4/10
Biased for sure - a complicated topic
20 February 2012
What I liked in the film was clear evidence of the obvious, built-in misogyny which exists in pornographic expectations, from filmmakers and performers (erotically charged & unconscious self-loathing) to the consumers (expecting images matching the fantasy of unbridled, orgiastic, available flesh - "they look like they love it!").

What I didn't like was the simplistic idea that the practice of porn creation is the cause of societal ills, not an effect. I believe that porn is an expression of an existing condition. We are a sexually dysfunctional world with often pathological expectations of women. For sexual addicts, porn provides a toxic promise of a permanent state of arousal. For the dangerously antisocial, it can provide dark inspiration, certainly. But for the rest of mankind it represents what's already there - fantasy prostitution, visualized. What drives people to engage in commercial sexuality, either in service or as a client is no different than it is for those engaged in porn.

It's not just about money; it's also about the personal history of those who need a heightened sexual expression and are willing to risk their mainstream dignity to achieve it. What would be more interesting to explore is how the price of commercial sexuality is often not merely one's very brief youth, but also one's emotional health and lifelong financial well-being.

I wish the film were more circumspect about the personal histories which drive or lure individuals into this field.
4 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed