Hi Marc It's not just about obvious cases of slavery, of whatever kind (from wage slaves to far worse). Page 3 girls, for example, are as much a problem as anything else. They normalise unhealthy and oppressive attitudes towards women that effectively enslave all women (and those whose attitudes are thus shaped). The recent submission to the Leveson inquiry by a number of feminists on this topic was timely. It was shocking when a senior newspaper executive responded by saying page 3 girls are harmless fun. They do enormous harm to those involved in their production and all those exposed to them. The impact of hard porn is arguably that much greater, as is the impact of prostitution. It's all exploitative. I stress again, this is not a moral issue but a political one - it's about power.
best Simon On 8 Feb 2012, at 16:36, marc garrett wrote: > Hi Simon, > > I remember in the 80s, a radical lefty feminist artist who was showing > strange artwork in a Brixton Gallery in 84, introduced me to Kathy > Acker's work; and lent me a copy of her book 'Blood and Guts in High > School'. I found the book not only disturbing but also liberating. A > brillaint writer, I wish there much more like her. She challenged men > and women. > > What I like about her work, is how it cuts across the hypocrisy around > 'self censored & imposed ideas', on human sexuality. Much of the work, > unearths, even admits, certain realisms about human sexual fantasy which > may not necessarily be acceptable in polite or conservative thought > (right across the board), but is what it is. > > Of course, in respect of sex slavery - I am a humanist and believe that > people should never be made to do what they do not wish to. > > I have worked with people who have experienced such situations > themselves, and it has been traumatic (personally) to work with these > individuals. Especially in some of the homeless centres I have worked in > in London. The systems in place seem designed to exploit rather than > support. > > Wishing you well. > > marc > > >> Kathy Acker's work was often sexually explicit, in print and > performance (I was a videographer for the Pussy, King of the Pirates > performance in London, with the Mekons, so "was there"), but I'd never > have considered what she did as pornographic. Pornography isn't about > sex. There is plenty of pornography that has no explicit sexual content > (much popular culture fits in this definition). I would argue that any > representation that is created with the intention of inducing a sense of > gratification at the expense of those presented in or consuming the > representation is pornographic. This is also true of any particular > activity, not just representations, so when sex involves such dynamics > it is exploitative. I can accept that sex workers and their clients > might not believe themselves to be in an exploitative relationship with > one another. However, my earlier argument was not about those directly > involved in what might be fully consensual activities but the affect of > their activities upon others. When activity is in the pubic realm then > you are going to encounter major issues. Again, this isn't just about > sex. The same dynamics can be seen in sport, the creative arts and > elsewhere. Coming back to Acker, her work often sought to highlight how > what appears to be quite normal human interactions are actually > exploitative and pornographic. I see Alan's work in the same light. >> >> best >> >> Simon >> >> >> On 8 Feb 2012, at 13:46, marc garrett wrote: >> >>> Hi Simon, >>> >>> Let's I def-agree that we do not abide sexual exploitation... >>> >>> Yet, people also need to be able to find their own sexual identities >>> beyond the restrictions of the state or moralists. >>> >>> One of the problems with sex is that is one of those things which is >>> deeper than society can 'openly' deal with - you have interesting >>> individuals crossing the borders of their sexual activities such as >>> Kathy Acker, and much of 70s French cinema, and the sexual >>> liberationists such as Tuppy Owens. Where their sexual exploration is >>> linked to their liberty and politics and they consider society as a >>> social construct limiting their particular feral discoveries... >>> >>> Pornography is exploitative because we exist in a male dominated world, >>> with men who value exploitation and its industry above the liberty for >>> others - and this goes way beyond sex itself, wars, vid-games, sport, >>> economies - pornography is such a loaded term, and usually appropriated >>> as an absolute and partial to simplistic symbols. Yet, the problem is >>> not sex - it is our lack of freedom to explore the 'feralness' of >>> ourselves, in a world contained by frameworks trapping people's 'real' >>> potential as intimate human beings at various levels - thus it creates >>> scarcity and isolation as part of the product. >>> >>> Stop men controlling everything - then we'll find new ways of >>> rediscovering things beyond literalization of our 'selves'... >>> >>> Wishing you well. >>> >>> marc >>>> The question might not only be about whether the sex workers > themselves are being