-----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