[lbo-talk] Porn: By Men for Men

[Leigh Meyers]

On Wednesday, December 07, 2005 9:48 PM [PDT],
Yoshie Furuhashi <furuhashi.1 at osu.edu> wrote:
> 
> Even under capitalism, I don't see any reason why pornographers can't
> cater to more women.  While car ads can and do sometimes feature
> sexist imagery, cars in themselves can be and are driven by men and
> women.  Women probably have a wider range of choices in clothes
> (women can wear clothes for both men and women, while culture tells
> most men to stick to men's clothing only).  As for TV consumption,
> men do watch more TV than women in America (cf. 2.57 hours for men
> and 1.96 hours for women in households with no children under 18:
> <http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/atus.pdf>) since men have more
> leisure, but there are lots of shows that cater to women, and there
> isn't a radical gender difference in consumption of TV that you see
> in consumption of porn.
> 
> The gendered division of labor predates capitalism, and it won't
> necessarily get better for women after capitalism.  The same goes for
> a gendered division of cultural production and consumption.  Male-
> centered porn is a problem.
> 

So... the industry should spend more time marketing it's wares to women?

More diverse imagery? 
Fat Boys Magazine? 
MILF (Men I'd Love To Fuck)?

Winkie Wankers... for girl that prefers the package small and hairless?

That... would... be... an... improvement. [snicker... gag, rinse.]

More eros... less porn ($$$). No compromise.

Sex  IS a marketable commodity, but the question that needs
to be asked is "Should it be?", "How DID it become that in the
milieu of industrial society", and "Will there be any true social
benefit to *anyone* at all by it's continuation AS a commodity?"

Leigh
www.leighm.net