The benefit of the internet over traditional media such as newspapers and television is that it allows everyone a chance to contribute in a world that was once tightly mediated by gatekeepers, media-owners and those in privileged positions or with qualifications. However like traditional media forms the internet can be used to perpetuate stereotypes of traditional gender roles. Nowhere is this more evident than in porn made for men, by men, about women.

The internet, like other media, serves a dual purpose: it creates society and mirrors society. If this be the case, how is porn on the internet creating and mirroring today and tomorrow’s society?

The first thing that springs to mind is the growth of teenage girls, celebrities (think Sandra Bullock) and women kissing other females to impress and arouse males. There has been a steady increase in the number of films with girl-kiss-girl scenes in them. This is a relatively new phenomenon that was not a peer pressure for me fifteen years ago when I was discovering intimate relationships. I hypothesise if we surveyed young women today many of them will have buckled to the social pressure of kissing a girl. I am not saying two girls shouldn’t kiss if they share an intimate moment and go for it because they genuinely want too. I am questioning the motive of two girls kissing because they believe it will impress a boy they are trying to please. I also hypothesise if we surveyed young men we would find many of them have not buckled to the social pressure of kissing a boy. After all, boys are not socially pressured to kiss each other to turn girls on.

Recently Sydney University researchers did a study that found over half of all people access internet porn and that increasingly, it is impacting on real relationships (as opposed to safer fantasy relationships). Not surprisingly it found more men access porn than women. I believe this is purely because porn is normalised for men from a very young age. The culture of boys in today’s society is to view and share pornographic images, masturbation is normalised, and dads are more likely to introduce their sons to porn than mums are likely introduce their daughters to female porn. In other words, the culture of girls in public society is to suppress rather than express their sexuality, where as the culture of boys in public society is to express their sexuality. Noam Shpancer has called this ‘the masturbation gap’ at: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/insight-therapy/201009/the-masturbation-gap

In today’s public society, women’s sexuality is suppressed, where as male sexually is expressed. In today’s private society (particularly in porn) women are allowed to be ‘sexy’ for men, they are allowed to masturbate for men, but not necessarily allowed to be sexy for their own self-esteem, or masturbate for their own self pleasure. Just look at the gaze of porn stars. In porn for men, women gaze into the camera in seductively in an ‘I am doing this for you type gaze’. In gay porn, the majority of the men are not looking into the camera lense. What I am trying to say is that privately the loudest message heard is that men masturbate for themselves, women masturbate for men.

As a female genuinely attracted to the male body, I have found it incredibly difficult to access free female porn. The best place to access free porn for women is on gay porn sites. Intermixed in with lots of gay porn content is occasional female porn content. Heterosexual female porn is what I am from here on calling fe-porn. What is fe-porn? Fe-porn is similar to gay porn but it lacks the gay content, it objectifies the male body and finds arousal in watching the male engage in sexual acts such as masturbation. Female porn has hot guys, jacking off and looking longingly into the camera but lacks actors who are watching gay porn, showing their anus or engaging in gay sexual acts. Female porn features one average woman and multiple hot sexy men. Female porn features hairless men, men with well looked after physiques, and most importantly, men with large sexy penises. It includes close-ups of ejaculation, men who gaze into the camera and the soundtrack of enjoyment. Female porn (Like the initial Playboy pictures for men) has images for women that treat men, male genitalia, and the male body as a sexy object to be looked at and turned on by.

Eventually (in the future one day) women may be aroused by watching two men engage in sex acts (gay-porn) for the pleasure of women but at the moment most women I have spoken too will not access gay porn sites and therefore find free porn for women because they are not willing to sift through the gay content. Thus I am advocating free (not subscribe too or pay for) porn for women which makes it okay to watch men and normalises female desire to to find male bodies attractive. Without it, women are turning to porn for men, what I will call ma-porn, for their sex education.

Thus I feel that porn needs to be further categorised rather than lumped under the categories porn (for men) and gay porn (also for men). This will make it easier for people to easily locate what it is that really turns them on.  I think it would be beneficial to have multiple categories of porn readily available within porn sites under additional categories such as fe-porn and le-porn. Le-porn can be described as lesbian porn – it involves two women enjoying themselves for themselves, not for a man. I also think it would be beneficial for gay porn and porn sites not to automatically assume all its viewers are male.

