PLU M E
P u b lis h e d b y th e P e n g u in G r o u p
P e n g u in B o o k s U S A I n c , 375 H u d s o n S tre e t, N e w Y o rk , N e w Y o rk
1 0 0 1 4 , U . S .A .
P e n g u in B o o k s L td , 27 W rig h ts L a n e , L o n d o n W 8 5 T Z , E n g la n d
P e n g u in B o o k s A u s tr a lia L td , R in g w o o d , V ic to r ia , A u s tr a lia
P e n g u i n B o o k s C a n a d a L t d , 10 A l c o r n A v e n u e , T o r o n t o , O n t a r i o ,
C a n a d a , M 4V 3B2
P e n g u i n B o o k s ( N . Z . ) L t d , 1 8 2 -1 9 0 W a i r a u R o a d , A u c k l a n d 1 0 , N e w
Z e a la n d
P e n g u in B o o k s L td , R e g is te r e d O ffic e s : H a r m o n d s w o r t h ,
M id d le s e x , E n g la n d
P u b lis h e d b y P lu m e , a n im p r in t o f D u tto n S ig n e t, a
d iv is io n o f P e n g u in B o o k s U S A In c .
T h is p a p e r b a c k e d itio n o f P o r n o g r a p h y firs t p u b lis h e d in 1989 b y
D u tto n , a n im p r in t o f D u tto n S ig n e t, a d iv is io n o f P e n g u in B o o k s
U S A In c . P u b lis h e d s im u lta n e o u s ly in C a n a d a b y F itz h e n ry a n d
W h ite s id e , L im ite d , T o r o n to .
C o p y r i g h t © 1 9 7 9 , 1 9 8 0 , 1981 b y A n d r e a D w o r k i n
I n tr o d u c tio n c o p y r ig h t © 1989 b y A n d re a D w o rk in
A ll r ig h t s re s e rv e d . P r i n t e d in th e U .S .A .
N o p a rt o f th is p u b lic a tio n m a y b e re p ro d u c e d o r tra n s m itte d in a n y
fo rm o r b y a n y m e a n s , e le c tro n ic o r m e c h a n ic a l, in c lu d in g p h o to c o p y ,
r e c o r d in g , o r a n y in f o r m a tio n s to ra g e a n d r e tr ie v a l s y s te m n o w k n o w n
o r to b e in v e n te d , w ith o u t p e rm is s io n in w r itin g fro m th e p u b lis h e r,
e x c e p t b y a re v ie w e r w h o w is h e s to q u o te b rie f p a s s a g e s in c o n n e c tio n
w ith a re v ie w w r itte n fo r in c lu s io n in a m a g a z in e , n e w s p a p e r , o r
b ro a d c a s t.
L i b r a r y o f C o n g r e s s C a t a l o g C a r d N u m b e r : 8 9 -5 1 1 4 7
IS B N : 0 -4 5 2 -2 6 7 9 3 -5
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3
T h e a u th o r g ra te f u lly a c k n o w le d g e s p e r m is s io n f r o m th e f o llo w in g
s o u rc e s to r e p r in t m a te r ia l in th is b o o k :
G e n a C o re a fo r a n u n p u b li s h e d in te r v ie w w ith D r. H e r b e r t R a tn e r ,
S e p te m b e r 2 0 , 1979.
A le x d e J o n g e fo r h is t r a n s l a ti o n o f f o u r lin e s f r o m J o u r n a u x
C o m p le te s b y C h a r le s B a u d e la ir e , c ite d in B a u d e la ir e : P r in c e o f C lo u d s
b y A le x d e J o n g e , c o p y r i g h t © 1976 b y A le x d e J o n g e .
G ro v e P re s s , I n c ., fo r J u s ti n e fr o m T h e C o m p le te M a r q u is d e S a d e
b y M a r q u is d e S a d e , tra n s la te d b y R ic h a r d S e a v e r a n d A u s try n
W a in h o u s e , c o p y r ig h t © 1965 b y R ic h a r d S e a v e r a n d A u s tr y n
W a in h o u s e .
6
P o rn o g ra p h y
Consider also our spirits that break a little each time
we see ourselves in chains or full labial display for the
conquering male viewer, bruised or on our knees,
screaming a real or pretended pain to delight the
sadist, pretending to enjoy what we don’t enjoy, to
be blind to the images of our sisters that really haunt
us—humiliated often enough ourselves by the truly
obscene idea that sex and the domination of women
must be combined.
Gloria Steinem, “Exotica and Pornography”
Somehow every indignity the female suffers ul­
timately comes to be symbolized in a sexuality that is
held to be her responsibility, her shame. Even the
self-denigration required of the prostitute is an emo­
tion urged upon all women, but rarely with as much
success: not as frankly, not as openly, not as effi­
ciently. It can be summarized in one four-letter
word. And the word is not fuck, it’s cunt. Our self­
contempt originates in this: in knowing we are cunt.
