Question 3: responses continued...
Has anyone seen Midnight Cowboy lately?
John Schlesinger was way ahead of his time in drawing the connection between Jon Voight's character's flashbacks of a sexually charged childhood and his attempt in New York to create an identity/career for himself with sexuality as its core.
Some of the flashbacks — the ones least clearly defined — were of a teenage rape scene involving a girlfriend, neighborhood thugs, etc., but the early childhood ones — the ones that focus on his contact with his mom — fall into the gray area of contention: giving his mom shoulder rubs (and her moaning sexually with relief), being welcomed into the mom's post-sex-with-boyfriends bedroom, etc. Lots of questionable stimuli that may not technically count as "sexual abuse" but that was in fact all about boundaries being ignored or crossed (inadvertently or otherwise).
Anyway, the point here is I don't buy the "they were, I wasn't" stuff.
Tricia, I don't think you're lying, but if there was some way of replaying the videotapes of John's and your childhoods, my guess is we would find what I would consider evidence that the role your sexuality has ended up playing in terms of your careers and lives has its origins in the parenting and contact with adults in general — especially opposite sex parents and adults — that you guys received as young kids — in other words, in the types of stimuli you were being unfairly expected to process at an early age.
In John's very first response to Question #1, he alluded to sexually charged contact with his mom. I'd be interested in estimating — for myself, if there was some way — how his mom's behavior, attire, physical gestures and touches, etc. may have actually fostered those intense feelings, contributed to intensifying them, rather than simply and properly allowing her kid's normal sexual development to occur with a clear-cut sense of boundaries in place that insured for the child — in an unconscious or semi-conscious way — that consummation of his sexual feelings toward her was an impossibility, and therefore that those feelings were safe for him to experience without the threat of disastrous repercussions. If she wasn't conscious of her own sexual feelings toward her child — most parents aren't, and all parents have them — chances are, expressions of those unconscious feelings were bursting out at the seams, so of course creating a safe environment for her child to experience his own sexual feelings was probably never specifically addressed.
The trend in safe parenting would definitely involve, at least in the transition phase of popular standards, a hell of a lot more "walking on egg shells" than many couples seem to think is necessary, and a greater questioning of the propriety of exposing children to various forms of stimuli, culture, imagery that — in recent history — may have been considered innocuous.
Ugh, what a mouthful. Sorry. Look, for me the idea of posting these ideas on a site thousands of people hit seeking "literate smut" makes it worth it.
John Stagliano (#12 of 33)
Ian, what the hell are you talking about? I said I caught a glimpse of my mother's breasts down her night gown a couple of times in my life! This discussion turns on how much control we have as human beings in shaping ourselves, our personalities, independent of our environments. How dare you posit such possibilities about my mother's motives or behaviors! And if you say one word about my possibly being in denial of what happened to me as a youth, we no longer can have a valid discussion. You'll just have to take my word for it that I had as close to a "normal" childhood, in terms of what I was exposed to sexually, as anyone could possibly have had as a child. I'd hate to think that you mother fuckers were looking down on me and Tricia because we are in the porn business. It seems to me that most of you have some kind of psychological need to find an explanation for our behavior that fits your view of the world. I would think this is the kind of thing that would not be acceptable in a proper intellectual discussion. I hope we can put an end to this childishness and discuss the questions at hand!
In my case, I chose to pursue erotic stimuli at a young age. I spent more time than the average youth masturbating and trying to find things to masturbate to. Because I was, and am, a very introspective person, I have been analyzing these pursuits all my life. And perhaps because I am intelligent and ambitious, I have been fortunate enough to turn my obsession with porno into my life's work. I love porn. I love erotic art. I love discussing it, analyzing it, trying to understand why there is so much variety in it. I've proved that I'm good at it. I started making videos in a different way because of my passion for porn and now my passion has turned me into a millionaire.
Should I somehow be ashamed of how I make a living because porn is a shameful thing to consume? It seems to me that Matt and Ian think I should be. I've often thought that I was a good person to get into porn because I am so introspective. I try to never let other people's opinions effect my thinking and behavior. I'm willing to take a position that is unpopular. I'm willing to talk openly about being HIV positive, and how I got it, without worrying about what you people think about me (or what my mother thinks of me). I would be ashamed of this if I thought what I was doing, or what I had done, was wrong. This is not to say that I don't think I have made some mistakes in my life, of course I have. But shame is something you get when you don't believe in the verdict of your own mind.
