Comment at the Porn Debate

On behalf of Exeposé Comment, Fiona Potigny reviews Debating Society‘s heavily anticipated and highly attended Friday night debate discussing the virtues of pornography as a public service.

Tonight, feminist would meet feminist. American would meet Brit. Ex-porn star turned Christian would meet erotic writer. The tension was palpable in the air, and the crowd of eager debaters, packed like sardines into the Amory Moot, held their breath as they eagerly awaited DebSoc’s first Friday debate of the year. The motion: “This house believes that pornography provides a good public service.”

“Ultimately, the night was a success; one sure to go down in DebSoc history for not only having the first all-female panel since DebSoc’s formation 1893, but also for drawing a crowd so impressively large that many had to be turned away at the door.”
Photo Credit: Emily Cobb via Emily Cobb Photography

Jane Fae, feminist and Guardian journalist, was first to take the stand defending the motion. She opened by stating that the problem lies not with the pornography industry itself, but with the current education system, which currently provides no analysis of sexuality, but merely teaches a set of reproductive facts.

Despite supporting the motion, Fae was adamant that we should not glamorise porn, as to do so would be to naively deny the misogyny and false views about sex. Whilst Fae’s points were strong in themselves, she did come across as a slightly hesitant speaker, owing in part to her quiet delivery.  It must also be noted that she did not define the motion, as is the norm at the beginning of a debate. It was probably as a result of this that the audience remained unclear as to whether the debate was over whether porn is a morally “good public service”, or a “good public service”, which unfortunately allowed for all parties to dither away from the exact motion throughout the debate.

Tiffany Leeper, founder of Girls Against Porn and Human Trafficking, was up next. An exceptionally emotive speaker, Leeper launched into a personal attack on porn, using an anecdotal ‘boy meets girl’ scenario to explain how her relationship was torn apart by her childhood sweetheart’s addiction.

On the whole, she delivered a confident speech and her account seemed to be genuinely heartfelt. She ended on the point that, without doubt, men will have intimacy issues if they continue in their porn-reliant ways, which provoked audible disagreement from the male faction of the audience whilst raising a few laughs in the female (whether this was agreement or disagreement is more uncertain).

Erotic writer Zak Jane Keir was quick to provide a counter to this. Keir gave a cynical account of the government claiming that the new emphasis on blocking pornography was a scapegoat. She attacked the American religious right for inflicting compulsory social monogamy, something which would later cause a heated side-argument with her adversary, Dr Shelley Lubben, a born-again Christian.

As far as debating tactics go, Keir seemed to have a taste for the controversial, with phrases like, “children could see worse than a bit’a f*** and suck” for example, and refusing to accept any religion that depends upon an “imaginary friend”. She raised a few good points, notably that a counter-message should be sent to the porn industry through the support of progressive LGBTQ and feminist-friendly porn. Ultimately though, the only argument that seemed directly relevant to the motion was that “with porn you get a w*nk, a sandwich, and a good night’s sleep”. Nevertheless, as one heckler pointed out, “you don’t need porn to have a w*nk!” An equally fair point.

The most anticipated speaker then took her stand: Dr Shelley Lubben, former porn star turned campaigner against porn. Having experienced and eventually been reformed from the  Californian porn industry, Dr Lubben was keen to exhibit her insider knowledge of the darker side of the industry, using stories of HIV/AIDS-based STD pandemics, forced drug and alcohol consumption, and even instances of rape to further detail her point that the porn industry works illegally and immorally.

As was to be expected, Dr Lubben was an impassioned speaker, telling the audience that “we’re better than porn”. Despite her intense conviction which seemed to be bringing her to tears by the end of her speech, Dr Lubben lost some of the audience’s support when declaring her strong Christian faith and suggesting that her career exit was “God’s plan”. This seemed to divide the room rather than unite it. That said, she undoubtedly remained the highlight of the evening with such an insightful speech.

The question voted best by the judge came from Sasha Gibbins, who asked what the panel thought was preventing the porn industry from collapsing, which saw a remarkably concordant answer from each side: that apathy and popularity were the cause. The final vote showed a sway towards the proposition, who took the motion with a clear majority. Ultimately, the night was a success; one sure to go down in DebSoc history for not only having the first all-female panel since DebSoc’s formation 1893, but also for drawing a crowd so impressively large that many had to be turned away at the door.

Seeing as the next public debate is set to be “This house believes that Margaret Thatcher was a force for global good” featuring none other than everyone’s favourite public figure Kate Hopkins of recent baby name infamy, it is clear that DebSoc have no intention of slowing down on the polemic debates.

Fiona Potigny

 In case you don’t know who Katie Hopkins is, you can get an idea of what she’s like from the video below. Did you attend last Friday’s debate? Is this an accurate version of events? Does Exeter University have a healthy enough attitude towards pornogrpahy and sexuality? Leave a comment below or write to the Comment team at the Exeposé Comment Facebook Group or on Twitter @CommentExepose.

