 This concern is reflected in the distinctive way anti-pornography feminists tend to define “pornography.” As we have seen, conservatives typically define “pornography” as including all sexually explicit material. This definition reflects the fact that conservatives object to pornography’s sexual explicitness, which is obscene or appeals to “prurient interests.” Anti-pornography feminists, however, do not object to pornography’s sexually explicit content per se. They typically draw a more fine-grained distinction within the class of sexually explicit materials between “pornography,” on the one hand, and “erotica,” on the other. “Erotica” is generally defined as sexually explicit material premised on equality, which depicts women as genuinely equal and consenting participants in sexual encounters. “Pornography,” in contrast, is typically defined as that subset of sexually explicit material that depicts women being coerced, abused, dominated or degraded in such a way as to endorse their subordination. Unlike conservatives, anti-pornography feminists have no objection to material which is merely sexually explicit, i.e., erotica, for sexually explicit material of this sort does not harm women. The objection is to pornography – that subset of sexually explicit material that subordinates women.