On Sunday, February 1, 2004, at 12:39 PM, Carrol Cox wrote:
>
>
> Miles Jackson wrote:
>>
>> I don't mean to share inappropriately intimate info onlist, but
>> I have a point: crude generalizations--"visual fantasies
>> are important to men", "all men get off on lezzie sex"--aren't
>> going to help us understand the astonishing diversity of
>> human sexual activities and desires.
>>
>
> The theories continue to pour in, none of the theorists even nodding in
> the direction of Miles's argument.
>
on the contrary, there's been no claim that all men get off on lezzie sex, and i certainly don't want to get into the business of visual fantasies, yadda yadda. but we *can* talk about cultural expressions of these fantasies and inquire into their operation moreover, the size and reach of the pr0n industry and the prominence of girl-on-girl sex within it suggests that the phenomenon is significant.
that this is not a science does not disturb me. does it disturb you?
finally, i don't think most of the contributions in this discussion have been been as reductionist as you (or miles) suggests. the point is, granted, an important one, but it ought not to shut us up.
j