 

The end of an era: Pope Benedict's XVI's eight year papacy

Rachel Alcock-Hodgson looks back on the eight year tenure of His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI.In an almost unprecedented move, Pope Benedict XVI is to resign from office at the end of the month after an announcement on Monday.

Having been elected at the age of 78 in 2005, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (Benedict XVI) was one of the oldest new popes in history. He is now the first Pope to resign in 600 years. At the age of 85, he says old age has made it impossible to carry out the job as it needs to be done.

Pope Benedict XVI attends a meeting with young believers in Genoa in 2008. All photo credits to Vincenzo Pinto/AFP/Getty Images 

The Pope’s announcement left his cardinals reeling. One of those called to hear the announcement, the Mexican prelate Monsignor Dr Oscar Sánchez, said none of the cardinals had expected it. “The Pope took a sheet of paper and read from it. He just said that he was resigning and that he would be finishing on February 28… The cardinals were just looking at one another. Then the Pope got to his feet, gave his benediction and left. It was so simple; the simplest thing imaginable. Extraordinary. Nobody expected it. Then we all left in silence. There was absolute silence … and sadness.”Even the official spokesperson for the Vatican admitted he had been taken by surprise. But the brother of the German-born Pope said the pontiff had been advised by his doctor not to take any more transatlantic trips and had been considering stepping down for months. The BBC’s David Willey in Rome, said that although the news was a shock, the signs had been there to read. The 2013 Easter vigil mass, perhaps the most important liturgy of the year, usually celebrated at midnight, had been scheduled for early evening this year to allow the Pope to retire well before midnight.

In his statement the pontiff said that “in today’s world, subject to so many rapid changes and shaken by questions of deep relevance for the life of faith, in order to steer the ship of Saint Peter and proclaim the Gospel, both strength of mind and body are necessary, strength which in the last few months, has deteriorated in me to the extent that I have had to recognise my incapacity to adequately fulfil the ministry entrusted to me.”

His resignation shows an acknowledgement of the rigours of the job and moreover the “strength of mind and body” required to steer the church through the modern age.

Overshadowed by sexual abuse scandals, Pope Benedict’s papacy has received mixed reactions. He has said that he never wanted to be Pope and as a piano-playing academic, was a direct contrast to the charismatic John Paul II. However, he was not the out-and-out reactionary that he was predicted to be. He oversaw a number of modernisations especially in engagement with the media as the Holy See began to communicate to the world via the Internet and Twitter (the latter sometimes in his beloved Latin – the language he used for his resignation statement).

Pope Benedict XVI has remained theologically conservative during his papacy. All photo credits to Alessandra Benedetti/Corbis

He did remain theologically conservative throughout his tenure. To a rapidly changing modern Western world, his pronouncements on gay marriage seemed harsh and out of kilter with the changing times. But this was a man who was suspicious of making accommodations to a fickle and individualistic world hell bent on the pursuit of pleasure.

Regarding the question of contraception, he argued that condoms should be used by prostitutes but that they were not an answer to “the evil of HIV infection” and that the “sheer fixation on the condom implies a banalisation of sexuality” where sexuality is no longer an expression of love, “but only a sort of drug that people administer to themselves.”

In contrast to John Paul II, he met time and again with victims of sex abuse and took action against some of those who the institutional Church had sheltered for decades. But he lacked the energy and focus for substantial reform of the various Vatican ministries that would have made the actions of bishops and priests transparent and truly accountable – a huge task for any man, let alone an ageing academic.

One of the organisations representing victims of Catholic clergy in Ireland’s notorious orphanages and industrial schools, said the outgoing pontiff had broken his promise to offer justice for the crimes of priests and other members of religious orders. John Kelly, co-founder of Irish Survivors of Child Abuse, said: “In our view we were let down in terms of promises of inquiries, reform and most importantly of all the Vatican continuing not to acknowledge that any priest or religious found guilty of child abuse would face the civil authorities and be tried for their crimes in the courts.”

While a resignation in full freedom and properly published is fully within the rights of a Pope, it is extremely rare and has created a furore in the European media. Ezio Mauro, chief editor of Italy’s La Repubblica daily calls the Pope’s shock resignation on health grounds an “eruption of modernity”. The editor of German broadcaster Deutsche Welle, Bernd Riegert, calls the Pope’s move “a courageous step, a revolutionary step”. “He has helped himself to freedom, he is setting boundaries. No longer will successors be able to cling onto their office.”

It is unclear who the successor will be, but Benedict’s resignation seems to be a mark of the increasing awareness of the Catholic Church’s need for modernisation.

Life as an Egyptian

Alasdair Wood reflects on Egypt two years after its revolution and looks at where the country is now.