exploited but that others not associated with their > activities are. For example, sexual representation of young (or young > appearing) sex workers could be leading to the sexualisation of > children. Ditto, images of women performing as subservient sexual > partners to men exploits women generally. There are loads of examples > like this. It's not just pornography - it's a concern in representation > in general (eg: Louis Malle's representation of Brooke Shields in Pretty > Baby, a great film with huge problems). >>>> >>>> Of course, such exploitation is not unique to sex work. It happens > in other domains too. But there is no justification for such > exploitation, wherever it happens. >>>> >>>> This is not a moral argument but a political one. I agree with the > feminist argument that pornography and sex work are intrinsically > exploitative, not just of women but everyone involved in, exposed to and > even those totally unaware of it. >>>> >>>> best >>>> >>>> Simon >>>> >>>> >>>> On 8 Feb 2012, at 10:02, marc garrett wrote: >>>> >>>>> [Copied from the Spectre list...] >>>>> >>>>> Sex Work and Consent at @transmediale - by Dmyri Kleiner >>>>> >>>>> Transmediale 2012 is over. R15N is closed again, until the >>>>> next occasion. As usual, lots of great people at the > festival, and >>>>> lots to talk and think about. >>>>> >>>>> On Saturday I attended the discussion "Commercialising Eros" with > Jacob >>>>> Appelbaum, Zach Blas, Liad Hussein Kantorowicz, Aliya Rakhmetova and >>>>> moderated by Gaia Novati. Aliya Rakhmetova, supporter of sex workers' >>>>> right working as a co-ordinator with SWAN, gave an overview of her >>>>> organization and it's campaigns defending the rights of sex workers, >>>>> including campaigns to fight violence against sex workers. Jacob >>>>> Appelbaum went over his experience working in the IT department of >>>>> smut.com, a leading internet pornography company, which he left as a >>>>> result of his opposition to exploitive pay inequality at the company >>>>> which paid the performers far less that the executives at the company. >>>>> Liad Hussein Kantorowicz talked about her work as live erotic > performer >>>>> at a internet pornography site, and performed her job on the stage for >>>>> her online clients while the other panelists gave their presentations. >>>>> Zach Blas gave an overview of the work of the "Queer Technologies" art >>>>> collective. >>>>> >>>>> I enjoyed the presentations and discussions and applaud the panellists >>>>> for their support of sex workers. One question stuck with me, I didn't >>>>> expand upon it at the discussion, but I'd like to here. >>>>> >>>>> Several of the panelists referred to the issue of consent as a >>>>> justification for sex work and a way of arguing against legal >>>>> repressions of sex work, and against the opposition against sex work >>>>> that some feminists and other have, as well as a way to > distinguish sex >>>>> work from rape. Sex work is distinguished from rape because it is >>>>> consensual, and neither legislator nor moral campaigner has any place >>>>> interfering with what consenting adults do. Yet, this argument is >>>>> unsatisfying. >>>>> >>>>> Within the capitalist system, where workers and their families face >>>>> destitution and homelessness unless they work, no work can be truly >>>>> described as consensual. What's more the pretense of consent, is often >>>>> used as justification for exploitation and to excuse the exploitive >>>>> behaviour of employers. After all, the worker chose to accept the job. >>>>> Yet, as the cliche goes, in context this choice is not much different >>>>> than the one that a mugger gives you. "Your money or your life" is > also >>>>> a choice. >>>>> >>>>> Like all professions, there can be no doubt that many sex workers feel >>>>> empowered by their work, and take great pleasure in it. However, there >>>>> can also be no doubt, that many sex workers are directly or indirectly >>>>> coerced into doing this kind of work, and face emotional and social >>>>> trauma as a result. >>>>> >>>>> "Consent" seems to justify not only the sex-work itself, since the sex >>>>> worker consents to perform sexual services for a client, but the >>>>> conditions of the sex-workers labour as well, since the sex-workers, >>>>> like other workers, has consented to the terms of employment. Thus > while >>>>> consent may help us differentiate sex work from rape, it justifies the >>>>> economic exploitation of the sex worker at the same time, since > both the >>>>> workers relationship with the client and the employer are ultimately >>>>> consensual. >>>>> >>>>> I would prefer to see a stronger line of argument that says that sex >>>>> work is a valid form of work not merely because it is consensual, but >>>>> because it is valuable. Rather then a week liberal argument based > on the >>>>> sanctity of what consulting adults to, a strong social argument that >>>>> argues that sex workers do necessary and beneficial work and should be >>>>> protected and supported. >>>>> >>>>> Like the consent argument, the value argument also differentiates >>>>> between sex work and rape, as rape clearly