|
Just a john? Pornography and mens choices
by Robert Jensen
Talk delivered to the Second Annual Conference on
the College Male, Saint Johns University, Collegeville, MN, February
26, 2005. This version reflects changes based on comments of conference
participants.
There has been much talk at this conference about the need for men to
love each other and be willing to speak openly about that love. That
is important; we need to be able to get beyond the all-too-common male
tendency to mute or deform our emotions, a tendency that is destructive
not only to ourselves but to those around us. Many this weekend have
spoken about our need to nurture each other, and thats important,
too. But its also crucial to remember that loving one another
means challenging ourselves as well.
Thats what I would like to do today, to challenge us -- in harsh
language -- on mens use of pornography. In an unjust world, those
of us with privilege must be harsh on ourselves, out of love.
This challenge is: Can we be more than just johns?
Let me start with a story that a female student at the University of
Texas told me. She was riding from Austin to Dallas for a football game
on a bus chartered by a fraternity, on which many of the passengers
were women. During the trip, someone put into the bus VCR a sexually
explicit video. Uncomfortable with those hardcore sexual images of women
being used by men, the female student began a discussion with the people
around her about it, and one of the men on the bus agreed that it was
inappropriate. He stood up and said to the other men, You all
know me and know I like porno as much as the next guy, but its
not right for us to play this tape when there are women on the bus.
No doubt it took some courage for that young man to confront his fraternity
brothers on the issue, and we should honor that. But we should recognize
that his statement also communicated to his fraternity brothers that
he was one of them -- one of the guys who, being
guys, naturally like pornography. His objection was not to pornography
and mens routine purchase and use of womens bodies for sexual
pleasure but to the viewing of it with women present. He was making
it clear that his ultimate loyalty was to men and their right to use
women sexually, though that use should conform to some type of code
of chivalry about being polite about it in mixed company.
In doing that, he was announcing his own position in regard to sex.
He was saying: Im just a john.Pimps and johns
A john is a man who buys another human being for sex. Typically that
other human being is sold through an intermediary known as a pimp.
Pimps sell the bodies of other people (most typically, a male pimp selling
a woman) to a third person (who is almost always a man).
Men sell women to other men for sex: Pimps and johns.
There is much that could be said about the current cultural practice
of using the term pimp in a wide variety of other contexts
-- for example, the MTV show Pimp My Ride. We live in a
world in which men who sell women are glorified. It also is a world
in which the dominant white culture implicitly defines a pimp as black
and then alternately celebrates and denigrates them. The confluence
of racism and sexism in these cultural trends deserves discussion. But
today I want to concentrate not on the pimps but on the johns, on the
men who buy women for sex.
I assume that lots of the men in this room use, or have used, pornography.
I assume that lots of the men in this room masturbate, or have masturbated,
to pornography. So, I assume there are lots of johns and former johns
in this room.
I dont mean that most of us have necessarily bought a woman from
a pimp in prostitution, though no doubt some in the audience have. Im
talking about the far more common experience of masturbating to pornography.
In my childhood and young adulthood, I was sometimes a john. Virtually
every man I know has been a john. Some number of you in this room no
doubt still are johns.
In pornography, the pimp is called a publisher or a video producer,
and the john is called a fan or a pornography consumer. But that doesnt
change the nature of the relationships: One person (usually a man) selling
another person (a woman) to a third person (usually a man).
So, pornography is pimps and johns, mass-mediated. When you masturbate
to pornography, you are buying sexual pleasure. You are buying a woman.
The fact that there are technologies of film or video between you and
the pimp doesnt change the equation. Legally, its not prostitution,
but youre a john. Legally, youre not in trouble, but youre
still just a john.The pornography that johns like
At this point, let me define a few terms. In this discussion, Im
using the term pornography to describe the graphic sexually explicit
material that one finds in a pornographic video store that depicts primarily
heterosexual sex and is consumed primarily, though not exclusively,
by heterosexual men. Such material is also widely available on the Internet.
There are, of course, other genres of pornography (such as gay or lesbian).
But Im speaking today of the material that I would suspect most
of the men in the room have used most routinely -- those DVDs and videos
that are the bulk of the commercial pornography market.
