Porn is a privilege not a right

porn prison

Once again, the issue of prisoners’ right to pornography is up for debate; this time in Canada.

In 2013, Correctional Service Canada blocked inmates’ access to TV channels showing late-night pornography after complaints that female correctional officers were feeling harassed.

“It was found that sexually explicit material undermined a person’s sense of personal dignity, and in the circumstances under consideration, particularly that of female correctional officers,” state the records.

Haris Naraine, who was an inmate at the time at Archambault Prison in Quebec, filed a grievance, eventually taking his case to federal court, arguing that banning access to porn infringed on his constitutional right to freedom of expression. The judge concluded that banning the channels was not legal but, it seems, Quebec Minister of Public Security Lise Thériault disagrees. After learning that inmates at Quebec’s Amos detention centre were accessing porn via a late-night movie channel, she vowed to install parental controls in prisons across the province in order to block access to channels that showed porn.

Correctional Service Canada is still reviewing the court ruling and the policy so, in the meantime, there is ample opportunity to debate things like “sexuality” and “morals” and to prove how sexy and unprudish we really are when it comes to men’s right to misogyny.

In a repulsive but revealing report by Brigitte Noël for Vice, she accuses Thériault of “pearl-clutching” and goes on to discuss the issue of “sexuality in prison,” as though male sexuality is inseparable from pornography. This kind of commentary is useful as it gets at one of two key issues here: 1) the “right” to access any media one likes, and 2) the idea that men are unable to function in a healthy manner without access to pornography.

What these arguments tell us is that, as a society, it’s time to stop pretending as though pornography is simply “entertainment” and, therefore, innocuous. Pornography is not a neutral form of “entertainment.” Rather, it is a form of media that reinforces and celebrates female degradation and abuse as well as racist stereotypes. Unless we are prepared to argue that racism and misogyny are either integral aspects of male sexuality or simply neutral — and therefore harmless — forms of entertainment, we cannot treat porn as “sexuality” or as a “right,” like access to education or health care. As such, we must acknowledge that it is unacceptable for everyone — not simply for inmates.

If pornography is an innate part of men’s sexualities, then we must also argue that men naturally want to hurt and abuse the women they have sex with and that men are not capable of masturbating without simultaneously degrading women, as these behaviours feature so prominently in porn. We must also argue that, for example, adult men naturally want to have sex with teenage girls and that “facial abuse” is a healthy expression of male sexuality.

While folks like Noël assume that access to porn reduces rates of rape and male violence, there is no strong evidence to support this and, moreover, it is an irrational claim. Both porn consumption and male violence are ubiquitous. If it were true that porn reduced violence against women and sexual assault, you’d think we’d have seen a notable drop, seeing as pornography is so easily accessible online and so commonly-used by men and boys. Yet sexual assault and other forms of violence against women continue, every day, globally.

There is also plenty of evidence that shows younger and younger boys are acting out scenes from pornography on girls, resulting in rising levels of violent sex crimes. We know from both reports and from personal experience that both men and boys are pressuring their female partners to engage in sex acts they saw in porn videos. We also know, from not being stupid, that the images we see in media, more generally, have an impact on our view of the world and people around us. Racist propaganda teaches people racism, sexist propaganda teaches people sexism, fast food propaganda teaches people to buy fast food. Advertising works, that’s why companies use it to sell products.

The problem with pornography is not, in any case, simply rape. The objectification and sexualization of women is completely normalized today, a result of the mainstreaming of porn and the entrenchment of porn culture. So the idea that women are things to look at and that our bodies exist for the purposes of male pleasure and titillation is something that must be discussed in all of this. Porn isn’t only about teaching men to ejaculate to violent acts and it isn’t only teaching them to be sexually selfish; it’s also teaching them how to see and treat women, more generally — it teaches men what we are for.

Today on CBC’s The Current, Anna Maria Tremonte spoke to Naraine and his lawyer, Todd Sloan, who said that from a “human rights perspective,” prisoners should be able to watch the same programming as the rest of society.

This argument is actually a useful one to consider. If “the rest of society” agrees that porn is simply another form of expression, sexuality, and entertainment, why shouldn’t prisoners be able to watch it? I mean, isn’t this the crux of the matter? That most of society accepts that women’s safety is less important than men’s ability to “express themselves” through misogyny? And that most of society takes for granted that men “need” both racism and sexism in order to masturbate and that violence is an innate part of men’s sexualities?

