Publication details
Sexual/Textual Politics: Feminists Struggling With Porn.
| Authors | |
|---|---|
| Year of publication | 2005 |
| Type | Article in Proceedings |
| Conference | Sex and Sexuality: Exploring Critical Issues |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Field | Sociology, demography |
| Keywords | feminism; pornography; representations of sexuality; speech acts; symbolic power |
| Description | Censorship of sexually explicit imagery is currently being called for not by conservatives but, paradoxically, by feminists. Efforts like these are not historically unique. Two decades earlier, American feminists fought the so called sex wars; Canada adopted their feminist-inspired anti-porn laws in the early 90s. North American arguments now resonate in Europe. Using American reasoning, some European feminists are lobbying for a porn-banning law. Assuming that everywhere, women are silenced by pornographic pictures, they want to enhance agency for women by framing porn within the Civil Code on the basis of discrimination, which they hope will bring speech back to women. What dangers are hidden when the state is called upon to have the last word about sexuality and its representation? Is it really so, that all feminist arguments, however radical in intent and consequence, are with or against assertions or premises implicit in the male system, which is made credible or authentic by the power of men to name? Can we step out of either-or,man-woman binaries, and what contours would feminist politics have then? What are the other ways a woman can use language? My analysis of feminist anti-porn arguments both current European ones and older American ones is based on Pierre Bourdieus concepts of language and symbolic power and on Austins notion of performative speech acts. |
| Related projects: |