There are three consistent themes in that pornography:
1. All women want sex from all men at all times.
2. Women naturally desire the kind of sex that men want, including sex
that many women find degrading.
3. Any woman who does not at first realize this can be turned with a
little force (though force is rarely needed because most women in pornography
instinctively understand their true sexual nature).
The pornography industry produces two major types of films, features
and gonzo. Features mimic, however badly, the conventions of a Hollywood
movie. There is some minimal plot, character development, and dialogue,
all in the service of presenting the sex. Gonzo films have no such pretensions;
they are simply recorded sex, often in a private home or on some minimal
set. These films often start with an interview with the woman or women
about their sexual desires before the man or men enter the scene.
All these films have a standard series of sex acts, including oral,
vaginal, and anal penetration, often performed while the men call the
women bitch, cunt, whore, and similar
names. As they are penetrated, the women are expected to say over and
over how much they like the sex. As pornography like this has become
increasingly normalized and mainstream -- readily available throughout
the country by increasingly sophisticated technology -- pornographers
have pushed the limits of what is acceptable in the mainstream.
One of the increasingly common types of sex in gonzo, and less common
in features, is the double penetration -- a scene in which a woman is
penetrated anally and vaginally by two men at the same time. Another
type of sex scene in gonzo is a blow bang -- a scene in
which a woman performs oral sex on a group of men, with each man in
turn ejaculating onto the womans face or into her mouth in standard
pornographic fashion. Some gonzo tapes advertise ATM, or
ass-to-mouth, in which a man removes his penis from the
womans anus and she puts it directly into her mouth.
As one pornographic film director put it: People want more. They
want to know how many dicks you can shove up an ass.
Make it more
hard, make it more nasty, make it more relentless.
How many dicks can you shove up an ass? Its rare, but there are
films with double anals: Two men penetrating a woman anally at the same
time.
In recent years, the pornography industry has produced about 11,000
new hardcore, graphic sexually explicit films a year. Estimates of the
annual revenues of the pornography industry in the United States start
at $10 billion. For comparison, the Hollywood box office -- the amount
Americans spend to go to the movies -- was $9.5 billion in 2003.
Thats a lot of johns and a lot of profit for the pimps.Mens
choices and responsibility
So, we live in a world in which men sell women to other men directly.
And men also sell women to other men through mass media. These days,
women are sometimes the buyers. And on rare occasions in recent years,
women are the sellers. That is, there are women who consume pornography
and a few women who make it. In this society, thats called progress.
Feminism is advanced, we are told, when women can join the ranks of
those who buy and sell other human beings.
All this is happening as a predictable result of the collaboration of
capitalism and patriarchy. Take a system that values profit over everything,
and combine it with a system of male supremacy: You get pimps and johns,
and pornography that is increasingly normalized and mainstreamed, made
into everyday experience. Because its profitable in a capitalist
world. And because men take it as their right to consume womens
sexuality in a patriarchal world.
When confronted with this, men often suggest that because women in pornography
choose to participate, theres no reason to critique mens
use of pornography. We should avoid that temptation to take that easy
way out. Im going to say nothing in regard to what women should
do, nor am I going to critique their choices. I dont take it as
my place to inject myself in the discussions that women have about this.
(A new book, Not for Sale, has interesting insights into
those questions.)
I do, however, take it as my place to talk to men. I take it as a political/moral
responsibility to engage in critical self-reflection and be accountable
for my behavior, at the individual and the collective level. For men,
the question is not about womens choices. Its about mens
choices. Do you want to participate in this system in which women are
sold for sexual pleasure, whether its in prostitution, pornography,
strip bars, or any other aspect of the sex industry? Do you want to
live in a world in which some people are bought and sold for the sexual
pleasure of others?
When one asks such questions, one of the first things one will hear
is: These are important issues, but we shouldnt make men feel
guilty about this. Why not? I agree that much of the guilt people feel
-- rooted in attempts to repress human sexuality that unfortunately
are part of the cultural and theological history of our society -- is
destructive. But guilt also can be a healthy emotional and intellectual
response to the world and ones actions in it.