Lots of people feel shame in relation to porn because they have not thought these issues through thoroughly enough. They just accept the opinions of others (especially their mothers), because they are not strong enough to stand on an unpopular position. I'll talk about the other complicated sexual things involved with this more later. I hope I've stayed close enough to the subject at hand here, but I felt that it was necessary to broach this subject now.
Tricia Devereaux (#13 of 33)
I just wanted to thank John for defending us. I couldn't have said it better myself, baby.
My mother and I have a pretty good relationship. At first she was horrified by my job. But she quickly realized that it didn't make someone a bad person unless they already were. She and I visit whenever we get the chance (she's back in the Midwest), and we talk and e-mail constantly. Anyway, my parents watched porn movies to add to their sex lives. It was explained to me when I was old enough that that's something they did, and I accepted it. My mother will never approve of my career, but she accepts it and it makes me laugh whenever she wishes me luck on a project.
(Quick story: In 1998 I was nominated for several awards in the business, including best sex scene, best actress, best all-girl sex scene. When I called to tell her I had won one in that category, she said, "Great — it couldn't be the one for acting. My daughter gets an award for being the best lesbian." Well, I'm bisexual, but you get the point.)
I'm sure a lot of people who read this will wonder the same question that Matt asked. I wonder it too. What will I tell my child I did? Well, I won't lie to him. But I believe the matter will have to be presented very carefully, and will have to evolve as the child matures. I've already considered the consequences of him getting teased at school because his parents are/were porno people. We'll teach him that he can be strong, that he can be his own person with his own ideas about others. And he's not going to be inundated with images of porn surrounding him. But he won't be closed off, which I believe can do more damage than not; when kids are closed off they often decide they need to experiment without having the knowledge or the maturity to do so. If my son or daughter has a problem or a question, I want them to know that they can come to me, and I will give the most knowledgeable, caring and honest answer I can. Sex and sexuality (two different things) are not something to be ashamed of.
In my private life, I used a condom with the five or six different people I had sex with. I made the mistake of not practicing safe sex while I was working in the business. I'm dealing with the result of that mistake. I've often thought that maybe I can make what's happened to me have some sort of closure by showing others that "the girl next door" can have STDs and the only way to protect yourself is to abstain from sex, have a completely monogamous relationship or, at the very least, use a condom every time. That's what I'm going to tell my children.
Rufus Griscom (#14 of 33)
John, I think you are right to be somewhat offended.
I talked to the guy who made a fortune starting Spectravision, the company that offers movie services (including porn) in hotels. He said that they had records of how many porn films were viewed each week in hotels attached to convention centers. He said that whether the hotels were filled with Catholic priests, private detectives, Republicans or Democrats, the consumption of porn levels were almost exactly the same (very high). In other words, everyone consumes porn now and again; what varies is how honest people are about it. Those who lie about it are no doubt the same people who judge others most severely.
Matt, I am well aware that bestiality is illegal; so is bludgeoning and killing people, which we regularly see in movies. It's legal to show illegal acts in film; it's a world of make believe. Though I can assure you that I have no intention of soiling your breakfast, nor making it easier for others to do so, I think individuals should have the right to create, on film, the appearance (through special effects) of a porky porking. (For some reason this conversation is kind of turning me on.)
Ian Gittler (#15 of 33)
John, I'm not getting through here.
The themes I have problems with in regard to your profession are ones I believe run in direct parallel with the rest of our society. I never implied you should feel shame or anything else about what you do.
But let me feel how I feel, too.
As an outsider, every time I've heard people who make their living by bartering with sexuality take a stab at justifying or explaining their motivations — and I've heard more of it than most (and you, especially, do it with disarming honesty and intelligence, which is admirable), I am still left with a "what's missing from this picture?" feeling.
That feeling won't go away.
