Course:CSIS200/2024/Rewinding the Feminist Sex Wars: The VCR and Intentions of Lesbian Pornography

Introduction

The Fox Cinema, a Vancouver porn theatre established in 1983.

In the early 1980s, amidst the height of the golden age of porn, porn theatres are filled with anticipating attendees, eager to lay their eyes upon the newest X-rated film. The lights dim, and a tale as old as time is cast upon the screen: a submissive woman is quickly controlled by her opposite-gender counterpart. The male-dominated theatre applauds male domination; heteronormativity* runs rampant as the male fantasy is drafted, produced, and presented.

All the while, two significant things are occurring outside of the theatre walls. One, women are at home, tinkering with their video cassette recorder (VCR). They want to indulge and consume porn but prefer to do so in an environment free of men ogling at the overpowering of them. Two, there are protests in the streets, and the feminist sex wars are at their height. Two polarizing sides argue the morality of the pornography industry. One side focused on the right of women to be consuming porn, even their right to star in it. The other highlights the unsafe production and consumption of said porn.

This war is incredibly prevalent in queer communities, and this paper aims to hone in on the intersectionality* of the feminist sex wars and the porn industry, more specifically, the lesbian porn industry, examining the delicacy of and place for lesbian porn in a male-dominated industry.

Coming back to today, the 21st century, porn theatres and VCRs cease, but the war rages on. These ongoing feminist sex wars in the film and pornography industry produce no clear winner due to the pervasive influence of the male gaze, which endangers authentic representation and the spaces where lesbian porn can exclusively serve its intended audience, leaving lesbian narratives subjected to broader heteronormative and patriarchal* ideologies.

Public Theatres to Private Screens

A video cassette recorder (VCR).

It is incorrect to assume that the issue with lesbian porn in the 1980s was the erasure of it. Instead, the qualm is the mass consumption and availability of porn, as it leads to a cycle in which lesbian porn production loses sight of its intended viewership. Like the internet today, porn theatres were open to anyone, but it was normalized for men to be attendees, less so for women. With that in mind, porn is and was geared toward the general male audience.

This is not to say porn was solely heterosexual, but the majority of queer porn was portrayed through the lens of cis-male ideals. This poses the question: what stops this cycle? In the 21st century, this is still being workshopped, but back in the golden age of porn, the prevalence of VCRs lent a hand in promoting ethical and intentional porn production and consumption. Porn on VCR allowed women to escape the stifling masculinity of porn theatres and watch the porn they desired. For lesbian women, this resulted in the rise of porn created by and for queer women - one being the porn movie production company Lipstik, “which identifies itself as heterosexual, bi-sexual, and lesbian owned”.

The VCR symbolizes a pivotal shift in porn, offering a private alternative to the male-dominated spaces of porn theatres. By enabling women, particularly lesbian women, to access content on their terms, the VCR fostered the proliferation of queer-centred porn. This technological advancement marks a step toward reclaiming agency in a space historically shaped by patriarchal norms, laying the groundwork for more inclusive operations in the porn industry. Overall, the VCR exemplifies the vital role that intentional production and private consumption play in the feminist sex wars.

Combatting Pornography and the Male Gaze

The anti-pornography movement within the 1980s feminist sex wars emerged amidst concerns regarding the exploitation of women both within and as a result of the porn industry. Leading activists such as Andrea Dworkin argued that “pornography is the essential sexuality of male power: of hate, of ownership, of hierarchy; of sadism, of dominance”. She claimed that it normalized misogyny, objectification, and abuse, perpetuating constructs that subordinate women to the desires of men.

The cover of Pornography: Men Possessing Women, a book authored by Andrea Dworkin, a notable figure in the anti-pornography movement.

Central to their critique was the concept of the male gaze, a term coined by feminist film theorist/maker Laura Mulvey. The male gaze is a theory that asserts how all female figures in films - and by extension, pornography - are a projection of the “male [f]antasy” and cater to a heterosexual male audience. In porn, this framework shapes everything from camera angles to script, ensuring that women are portrayed as passive and submissive, rather than active participants in their expression of sexuality. The anti-pornography movement asserts that even when women were featured prominently, their agency was stripped away, establishing a system of inequality.

