So. James Deen. According to an advancing media meme, he’s the male porn star that every woman wants. This piece claims he’s the only “young, heterosexual, nonrepulsive man” in the whole porn industry. Swathes of Tumblr posts are devoted to him. And apparently parents should be terribly concern that their daughters love him.
Every woman wants James Deen – except me. To be honest I’ve never really seen the appeal. It may be that he’s just not my type although I can see that’s he’s not bad looking. And he’s also said a few things that I wasn’t enamored of – like that time he said he hated feminism.
But ultimately, I’m not a fan because he often appears in exactly the type of porn that I don’t like: really mainstream stuff, often with rough sex or choking, with female submission doled out as a matter of course, without context. Apart from his occasional appearance in Tristan Taormino’s work, the snippets I’ve seen just haven’t been my bag, baby.
Which is all well and good. Everyone has different tastes. It’s why I’ve never blogged about him before, despite the fact that he keeps getting mentioned in the media next to breathless reports about how women are “suddenly” enjoying porn.
Advertisement
Support independent, ethically made, award-winning porn. Bright Desire features all of my erotic films and writing. A membership to Bright Desire gets you access to every movie I've ever made and lets me keep making female friendly porn!
Click here to find out more.
-------------------------------------------------------
But now I have to blog because James Deen has been interviewed by Refinery 29 and declared that “porn for women” is a myth. (This is the same Refinery 29 which is currently #1 on the Google search for “porn for women” because it has an article listing possible good sites.) Anyway, James Deen says:
“My theory on porn for women is it’s just porn. Why is there porn explicitly only for women? By saying there needs to be porn for women, you’re basically isolating women as a gender, and saying, ‘This is how women should think. This is how their sexuality should be.’ It’s counterproductive (from what I understand) to the equality movement. Who says that one woman’s take on sexuality is the right way to think? One woman might like to watch a film with high production value and beautiful sex. Another might like some BDSM things with beating, degradation — and it doesn’t mean either is right or wrong. Pornography is made for individuals to find what they enjoy, and what turns them on. There’s no market research on this because sexuality is always developing, growing, and evolving. You could talk to a million people about what they like in porn, and you’re going to get a million answers of what a million people like in porn at that moment.”
Other websites have jumped on this quote and reported it: The Frisky says “James Deen debunks the myth of porn for women” (phew, at last, like this is the first time anyone has said it!) and Cosmopolitan wrote this.
On both sites I’ve added my own comments which are basically the same thing I’ve been saying on this blog for years and years and years:
The reason the phrase “porn for women” exists is because the vast majority of porn still assumes the audience is male, still gives priority to a male gaze, male pleasure and male fantasy. The boxcovers, the language, the porn awards, the whole straight porn industry operates on the idea that women are looked at, men do the looking. So if that is the default position then you need something to describe a different kind of porn, one that bothers to speak to women as an audience. One that, say, might want to look at men for once. Hence “porn for women”.
The fact that James Deen is saying all porn is the same means that he’s not taking gaze or perspectives into account. For him, the way porn presents sex is just the way it is and has always been. For James Deen, there’s no other ways of viewing it. And so he interprets the phrase purely in terms of it being prescriptive – “porn for women” assumes all women want one thing. Which it doesn’t.
James isn’t the first person to make this statement and I’m well aware of the arguments against using the phrase. I realize that “porn for women” is a flawed label and no, you can’t assume all women want one thing, but it’s better than nothing. Because even in 2013 the majority of porn still assumes that the audience is male. So it’s the best way to raise a flag to draw attention to a different kind of porn.
And saying I know plenty of women who like porn just as it is suggests that the women who don’t like it that way should just shut up and take what they’re given. To which the answer is, fuck you.
For all previous rants on this topic, see the list on this post: Porn for women is not analgous to Bic Pens For Women. Because I’ve said this all before.
What IS interesting about this are the comments underneath the Frisky post. To be honest they made my heart swell a little when I read them. I’m not alone in thinking like this. So I’m going to get very quotey here because I love what these people are saying:
“Wrong, James Dean, wrong! Stick to your day job. I’m sure you meant well with this statement, but let’s leave the real thinking to the big girls, shall we? Let me expound on why you are so very wrong: porn is made (get ready for a shocker) for a male-centric viewpoint. I, as a woman, don’t want to see ladies over-acting ridiculously, crying out in fake orgasms. I don’t want to see tits and ass. Yes, it’s sex. But it’s not sexy. It’s not enticing. I do not speak for all ladies of course, but for me that’s why I’m not drawn to porn.” – Girl Friday
“An intelligent way to say he doesn’t give a fuck and really doesn’t understand. Porn for women doesn’t have to mean high production value and romance, wtf is that?! It just means the woman should actually seem to be enjoying herself or having things done to her that are actually enjoyable.” – Madeleine Witherow
“He’s missing the point that most porn is specifically geared toward men. Is he just saying we need to watch guy porn and learn to like it?” – Itsfunnythat
“I think his is a very one-sided argument. As someone who seems to only appear in “mainstream” porn, he is missing out on a whole viable section of porn that does more than close up, well lit pounding of pussy. There are directors out there doing artistically shot porn that intrigues and titillates…something mainstream porn never does, and something as a woman, I wish there was more of out there. I doubt there are men out there asking for more romantic scenes, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t a market for it. I think James isn’t even considering the scope of porn that isn’t represented.” – Nancy Fulton
These commenters show that I’m not just being pedantic and old fashioned about the term “porn for women”. There remains a need to label and identify porn that isn’t just rehashing all the mainstream porn tropes. And until someone can come up with a better term for it, one that people like those commenters above will type into google, I’ll keep using it.
Edit: Jezebel and Huffpost have also reported his quote and there’s similar comments re the male gaze under both of those posts.
Image: by Glenn Francis via Wikimedia Commons
consider my perspective: I am a submissive woman. I DO enjoy a lot of the ‘mainstream’ porn you describe including choking and male submission. I am also a feminist. Hearing all the ‘porn for women’ dialogue does nothing but leave me feeling like a bad feminist who doesn’t like the right kind of porn. I don’t care if that’s nor logical, it’s how I FEEL and it’s my reaction to the term. I feel that it’s people like me who James Deen was talking about. He clearly is not talking about the style of porn here, he’s talking about the LABEL ‘porn for women’. Reading comprehension is important here. He wasn’t saying ‘porn for women’ should not be made at all, he’s saying there’s no reason to LABEL It as ‘for women’ which I completely agree with. What about men who enjoy porn that is labeled for women? What about the many women who DO like the things you are claiming not that many women like? There are many female directors who do not label their porn as ‘for women’ or ‘feminist’ but their movies have so much more passion and chemistry and are just hotter to me than your typical porn for women. He absolutely was NOT saying ‘just shut up and enjoy what you’re given’ as you can clearly see in his statement about women enjoying ALL different types of porn. He is simply saying, women, like ALL humans, are very diverse in their sexuality. What is so horrible about that?
As I said in the post, I’m well aware of the arguments against using the phrase and I don’t disagree with that. You can’t say all women like one thing and that is why the phrase “porn for women” is problematic. I’ve said this in previous posts. What bugs me about James Deen’s statement, and all the other people who demand that the phrase never be used, is that it doesn’t acknowledged the skewed, default nature of porn’s gaze. And there’s no suggestion as to what label could replace it. Labels do matter but they’re always going to be interpreted in different ways – and subsequently complained about. I refer to my post on the term “feminist porn” for a larger discussion of this: http://www.msnaughty.com/blog/2013/04/16/definitions-and-denials-feminist-porn-as-a-label/