We see examples of this argument all the time, including recently with the case of Jian Ghomeshi, who defended his violence against women on the basis of “sexuality,” arguing that his violence was simply a “sexual preference” and that “sexual preferences are a human right.” In the end, society did not accept his excuse because the women he assaulted made clear that his violence wasn’t “consensual.” But what if it were? The fact that Ghomeshi believed his own rhetoric and employed the language of “human rights” in his self-defense is notable.

Women in pornography technically “consent” to violence in their contracts. They agree to accept money in exchange for being degraded, abused, gang-raped, choked, and called misogynist and racist names. Does “consent” make that imagery that a healthy expression of male sexuality? Are depictions of sexualized violence a human right simply because it exists and some people enjoy it? Is racism and sexism ok so long as one woman agrees to be the target?

If you believe the answer to these questions is “yes,” do you also believe that hate speech is a human right?

What baffles me is that pornography is not, as of yet, legally defined as hate speech, considering the amount of literal hate speech in porn.

What should be clear, at very least — even to those who wish to pretend “consensual” racism and sexism are acceptable — is that porn makes women feel harassed, disrespected, and unsafe. While Sloan argued that there was no evidence that inmates’ porn consumption lead to an increase in harassment of female correctional officers, you have to wonder why, if there was no impact, these women complained in the first place… You have to wonder why, more generally, porn is banned in workplaces because women interpret it as sexual harassment, which is, you know, illegal nowadays.

Despite the fact that this decision to ban porn was made with the safety of women in mind, Naraine and many others believe this infringes on men’s human rights.

The thing is, hate speech and sexual harassment are not human rights. So this debate about porn access is not about rights at all. It’s about privilege, specifically male privilege.

Meghan Murphy
Meghan Murphy

Founder & Editor

Meghan Murphy is a freelance writer and journalist. She has been podcasting and writing about feminism since 2010 and has published work in numerous national and international publications, including New Statesman, Vice, Al Jazeera, The Globe and Mail, I-D, Truthdig, and more. Meghan completed a Masters degree in the department of Gender, Sexuality and Women’s Studies at Simon Fraser University in 2012 and lives in Vancouver, B.C. with her dog.

Like this article? Tip Feminist Current!

$
Personal Info

Donation Total: $1

  • Bastet

    As far as I’m concerned, people in maximum security prison are there because they don’t acknowledge other people human rights and thus forfeit their own. They should get access to healthcare that keeps them physically healthy, access to psychological care that may help them return to psychological health but they’re owed no such ‘rights’ as entertainment. That is a privelege. Prison isn’t a holiday home.

    Minimum security prisons where inmates still observe others human rights haven’t forfeited their own. Porn isn’t a human right and thus should be banned due to it being a workplace.

  • Zhompo

    Excellent article, Meghan. Their argument fails on the same test that is applied to people being subject to a criminal background test before they can access IVF in some jurisdictions; just because someone has the ability to access/do something in the wider world, it doesn’t mean when the state has governance over it that they should be made to endorse the behaviour.

  • TheArtistFormerlyKnownAsYoya

    Great article. Good thing we have the LibFems around to accuse the female guards of being jealous prudes!

  • Meghan Murphy

    Seriously.

  • Meghan Murphy

    My point about the term ‘privilege’ is explained in the last line. This is about male privilege. I didn’t argue that it was a ‘privilege’ in the sense that it’s a reward for good behaviour.

    • cynicalleftist

      Ah, that makes sense. From the title, I took “privilege” in the same sense Independent Radical thought it was used.

      • Meghan Murphy

        Sorry that was unclear

  • A genius in New Zealand (female Maori Member of Parliament, forget her name unfortunately) pushed through legislation that forbids all smoking in prisons. When the whingeing about civil rights started, it was pointed out they’re in prison. The whole point is that they don’t have most civil rights. (Can’t move freely, can’t vote, can’t say whatever they want to whomever they want, etc., etc.) The state can definitely stop them from harming their health.

    Or practicing hate speech.