My intention is not to condemn an individual — you or your mother or Tricia or anyone — and I apologize if I have. My understanding of your lifestyle, based on very little, is still more complicated than that, and my perspective is not given justice in your characterization. Putting me in the same box with Matt, whose humor I do not feel justifies his mean-spirited tone and seemingly limitless resource of ill will, and whose actual views I find little or nothing in common with, is unfair. It may seem totally contrary with my expressed beliefs, but I just don't judge you, or your upbringing, or who you are, in the way you think.
It must be clear to anyone paying attention that I have a personal stake in taking to task the climate as a whole — a climate that fosters these harsh societal themes. And I think they are harsh themes. I'm as much a product of what I refer to as "the gray area" as anyone. Porn is a valid arena in which to address that since these themes are represented in a statistically outrageously high percentage of the population of the porn industry, and more importantly, because as I see it, few industries reflect these basic, ugly truths about our society as a whole so unflinchingly.
Nothing you have said changes my mind about how I see things. Matt ridiculed me early on in this discussion for being a member of the "Freudian tribe." Well, my skepticism does grow the more vociferous someone's arguments become about how "a cigar is just a cigar."
John, I'm not worried about proving that porn is nice, regardless of how much of it I've looked at while jerking off. That's your job. But I can't think of another book that has shown so much respect for the individuals in your industry than mine, despite my conclusions.
Finally, John, for a seemingly private person, you have a gift for surprising candor. Whatever my sense of where you are at, or why, or how, or what I think is good or bad about it, I regret not resisting the impulse to take you, personally, to task.
So again, I'm sorry.
Matt Labash (#16 of 33)
Jeez, Ian, to think I was about to defend you. Glad I didn't make that mistake since you're not "in my box." Question for you: Do they have Kegel exercises for the backbone? My word, man, have the courage of your convictions. One minute, you're suggesting that John's the last of the great mother-lovers (then again, I guess John called you the same thing, in more colorful language), the next, you're knob-polishing so hard that you have us wondering if you're trying to get cast in his next production. I know it's very important for you to be loved by your noble subjects, even as you condescend to them, but why don't you just say what you mean?
The sad fact is, Ian actually did have some salient points, maybe by happy accident. For instance, Trish, you said you "loved" Ian's theory that a large portion of porners were sexually abused as children, though you said you weren't. Fine, so you weren't. But why give Ian's theory any credence (it's hardly a novel one, it enjoys a rather wide currency), if it weren't so? If, as even you admit, that say, 80 percent of the industry had damaging sexual experiences in their youth, then why are so many drawn to an industry that porner propagandists would have us believe is packed with healthy, happy practitioners? I must say, you kids did work up a healthy head of indignation during the last go-around (I believe, at one point, I heard music swells). But to hear you guys tell it, you should not only be unabashed about your profession, but you're damn near role models. Maybe you should consider cutting Saturday-morning public service ads, encouraging kids to stay in school, stay off drugs and pursue a career in hardcore videos.
There's still a few unanswered questions. Let's start with Buttman Junior. First of all, I don't mean to raise any unpleasant realities, but both you and John admit you're HIV positive (and at least with one of you, as a direct result of your life in porn). The last time I checked the medical literature, two HIV positives don't make a negative, which means Junior could have problems slightly more serious than getting ribbed by unkind classmates. But let's assume BM Jr. is born clean. It still astonishes me, Tricia, that someone who has seen so much life has such a naíve construction of how it actually works. Do you honestly think you will somehow be able to gently and diplomatically avert the subject with your child until some fancifully imagined "appropriate age," when you can tell him, what? "Don't mind your Daddy, Jr., the reason he comes home with his nose looking like a chocolate fondue skewer is because he's been eating out some girl's bunghole all day." Or how about, "BM, when two people really love each other, sometimes they go off with other people to a studio, get naked, and catch one up the tailpipe in front of a camera for a six-figure payday. Now eat your Pop Tart. Be strong. Remember to always express yourself, and wear a jimmy hat." This is not a gratuitous question. I'm genuinely asking you how this works. And I think we both know that it doesn't. You can't drop a bomb like that in the lap of a child without seriously adverse consequences. A child will not process this information with the worldly sophistication of, say, Ian. You won't be his pen pal, you'll be his mother. And if you think you can somehow shield him from that reality, think about how well most parents are able to shield their children from sex generally, even when raising them in environments that aren't so hyper-sexually charged. Most kids get the skinny one way or another, whether you sit them down for one of your elaborate chats, or whether they find out quick and dirty from their porno-watching friends.
