Lesbians who like to watch gay male porn?

[Huckleman2000]

I searched for the old "Pornography in the service of women" thread, to find that the last post was already a year ago! Time flies like an arrow, and fruit flies like a banana...

Came across this article about a scene in a new movie, The Kids Are Alright, where a lesbian couple decides to watch porn. Turns out, it's gay male porn that they like. Here's the article, excerpt below:

As it happens, lesbians liking male gay pornography is not an unknown phenomenon.

“I don’t do it, I don’t understand it, but I know so many dykes that watch gay porn,” said Ariel Levy, a writer for The New Yorker who has written on gender and sexuality for the magazine. “It’s definitely a thing.”

Levy directed me to her friend Alex (not her real name), who told me why she prefers watching gay male porn rather than straight pornography, or women with women. For one thing, she doesn’t find female porn stars attractive, no matter whether they’re starring in movies featuring men and women or girl-on-girl action. “There’s too much plastic surgery,” she said, adding that the women look “like cyborgs.” And the movies she watched were depressing. “It never seemed like they were having fun.”

Other lesbians who came of age in the feminist and post-feminist era told me that the role assigned to women in straight pornography was frequently in opposition with the ideal they strived for in their daily lives, making the movies hard to watch. Moreover, most of the pornography featuring lesbian action was actually made by straight men for straight men.

“Our feminism remains with us when we grab the remote,” said Tristan Taormino, a sex educator and producer of erotica. “So when there’s no women around, it… gives queer women the ability to get swept up in the action of the film without thinking, ‘Who is this woman? Is she having a good time? Is she coerced?’ With gay porn, for a second, we can go there and not think about politics and sexism… there’s something about removing women from the equation that’s freeing.”

She added: “You don’t have to want to have sex with a man to be attracted to masculinity in a specifically sexual context.”
[....]
A few lesbians I spoke to suggested that the members of the tribe who watch gay porn are in fact getting off on a fantasy, in which the man is subjugated and used in the way women frequently are.

As Jen, another gay porn-loving lesbian, put it: “It’s a surrendering of male privilege. It throws a monkey wrench into the idea that women are receptacles.”

Clinton put it even more bluntly.

“It’s about power dynamics,” she said. “We’re so used to watching men in our lives wield power. Gay porn is an opportunity to watch them get f-----.”

 

[Stella_Omega]

yes indeed. All of those are legitimate reasons why lesbians watch gay porn.

Although none of the gay male porn I've seen is as mind-melting hot as the gay male sex scenes that some lesbians write...

Because we know what we like.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Lesbians like to eat barbecue NOT watch porn.

 

[Huckleman2000]

yes indeed. All of those are legitimate reasons why lesbians watch gay porn.

Although none of the gay male porn I've seen is as mind-melting hot as the gay male sex scenes that some lesbians write...

Because we know what we like.

I guess I was struck by how casually the women in the article acknowledged the sexuality of the "power dynamic" involved. Isn't this the same "misogynistic" attitude that feminists decry in "straight" porn, just gender-swapped? (I put those words in quotes because their meaning seems fuzzier in this context somehow)

It reminds me of watching drag-kings - some of their acts strike me as blatantly misogynistic, as if they're celebrating the same behavior that most women (and 'enlightened' men) would be repulsed by if they were watching actual men, not just women dressed up like men. I would think that there would be lampooning of that behavior, but instead they seem to embrace it, "power dynamic" and all.

 

[xssve]

That critique assumes there exists some other option - women are receptacles, by virtue of simple, basic, biological reality, the only question is whether it's active or passive - it isn't something you can do anything about, the only option is to change the perception of that fact in terms of status perception: sharing the onus is one way of doing that.

Anal and oral sex are, objectively speaking, gender neutral activities, one reason reason androcentric religions and similar cultural constructs have been traditionally dead set against it, it blurs the gender line.

It's called the Cultural Theory of Risk, all hell will break loose.

"Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!"

Also see related Stereotype Threat.

 

[3113]

The Game is not Misogynistic...the Rules can be.

I guess I was struck by how casually the women in the article acknowledged the sexuality of the "power dynamic" involved. Isn't this the same "misogynistic" attitude that feminists decry in "straight" porn, just gender-swapped?

Yes. And? Look, the decrying of any power dynamic, be it one race over another, one religion over other religions, or men over women isn't really a decrying of the power dynamic per se. It's not the game, it's rules that say that only one sort gets to win it. Always.

