Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!aero-c!nadel
From: dgross@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (Dave Gross)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: does healthy, mutual erotica exist?
Message-ID: <27e10cc1.3f0f@petunia.CalPoly.EDU>
Date: 15 Mar 91 18:04:49 GMT
References: <2995@titan.tsd.arlut.utexas.edu>
Sender: news@aero.org
Distribution: usa
Organization: Manumission: The Campus Men's Forum
Lines: 93
Approved: nadel@aerospace.aero.org
Originator: nadel@aerospace.aero.org




According to ford@titan.tsd.arlut.utexas.edu ():
>
>My partner and I are having an ongoing debate on the harmfulness or
>harmlesness of "light" pornography, specifically "Playboy."  My
>normally open-minded and understanding partner insists that it is
>completely innocuous, and he sees nothing wrong with looking at
>these women because they're beautiful, and there is nothing wrong 
>with the human body.  My argument is that these magazines portray
>women as the playthings of men, and the idea that women in general are 
>primarily around for the pleasure of men.  

	In my Psych of Women class this quarter we've just finished
	a lecture on pornography.  Actually, it was less a lecture
	and more a movie.  We saw "Not A Love Story," which was
	put out by some feminists in cooperation with the Canadian
	Film Bureau.  Mostly what was shown was a lot of bondage
	videos, but also included were brief interviews with strippers
	and peep-show performers.

	I've seen a couple of porno films, and I've seen my allotment
	of dirty magazines, but I've never seen anything as disturbing
	as the movie I saw in psych of women.  The porno films I've
	seen are more absurd than frightening, but the ones they found
	for "Not A Love Story" (NALS) were pretty bad -- Women tied
	up being spanked, women performing fellatio on handguns, even
	a couple of excerpts from child porn films.

	The conclusion that I would have drawn from the evidence given
	in the film is that there is some really ugly pornography out
	there.  The conclusion that they drew was that pornography was
	bad.

	It would be like reading excerpts from "Mein Kampf" and then
	concluding that books are evil.

	But they left themselves an out.  So as not to appear too
	prudish or anti-sex (and so as not to condemn those depictions
	of sexuality that they happen to enjoy), they created this
	dichotomy:  Good dirty pictures are "erotica;" Bad dirty pictures
	are "pornography."

>Now I know there was a raging debate in
>this newsgroup last year on the pros/cons of pornography.  It is
>not my intent to start that up again.  I have decided that, yes,
>I believe the human body is beautiful, and that there is nothing
>wrong with human sexuality, so what I am looking for are books or
>magazines that celebrate the beauty of mutual sexuality.  I would
>be willing to trade him "erotica" involving both sexes which
>promotes positive feelings about both sexes, in exchange for him
>giving up his subscription to Playboy.  Does anybody know if
>such things exist?

	Sure they do.  If you like it, it's erotica.  If you don't
	it's pornography.  Go find some erotica and share it with
	him.  It can't hurt.

	But don't tell him that the pictures in Playboy that he likes
	to look at are dirty, evil, pornography.  They just happen to
	be things that turn him on.

>Thanks for any help.  Yes, I am reading Andrea Dworkin's _Pornography_
>at the moment, but I think it's not going to help me out much in 
>my argument because Playboy doesn't show bondage, abuse, etc.  My
>partner would be very opposed to those things, but still sees Playboy
>as harmless.

	So do I.  I've found that arguing with feminists about what
	is "erotica" and what is "pornography" is the same argument
	in substance and style as arguing with fundamentalists about
	what is "art" and what is "pornography."

	It all seems to center on what you happen to like.

	Men seem to be far more visual than women in what they respond
	to sexually.  Women seem to be far more interested in stories
	and vivid verbal descriptions.

	I think that romance novels, women's favored pornography,
	are really dumb.  I think they contain some really backward
	notions about the relations between the sexes.

	Many people draw the same conclusions about pornography.

	The problem isn't with the medium (the romance novel, or the
	nudie magazine), but with the sexist attitudes which are
	pretty pervasive in ALL media.

-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- dgross@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
On Iraq's release of only female hostages:
  "That was Iraq's idea.  In a touchy political situation, we didn't feel
   it was wise to make a comment." -- California NOW coordinator Linda Joplin