Two years after the revolution that overthrew the Mubarak regime, Egypt is more divided than ever, or so all the media tells us. People were divided on the new constitution, but the predicted bloodbath or civil conflict never took place. On the constitution there was a clear divide between Islamists (including the Muslim Brotherhood and hardline Salafists) in favour of the constitution, and liberals, secularists and Christians against. However, many others were also not satisfied with the constitution, but voted in favour purely in the hope of bringing back stability. Politics is increasingly polarised, with President Morsi becoming a character that you either passionately love or hate.

The people who hate Morsi the most are Egypt’s Christian minority who make up about five-ten per cent of the population. They loathe him with a passion, with one Christian friend telling me she hates Morsi more than Mubarak. Seemingly it only takes a few years to forget Mubarak’s horrific decision to wipe out all pigs in Egypt, in response to the swine flu epidemic (despite the fact swine flu was spread by humans). This decision devastated the lives of many poor Christians in Egypt. The fact is the Brotherhood as of yet have done nothing to threaten the Christians, and have spent most of their efforts on trying to reassure them, with many Christians continuing comfortable lives, as they make up a large percentage of the middle classes.

Photo credits to S.A.A.D. photography

One reason for the protests against the constitution not getting out of control may be that the constitution wasn’t the evil Islamic masterpiece, our media suggest. The article of Sharia, is crucially no different to under Mubarak and states the law “is made on the principles of Sharia”, but adds an article that the Al-Azhar Mosque (the highest Islamic authority in the country) should be consulted on matters of Sharia law. However, it crucially states that Christians and Jews should be subject to personal and religious laws of their own and not of Sharia. For example Christians could not be subject to any laws about dress, alcohol or marriage.

Of course, all is not well for the Christian minority. Women face extra hassle for not wearing the Hijaab, there have been isolated cases of Christians being accused of blasphemy, and the most shocking cases against the Christians are of being forced to convert to Islam, including girls being kidnapped and forced into marriage. However, the vast majority of Muslims are moderate. A case of a Salafist warning people not to wish their Christian neighbours a “Happy Christmas” may have made headlines across the world, but was widely ignored by ordinary Egyptians. My Muslim neighbours presented me with a Christmas present, the Grand Mufti (leading cleric in country) met the Coptic Pope to wish him Christmas greetings, and some street cleaners gave me and some Egyptian friends the biggest smile and “Happy Christmas” on leaving a church on Christmas Day. In a religious society, I’m often asked about my religion, and on hearing I’m a Christian, Muslims will respond, “We are all brothers”. While graffiti across Cairo also shows the Egyptian flag altered, with a Christian flag and Islamic Crescent placed together. Islam and Christianity have coexisted here for the most part ever since the Arab Invasion in 641, which is something quite shocking coming from a country that has history drenched in the blood of religious intolerance.

The real problem of the constitution is its lack of ambition. The worst aspect of all is its failure to have an article setting out gender equality. Roles of women and men are completely different here, and women are widely expected to stay at home to cook and clean, especially if they are married. All young women in Egypt suffer from sexual harassment on the streets, whether covered or uncovered. One Egyptian friend told me that when she takes a microbus she puts her bag on one seat and pays for two seats, because she, “had bad experiences of old men on microbuses.” It’s all rather sickening, but Egyptian women know how to stand up for themselves. On facing harassment they will most often scream, shout and lash out at the perpetrator. In Egypt, people won’t walk on by when seeing this but will intervene to try and deal with the situation.

Photo credits to sierragoddess

Despite these problems I feel optimistic about Egypt. The revolutionary spirit is still very much alive here. Under the Mubarak regime people didn’t talk about politics, but today the streets, markets, coffee houses, and public transport are alive with people actively debating politics with each other. Egyptians love to argue, but contrary to popular opinion they don’t always resort to violence. In fact, the political atmosphere is generally mature. Politics may seem polarised but when you see businesses happily displaying posters showing their alignment, it’s evident that people are tolerant enough to accept each other’s political differences. I can’t imagine any businesses in the south eastern rural heartlands that would risk displaying a Labour poster, or a business in the North of England risking the display of a Conservative party poster. There are isolated cases of political violence in Egypt and our media all too often forget the wider picture.

This negative picture has helped to cripple Egypt’s tourism, particularly in Luxor, Aswan and Cairo, throwing Egypt into a deeper economic crisis, in which the Egyptian Pound is now tumbling and Egypt is left to go begging to the IMF. It’s certainly a difficult time, and could prove to be a disaster for the ruling Brotherhood as the poor (the Brotherhood’s biggest support base) will suffer the most, while the opposition have become increasingly organised and united since the protests against the new constitution. Egypt has a difficult road ahead, but the taste of freedom people felt in Tahrir in 2011 and people’s continual tolerance and political maturity means there is now no going back.