During the "Feminist Sex Wars" in the 1980s, feminists opposing anti-pornography stances, such as Carole Vance and the late Ellen Willis, began referring to themselves as "pro-sex" or "sex-positive feminists". Sex-positive feminists and anti-pornography feminists have debated over the implicit and explicit meanings of these labels. Sex-positive feminists note that anti-pornography ordinances drafted by MacKinnon and Dworkin called for the removal, censorship, or control over sexually explicit material.[46]
In States of Injury (1995), Wendy Brown contends that MacKinnon's attempt to ban prostitution and pornography does not primarily protect but re-inscribes the category of "woman" as an essentialized identity premised on injury.[47] In The Nation, Brown also characterized MacKinnon's Toward a Feminist Theory of the State (1989) as a "profoundly static world view and undemocratic, perhaps even anti-democratic, political sensibility" as well as "flatly dated" and "developed at 'the dawn of feminism's second wave... framed by a political-intellectual context that no longer exists — a male Marxist monopoly on radical social discourse'".
Judith Butler's 1994 article "Against Proper Objects," in a section titled "Against the anti-pornography paradigm," criticizes MacKinnon as having "totalizing" and "deterministic" positions on sexuality, specifically heterosexuality, as follows:
Feminist positions such as Catharine MacKinnon’s offer an analysis of sexual relations as structured by relations of coerced subordination, and argue that acts of sexual domination constitute the social meaning of being a “man,” as the condition of coerced subordination constitutes the social meaning of being a “woman.” Such a rigid determinism assimilates any account of sexuality to rigid and determining positions of domination and subordination, and assimilates those positions to the social gender of man and woman. But that deterministic account has come under continuous criticism from feminists not only for an untenable account of female sexuality as coerced subordination, but for the totalizing view of heterosexuality as well—one in which all power relations are reduced to relations of domination—and for the failure to distinguish the presence of coerced domination in sexuality from pleasurable and wanted dynamics of power.[48]
