[lbo-talk] Re: theory of porn?

Kenneth MacKendrick kenneth.mackendrick at utoronto.ca
Mon Feb 2 06:30:44 PST 2004


-----Original Message----- From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org] On Behalf Of / dave / Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2004 5:07 PM To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Re: theory of porn?


> This situation makes possible a "lez" film context in which a
het-male viewer can obtain the triple benefits of a) two writhing bodies instead of one, which provide added opportunities for excitement, b) an ostensible didactic or instructional element, "stolen" and secreted away by the viewer owing to his privileged sneak-peek into the behavior of women "amongst themselves", and c) the authoritarian and perhaps even paternal satisfaction of "permitting" said activities sans negative consequences (cf first paragraph above re. lack of participant agency).

Does anyone know if there is a coincidence of Bentham's (1748-1832) panopticon writings and the Marquis de Sade (1740-1814). Porn was invented in the era after Sade (according to Lynn Hunt)... it somehow seems appropriate that this coincides with the threat-concept of total surveillance and invasive voyeurism backed by an obsessive masculine brotherhood (Rousseau's fraternity) (1712-1778).

ken



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list