Buying 'Intentions' (was Re: Giggly Guys)

Charles Brown CharlesB at
Wed Mar 24 10:51:52 PST 1999

However, aren't there problems with the anti-pornography movement, Dworkin and McKinnon, anti-smut brigades, etc. as discussed at length on the M-fem list ? What is the thin line here between anti-sexism and sexual repression ?

Charles Brown

>>> Yoshie Furuhashi <furuhashi.1 at> 03/23/99 09:19PM >>>
Rob wrote:
>>with pictures - I gotta be imagining someone trying to turn me on if I'm to
>>slobber appropriately - so a picture does it only after mediation by my
>>sordid imagination

Not only Rob but all men who enjoy porn surely _know_ that female models in porn posing or acting to appear as if they had an 'intention to arouse' men are doing just that--posing & acting, for money they need or want. The same for prostitutes who sell sexual services with physical contact. Moreover, the said models and prostitutes must also often feel rather deep contempt for and resentment toward their customers (as most workers in service industries often feel) that are starkly portrayed by Lizzie Borden in _Working Girls_, as Michael Hoover wrote.

Doesn't knowing that 'intentions' represented are not only illusory but also likely to be the mask that hides opposite feelings put a damper upon men who buy & use porn? Apparently not, given the quantity and variety of products and services offered in the sex industry. What makes men want to buy imaginary 'intentions'? Doesn't buying imagined 'intentions' make men feel embarrasingly stupid? Isn't it the reason why men buy lots of porn _even though_ most of them profess not to take it 'seriously'?


More information about the lbo-talk mailing list