Groupon has stooped to an all-time low and is in danger of losing its customer base unless it changes course. For the second time this year, it is teaming up with torture pornography producer, Kink, selling tours of Kink's San Francisco building and production studio. Because of this, Porn Harms and Morality in Media have announced a nationwide boycott of Groupon.
Pornography's purpose is primarily the sexual exploitation of women and children for pleasure of men. Numerous scientific studies now demonstrate that pornography consumption contributes to many societal ills, such as violence against women and misogyny, addiction for adults and children, sexual trafficking and so much more. The website PornHarmsResearch.com substantiates these claims by offering a wealth of peer-reviewed scientific studies on porn's harm. Kink's pornography though takes sexual exploitation and harm to a new, lower level.
Kink sells the sickest of hardcore videos and live online performances of "young, sexy teens who are overwhelmed and outnumbered...who need to learn a lesson by multiple men." The teens and women, according to Kink, are, "bound, whipped, objectified and humiliated ... suspended and tied in rope bondage...tormented beyond all reason ...pulled in and out of cages, their tongues clamped, their bodies pinned."
Kink also brags on its site that, "contraptions used in countries such as China for torture" as well as machines, metal, wood, electrodes, hooks, needles and urination are its objects of female torture. Kink claims the women they abuse actually enjoy being tortured and it prides itself on the fact that it works with female directors. The fact is that the these women directors have completely accepted the male pornographers' views of women and shoot the same misogynistic and abusive content as men, failing to make the industry any more female friendly.
Groupon's response? What's not to like!?
Well, close to that. When confronted with concerns about Kink, Groupon defended the company, saying in response to the boycott: "We thoroughly vet the businesses we feature... Fortunately, this business has proven to be a responsible member of their community... We feel that because the business is an active good community citizen..."
Thoroughly vetted? This raises the obvious question: Does Groupon have any women in senior management? If so, its time to speak up at the staff meetings, or, if they are too timid do defend womanhood, move out of the boys-will-be-boys culture of Groupon.
The company is worthy of a national boycott and, until it announces a change of policy (and maybe a change in senior management,) our boycott will succeed in costing the company money and customers.
Where is Groupon's sense of corporate responsibility? Could it possibly believe its considerable fan base supports Kink's treatment of women? Instead of defending Kink, Groupon should be thinking of its wider commercial audience, most of whom, unlike Groupon, would not support the torture and humiliation of women and girls for the sexual enjoyment of disturbed men.
I understand that the company is experiencing financial difficulty, with its stock price nearly cut in half since its public offering last November. But I say, let it fall to $0 if that's what it takes to learn this simple lesson. The sexual humiliation of women is not a successful financial strategy.
Oh wait again!!.... maybe its not real... **facepalm**
But seriously, Groupons is new to me and now that I know that they do buisness with a reputable buisness like kink, I might just check them out!
"I find it insulting that Hawkins is taking the position that women who do porn are doing so because of men and have no idea what, if anything, they are doing to themselves. That statement implies that women do not know how to think for themselves, which is an insulting and degrading statement."
I do not understand how extreme radical feminists cannot see the inherent hypocrisy and control in this stance.
And for as many of your so called peer reviewed studies that say porn causes harm, I can find just as many that show that having the outlet of porn prevents crime and abuse.
Also, anytime a group points to one thing as the reason for societal ills and problems it is dangerous because you are not viewing the whole picture. EXAMPLES; child abuse, bullying, violent video games, porn, bad parenting, nature, alcohol, drugs, sex, masturbation, religion, atheism, etc etc. Lets face it, life is hard and complicated and the sooner a person like Dawn accepts this premise the happier they are going to be and the more good they can do to improve society. It is impossible to categorize life into simple boxes. I wish we could, because it would be so much easier.
What can you tell us about the aforementioned Kink business that Groupon and other commenters on this thread have not told us. Hint: You'll need to do some extensive reading before you answer this one.
The author, as others have already pointed out, explains that the primary purpose of pornography is to exploit women and children for the sexual benefit of men. Patently false. While it is true that more men purchase porn and men tend to view porn more frequently, the purpose of porn is not to exploit women or children.
The author contends that women are always exploited in porn as the weaker person. Once again, very untrue. Kink has several lines of porn titles which feature women exclusively, feature women as dominant over men, or include no women at all. Gay men, as much as straight men, enjoy pornography.
The article implies that porn actors do not choose to be in the adult entertainment industry. While I'm sure there are some actors who would prefer a different line of work, the majority enjoy their work and choose to continue in it.
The author apparently has a particular distaste for Kink as a company and pornographers that make fetish porn. Kink is very concerned with the well-being and treatment of their models and actors. Not every studio has such stringent policies promoting the safety of performers. The author is wrong to imply that Kink is causing harm and abuse to the women performing in their films: Kink causes no harm or abuse to the performers.
I don't doubt that there are a few individuals who have not enjoyed their experience. This does not mean Kink is inherently bad. It means that we must constantly endeavor to insure that all models going in know what they are getting into and continue to maintain clear and honest communication.
Dare I sugest that many professions are more demeaning and oppressive than porn? Does your housekeeper get down on her knees to scrub your floors because she enjoys it or because she needs the money to feed her family? Is your waitresses smile because she is really happy to see you and just can't wait to carry heavy trays all evening?
It's fine if you don't want to watch porn. It's fine if you want to endeavor to provide alternate work environments for those that choose them. Just know that it is my right to objectify myself for my own reasons.
Well, that makes total sense coming from a Democrat/communist party beholderist.
Hahaha @ "dysfunctional societal tolerance". Because a healthily functioning society has no use for open acknowledgement that people have sex.
LOL!
Ignoring for the moment that this article offers zero evidence of exploitation at the company being promoted, the reason women (and men) in the sex trade industry are so easily exploited is because they are marginalized by society and infantilized by people claiming to know what is in their best interest better then they do. If you care about these women then that is where your moral outrage should be directed.
If you were serious about preventing abuse you should be encouraging the kind of public tours you say Groupon was promoting. Exploitation and abuse thrive when people have to hide in the shadows not when their activities are open to the public. As long as humans have sex prostitution and pornography are *never* going to go away. Driving them further underground facilities exactly the kind of abuse you claim to want to prevent.
No, I am not the moral arbiter of all that is good. Good grief. I am stating that I am opposed to a company, with which I have done business, promoting a business with highly debatable ethics and actions. And that is something that everyone, at some point in their life, will likely do, for reasons of their own. At least, if they have a spine.
But since we're in the arena, I am a bit surprised, to be honest - are you really trying to convince me that prostitution and voyeurism, not to mention simulated rape, are morally ok? If so, what is your moral standard for being able to do so? You accuse me of trying to be a moral arbiter; however, you are the moral arbiter by giving moral acceptance to this while telling ME I'm wrong. To pretend that moral neutrality in such an arena, exists, is intellectually dishonest. Everyone has a moral bias regarding sex, including you!
At least I have a substantial backing: the vast majority of civilizations and religions, not to mention research we have quantifying regarding the damaging effect of such actions and their consequences (STDs, abortions, the damage to sex organs), side on the recognition of these things as moral evils.
Furthermore, I am not stating that it should be illegal or even is immoral to be interested in bondage, leather, etc. I am talking about sex as a business, and rape.