    (And when did this BS start that if the victim has enough Stockholm Syndrome to go along, destroying her is A-OK? Doesn’t seem to work that way with racism. Or any other -ism. Doesn’t work that way with other crimes, either. Murder is still prosecuted as murder, no matter how the victim behaves.)

  • Tesla Livia

    But, but,but….porn is just FANTASY** and doesn’t affect how men deal with women IRL!

    From the article: “It says some guests, often businessmen, call the reception for extras – such as fresh towels – to lure female staff.”

    **practised on actual women and filmed

  • amanda fiona

    When will the site stop talking about porn as fi S&M is the only genre of porn out there & as if sites like xart don’t exist? Also I don’t believe media can influence adults views towards human rights.

    • radwonka

      Site like xart still objectify women.

  • amanda fiona

    If women are viewed as objects, howcome they are allowed to vote & run for president?

    • somebody42

      “…allowed to…” Because people like you think that men can or should “allow” women to do anything. BTW I freely admit that I don’t believe your real name is “amanda fiona” nor any other feminine name.

      • radwonka

        MTE. He sounds like a troll.

  • amanda fiona

    I believe people who commit rape would still choose to do so even without any pornography.

    • Studies show that men who consume more pornography are less empathetic towards rape victims, more likely to blame victims for rape, believe that rape is a less serious crime and rate their own likelihood of commiting rape higher. Of course they do not say that the reason they want to commit rape is because of pornography, but if people perfectly understood their own minds and desires the field of psychology would not be necessary. Men who become violent jerks because of pornography (and sexualised, violent media is general, which is common through mainstream media partially because of the pornography industry) do not tell the reason why they turned out that way anymore than compounds tell us why they reacted, but the evidence speaks for itself.

  • amanda fiona

    Just like going to church doesn’t make you become a Christian or make you want to not steal or envy or commit adultery, watching racist propaganda doesn’t make you become a racist.

    • Si Llage

      You think media and religion have little influence on people but writing comments under articles on feminist websites will better the world. Okay.

  • Sally

    that is horrifying… wow.

  • Meghan Murphy

    Can you compare consumerism and a person’s views on human rights when the person in question’s consumerism involves the exploitation and abuse of other human beings?

  • marv

    Jesus confronted and forgave the woman caught in adultery but the man she cheated with was not brought forward at all.

    The history of marriage is about the ownership of wives by husbands. The scriptures are part of this tradition (wives are exhorted to be obedient to their husbands). Thus it was much more dangerous for a woman to commit adultery than a man.. She could be killed by him and often was. In parts of the world marriage has evolved away from a property relationship but it still frequently carries the legacy of male control and violence when women commit adultery or not. When men are adulterous they rarely have to feel their lives are in danger.

  • Tired

    Sorry for slight derail below and necroing the thread but there was a case in Australia a few years ago (maybe 20? Crap, I’m getting old) where female cleaners on a construction site complained to the union about pornography in the site offices (mainly bondage and torture porn) and were not taken seriously and the construction union blew them off. Part of their problem (like they needed one) was that in the presence of those images, the men on site treated them abysmally whereas they didn’t where those images weren’t present.
    At least one of them ended up being raped and the only good thing to come from it was these days, that stuff is banned on construction sites (where I work as a professional woman who still gets not so veiled threats from an increasingly smaller percentage of male colleagues as the years go by and with an increasingly larger % of men who are realising this could happen to their own loved ones – there is still a long way to go!). As I recall, (and it’s been a while) management and union management (all men) agreed there wasn’t really a problem. Until it became a problem and the courts got involved.
    All power to the female prison guards who raised this and fought this. I support you without reservation. I personally think it is a total red herring that it’s only men in jail complaining about this stuff. They have nothing to lose by raising this as they are already incarcerated. (they don’t have a job to lose – something I worry about all the time) Porn is banned at work in every place I’ve worked in the last 15 years (heavy engineering and construction – totally male dominated) and no-one bats an eyelid. I’m especially not a fan of the privatised prison system and all the implications (especially the trends towards incarceration increasing since many parts of the system were privatised ‘contributing to the economy wtf??) It really does beggar belief though that women prison guards are still fighting this battle in a place where so many of the men locked up are there for violent crimes against women. And some people feel like this is something that should be debated. I have no problem with basic human rights in any prison but porn is not a right. I don’t think it should even be a privilege actually