bodies are being stripped, exposed and contorted for the purpose of ridicule to bolster that 'masculine esteem' which gets its kick and sense of power from viewing females as anonymous, panting playthings, adult toys, dehumanized objects to be used, abused, broken and discarded." (Against Our Will, Susan Brownmiller, pp 442 - 443)

This inflammatory denunciation of male sexuality springs from the sexist assumption men cannot feel sexually aroused without there being some element of ridicule or desire to dominate. I remember getting into my father's Playboy collection as a boy during puberty, and Worship would be a better description of what I felt than "ridicule." And the millions purveyors of "phone sex" make catering to men's need for intimacy proves "anonymous, panting playthings" have little to do with why men pay for porn.

Another reason pop-feminists oppose pornography for men is that, ostensibly, it "degrades" women: "Strip clubs further the image of women as objects of pleasure for men. Stripping may not degrade the women who do it for a living (who describe the feeling of power and superiority they have over their audience) but it does degrade women as a whole." (Women on Rape, Jane Dowdeswell, p 42) This completely misstates the real issue -- pornography doesn't diminish women in general so much as it increases their sexual competition.

Does pornography undermine women's power as sex objects?
Pop-feminists really oppose male pornography because it undermines the sexual power of women. A man who can see naked women any time he finds it convenient is not a man very vulnerable to the coy hint of cleavage beneath a woman's blouse. If he's seen so many naked breasts that a woman who hides hers cannot use partial concealment to arouse his interest and, thereby manipulate him, then she has less power over him.

Power, however, is not the reason they give because to admit it would undermine their efforts. Instead, they try to persuade us that, rather than being a symptom of larger problems, pornography is a primary source of problems: "Pornography implies that a woman's inherent seductiveness justifies any sadistic and/or sexual act a man wishes to commit against her." (Men Who Hate Women and the Women Who Love Them, Bantam Books 1988 edition, Dr. Susan Forward and Joan Torres, p 122)

Women have no more inherent seductiveness than men do. Is makeup part of their inherent seductiveness? Is perfume? Are the thousands of different hairstyles and the big dollar industry of high-fashion all a part of their inherent seductiveness?

Men obsess about women's sex because generations of women have set themselves up as sellers of scarce female sexuality.

How do women commonly attract men? With their sexuality and sensuality. Take this away, and they would have to work to attract men with their personality and intelligence. This, as men well know, is a tough arena in which to compete for the attention of another. Easier by far for women to maintain their ability to employ the sexual sell by outlawing pornography for men.

Pop-feminists need to oppose male pornography not because men see women as sex objects, but to increase women's value as sex objects.

Regards

Rod Van Mechelen

Rod Van Mechelen is the author of What Everyone Should Know about Feminist Issues: The Male-Positive Perspective (the page now includes several articles by other authors), and the publisher of The Backlash! @ Backlash.com. He is a member of the Cowlitz Indian Tribe and served for 9-1/2 years on the Cowlitz Indian Tribal Council.