Macleod's “Conscionable consumption: a theoretical model of consumer ethics in pornography” (2020)
“Conscionable consumption: a theoretical model of consumer ethics in pornography”
Whilst the parameters of ‘ethicality’, ‘ethical consumption’, and ‘ethical porn’ thus remain in flux, that which emerges as consistent across the data, however, is the relevance of ethical considerations to feminist experiences of porn consumption. Indeed, the imbrication of feminism and ethics is perhaps nowhere more evident than in issues pertaining to pornography, where questions of gender, sex, power, and the body coalesce.
Many made positive associations between (feminist) ethics and porn, for example, by linking both with the quest for sexual freedom – and women’s sexual liberation in particular. These associations, however, more often than not, existed alongside major ethical concerns about porn. For some participants, such concerns revolved around fears about exploitation and performer consent; for others, they extended to the perceived ethicality of sexual representations being portrayed in porn content. Grappling with such questions, in the context of their own porn use, emerged as a key feature of participating feminists’ consumption experiences, with interviewees positioning themselves at various points along a dissonance–consonance spectrum according to how well they considered their porn practices to align with their values.
[A] wide range of positions on porn were identified amongst participating feminists; some holding firm opinions on porn or strong feelings about particular types of porn, but others expressing deep-seated ambivalence.
[F]eminists’ experiences of porn consumption were often, although by no means always, characterized by a degree of separation or tension between their ethical predispositions in a philosophical sense and their porn selection behaviours in a practical one.
Conscionable consumption, however, represents something qualitatively different to the aforementioned understandings of consumer-citizen identity and practice. Rather than adopting the business-oriented approaches of most consumer ethics studies, whose underlying aim often appears to revolve around devising better strategies for increasing the consumption of particular goods and services, this model is grounded in the individual’s perspectives on ethics and consumption. Through the inductive analysis of interview data, the notion of ‘conscionable consumption’ emerged as a means for conceptualizing feminists’ experiences of navigating the ethical terrain of porn consumption. Instead of representing a particular classification of consumer, conscionable consumption practices may refer to a spectrum of consumption choices that individuals consider acceptable to them, and describes the processes by which these notions of conscionable practice may be arrived at.
[I]t is this variable evaluation of how to allocate care resources that appears to produce such divergent conceptualizations of ‘conscionability’ across different areas of ethical concern,
[R]ather than an identity term, an inspirational ideal, or a classification of ethically ‘superior’ consumer, conscionable porn consumption refers to a context-based process of practice, reflection, and (re)definition of what an individual may consider acceptable porn choices at a given point in time. Thus, perhaps by virtue of the origins of this research lying outside the boundaries of business studies and marketing, the notion of conscionable consumption neither presumes, nor seeks to delineate, a set of practices that business owners, politicians, or ethical consumption activists would necessarily wish to encourage. Instead, the model can simply be understood as a depiction of how feminists – and, conceivably, otherwise-identified ‘concerned’ consumers – may understand their own journey with (porn) consumption ethics, in a way that aims neither to glorify nor vilify such people or practices.
[C]learly identified within the interview data was the notion that feminists, themselves, often do not agree on any single way of practising ‘ethical consumption’ with regards to porn. In fact, some participants expressed uncertainty as to whether such a practice could ever be said to exist. Consistently conceded, however, was the view that certain types of porn could be considered more ethical and others less so:
“I don’t think you can say that there is such a thing as an ethical porn user, um, but people can go about their pornography in more ethical ways, if that makes sense?” (Lacey)
When it came to distinguishing the negatively framed approaches from the positive, participants once again diverged, articulating different ideas of what might constitute more ethical practice, and sometimes widely contrasting degrees of adherence to them.
Another respondent also highlighted consent in his discussion of ethical porn, paying most attention, however, to the industry side of porn ethics. Namely, he suggested that the most ethical type of porn would be productions devoid of any form of direct or indirect coercion, including economic coercion, where performers were freely consenting to the sexual acts in which they engaged:
“[When] it’s like porn or starving to death you know – nobody should be faced with that choice. Or even, like living in poverty to any extent. I guess that goes to much deeper societal issues than just the porn industry … If people need to work jobs really to what extent are they free? Can we consider pornography a form of wage slavery? In certain cases I would say so. So, I guess in order to solve problems like wage slavery you’d need a pretty drastic shift in how society functions … People need like a stronger social safety net so they’re not forced into things they don’t want to do, like porn in some instances.” (Akim)
In the absence of such radical societal shifts, however, Akim remained unconvinced of the power of his consumer choices to affect labour practices and conditions in the industry – a scepticism that was reflected across many interviews. Instead, Akim preferred to concentrate his efforts in other areas provided that his porn use at least stayed in what he referred to as the ethical ‘neutral zone’.