Ian Gittler (#17 of 33)
I guess it's about different methodologies, Matt.
If expressing my views independently of trying to fry John and Tricia isn't good enough, in conjunction with or set against their attempts to express their views, then I'm not convinced simply taking potshots at their arguments will further my agenda.
I am not alone. There are many, many like-minded individuals with histories of pornography consumption who nonetheless have great difficulty with the types of justifications John and Tricia have expressed. Many people equate their type of reasoning with being in denial. Many people who enjoy porn still find the idea of a rich man in his forties filming eighteen-year-old girls having sex kind of yucky. For lots of reasons.
But the fact is, sticking it to the pornographers participating in this discussion can't be as effective as encouraging them to air their views and letting readers come to their own conclusions.
One of the main reasons that a whole range of values I have grown to believe are healthful and sound — monogamy, fidelity, commitment, sobriety in conjunction with important life decisions, etc. — have had such a horrible time gaining popularity among individuals who came of age under the swell of '60s and '70s values, is because these ideas have historically been associated with mean-spirited conservatives who always seem to attach their views to proposed legislation that would mandate their ideas about morality, as opposed to inviting skeptics into the realm of their beliefs.
So once again John and Tricia, you know I have serious problems with a lot of the stands you take and serious questions about your lifestyle choices. Is it possible for me to still treat you with respect? I think it is, and I hope I do that from this point out.
Matt Labash (#18 of 33)
Ian, while I don't wish to further offend your delicate sensibility, it may be worth noting that this isn't Sunday School. Nor are we filing Associated Press wire copy (despite your let-the-reader-decide notion). I am here to persuade or enrage the reader, not to dribble little gloplets of pre-digested mush down their tender gullets. This is Nerve.com, a community of thoughtful hedonists, as I'm sure you've read. There is no crime in descending into the pit to love someone, even if it is tough love. You're welcome to join us. If you choose to bloodlessly present your arguments without cuffing anyone around, even when you can hear their hamstrings popping from the contortions in logic they must engage in to arrive at their rationalizations, then you may do so. (I hate to sound like John McCain, but I would point out that when we've locked horns, even when I have hung you up on a meathook, you have often gone negative first. I am just as often finishing quarrels with you as starting them.)
Second, you should know that I harbor no malice toward John or Tricia. I do disagree with them, and will continue to beat them about the head for sport for two reasons: a) I think they're kidding us and themselves; and b) it's fun. I do however genuinely enjoy their company and perspectives. It is not every day I get to break virtual bread with a girl who has starred in Anal Cornhole Cutie, Ass Gas and the Mystical Glop and Sodomania Slop Shots #2. Do I think they're a fun couple who I'd love to have out for beers? Absolutely. Do I think what they create is art or morally defensible? Absolutely not.
My last point is that (though it's true) it is a bit of a cop-out for you to say that these values that you find "healthful and sound" are often rejected by your generation because they are associated with mean-spirited conservatives (like me, I presume). I've got bad news for you Ian. The values you cite (monogamy, commitment, fidelity) pre-date the meanies of Modern Conservatism by quite a few years. In fact, they've been around since the dawn of time. If you choose to politicize them because they cause a free-association with Gary Bauer, that's from your own lack of imagination. No one side has the franchise on them — these are moral issues, not political ones.
Tricia Devereaux (#19 of 33)
Matt, I have a much higher vested interest in HIV research than you, so take my word on this: I'd never for a second consider having a baby if I thought there was a significant risk of it being born with HIV. With current medications, John and I know that we aren't cured, and may never be, but hopefully someday there will be a cure.
But it is a manageable disease. Don't forget that people still die from tuberculosis, diabetes and even bronchitis. Think of the (relatively recent) scientific advances with polio and smallpox. If this was five years ago, I would be devastated about having HIV; I would be seriously afraid of dying from AIDS; I would also not be considering getting pregnant. Do you think I haven't talked to specialists about this subject many times? The current percentage of HIV transmission during pregnancy or labor is below 10% (with medicines and a C-section) and is quickly approaching 5 and even 3% with obstetricians who have more experience with HIV+ mothers. I would never wish my medical condition on anyone, but if my child were to have HIV, it would still be incredibly loved. I have no doubts that John and I will make great parents and will do everything in our ability to help our child be as well adjusted as possible. There are lots of parents who could do worse.
