I don’t know if you got to look at the XBiz, www.xbiz.com report about Dr. Gail Dines’ appearance in Philadelphia last week. She was in Philly courtesy of the Justice Dept. for whom she was testifying in the Free Speech Coalition vs. Eric Holder trial.
Dines is a piece of work, she really is.
Dines, 55, who’s from Manchester, England, now lives in Boston where she’s a professor of sociology and women’s studies at Wheelock College.
Dines has also authored a book, “Pornland: How Porn Has Hijacked Our Sexuality”
Judging from the title, it’s not an atta-boy to the porn industry. Dines is also a founding member of the antiporn organization Stop Porn Culture.
She told the court she has spent 25 years studying adult entertainment.
“All of my academic career has been devoted to the study of pornography,” Dines testified. There’s a waste of time.
I’ve read over the years what Dines has to say about porn and most of it is her sexual flights of fancy and voices in her head. For a woman who claims to have studied an industry scrupulously for 25 years, she acknowledges she knows what she knows because she reads XBIZ and AVN.
Which should tell you something. That’s like a sports writer laying credence to their work because they read The Sporting News.
Oh, but Dines goes on to say, “I interview people in the industry. I also have many contacts in the industry who tell me what’s going on.”
During cross examination Dines was asked about that statement and who those industry contacts were. Dines conveniently replied, “They won’t allow me to speak their names. They ask me not to disclose their names…..They’re nervous about coming forward …. They’re scared of retribution from the pornography industry.”
That’s as convenient as a damning news story that begins with “…according to unnamed sources…”
If you read that XBiz piece you also make the determination that Dines is a communist. So what we have is a genophobic, commie, porn-hating academic testifying on behalf of the government. Yet I can’t deny her on a couple of points.
Dines testified that porn “has become much more cruel, much more body-punishing” and often involves “some form of physical or verbal violence.”
Obviously she’s talking about Kink.com [owner Peter Acworth] and Princess Donna both of whom should be locked away in an insane asylum.
Dines also draws many of her conclusions from trolling tube sites. Here, here. Dines describes adult tube sites like PornHub and RedTube as a “gateway into the entire porn industry.”
She states that people who use tube sites can find an abundance of porn in the teen genre. Actually that goes for every genre, but Dines seems to have a peculiar obsession with teen porn in her testimony. I guess that’s because this is a 2257 trial, and drooling about Dave Cummings would be far from the point.
Dines also said that free tube sites often lead to pay sites but said that the adult membership adult site model isn’t nearly as profitable as it once was.
Actually Dines probably got that info from reading AdultFYI because XBiz and AVN won’t tell you what toilet porn is flushing its money down.
Dines testified that she has spoken to “child protection agencies” about the teen genre and finds that genre disturbing because it is “normalizing young women, very youthful-looking women as objects for male use…chipping away at the cultural norms that define children as off limits.”
Dines must be talking about Japanese porn because I find American teen genre porn very sophomoric, dilly-dally, willy-nilly, non-sexual and hardly compelling viewing fare.
Dines goes on to say that the type of imagery she typically encounters in the teen genre includes “the bobbie socks, the pink … the pastel colors, light makeup … cartoon figures on her t-shirt,” whereas in the “regular genres” of porn, one typically hears terminology more along the lines of “bitches, whores and sluts.”
[If American teen porn included penny loafers, I’d be watching it. That’s why I switched to Jap school girl porn.]
Dines cited other imagery she finds is common in the teen genre: “the hair on their head is done up like a schoolgirl…You’ll have them with teddy bears…” Why is she bringing Bill Margold into this subject?
Dines also testified that female models [in teen porn] are not curvaceous or voluptuous. [True]. They are likely to have smaller breasts [True]. Yeah, Gail, you don’t see Vanessa del Rio doing teen porn.
During her testimony, Dines also described adult production companies as “sweatshops.”
Judge Michael M. Baylson then jumped in, saying, “You mean a sweatshop where people work for low wages?” Like Kathie Lee Gifford and Martha Stewart, maybe?
But Dines was unable to clarify why she considered adult production companies to be “sweatshops.” Judge Baylson then decided that her reference to “sweatshops” was unnecessarily inflammatory and asked that it be stricken from the record.
Dines claims that part of the porn industry — especially the teen porn genre — is trying to appeal to men who have sexual fantasies about under-age women.
Gail, most men I know lust for what they can’t have, and so they have fantasies about the cheerleaders and prom queens that shot them down in high school. And porn is their way of re-living that fantasy.
As an academic mired in 25 years of porn scholarship, Dr. Dines might understand that this is hardly an aberration created by the porn industry.
Likewise, her comment is tantamount to saying that a 16 year-old high school guy who covets the ass of a 16 year-old girl is probably a pedophile.
Truly, to appreciate Dines, you have to see her work on YouTube and read her essays.
This is a very damaged woman, and I suspect that some 16 year old high school guy in Manchester, England didn’t find her as appealing as some soccer tart. And it’s as simple as that.