[T]hese examples demonstrate how participants came to understand what types of porn use and porn content could be considered acceptable to them – often with rather different results. For many, this took the form of very low-level measures to maintain what they saw as ethical neutrality with regards to porn; for others, conscionable behaviour equated to overt efforts to approximate their ethical ideals, for example: by seeking out studios that they believed would employ more ethically sound practices; by supporting performers they knew to have launched their own independent websites in an effort to gain greater control over their work, pay, and the means of production; or by the use of material depicting women and minorities in ways they deemed more positive. In each case, however, subjective definitions of conscionability with regards to porn use represented the minimum acceptable standard of ethicality required for that individual to feel at sufficient ease with their porn choices:
“I’m not perhaps doing everything I could to guarantee that it’s ethically sourced, but I’m doing enough to make myself feel comfortable about it.” (Josie)
It is upon contravention of such minimum standards that feelings of dissonance were found to emerge.
Various strategies were invoked here, with a view to justifying, dismissing, accepting, or negotiating dissonance. For example, Helen discussed attempts to dismiss the dissonance she experienced by means of ‘numbing’ and ‘persona switching’. Others appealed to perceptions of powerlessness in order to justify using porn they perceived to be unethical, or placed some or all of the blame elsewhere, highlighting, for instance, the role of governments and producers in improving porn ethics. Many described being successful in these reconciliatory efforts, with most participants who expressed feelings of dissonance around their porn practices eventually coming to understand them as acceptable on the whole, and generally not expressing any intentions to change their behaviour. A minority, however, upon being unable to reconcile what they perceived as a misalignment between their ethical convictions and their actions, described feeling somewhat compelled to change their behaviour.
Unlike much of the extant research on ethical consumption, however, the exploration of behaviour change and intention does not constitute an underlying goal or focus of this study, and represents just one part of the conceptual model proposed. It is the wider journey – starting with the motivation to use porn; followed by the selection of, engagement with, and response to porn; and, ultimately, the cycle of ‘conscience processing’ that may be prompted – with which the presented model concerns itself
[T]he interviews highlighted how participants commonly experienced the role of ethics in porn consumption as an ever-evolving cycle of definition, practice, reflection, and redefinition of what could be considered acceptable behaviour and what would need to be ‘solved’. In this way, interviewees tended towards descriptions of consumption ethics as a ‘journey of conscience’ over time, rather than referring to an absolute definition with static criteria to which they had always and would always conform. It is this – perhaps somewhat short, perhaps sometimes lifelong – trajectory of fluctuating attitudes and behaviours towards ethics and (porn) consumption that characterizes the theory of conscionable consumption.
This study provided insights into the interaction between ethics and practice in porn consumption amongst London feminists, resulting in the development of a model for understanding this process of ‘conscionable consumption’. Whilst a key criterion for participation in this study revolved around respondents’ feminist identifications, it is in no way supposed that the theoretical model itself represents a universally or ideally ‘feminist’ way of using porn. Neither has it been the aim of this article to in any way assess the degree to which participants’ articulations may be considered feminist in any ‘true’ sense. Rather, the theoretical framework presented is simply intended as an aid to conceptualizing the feminist porn consumption experience and the nuanced, complex, and sometimes contradictory nature thereof.
[This article] supports positions established in some consumer ethics studies that consumers in real-life decisionmaking contexts often face ‘incommensurable forces’ (Slater and Miller 2007, 20). They navigate these in myriad ways depending on the circumstances and consumption context, often resulting in seemingly erratic behaviour or an attitude–behaviour/values– behaviour gap. Such behaviour can be said to reflect a complex array of conflicting priorities rather than necessarily mirroring the ethical principles of the individual in any simple or direct sense
The analysis highlighted the perceived material and emotional resource limitations with regards to ethical undertakings; limitations that result in an apparent ‘care deficit’, whereby social and environmental needs ultimately outweigh the capacity of individuals to address them. On the other hand, the analysis acknowledged participants’ refusal to transgress certain ethical parameters regardless of other pressures and obstacles, and referred to this as the ‘line’ of un/conscionability. As a result, this research has been able to posit a new means by which to theorize how these ‘incommensurable forces’ may be navigated.
The model of conscionable consumption presented in this article in fact suggests that, rather than dictating how individuals are likely to act, a person’s ethical orientations may actually be more likely to dictate which actions they seek to avoid.
☙