I think there is a growing, enlightened number of people who understand that all humans--mammals that we are--naturally play power dynamics and feel fine with taking positions of power (or no power). Depending on the situation, we may want it or not want it. We may be leaders or followers. We may want to command or take commands. The problem arrises when we decide on these things not according to who wants the position of leader--and is best qualified AND is whom others naturally feel they could obey, but, instead, grant everyone of a certain skin color or religion or sex that position. No matter what they want or what anyone else wants. This not only screams of unfairness--of a rigged game, but it's also stupid, as it robs us of the right person in the right position.

And it's no surprise if the first reaction of those who are treated unfairly is to decry the game entirely. It's hard to be objective and say, "Well, there's nothing wrong with the game, in fact, it's natural and what we'd all like to play...." when the game is always rigged to make sure that you lose. So. Yes. This is what feminists decry as "misogynistic." But only because there was no way, in the past, for them to say, "The game isn't misogynistic, only the way you've set up the rules--which always allow men to win and women to lose."

And, in fact, it seems that the reason Lesbians don't like most lesbian porn is because that rule still holds. The women on screen are still viewed as losers. They have lesbian sex so men can win--so men can enjoy themselves, not so they can enjoy themselves. Hence, lesbians still feel like lesbian porn portrays them as losers. The game is fixed. Why play it?

Yes?

 

[CharleyH]

I searched for the old "Pornography in the service of women" thread, to find that the last post was already a year ago! Time flies like an arrow, and fruit flies like a banana...

Came across this article about a scene in a new movie, The Kids Are Alright, where a lesbian couple decides to watch porn. Turns out, it's gay male porn that they like. Here's the article, excerpt below:

I know many gay women who prefer straight porn, but you might also be surprised at how many straight women prefer gay porn, albeit they won't watch it with their boyfriends. You may also be surprised, if you don't usually read stories in that section, at how many gay stories posted at Lit are written by women - me included.

 

[CharleyH]

I think there is a growing, enlightened number of people who understand that all humans--mammals that we are--naturally play power dynamics and feel fine with taking positions of power (or no power).

I am sorry that I can't speak to the rest of your post (which I conveniently deleted) but your argument does sound a little Camille Paglia. I like it.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I guess I was struck by how casually the women in the article acknowledged the sexuality of the "power dynamic" involved. Isn't this the same "misogynistic" attitude that feminists decry in "straight" porn, just gender-swapped? (I put those words in quotes because their meaning seems fuzzier in this context somehow)

Not gender swapped. That would be Women topping men. And it's het-- and in the porn industry, that will mean that it's for male viewers, not for women.

Same-sex power dynamics sidestep a hugely problematic set of cultural assumptions that exist at the expense of women. Indeed, gay male porn is for men-- but it does not make use of women to that end. I refuse to speak for every lesbian woman in the universe, but for myself-- I'd rather be completely out of the picture, than be lampooned.

It reminds me of watching drag-kings - some of their acts strike me as blatantly misogynistic, as if they're celebrating the same behavior that most women (and 'enlightened' men) would be repulsed by if they were watching actual men, not just women dressed up like men. I would think that there would be lampooning of that behavior, but instead they seem to embrace it, "power dynamic" and all.

Wow, all of them embrace it?

But that is a really good point, and really worth exploring.

Don't forget-- as the watchers never forget, not for a moment-- that there is a woman in that male disguise.

This is the thing about power dynamics; I love 'em but the playing field has to be level. hetero dynamics mostly aren't. We have this huge cultural weight pushing the female side of the field down. Same sex means that the balance depends on other factors beside the possession or lack of ovaries. When that single factor is missing-- a woman can wear the trappings of male privilege and it will be sexy to other women.

I think it can be sexy to some men as well, for similar reasons?

 

[sr71plt]

Most of my "fan" mail on GM stories purports to come from women. Have to admit I doubt remember any claiming to be lesbians, though.

 

[Huckleman2000]

[...]This is the thing about power dynamics; I love 'em but the playing field has to be level. hetero dynamics mostly aren't. We have this huge cultural weight pushing the female side of the field down. Same sex means that the balance depends on other factors beside the possession or lack of ovaries. When that single factor is missing-- a woman can wear the trappings of male privilege and it will be sexy to other women.

I think it can be sexy to some men as well, for similar reasons?

Well, you're assuming that the men who like their porn to be "degrading" see their "male privilege" as women do. I suspect those men don't see themselves on a level playing field at all. They're probably not very successful with women, or maybe in their careers - they see themselves as not as successful as the culture expects - they have no "privilege" - which translates into externalized anger.

Don't dominatrix' say that most of their clients are powerful men?

 

[mynameisben]

Maybe it's just me, but I think gay male porn is overblown.

