boddi satva writes:
> Indeed it is fundamental conflicts in the making
of porn exacerbated to a distorting extent by the
patriarchy which makes this utopia of porn equality
you seek very unlikely indeed.
Since you are loathe to divorce words from reality, what are the "fundamental conflicts in the making of porn"?
>That's really because porn is evil crap.
Why is it evil crap?
> Let children develop their sexual identity with other
children in a safe environment that nourishes respect.
And part of that nourishing safe environment are images and videos that show how to engage in various sexual practices and fetishes in a healty, nourishing way.
> They are wards, not free individuals and that is exactly
as they should be treated.
They are free individuals.
> Well, first you have to deal with the fact that men - gay
and straight - love porn in the main and most women have
little to do with it, despite the ubiquity of all sorts of
pornography.
And this is because? (You seem to be emulating Chip with broad generalizations that you do not back up with evidence -- which oddly enough you require of other posters. Quid pro quo, Clarice!)
> Women are constantly encouraged to be shallowly sexual . .
Which is the exact opposite of what I was saying was healthy for them. Behaving shallowly is not owning and caring for one's sexuality.
> Many women may feel their sexuality is not encouraged but
I think the culture clearly does encourage it and accept it
publically.
What culture encourgaes is women to be sexual at the behest/ instigation of males.
> Porn is about masturbation - a purely personal act if
ever there was one.
I have masturbated with all of my husbands, most of my boyfriends, and a goodly number of casual acquaintances. For me, masturbation is an intimate act, but not a solitary one. YMMV.
> If you think that the problem with porn is that it is not
"produced without shame," you just don't know anything
about porn.
Actually, I know quite a lot about it. Your posts are the ones that contain a blinkered vision, i.e., "porn is evil crap."
> Indeed, pimp culture is a particularly distilled form of
capitalist culture.
Pimps and sex workers are not the same things.
> Right, but I'm not talking about them - note first
sentence above.
I know you are trying to have your arguments make sense by severely narrowing them, but even then they do not withstand scrunity.
> No you don't, not as far as the main body of porn is
concerned.
Again, I do. Also, I would appreciate it if you would not try to tell me about my own experience.
> Don't cooperation and recirprocal altruism generally
imply a level of mutual concern and respect that tend to
encourage more positive endeavors than pornography?
Your question is tautological since it already assumes that pornography is not a "positive endeavour." Again, that is an assertion which you have yet to prove.
> I know sex workers too. I don't think that they would
say that it is "very positive".
Do you know what they would say, or are you speaking for them? Could you invite some of them to join LBO so the list could gain a deeper understanding of the subject?
> It's pretty decent work for the rare individuals who can
handle it psychologically.
So then the fault, dear boddi, lies not in porn, but in those selves are unable to handle it psychologically?
Seems reasonable to me. There are many jobs/professions/ careers/pursuits which are perfectly fine for some people and disasterous choices for others.
> This "essentialist" business is eyewash. Say what you
mean.
I did. Repeatedly. But to quote the divine Addison: "More clearly and more distinctly:"
The broad statements you have made regarding the nature of porn, women and men's relationship to porn, and the production of porn are so vague and overbroad as to be meaningless. You charge me with providing no context, but in actuallity your own posts are exemplars of this tack.
And when you do admit that these broad essentialisms have exceptions, e.g., that some people may find porn decent work, you do not acknowledge that you have just shot down your own essentialist thinking.
Brian Dauth Queer Buddhist Resister