is not socially > valuable, but >>>>> unlike the consent argument it doesn't excuse the economic > exploitation >>>>> of sex workers, since such exploitation is not socially valuable. >>>>> >>>>> If we accept that sex work is valuable work that has a place in > society, >>>>> then we can focus on the health and well being of the sex workers >>>>> directly, and acknowledge that many of them are not empowered > consenting >>>>> workers, but rather victims of coercion, trafficking and exploitation, >>>>> often forced, unwillingly, into their work. Pretending that they have >>>>> consented to their own exploitation is both delusional and > disrespectful >>>>> when it's quite likely that the empowered sex worker who takes > pleasure >>>>> in their work is the minority within an industry that recruits most of >>>>> its workers by way of terror and desperation. >>>>> >>>>> The value argument also confronts the moral issues more directly, > since >>>>> the consent argument doesn't necessarily dispute the immorality of the >>>>> work, it only argues that nobody that is not directly involved has any >>>>> business with it. The value argument makes a much stronger social >>>>> statement: that sex work is not just a private business between >>>>> consenting adults, but a form of work that benefits society and, far >>>>> from being immoral, is a vital part of human civilization and > always has >>>>> been, despite persecutions and prohibitions. And that such persecution >>>>> and prohibition should stop, not simply because it interferes with >>>>> liberal rights, but because it is wrong and harmfull. >>>>> >>>>> First we must reject capitalist ideological notions of consent, > these do >>>>> not help sex workers, only make them responsible for their own >>>>> exploitation, and exploitation aint sexy. Once we see sex work as an >>>>> essential form of work, we can fight for the conditions of these > workers >>>>> along with those of all other workers. >>>>> >>>>> I'll be at Cafe Buchhandlung for Stammtisch tonight at 8pm or so, > I hope >>>>> some transmediale folk who are still in town will join for a drink in >>>>> celebration of a great event. >>>>> >>>>> Stammtisch is here: http://bit.ly/buchhandlung >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Dmyri Kleiner >>>>> Venture Communist >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> NetBehaviour mailing list >>>>> NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org >>>>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >>>>> >>>> >>>> Simon Biggs >>>> si...@littlepig.org.uk http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ @SimonBiggsUK > skype: simonbiggsuk >>>> >>>> s.bi...@ed.ac.uk Edinburgh College of Art, University of Edinburgh >>>> http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ http://www.elmcip.net/ > http://www.movingtargets.co.uk/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> NetBehaviour mailing list >>>> NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org >>>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Other Info: >>> >>> Furtherfield - A living, breathing, thriving network >>> http://www.furtherfield.org - for art, technology and social change > since 1997 >>> >>> Also - Furtherfield Gallery& Social Space: >>> http://www.furtherfield.org/gallery >>> >>> About Furtherfield: >>> http://www.furtherfield.org/content/about >>> >>> Netbehaviour - Networked Artists List Community. >>> http://www.netbehaviour.org >>> >>> http://identi.ca/furtherfield >>> http://twitter.com/furtherfield >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> NetBehaviour mailing list >>> NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org >>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >>> >> >> >> Simon Biggs >> si...@littlepig.org.uk http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ @SimonBiggsUK > skype: simonbiggsuk >> >> s.bi...@ed.ac.uk Edinburgh College of Art, University of Edinburgh >> http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ http://www.elmcip.net/ > http://www.movingtargets.co.uk/ >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NetBehaviour mailing list >> NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org >> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >> > > > -- > Other Info: > > Furtherfield - A living, breathing, thriving network > http://www.furtherfield.org - for art, technology and social change > since 1997 > > Also - Furtherfield Gallery & Social Space: > http://www.furtherfield.org/gallery > > About Furtherfield: > http://www.furtherfield.org/content/about > > Netbehaviour - Networked Artists List Community. > http://www.netbehaviour.org > > http://identi.ca/furtherfield > http://twitter.com/furtherfield > > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > Simon Biggs si...@littlepig.org.uk http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ @SimonBiggsUK skype: simonbiggsuk s.bi...@ed.ac.uk Edinburgh College of Art, University of Edinburgh http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ http://www.elmcip.net/ http://www.movingtargets.co.uk/ _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
