‘The idea that pornography is “dirty” originates in the conviction that the sexuality of women is dirty and is actually portrayed in pornography… Pornography does not, as some claim, refute the idea that female sexuality is dirty: instead, pornography embodies and exploits this idea; pornography sells and promotes it.’ (Andrea Dworkin) Dworkin’s diagnosis of pornography as institutionalized (male) ‘violence against women’ has triggered vehement debates within feminism and feminist theory. Critically evaluate what you consider to be the key aspects of these debates.
In this essay I will begin by establishing the four main positions on pornography in order to draw the battle lines of this debate. This is important because although the core of the debate may lie in a split between feminists, it is crucial to understand the positions of their respective “allies”. The following paragraphs will analyze different definitions of erotica and pornography. Although it is very difficult to arrive at clear-cut definitions, it is nevertheless very useful to see how different groups define the two categories, in particular the anti-pornography feminists, as many of them are very much pro-erotica. I shall then look at pornography from a psychoanalytical perspective – first a Freudian one, then looking at Susan Lurie’s criticism of his definition of the castration complex – which I believe will be important in defining not only why pornography is so important to men, but why they also enjoy the more violent side of pornography as well as other forms of violence against women. I will conclude by briefly looking at the research presented as evidence of the effects of pornography – positive and negative – and question whether censorship would actually help advance the feminist cause in any way.
Lynne Segal (1993;6) usefully identifies three distinct positions on pornography. According to her, the liberal position points to the fact that there is no definitive scientific evidence for pornography causing harm to society, and in spite of being offensive to some, it brings pleasure to others and there can therefore be no true justification for banning or censoring it. She then outlines the Moral Right position, which considers pornography to be a threat to family values in that it promotes sex unrelated to reproductive purposes, making it a position that does not protect women or support feminism, but upholds the core value of patriarchal society. The feminist view, on the other hand, is divided into those who believe that pornography constitutes in itself violence against women and those who caution that such blanket condemnation discourages women from facing up to their own sexual fears and fantasies, repressing women instead of liberating them.
Before engaging further with these views it is important to touch on the difference between pornography and erotica. This is crucial due to the fact that the part of the feminist movement that wishes to impose censorship or even a total ban on pornography, makes allowances and even exalts the liberating qualities of erotica. I will now look at some definitions offered by different people both from within this movement and from outside it.
Andrea Dworkin in her 1978 speech quoted Georges Bataille as saying that ‘In essence, the domain of eroticism is the domain of violence, of violation.’. She did this in order to support her point regarding pornography, and explained the difference in terminology simply by saying that Bataille ‘called it eroticism’(1980;286). This in my view immediately illustrates the difficulty in attempting to clearly differentiate between pornography and eroticism (or erotica, or erotic art) as it is so highly subjective and open to interpretation. I will now look in some detail at some of these attempts.
The difference between erotica and pornography is often defined in the association of erotica with art and higher culture and pornography with intellectually devoid material which stirs the body whilst never engaging the mind, being therefore potentially corrupting to its audience which is (perhaps wrongly) perceived as the lower classes. According to Phyllis and Eberhard Kronhausen (1973;6) Erotic art educates at the same time it entertains, and while it arouses the body it makes us think. Others, like Kenneth Clark, believe that art is bound to the realm of contemplation, meaning that if it stirs physical responses in the viewer, inciting action, it loses its true character (Cited in Longford, 1972;99-100). Lynda Nead (1993;145) builds on this by asserting that ‘for art to be art it has to engage the mind rather than the body; it has to involve the faculty of imagination and bring about a still, contemplative state in the viewer’. If we accept this definition, then the difference between erotic art and pornography becomes somewhat clearer in that pornography tends to leave nothing to the imagination, and the pornographic gaze forever investigates in up-close detail the sexual acts performed.
