>the point is this: the assumption was that those depictions are demeaning
>to women, that somehow anal sex is "bad", as are facials. it's not
>necessarily the case that women view these acts and feel denigrated.
Good onya. I agree with you, too, when you say elsewhere that all sex involves a certain amount of objectification. Perhaps you meant it otherwise, but I'd say the beloved is always in some sense the beloved object.
>and why should they? what makes anyone feel that anal sex is denigrating
>to women? are depictions of men having anal sex denigrating to men? are
>films of men getting facials denigrating to men?
The interesting question to pose of pornography, it seems to me, is, how much of the titillation is derived from observing the humiliation of the one being acted upon.
>somehow these are acts of domination and objectification according to
>uday. well, obviously, they don't have to be. and, frankly, when it
>comes to yer average porn fare, i'd say that the blow job is the number
>one act depicted, not anal sex.
Of course blow jobs, too, can be either desired (on the part of the one doing the job) or humiliating, or a blend of both.
cheers, Joanna
www.overlookhouse.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20001125/e9f540b8/attachment.htm>