What an excellent review! (I'll have to link to it over on BPPA if somebody else hasn't already.) It really hits the nail on the head about exactly what's wrong with Jensen's line of argument. Its also something that I've argued about porn for a long time now – porn is a genre or even an artistic medium. Condemning all porn across the board is like condemning all westerns or all musicals or even all movies because you don't happen to like a popular subset of them. In fact, it smacks more than a bit of religious sects that condemn visual art as a whole as "sensual" or "idolatry". Some thoughts on particular points you've made –

"It’s not immediately obvious, but Robert Jensen and I have a lot in common. We both grew up as scrawny, physically inept boys with no aptitude for athletics. We were the kind of boys who were by default identified as “faggots” by our peers and, at least in my case, sometimes by teachers. On the playground and the streets, our status as “sensitive” boys made us easy targets for insults and physical abuse."

I've so been there! And yet, I strongly reject the whole "sensitive politically correct guy" role that writers like Jensen, John Stoltenberg, and Hugo Schwyzer are trying to shove down our throat. At best, it divests you of your personal power and makes you into a doormat and totally ineffective in the world. At worst, it turns you into a passive-aggressive asshole that serves as nothing more than an annoyance and dead weight on the very people you're trying to ally with.

"Corporate porn might be the elephant in the room, but it's not the whole story, not by half. As porn has become more acceptable, the voices and forms that are available have also become more diverse. Writing about corporate gonzo porn gives us little basis for insight into magazines like On Our Backs or its descendants; slash fiction (written largely by heterosexual women); sex blogs; alt-porn sites like ThatStrangeGirl (now defunct, but certainly influential) and I Shot Myself; or independent, sex-positive porn producers like Maria Beatty or Audacia Ray. You can praise or damn any of these subgenres as you will, but the fact remains that if you're going to do so, you have to look at them for what they are, not what you expect them to be based on what you've seen in a Slutbus or Seymour Butts production."

This is a point well taken and one I agree with, and yet at the same time, I think that positing "queer", or "pansexual", or "feminist" porn as the sole examples "good porn" leaves the implication that everything else is unreservedly monolithic and bad. I don't think this does the porn world justice at all. To my mind, the grey area between I Shot Myself and Bang Bus is huge. Porn, even "mainstream porn" is extremely diverse and full of both positive and negative messages about sexuality, often in the same package. (Kind of like most people, huh?) Where does one put alt porn that's still very much part of the commercial porn world, like Eon McKai or Joanna Angel's work? What about the extreme, but nonetheless very sex-positive gonzo videos of Belladonna? Or non-degrading high-production glamour porn like Viv Thomas' work? I don't think this stuff should be written off just because its too close to the "mainstream". (In fact, it seems to me like the "mainstream" vs "non-mainstream" porn dichotomy has simply become a rehash of the tired old "porn vs erotica" warhorse radical feminists occasionally still trot out.)

More broadly, to imply that porn that's made for straight men who are into conventionally attractive women as somehow inherently reactionary or beyond redemption is to largely write off the idea of transforming porn. Like it or not, men are still the majority of the porn audience, and demographically, the majority are largely heterosexual. That's who's buying the most porn, so its inevitable that that's who the majority of porn is going to be produced for. Writing off the idea of positive porn for this audience is myopic.

"I'm a little dismayed though, at how much credibility sites like Feministe and Alternet have been giving Jensen, although Feministing has an interesting review by Courtney Martin, which, while I don't wholly agree with, I can at least respect it."

I was really disappointed by that review – it was basically in agreement with most of Jensen's points, even if Martin thought the "elimination of masculinity" idea went to far. Most of the feminist "big blogs" – Feministe, Feministing, Pandagon, and Alternet – have been quite positive (even gushing) in their reviews. Feministing surprised me, since I thought it leaned more-or-less sex-positive. Similarly, the majority of mainstream feminist writers were highly uncritical of Melissa Farley's anti-prostitution PR campaign a few months back and quite a few came out for a Swedish-style "bust the johns" criminalization. I guess feminism is going through a puritanical phase again, like it did during the late 70s through the 1980s – hopefully this too will pass.