This is what we are supposed to be about—our
essence, our offense.
Kate Millett, The Prostitution Papers
I can never have my fill of killing whores.
Euripides’ Orestes, in Orestes
The word pornography, derived from the ancient Greek porne and
graphos, means “writing about whores.” Porne means “whore, ”
specifically and exclusively the lowest class of whore, which in
ancient Greece was the brothel slut available to all male citizens.
The porne was the cheapest (in the literal sense), least regarded, least
protected of all women, including slaves. She was, simply and
clearly and absolutely, a sexual slave. Graphos means “writing,
etching, or drawing.”
The word pornography does not mean “writing about sex” or
“depictions of the erotic” or “depictions of sexual acts” or “depic­
tions of nude bodies” or “sexual representations” or any other such
euphemism. It means the graphic depiction of women as vile
whores. In ancient Greece, not all prostitutes were considered vile:
only the porm eia.
Contemporary pornography strictly and literally conforms to the
word’s root meaning: the graphic depiction of vile whores, or, in
our language, sluts, cows (as in: sexual cattle, sexual chattel), cunts.
The word has not changed its meaning and the genre is not
misnamed. The only change in the meaning of the word is with
respect to its second part, graphos: now there are cameras—there is
still photography, film, video. The methods of graphic depiction
have increased in number and in kind: the content is the same; the
meaning is the same; the purpose is the same; the status of the
women depicted is the same; the sexuality of the women depicted is
the same; the value of the women depicted is the same. With the
technologically advanced methods of graphic depiction, real women
are required for the depiction as such to exist.
The word pornography does not have any other meaning than the
one cited here, the graphic depiction of the lowest whores. Whores
exist to serve men sexually. Whores exist only within a framework
of male sexual domination. Indeed, outside that framework the
notion of whores would be absurd and the usage of women as
whores would be impossible. The word whore is incomprehensible
unless one is immersed in the lexicon of male domination. Men have
created the group, the type, the concept, the epithet, the insult, the
industry, the trade, the commodity, the reality of woman as whore.
Woman as whore exists within the objective and real system of male
sexual domination. The pornography itself is objective and real and
central to the male sexual system. The valuation of women’s
sexuality in pornography is objective and real because women are so
regarded and so valued. The force depicted in pornography is
objective and real because force is so used against women. The
debasing of women depicted in pornography and intrinsic to it is
objective and real in that women are so debased. The uses of
women depicted ill pornography are objective and real because
women are so used. The women used in pornography are used in
pornography. The definition of women articulated systematically
and consistently in pornography is objective and real in that real
women exist within and must live with constant reference to the
boundaries of this definition. The fact that pornography is widely
believed to be “sexual representations” or “depictions of sex”
emphasizes only that the valuation of women as low whores is
widespread and that the sexuality of women is perceived as low and
whorish in and of itself. The fact that pornography is widely
believed to be “depictions of the erotic” means only that the
debasing of women is held to be the real pleasure of sex. As Kate
Millett wrote, women's sexuality is reduced to the one essential:
“c u n t. . . our essence, our offense.” 1The idea that pornography is
“dirty” originates in the conviction that the sexuality of women is
dirty and is actually portrayed in pornography; that women’s
bodies (especially women’s genitals) are dirty and lewd in them­
selves. Pornography does not, as some claim, refute the idea that
female sexuality is dirty: instead, pornography embodies and
exploits this idea; pornography sells and promotes it.
In the United States, the pornography industry is larger than the
record and film industries combined. In a time of widespread
economic impoverishment, it is growing: more and more male
consumers are eager to spend more and more money on pornogra­
phy— on depictions of women as vile whores. Pornography is now
carried by cable television; it is now being marketed for home use in
video machines. The technology itself demands the creation of
more and more porneia to meet the market opened up by the
technology. Real women are tied up, stretched, hanged, fucked,
gang-banged, whipped, beaten, and begging for more. In the
photographs and films, real women are used as porneia and real
women are depicted as porneia. To profit, the pimps must supply
the porneia as the technology widens the market for the visual
consumption of women being brutalized and loving it. One picture
is worth a thousand words. The number of pictures required to
meet the demands of the marketplace determines the number of
porneia required to meet the demands of graphic depiction. The
numbers grow as the technology and its accessibility grow. The
technology by its very nature encourages more and more passive
acquiescence to the graphic depictions. Passivity makes the already
credulous consumer more credulous. He comes to the pornography
a believer; he goes away from it a missionary. The technology itself
legitimizes the uses of women conveyed by it.
In the male system, women are sex; sex is the whore. The whore
is porne, the lowest whore, the whore who belongs to all male
citizens: the slut, the cunt. Buying her is buying pornography.
Having her is having pornography. Seeing her is seeing pornogra­
phy. Seeing her sex, especially her genitals, is seeing pornography.
Seeing her in sex is seeing the whore in sex. Using her is using
pornography. Wanting her means wanting pornography. Being her
means being pornography.