Pornography and Its Apologists
Update 03/18/2003 8:00 PM
Presca Ahn of Yale posted a comment where she copied a letter to Brent Bozell, whom I quoted below. Please note her comment related to the events of the evening in question.
****
Original Post
For quite a while now, I have been putting together a post about pornography. It’s one of the principle reasons for this new blog, since it seems so out of place next to a review of Microsoft Office 2007 or an article on weak computer security. I have been wanting to show the link between human trafficking and the porn industry. I went through several drafts in my head and have been doing tons of research online (no, not that kind) to discover that it’s nearly impossible to grasp what is going on with this industry. That’s because the porn industry is about perception and who communicates that perception to others.
Just like the optical illusion drawing of the two faces / goblet, porn is described by many as this natural, healthy expression of free speech performed by consenting adults for other open-minded adults. However, the more you learn about the actual reality going on behind the scenes, you start to see the goblet along with the two faces.
My epiphany related to porn was around five years ago when I started reading about sex workers in Europe who were used as fodder to get fast and cheap images used on free porn sites. Nothing is really free and free porn certainly costs somebody. Since pornographers are not philanthropists, somebody is paying somewhere. You have to wonder where the vast plethora of free images come from. Did all of these women, young girls, and boys suddenly decide to pursue a career in the adult industry?
I am fascinated by the complete lack of regard for the sources of pornographic content. The American defenders of the pornography industry long ago changed perception of what was once an embarrassing, underground activity to something that had to do with free speech. Obviously, this was a smart tactic because it made the issue of pornography about the porn consumer rather than the content providers. As a free speech issue, stupid liberal academics now defend porn as some kind of entitlement for all Americans; meanwhile, they willfully choose to remain clueless about how the industry continues to make record profits and who is used and discarded as part of the process.
Brent Bozell’s excellent column last week regarding Sex Week at Yale accidentally showing a rape fantasy film demonstrates my point about liberals and porn:
The Yale Daily News reported that at about the same time Newsweek was putting its saucy story on the presses, the organizers of Sex Week at Yale were throwing a porn-movie screening in the law school auditorium. Hardcore pornographer Paul Thomas was invited to show films and have a question-and-answer session (and plug sales for his Vivid Entertainment DVDs). Unfortunately for Yale, Thomas brought footage of graphic rape fantasies and the labeling of a woman as a “slut” who “deserved” violent sexual degradation.
Oops. Apparently, when you run Sex Week, you don’t think of pre-screening anything. After all when does the concept of “inappropriate” porn arrive with this crowd? Everyone wants to be “cavalier,” because anything less makes you Jerry Falwell. But there’s a force at Yale far more powerful than Christianity.
Enter the feminists at the Yale’s Women Center, who were not pleased. Presca Ahn, who is the “fellowship coordinator” there, declared: “In porn, sex is not a normal, healthy part of normal, healthy lives; it’s fetishized, exaggerated or embellished. Porn isn’t honest. We need to talk honestly about it: It hurts women.”
The film clips were abruptly ended, and the session went right into the Q&A. Sex Week coordinators made it very clear to the Yale Daily News they do not support the practices displayed in the film. Colin Adamo, Sex Week event coordinator, called the screening a grave mistake. “We really dropped the ball on this one,” he said. “No one watched the movie before Paul showed it to the audience.”
Unsurprisingly, that was not the pornographer’s opinion. The Daily News reported that Adamo described the images as sexually unhealthy and disrespectful to women. But the pornographer’s response “insinuated that he was a prude and just needed to watch more porn, Adamo said after the screening.” Thus the solution to having any moral qualms about pornography is to drown yourself in more pornography.
No one in this controversy asked: Where are the grownups? Isn’t there a one questioning his return on the annual $45,000 investment in “education”? Where are the administrators? Is there anyone at Yale who can provide students with a more rational voice than a hardcore pornographer? This whole controversy gives off a whiff of the inmates running the asylum.
To expect the Ivy League to reflect traditional values is to dabble in fantasy. But it’s a sad cultural signpost when it’s considered a prudish traditional value to object to films that seek to encourage men to build fantasy scenarios about violent sexual assault.
And that is really the point. This is a cultural problem. So much so that rape fantasies are part of mainstream porn. How many of these fantasy films are actual rapes? Many former adult stars have written about how they were forced to perform much of what they did. Many claim that drugs are used to keep the women agreeable. We come back to my original point: nobody questions where the content comes from. Sex Week at Yale was all about the end-users and their fantasies. The faculty were shocked that a rape video was even conceived by their invited guests. I was surprised they were surprised. But then again, they were responding to criticism from a liberal organization and that put them in a tough spot.