This movement highlighted the degrading depictions of women in pornography, which they argued perpetuated and mirrored gender hierarchies in the real world. They criticized the role the prevalence of porn played in shaping societal attitudes which normalize demeaning power dynamics. The result of this is the desensitization to harm inflicted on women, which can even escalate to the fetishization* of gender-based violence. This conclusion bleeds through in the book Male Lust: Power, Pleasure, and Transformation, a collection of memoirs surrounding men’s experiences with porn and sex. In this book, erotic author Thomas Roche recounts an S&M* experience with a woman, concluding that he “felt at one with my desire for her, the overwhelming, all-consuming lust [he] had felt since [their] first connection, the hunger that threatened to eat [him] alive—the burning desire to do her harm and do her well. The pleasure of control, of ownership”

. These blurred lines between harm and pleasure appear to be derived from pornographic depictions in which women are “control”led and “own”ed. The summation of this viewpoint is a well-known quote from feminist writer Robin Morgan: “Pornography is the theory, and rape is the practice”.

When it came to lesbian porn, the anti-pornography movement identified similar patterns. They concluded that, despite the relationship between women on screen, most lesbian porn was produced with the male viewer in mind. In 2013, Davey Wavey - a Youtuber covering LGBTQ+ topics - posted a video titled Real Lesbians React to Lesbian Porn! This displayed the prevalence of skewed narratives in this genre, with one of the participants claiming she “has yet to see a porno that was made for a lesbian… It’s gross and it’s not sexy and it’s not true”.

This movement’s critique revealed the inescapable influence of the male gaze in the porn industry, where even lesbian material was subordinated to the wants of men. This system is set up by porn-producing companies valuing mass consumption, rivalling the ideals represented by the VHS: conscious production for specific audiences.

Liberation through Pornography and Lesbian Sex Magazines

The pro-sex movement emerged in the 1970s as a counterpoint to the anti-pornography stance in the feminist sex wars. Advocates such as Nadine Strossen - past president of the American Civil Liberties Union - believed that the censorship of pornography would only bolster gender inequality and undermine women’s rights. Rejecting the idea that all porn is inherently exploitative, the pro-sex movement suggests that it can be empowering to produce and consume porn as a woman. They spearheaded the idea that female participation in X-rated media can contribute to the reduction of stereotypical gender roles.

Created in 1984, the lesbian sex magazine On Our Backs became a pioneering example of how women could produce erotic content separate from the influence that is the male gaze. The magazine responded directly to the male-dominated porn industry, creating a sex-positive lesbian public culture. On Our Backs took a blatant pro-sex stance, often critiquing the anti-pornography movement. The title alone antagonizes the opposing side, as it is based on the title of an anti-pornography, radical feminist magazine, Off Our Backs. Other pieces of pro-sex protest included the endorsement of dildos in the editor’s advice column (after anti-pornography advocates equated their usage to being complicit in the patriarchy) and a satirical article involving a caricature of Andrea Dworkin attacking a lesbian support group.

The magazine, like other queer print media, also provided a platform for artists, writers, and photographers from the lesbian community, emphasizing collaboration and representation. This supports the broader idea that lesbian sex magazines are frictional spaces from which new ideas emerg. This made On Our Backs a powerful statement against the male gaze, as there was a myriad of contributors from outside the straight male sector.

Pictured above: The cover of the 1st edition of On Our Backs.

On Our Backs emerging amidst the feminist sex wars proved that not all porn is derived from the preferences of men, supporting the pro-sex movement. Tracing back to the VHS, it is aligned with On Our Backs, and lesbian sex magazines as a whole, as they both illustrate how producing porn for a niche (or just not solely cis-male) audience allows for conversations with the represented community, empowering those that have been historically preyed upon by the porn industry.

Frictional Spaces to Digital Exploitation

It can be argued that lesbian sex magazines and print media, such as On Our Backs, stand as the antithesis of the male gaze in pornography. These publications create frictional spaces* that foster collaboration, discussion, and the intersectionality of marginalized communities, addressing gaps left by the mainstream, industrialized porn industry. Unlike the mass-market approach of pornography, driven by male-dominated investment and audience demand, lesbian sex magazines emphasize intentional production - each issue is curated with a specific focus - and intentional consumption, as readers consciously choose to purchase these products both financially and physically.