 

[Handley_Page]

Maybe it's just me, but I think gay male porn is overblown.

it ain't just you.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Well, you're assuming that the men who like their porn to be "degrading" see their "male privilege" as women do. I suspect those men don't see themselves on a level playing field at all. They're probably not very successful with women, or maybe in their careers - they see themselves as not as successful as the culture expects - they have no "privilege" - which translates into externalized anger.

Don't dominatrix' say that most of their clients are powerful men?

In those first paras, I wasn't saying anything at all about men and what they like. We're talking about lesbians-- and other women-- and how they perceive commercial porn, and why some of them might prefer to not watch the stuff that has women in it, but do want to watch porn.

but I'm wondering if some men like drag kings because they know that this woman has chosen to don the trappings of male privilege-- as much or as little as that might be-- but is still a woman. he can meet her as an equal, in sexual fantasy at least, yet have his preferred sex in the parnter under the clothes? There are lots of drag queens that are successful for the same reason.

There are a hundred reasons, by the way, for a woman to do drag. A lot of them are straight, and have no gender dysphoric issues at all-- but plenty of them do, and are in transition. Some are dykes, some het. it's more of a burlesque tradition thing, IMO, as is so much of the drag queen scene.

 

[Handley_Page]

Being a queen is Such a drag. . . .

[sorry; could not resist it ]

 

[3113]

Well, you're assuming that the men who like their porn to be "degrading" see their "male privilege" as women do.

But it doesn't have to be obviously "degrading" to be "degrading." There are plenty of movies and television shows, watched by men and women, where women characters have no character--they are just in the movie to present some tits & ass to the male viewers.

And there's anything bad with this--now and then. But when it becomes pervasive, then it becomes a cultural norm. Taken for granted, to the point where both men and women can't see women in any other role. They're not people, they're treasures to be used, abused, rescued, bartered and put on display.

This "degrades" and yet a man can enjoy such a film without giving a second thought to the fact that the males in the movie/show have all the privilege (to be characters, heroes, even side characters like plane pilots, police, presidents--do you ever notice that they're almost all men?), and the women none (they're still housewives, kindergarden school teachers, secretaries). The male privilege doesn't have to extend to being a master with women as slaves, it can simply be the accepted one that you don't even notice until it's pointed out.

Such "taken for granted" privileges are even in porn.

 

[3113]

Maybe it's just me, but I think gay male porn is overblown.

It's not just you, it's Handley, too.

it ain't just you.

But it is just the two of you

 

[Handley_Page]

But it is just the two of you

We ain't alone by any means, I reckon.

 

[sr71plt]

This "degrades" and yet a man can enjoy such a film without giving a second thought to the fact that the males in the movie/show have all the privilege (to be characters, heroes, even side characters like plane pilots, police, presidents--do you ever notice that they're almost all men?),

Ummm, no. It's obviously an ingrained perspective "thing." Because I see people of power on the screens being pretty equally divided between the genders now and the character of the U.S. president being cast with a woman more often than not.

And the characterization I've seen on screen, especially the TV, of men for at least a decade has been that of a buffoon backed by a smarter, more centered woman character (or two).

So, I guess it's all in what you're looking for.

(By the way, I've seen this "eye candy" thing on screen being in effect for both genders for almost forever too. I was a bit "background" movie actor back in the sixties--and I was never cast with a shirt on.)

 

[3113]

Ummm, no. It's obviously an ingrained perspective "thing." Because I see people of power on the screens being pretty equally divided between the genders now and the character of the U.S. president being cast with a woman more often than not.

Which movies? I haven't seen a woman president yet. Not in movies or television, but I don't watch as much as I used to. I do admit that moves and television have gotten better. But the movies most highly favored by men and boys for entertainment--sorry. No. Male porn--meaning guy fantasy movies about going to Las Vegas, etc., or becoming a superhero, or being an action hero, in those movies the boy hero is matched up with a stunningly beautiful girl. And no matter how baffoonish he is, and no matter how seemingly smart (if lacking in all character) she is, he gets her in the end. She may be the kick-ass woman of all women, but she will acknowledge that he is the hero and she belongs to him.

That is the taken-gor-granted norm. She always has to bow to the boy and surrender to him in the end. And he will never, ever get anything less than the most beautiful girl. Hey. It's porn, a fantasy, and fine with me. Some of the time. But if it's too pervasive, then no, we're back to male privilege because the number of movies the opposite are still relatively small (Romantic comedies and Twilight).

Now, if you want to talk about shows that aren't fantasy or male porn, once again, they're better. But the men in starring roles still outweigh women, and yes, that includes the side roles of police, pilots and presidents.