I do realize there are many people who voluntarily give themselves up to be in porn, whether it’s amateur, self-published or somebody who really wants to do it for the money. However, I firmly believe that the number of willing volunteers in the worldwide porn industry pales when compared to those who ended up there from unfortunate circumstances, desperation, manipulation, or outright slavery. I’m still looking for studies to back up my assertion, but there seems to be a serious lack of academic research into content providers and porn. Imagine that.
So you might say to me something about consenting adults using pornography to enhance their sex lives and that there’s nothing wrong with that. In theory, I agree. But the fact is you never know where the individuals in the porn come from. As happened to me, I saw the goblet and now I can’t help but see it even when I’m concentrating on the two faces. Look past the selfish consumers of porn to see what this industry does to its participants.

Thank you for this piece; I agree with many of your points about pornography. However, I must also bring your attention to your quotation from Brent Bozell’s recent column “Rape Films at Yale.” I understand that Mr. Bozell’s article is an opinion piece, but it contains factual errors. My letter to Mr. Bozell, in which I outline these errors, is attached below.
Otherwise, thank you again for your continuing attention to the problem of human trafficking that underlies much pornography.
Best regards,
Presca Ahn
———-
Mr. Bozell,
I feel compelled to correct some apparent factual errors in your column, “Rape Films at Yale.” Your writing suggests that feminists from the Yale Women’s Center “[e]nter[ed]” Sex Week at Yale’s pornography screening, that I “declared” the porn to be objectionable, and that the film was shut down as a result of these two actions. In fact, leaders of the Yale Women’s Center did not attend the screening– nor did they issue any kind of statement (or declaration) about it. My opinion editorial in the Yale Daily News– from which you’ve lifted your quotation of me– is just that: my personal opinion. While it is true, as you say, that many members of the Women’s Center were “not pleased” about the screening, we did not interfere with the screening itself. Free speech is a cornerstone of university life. My view is that discourse is far more constructive than blanket censorship, as I hoped to suggest through my critique of the Sex Week organizers’ apology, and my expressed hope that we may “talk honestly” about porn as a powerful cultural product (not a genre to be categorically, or institutionally, banned).
Also, I am pained at the assumption that my op-ed should be taken as representative of the Yale Women’s Center. I am listed under the op-ed as a “junior in Branford College” and the “Amy Rossborough Fellowship Coordinator of the Yale Women’s Center.” However, this identification does not mean that my opinions are those of all juniors or all members of Branford College, let alone of all the members of the Women’s Center. When the Women’s Center wishes to issue a statement, the entire board signs as such.
One more note, if I may: you seem to imply in your piece that feminism is a more powerful force at Yale than Christianity. If you must deal in false dichotomies, I am not sure that “more powerful” is the best way to characterize campus feminism in comparison to campus Christianity. “Less funded” and “more vibrant” might be better choices.
Sincerely yours,
Presca Ahn
Thanks for your kind comments and clarification.
[…] of the persons named in Pornography and Its Apologists commented to set the record straight on some facts regarding Sex Week at […]
I appreciate your coverage of this issue. In my research over the past four years, I have been alarmed to find that many of the missing and abducted people in the US have been used in porn and snuff films. I’m pretty certain that even the corporate mainstream porn industry has a large investment in these exploitative networks. If there is money to be made, big corp is at the door. I bet the money trail would astound most of us.
THANK YOU! My husband and I have had ugly arguments through the years about his porn use. It’s not my “insecurity” or “sexual hangups” - it’s the fact that REAL people are hurt portraying FAKE sexuality, and his using it, I feel makes him complicit in this wrongdoing. (Since we have 2 daughters, and he can’t get it through his head that he’s watching someone’s daughters, I really feel he’s in self-centered rampant denial.) We have disclaimers on TV and Movies that say “No animals were harmed in making this film” but women are not treated with that much decency, and lunatics (who happen to like porn) pretend this has something to do with “Free Speech.”
“However, I firmly believe that the number of willing volunteers in the worldwide porn industry pales when compared to those who ended up there from unfortunate circumstances, desperation, manipulation, or outright slavery. I’m still looking for studies to back up my assertion, but there seems to be a serious lack of academic research into content providers and porn. ”
As a porn addict, i’ve been trying to look into what it is i’m actually looking at. To date, i have yet to find any real documentation of women being forced into performing pornography. I would be hestitant to state that you “believe” something without any real evidence. Have you been able to come up with any specific examples or cases?
actually just found one, hopefully someone here can supply some more information
http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/mainfile.php/2008/3009/
Thanks for finding this. The porn I’m talking about isn’t the “cheesecake, glamour girl” type of nonsense. I don’t take issue with that. It’s the rough, horrible material I’m talking about. The films and photos where women are being abused and mistreated. They do exist. Often these women are drugged or beaten into submission. Often they’re enslaved. The fact that cruelty to women is regarded as an entitlement for men’s sexual pleasure makes me sick.