> Yeah, Yoshie, that's way old news, which was posted about on here
> quite a bit back around the date of the article you just referenced
Michael Pugliese posted a Salon article about it (he just reposted a link to it), but, like most things that he posts, it didn't get commented on.
> Included were links to the "Porn in War" and "Iraqi Babes" DVDs,
> whose authenticity were under question.
The article's point is that soldiers are exchanging photos of dead Iraqis (using them as currency so to speak) for porn, not that the porn they exchange them for features "Iraqi babes."
In any case, I'm also responding to the point made by Joanna. It's way too easy (at least today if not in the past) to defend Susie Bright, Pauline Reage, and the like. But if we are only talking about porn that clearly has political or aesthetic merits, we are evading the question that some feminists raise, so that's not a useful dialogue between feminists of different schools. Surely pro- porn feminists need to discuss disturbing uses of porn, too, rather than just meritorious or run-of-the-mill ones.
Yoshie Furuhashi <http://montages.blogspot.com> <http://monthlyreview.org> <http://mrzine.org>