Feminist views on pornography range from total condemnation of the medium as an inherent form of violence against women to an embracing of some forms as a medium of feminist expression. This debate reflects larger concerns surrounding feminist views on sexuality, and is closely related to those on prostitution, BDSM, and other issues. Pornography has been one of the most divisive issues in feminism, particularly in Anglophone (English-speaking) countries. This division was exemplified in the feminist sex wars of the 1980s, which pitted anti-pornography activists against pro-pornography ones.
Anti-pornography feminism
Feminist opponents of pornography—such as Andrea Dworkin, Catharine MacKinnon, Robin Morgan, Diana Russell, Alice Schwarzer, Gail Dines, and Robert Jensen—argue that pornography is harmful to women, and constitutes strong causality or facilitation of violence against women.
Catharine MacKinnon and Andrea Dworkin had separately staked out a position that pornography was inherently exploitative toward women, and they called for a civil law to make pornographers accountable for harms that could be shown to result from the use, production, and circulation of their publications. When Dworkin testified before the Meese Commission in 1986, she said that 65 to 75 percent of women in prostitution and hard-core pornography had been victims of incest or child sexual abuse.
Andrea Dworkin's activism against pornography during the 1980s brought her to national attention in the United States.
Harm to women during production
Anti-pornography feminists, notably Catharine MacKinnon, charge that the production of pornography entails physical, psychological, and/or economic coercion of the women who perform and model in it. This is said to be true even when the women are being presented as enjoying themselves. Catharine MacKinnon argues that the women in porn are "not there by choice but because of a lack of choices." It is also argued that much of what is shown in pornography is abusive by its very nature. Gail Dines holds that pornography, exemplified by gonzo pornography, is becoming increasingly violent and that women who perform in pornography are brutalized in the process of its production.
Anti-pornography feminists point to the testimony of well known participants in pornography, such as Traci Lords and Linda Boreman, and argue that most female performers are coerced into pornography, either by somebody else, or by an unfortunate set of circumstances. The feminist anti-pornography movement was galvanized by the publication of Ordeal, in which Linda Boreman (who under the name of "Linda Lovelace" had starred in Deep Throat) stated that she had been beaten, raped, and pimped by her husband Chuck Traynor, and that Traynor had forced her at gunpoint to make scenes in Deep Throat, as well as forcing her, by use of both physical violence against Boreman as well as emotional abuse and outright threats of violence, to make other pornographic films. Dworkin, MacKinnon, and Women Against Pornography issued public statements of support for Boreman, and worked with her in public appearances and speeches. In this instance, both against and pro-pornography feminists recognize that "exploitation and abuse of vulnerable women does sometimes occur to produce some pornography," but situations like Boreman's are viewed by some feminists as preventable and not as an essential aspect of producing pornographic material.
Social effects
Sexual objectification
MacKinnon and Dworkin defined pornography as "the graphic sexually explicit subordination of women through pictures or words". According to Dworkin, the original definition of the word pornography was "the graphic depiction of whores." "Whore" is a term that has historically been used to describe sex-workers. While there is some debate around the connotations of the word today, Dworkin's use of this word alludes to the fact that sex-workers are frequently treated not as human but merely as objects for sexual gratification. As Johanna Schorn points out, "the very meaning of the word pornography, then and now, seems to point towards the misogynistic and exploitative practices of the industry."