Se la maggior parte delle persone è d'accordo nel limitare lo sfruttamento dell'immagine femminile erotizzata nei media, la proposta di bandire completamente la pornografia, bollandola come violenta verso le donne, appare, altrettanto diffusamente, come frutto del pregiudizio e dell'ignoranza. La proposta, mossa per 'proteggere' le donne, finisce col trattarci come minus habens e nega la nostra stessa sessualità. La pornografia, come prodotto culturale, non solo non può essere vietata in un paese che si dica libero e democratico ma, in quanto rappresentazione e narrazione, può essere perfettamente espressione di una sessualità declinata secondo la parità dei generi, tutti.
...
Porn for all, not a ban, is better for women
To
truly eliminate gender stereotypes, as voted on by the EU, we should do
it within porn, not by damning all sex on film as sexist
di Fern Brady per guardian.co.uk,
di Fern Brady per guardian.co.uk,
Onanists across the EU will be relieved to know that MEPs have voted against
a proposal suggesting a blanket ban on internet pornography. The move
was part of a wider remit to stop the sexualisation of women in
advertising and media. While most people would praise any move to reduce
the amount of eroticised images of women used to sell all manner of
stuff, the definition of pornography was worryingly vague. It felt as if
Kartika Liotard (the Dutch MEP responsible for the motion on eliminating gender stereotypes in the EU) either hadn't watched enough porn or was attempting to let her own prejudice slip in unnoticed.
Although
it would have been a long way off from being made law even if the
proposal had been passed, there was a previous move to ban porn in 1997
and it's that which Liotard was attempting to resuscitate. On top of
that, Iceland and Finland
are already looking at blocking anything vaguely defined as sexually
"violent", so it's clear anti-porn suspicion is on the rise despite this
week's outcome.
If we're going to criticise or attempt to
regulate online content, let's have someone with some knowledge of the
topic make the decisions for us – as opposed to a proponent of vague
pseudo-feminist rubbish of what porn is or isn't. Getting someone who
knows nothing about pornography to govern our online sexual behaviour is
as backwards as roping in someone who knows nothing of poverty to make
vital decisions on welfare policy. And we'd never allow that.
Article
16 of Liotard's report talked about "the importance of promoting the
representation of the female image in a way that respects women's
dignity … while fully respecting freedom of expression". Isn't it
negative stereotyping to assume women can't have dignity and be sexual?
Liotard
and her Scandinavian peers might be attempting to eliminate one set of
stereotypes – women as constantly sexually available to heterosexual men
– but their well-intentioned moves are unwittingly introducing another
set that are equally as damaging. As former sex blogger Dr Brooke
Magnanti put it, "Yet again the assumption is that … all women are meek sub-adults who must be protected from the clutches of sexy, sexy evil".
I'm
tired of women being told what they want sexually. If anything, the
freedoms we have on the internet go some way towards undoing years of
mainstream media telling women how to look and be looked at, how to
behave through articles like "What Men DON'T Want In Bed!".
Further,
I've lost count of the number of times I've had to switch porno off
because I've felt it was misogynistic or formulaic, but that doesn't
mean I want my consumption of porn to be regulated. Blow job scenes, for
example, are overly long in almost all mainstream content. With the
exception of a smattering of offerings from women directors such as Anna Span,
female viewers are constantly reminded that this stuff isn't for them.
Yet shouldn't that mean we'd be better off striving for greater equality
within pornographic images, not hastily writing off all sexual
expression on film as sexist?
We need better lesbian scenes, not
ones that blatantly pander to men, with heterosexual actresses looking
vaguely nauseated as they gingerly trail their fake nails across each
others' breast implants. Speaking of which, Liotard's proposal
conveniently glossed over the world of gay, lesbian and trans porn,
probably because it would draw unwanted attention to the fact her
argument only considers gender stereotypes from the blinkered
perspective of heterosexual men and women.
Instead of being
squeamish and reluctant to discuss porn, it would be more productive if
people could focus on asking why there isn't more readily available
porn that caters to all sexes and, crucially, understand why this is
important in reflecting gender equality. Perhaps then Liotard and her
colleagues can devote more time to looking at the real issues, instead
of picking on the most obvious targets.
Fonte: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/13/porn-all-ban-better-women