A graph displaying the most viewed porn categories in 2022. Information derived from Pornhub statistics. [Own work]

The uproar in 2011, when On Our Backs was digitized and made publicly accessible online, underscores the significance of these distinctions. Understandably, concerns arose over the violation of consent, as women featured in the magazine had not agreed to have their images shared in such a widely accessible format. Moreover, the digitization of On Our Backs marked a shift from its original purpose, transforming it from a niche medium - akin to a VHS, which promoted private and deliberate engagement - to an online equivalent of a porn theatre, accessible to all but primarily catering to a mainstream, male audience. This transition diluted its original intent, subjecting it to the same issues of mass consumption and generalized production it once challenged.

A comparison of queer sex print media and online queer content in the 21st century highlights the stark differences in their impact. Whereas print media like On Our Backs served as a historical artifact of authentic lesbian sexual expression, the dominance of lesbian porn as a popular online category (the most searched term on Pornhub in 2022) reflects the influence of the male gaze. Online lesbian porn - consumed primarily by men as they are four times more likely to watch porn than women - often distorts lesbian relationships, as noted in critiques of its exaggeration within the aforementioned Davey Wavey video. The capitalist* nature of the porn industry perpetuates this cycle of misrepresentation, reinforcing harmful stereotypes and skewing societal perceptions of lesbian relationships.

On Our Backs is a critical example of the potential for queer-centered media to create empowering and intentional spaces for marginalized* communities. Its history illustrates the tension between ethical representation and the pervasive influence of mainstream pornographic practices, offering valuable lessons on the importance of maintaining agency in the face of mass-market pressure.

Conclusion

Given the role it played in terms of porn consumption among women, the VHS embodies the vitality of safe porn spaces. Safe porn spaces within the context of lesbian sexual expression entail the absence of the male gaze. This looks like ethical and intentional porn production that is decentred from stereotypes and the subordination of women at the hands of men. This also involves conscious consumption and devaluing mass reach, instead prioritizing distribution to intended audiences. This conclusion aligns with the viewpoint of both the anti-pornography movement - as it redefines porn, removing it as an aggressor encouraging violence against women - and the pro-sex movement, as it allows for lesbians, and more broadly, women to take control of their narratives and feel empowered in their sexuality.

But this is not the current state of society.

On Our Backs is a suitable example of a safe porn space, made by queer women for queer women. But this was not the societal standard in the 1980s, nor is it today given the rapid digitization of pornographic material and the capitalistic influence of the $58.8 billion porn industry. The result of such is that there is no winner of the feminist sex wars, so long that lesbian sexual expression is subjected to heteronormative principles, as this immortalizes the male gaze, threatening spaces that foster authenticity. This discourse opens the floor for wider discussions pertaining to women's rights, queer rights, reproductive rights, and more, and the examination of such is encouraged after the review of this paper.

Picture above: Christopher Street Liberation Day parade, June 25th 1978.

Definitions

Terms Labelled with "*"

Heteronormativity	The ideology that heterosexuality (straight) is the predominant/default sexual orientation.
Intersectionality	The connectedness of two concepts, categories, or identities.
Patriarchal	Related to a system/society designed by men that gives power to men.
Fetishization	A sexual interest.
S&M	Sadomasochism, deriving pleasure from pain.
Frictional Spaces	Spaces that encourage collaboration.
Capitalist	Pertaining to capitalism, a system in which establishments are privately owned for profit. In terms of the porn industry, porn is produced as a means to make money, meaning decisions revolve around maximizing view count.
Marginalized	Historically/currently treated as unimportant.

About the Author

Taya Lee is a second-year commerce student at the University of British Columbia. Being from Toronto, she has an affinity for exploring all Vancouver has to offer: hikes, bars, beaches, and more.

Taya registered in CSIS200 in order to win more arguments. She has always enjoyed reading fictional works (having read the Hunger Games series five times) but wanted to broaden her exposure to non-fiction. Taya was frustrated by misinformation surrounding sexuality studies, so she made it a goal to learn more through the readings in order to correct misconstrued statements when she hears them. This illustrated essay is an accumulation of her newfound knowledge - though, she still has lots to learn.