Sunday, April 10, 2011

Orgasm, Inc. and PORN


I sat in on a Politics of Sex class (follow on Twitter at #posex2011) at the University of Minnesota the other week to watch the screening of Orgasm, Inc. It is a documentary about the medicialization (and I'd argue capitalization, corporatization, and commodification) of the female orgasm. I want to discuss the usage of porn in the documentary. Before I do so I wanted to make something clearer that I think the documentary mentions but does not stress. The reason women are having issues orgasming is NOT due to something messed up with their bodies. It is due to horrible sexual education and a society that pushes male pleasure and discourages women from exploring their sexuality (I should mention here that all the women in the film appear to be heterosexual and are for sure all caucasian). The documentary makes the structural and social impacts on women's orgasms depressingly clear when an older women (at least in her late 50s) had her mind blown (no pun intended) when a person working on the documentary had to walk her through the idea that it is not normal for women to orgasm during intercourse. This older woman had the idea that "normal women" orgasm by a penis going in and out of her vagina. The older woman was so distraught by her inability to orgasm by a penis pounding on her cervix that she went and sought medical attention that resulted in a metal thing being placed on her spine (called the Orgasma-tron!) Yes. Ok. If you are a female-bodied person reading this and have issues with orgasms I highly suggest going to feminist sex toy stores like Smitten Kitten (Minneapolis) and looking through the books available there on female sexual pleasure.
On to my task at hand here: porn in Orgasm, Inc. There are two things I want to discuss. One is the images of porn seen in the documentary. The reason porn was even brought in was because the evil pharmaceutical and medical companies trying to produce medicine and metal things for women to get them to orgasm also used porn to test out their products. So, for example, during a trial for Viagra for women, they were shown porn. Funny thing is the women taking the placebo reported high sexual arousal when watching porn and "taking" Viagra. Ha, joke is on the medicine!! One company, Allista, commissioned a woman to make pornographic material for women to watch during product testing. The shots of porn shown in Orgasm, Inc. were fairly amusing. One was an early 90s porn of two women in obnoxious 90s style talking in a kitchen. Other brief shots included two heterosexual people having intercourse. And at various times there would be still shots of porn, one of a Black woman with her mouth gaping open in ecstasy, apparently. The images of porn in my eyes were generic, stereotypical, and boring. The viewer of the documentary should think about how pornography was depicted in the film on a more social level. A woman who runs a women's porn shop (whatever that means) was interviewed and talked about how women like all sorts of porn. Thus we can question the medical companies and their choice to "produce" porn and/or show particular kinds of porn. How do they know what kind of porn women like? Will the showing of particular kinds of porn impact the results they are recording when testing orgasm products? Here is a thought: porn IS an orgasm product!
The second thing I wanted to discuss is the assumptions built into women's porn. Interestingly enough I just read some research on women watching porn (especially porn made for women). A master's thesis written by Verena Chiara Kuckenberger and discussed here http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2011/mar/22/porn-women includes interviews with women after they watched five women's porn films. The results may be surprising: the criteria that makes women's porn just that (female desire stressed, natural lighting and bodies, developed plots) does not get all women off! In fact all the women found at least a few of the films undesirable. For example, a film that shows a woman being pleased by multiple people using multiple toys was marked as having low sexual arousal reaction by many of women. Why? For some it was because there was too much going on and it was hard to concentrate on the woman being pleased. So we could conclude there are some issues with producing porn for women and assuming that IS what women want. Female pleasure is not any easier to pin down than that pesky clit (I kid, I kid). For a political economy project I am working on, I am trying to track down audience data on feminist/women's porn; it is pretty hard to find. So right now no one can assume that it is just women who are watching porn made for them just as much as we can't assume it is just men watching mainstream porn. Until I can find some solid audience data I am reluctant to claim porn for women is watched by women; this claim being even more complicated by research that shows women are not always down with what is given to them in the porn world.
In conclusion, Orgasm, Inc. leaves much to be desired. The issue of women's orgasms being medicialized is a huge problem and the documentary just skims the surface of what is happening on a social and structural level. But I think the documentary makes a possibly unintended argument. Having issues orgasming because your partner is more worried about banging your cervix and/or getting a sweet BJ? Watch some porn! Having issues with orgasms because you think your pleasure is not important? Watch some porn! Having issues with orgasms because your fantasies are getting dull and predictable? Watch some porn! Want to have an orgasm? WATCH SOME PORN!*
*I do not suggest watching any and all porn. I once again suggest checking out places like Smitten Kitten that are committed to selling "ethical porn." Sexy, hot porn that doesn't abuse anyone on the set! Do it up!