My issue is not with the rise of porn per se, because like it or not, porn is here to stay. My issue is with the fact that male sexuality is expressed eloquently in the public and private arenas, whilst females are still encouraged publically and privately to ‘look at women’ rather than men. If women are encouraged privately to explore their sexuality and their sexual desires for their own pleasure, if women realise it is normal and okay to look at and be turned on by the male body,  then eventually perhaps women will stop objectifying women and contributing to a major cause of their own oppression.

Both sexes were involved in educating and socialising children into traditional roles. Men had strong bonds with the men they hunted with and women had strong bonds with the women they shared most of their days with.

With religion came new explanations of spirituality, social roles and responsibilities. Communities were no longer the sole teachers of children as religious institutions and eventually schools took on a greater socialisation role.

The industrial revolution and accompanying practices such as mass farming and the rise of the family unit meant instead of hunting, men began to work and earn a wage to purchase food and shelter. Men brought home money so that women could gather (shop) and provide for their man and children.

Men formed strong bonds with the men they worked with but women were beginning to feel disillusioned with the lack of companionship inside the walls of the family home. After a long hard day at work men wanted to relax while women wanted someone to talk to.  

This created conflict.

World war two saw many men leave the family home to fight for their country. Lack of males in the workforce meant women were called upon to help the nation by working in male jobs. Women began doing jobs they were told they couldn’t do prior to this because they were female.

Some women liked the culture of working so much that they felt sad that the return of men meant they must return to their home duties.

Around this time the television became a permanent fixture in many homes. What a fantastic companion for women! What a fantastic distraction for everyone who had made it through the war!

Parents, teachers and religions were no longer the main teachers of children as the media took on a greater socialisation role.

The feminist movement challenged the continuation of traditional male-female gender roles and led to men allowing women to choose whether they wanted to work and provide for themselves, or stay at home and be provided for.  

The feminist movement is similar to the environmental movement that is happening today which challenges the naturalisation of human versus all-other-species mentality. This movement will hopefully guide humans to consider their impact on other living things.

Those getting the raw end of the deal gain a voice.

So here we are today. Women are a fixture of the workforce and are even leading the country. It seems a lot has changed in a short amount of time.

Individuals have gone from relying on their communities, to relying on their families, to relying on themselves.

But it is not as simple as that.

Equality in relationships means individuals share in hunting (for knowledge), gathering, protecting, caring and providing for each other and their families and communities.

People stay together because they choose to, not because they rely on one another. Both sexes can bring home an income and both sexes can share the household duties.

Thus families either play out or challenge traditional gender roles. They socialise children into traditional gender roles or they challenge traditional gender roles through their actions. Does your family socialise children into traditional gender roles? Who does most of the housework?

Equality begins at home.

Men and women are still getting socialised into traditional gender roles by the media. In the 1970’s feminists argued the media created women is wife, mother and housekeeper for men, a sex object for men and a person trying to be beautiful for men. Today she is all these things and a worker.

What about the media created man? Ads often depict men as imbeciles incapable of cooking themselves a meal, changing a nappy or taking life seriously.

A major concern is what effect media socialisation has on children.

Women today are largely depicted as objects concerned wholeheartedly with what they look like.

Does this make men feel ripped off when they have been told their whole lives that they are entitled to a cook, cleaner and a sex slave who will forever look young, hot and won’t care about anything but turning him on, when the reality falls short of the image?

It reminds one of when people had slaves and the slaves began claiming they had rights. The slave owners had spent years believing they were above, beyond, smarter, born with the right skin colour, and therefore more deserving of the privileges afforded to them.

Did the slave owner resent the slave for voicing their rights and therefore taking away their privileges?

So how does a slave owner ever really empathise with a slave?

First option is to become a slave. By experiencing what it feels like to be a second class citizen who gets the raw end of the deal they begin to really understand the nature of their incorrect beliefs, what they have put the other through and why.

Second option is by humanising them. The trouble with the objectified women is she can never be humanised.

It reminds one of the ‘savages’ that were wiped out when white folk colonised Australia. Aboriginals couldn’t be humanised because they were likened to animals.

So does it look like we are on the verge of humanising rather than objectifying women?

Unfortunately it has gotten worse.

Nowadays plastic women are becoming the norm rather than the exception. These Barbie dolls urge young girls to stop caring about having a brain and focus on looks, fashion and turning men on. But I wonder, without a brain how are they going to pay for all that plastic surgery?

Thus the only way men are ever going to understand what it feels to be a woman in this society is to experience it.

Women need to dehumanise men and see them as objects. Objects for female pleasure. We don’t care what you think, it only matters what you look like.

Too old? No thanks. To hairy? No thanks. Got a small penis? Ever heard of plastic surgery?