Though I am hoping to see more women presidents now that the black president is no longer a novelty.

 

[sr71plt]

Women protraying U.S. presidents on film are at a natural disadvantage, as they can only portray fictional presidents. Naturally, anyone playing the role of a real president has to be a man (or Vanessa Redgrave in drag).

That said:

Movies:
Christina Applegate
Ernestine Barrier (back in 1953)
Sally Champlin
Joan Rivers
Loretta Swift

TV (Mostly in very recent years)
Patty Duke ("Hail to the Chief")
Geena Davis ("Commander-in-Chief." The title role, two seasons)
Cherry Jones ("24" From 2008 to the present)
Mimi Kuzyk ("XIII")
Patricia Wettig ("Prison Break")

Now, you can name the men who have played regular roles as fictional presidents in TV programs for the past decade. Let's see, there's "West Wing" and . . .

 

[sr71plt]

but I don't watch as much as I used to.

But the men in starring roles still outweigh women, and yes, that includes the side roles of police, pilots and presidents.

Perhaps putting these two statements of yours together suggests you probably shouldn't be making sweeping statements about films and statistics.

As I indicated, it's probably mostly in the perception of where you are and what you want to see rather than what's actually there.

 

[Stella_Omega]

We ain't alone by any means, I reckon.

there can never be too overblows in gay porn, I always say.

 

[3113]

Perhaps putting these two statements of yours together suggests you probably shouldn't be making sweeping statements about films and statistics.

And maybe you should read my sweeping statements more carefully. I specified shows primarily watched by men. "Hail to the Chief"--boys tv show? (canceled after 7 episodes. I suppose not). Nice that there was a woman president in a 1953 film...too bad it took how many years to get another on film?

Can I name men playing presidents? How about Harrison Ford, Bill Pullman, Morgan Freeman (and Morgan Freeman and Morgan Freeman), John Tavolta, Peter Sellers, Kevin Kline, Danny Glover, Martin Sheen (as mentioned), Michael Douglas (playing the part that led to the West Wing) Christopher Plummer (tv mini-series Summit), Robin Williams, Chris Rock, David Palmer (President before Cherry Jones)....the list does go on. Any movie with any male president, right? But notice that most of these presidents are A-List actors, and a few of play presidents that kick ass rather than sitting behind a desk. Harrison Ford takes back Air Force 1 from terrorists, and Bill Pullman saves the world in Independence Day. Michael Douglas romances a hot woman. And Morgan Freeman, is, well, Morgan Freeman.

24 and Prison break certainly indicate progress, but how many of those fictional female presidents you listed were in movies/shows watched by guys? And do you really want to count Loretta Swift--president in "Whoops Apocalypse" who's incompetence starts WWIII? Or Joan Rivers? These are comedies with the woman president as a joke.

I really don't think my generalization that far off given those parameters. I certainly hope that things are turning around and going to be different, but I don't think my observations are that far off the mark.

 

[sr71plt]

And maybe you should read my sweeping statements more carefully. I specified shows primarily watched by men. "Hail to the Chief"--boys tv show? (canceled after 7 episodes. I suppose not). Nice that there was a woman president in a 1953 film...too bad it took how many years to get another on film?

Can I name men playing presidents? How about Harrison Ford, Bill Pullman, Morgan Freeman (and Morgan Freeman and Morgan Freeman), John Tavolta, Peter Sellers, Kevin Kline, Danny Glover, Martin Sheen (as mentioned), Michael Douglas (playing the part that led to the West Wing) Christopher Plummer (tv mini-series Summit), Robin Williams, Chris Rock, David Palmer (President before Cherry Jones)....the list does go on. Any movie with any male president, right? But notice that most of these presidents are A-List actors, and a few of play presidents that kick ass rather than sitting behind a desk. Harrison Ford takes back Air Force 1 from terrorists, and Bill Pullman saves the world in Independence Day. Michael Douglas romances a hot woman. And Morgan Freeman, is, well, Morgan Freeman.

24 and Prison break certainly indicate progress, but how many of those fictional female presidents you listed were in movies/shows watched by guys? And do you really want to count Loretta Swift--president in "Whoops Apocalypse" who's incompetence starts WWIII? Or Joan Rivers? These are comedies with the woman president as a joke.

I really don't think my generalization that far off given those parameters. I certainly hope that things are turning around and going to be different, but I don't think my observations are that far off the mark.

Oh, it's OK with me for you to mealy mouth it so your perceptions fit your preferences.

(It was sort of worth it to know you've spent all that time in research to backpeddle and throw flak up in the air on flip statements that turned out to be false perceptions.)