Johns should feel guilty when they buy women. Guilt is a proper response
to an act that is unjust. When we do things that are unjust, we should
feel guilty. Guilt can be a sign that we have violated our own norms.
It can be a part of a process of ending the injustice. Guilt can be
healthy, if it is understood in political, not merely religious or psychological,
terms.
Buying women is wrong not because of a societys repressive moral
code or its effects on an individuals psychological process. It
is wrong because it hurts people. It creates a world in which people
get hurt. And the people who get hurt the most are women and children,
the people with the least amount of power. When you create a class that
can be bought and sold, the people in that group will inevitably be
treated as lesser, as available to be controlled and abused.
The way out of this is not church or therapy, though you may engage
in either or both of those practices for various reasons. The way out
of being a john is political. The way out is feminism. I dont
mean feminism as a superficial exercise in identifying a few womens
issues that men can help with. I mean feminism as an avenue into
what Karl Marx called the ruthless criticism of the existing order,
ruthless in that it will shrink neither from its own discoveries, nor
from conflict with the powers that be.
We need to engage in some ruthless criticism. Lets start not just
with pornography, but with sex more generally. One of those discoveries,
I think, is not only that men often are johns, but that the way in which
johns use women sexually is a window into other aspects of our sexual
and intimate lives as well. For many men, sex is often a place where
we both display and reinforce our power over women. By that, I dont
mean that all men at all times use sex that way all the time, but that
a pattern of such relationships is readily visible in this society.
Women deal with it every day, and at some level most men understand
it.
We can see that pornography not only raises issues about the buying
and selling of women, but -- if we can remain ruthless and not shrink
from our own discoveries -- about sex in general, about the way in which
men and women in this culture are commonly trained to be sexual. Its
not just about pimps and johns and the women prostituted. Its
about men and women, and sex and power. If throughout this discussion
you have been thinking, Well, thats not me -- I never pay
for it, dont be so sure. Its not just about who pays
for it and who doesnt. Its about the fundamental nature
of the relationship between men and women, and how that plays out in
sex and intimacy.
And if you think this doesnt affect you because you are one of
the good men, dont be so sure. Im told that
I am one of those good men. I work in a feminist movement. I have been
part of groups that critique mens violence and the sex industry.
And I struggle with these issues all the time. I was trained to be a
man in this culture, and that training doesnt evaporate overnight.
None of us is off the hook.What is sex for?
No matter what our personal history or current practice, we all might
want to ask a simple question: What is sex for?
A male friend once told me that he thought that sometimes sex can be
like a warm handshake, nothing more than a greeting between friends.
Many people assert that sex can be a purely physical interaction to
produce pleasurable sensations in the body.
At the same time, sex is said to be the ultimate act of intimacy, the
place in which we expose ourselves most fully, where we let another
see us stripped down, not just physically but emotionally.
Certainly sex can be all those things to different people at different
times. But is that not a lot to ask sex to carry? Can one human practice
really carry such a range of meanings and purposes? And in such a context,
in a male-supremacist culture in which mens violence is still
tacitly accepted and mens control of women if often unchallenged,
should we be surprised that sex becomes a place where that violence
and control play out?
This isnt an argument for some imposition of a definition of sex.
Its an invitation to confront what I believe is a crucial question
for this culture. The conservative framework, often rooted in narrow
religious views, for defining appropriate sex in order to control people
is a disaster. The liberal/libertarian framework that avoids questions
of gender and power has failed.
We live in a time of sexual crisis. That makes life difficult, but it
also creates a space for invention and creativity. That is what drew
me to feminism, to the possibility of a different way of understanding
the world and myself, the possibility of escaping the masculinity trap
set for me, that chance to become something more than a man, more than
just a john -- to become a human being. Robert Jensen, a journalism
professor at the University of Texas at Austin, is co-author of Pornography:
The Production and Consumption of Inequality and is working with
the producers of the forthcoming documentary film Fantasies Matter:
Pornography, Sexualities, and Relationships. He can be reached
at rjensen[at]uts.cc.utexas.edu.
|