I have a question out of curiosity for Matt: Would he be less offended at my thoughts of getting pregnant if I had contracted HIV by a non-sexual accident, such as a car crash or transfusion?
As to your other attack on us (and our non-existent child), we are aware that it's a very complicated matter to explain to anyone (we're obviously not getting anything through to you), much less a child. We will simply choose to present both sides of the matter, and then will let him figure out in his own mind what's right and how he will choose to live his life. John and I were both brought up very Catholic (I'm sure Ian will verify many porn people were), but decided that it wasn't for us. And many children whose parents lectured them on the evils of non-marital sex paid them virtually no attention, then did the exact opposite. I can't speak for John, but I don't believe in one-night stands. This is one thing I will strongly tell my child not to do. And of course I'll tell them to have safe sex. We can't make a child respect us or "forgive us" for our careers. He may choose not to. But honesty is the only way for me to go.
Porn isn't about love or emotional intimacy, and I will argue with any porn person who would says it is. It's people getting paid to perform or produce sex. That doesn't mean that they shouldn't enjoy it. But they shouldn't carry those actions over into their life outside of work.
Finally, to Rufus and Ian, thank you for simply agreeing to disagree. You both have very interesting views, even if I don't agree with some of them. The reason I said I liked Ian's statement about abuse leading to porn careers is because I do know a lot of people who fit that category. So I guess I'll save Matt the trouble of calling those of us who don't fit into that group "promiscuous sluts." I'm actually surprised no one has asked me if many porn girls are in it because they're rebelling to a strict childhood. For me, that might be a little bit true, but not completely. I was told what my parents believed to be morally right and wrong, and while I was underage, was expected to follow those guidelines. But I was always encouraged to think for myself.
Matt is obviously a very intelligent man. I welcome hearing all different people's opinions. But I would be more interested in listening to them if they were simply stated without the sarcasm.
Rufus Griscom (#20 of 33)
Tricia, you and I are both working late . . . I wrote what follows before reading your post:
Matt, I think you've been swilling too much of the party moonshine over there — you're stumbling into mushy Republican logic. What does John and Tricia's HIV positive status have to do with our assessment of their profession? Construction workers fall off buildings; it doesn't follow that people shouldn't build them, or that the buildings are inherently bad. Right-wingers tend to be big on cosmic justice until they blow their heads off cleaning their gun collections.
And Matt, so what if it's hard to explain to your kids? Many things are. More family values fatuousness. We don't live in a world comprised of firemen and policemen and astronauts, thank god, there are also a few porn stars out there to color in, and children figure that out in due time, hopefully with the help of parents as level-headed as John and Tricia appear to be.
Ian, you have clearly been deeply affected by your impression that people in the industry are troubled; many of them may be but it's a mistake to hence conclude that the films they make are nefarious. Consider the possibility that we lived in a warped society (not to suggest that there have been any that weren't warped) in which people are so terrified of sex that those who make simple films depicting it are heavily stigmatized. So heavily stigmatized that you have to be damaged goods or not care to go into the profession. It's incredibly hypocritical: we consume porn because its fun to do so, blame our guilt on the people who make it, wonder why they are so fucked up, and then use their problems as evidence that it's dreadful stuff.
Many perfectly reasonable professions are filled with weirdoes: Freud was a coke addict and psychologists tend to be anal retentive, but it doesn't follow that they are not providing a useful service.
Look, it just ain't that complicated: homo sapiens like having sex, homo sapiens like looking at pictures of people having sex. More often than not it's harmless. This morality play you two are building is a tautological delusion. But of course if guilt is an aphrodisiac, maybe this is all longwinded foreplay (he not-so-subtly segues to the final question) . . .
| Introduction | |||||||||
| |||||||||
| |||||||||
| |||||||||
|
To participate in the virtual roundtable discussion yourself, visit "Men, Smut & Shame" in the VoiceBox folder of NerveCenter Message Boards.
