Pornographic sex is not loving.

Independent Radical wrote a great entry about the differences between pornographic sex and healthy sex.

For a sex act to be healthy and non-pornographic participants must enter into it with the intention of enjoying the act itself. In case this is not already clear, this enjoyment does not need to be purely physical. Those who have sex with people they love can experience emotional and, in some cases, intellectual enjoyment from their sexual activities. If one does not have affection for their partner, they should at least have positive feelings towards the sexual act. To pursue sex as a means to some other aim (e.g. economic resources, popularity, approval, self-esteem), like women in the sex industry do, is to increase the pornographic character of one’s sex life.

Opponents of the sex industry recognise that women who enter it often do so out of poverty and desperation, but economic concerns also influence sexual activities which occur outside the industry. Conservative men brag about how they provide money and other resources to their wives (who in turn provide them with sexual and domestic services), while mainstream culture promotes the gold-digger stereotype, as well as the belief that men who buy things for women are entitled to sex.Thus the view that women should trade sex for economic resources is not limited to the sex industry.

2 thoughts on “Pornographic sex is not loving.

  1. Independent Radical January 20, 2016 at 12:25

    I reject the use of the word “real” with regard to non-pornographic sex, or rather, the implication that pornographic sex is “not real”. Unfortunately, it happens in the real world, to real women. I dislike the argument that pornographic sex is not actually a type of sex. It is based on the assumption that sex must always be a good thing. It would be kind of like arguing that nuclear weapons are not really a type of technology.

    There are good and bad kinds of technology and there are good and bad types of sex. I think we should try to make sex liberals accept that fact instead of trying to argue that we are the real “sex positives” because we support “real sex”. We should not give into their premises or their language. We are not “sex positive”. We do not blindly endorse all sexual behaviours. We recognise that some types of sex (which unfortunately actually exist and are generally regarded as “sex”) are not consistant with leftist and feminist values. We should be saying that without fear and without sounding like we want to appease anyone.

    That said, thanks for quoting me again! I think that post is one of my best ones.

    • Francois Tremblay January 20, 2016 at 17:49

      Yes, I’m sorry. That was an unfortunate choice of words. I will correct it.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: