During a brief (as they always are) conversation with Rusty, we discussing how I did not approve of pornography, but I did have a certain appreciation for erotica. Therefore, he directed me to the writings of Gloria Steinem, because he thought we might share some similar viewpoints. After having read some of her thoughts, it occurred that to me that we agree on nearly nothing. It seems to be that her argument breaks do to the belief that: pornography is about dominance, and erotica is about mutuality. Now, I will agree that pornography can be viewed from that perspective, but that is not why I have a problem with it. And, though erotica might be about mutuality (what ever that means) that is not why I like it.
You see, it has been projected that pornography degrades women; it is about “domination” and all the jazz. Well, that is all fine and good. I have never had a problem with the objectification of women, and I highly doubt that I ever will. No, the real problem about pornography is that the people who are looking at it shouldn’t be. I me seriously, why would you want to inciting sexual excitement for means of self-gratification? The entire ordeal is emotionally vacuous. Thus, people who try to alleviate sexual frustration are just perpetuating a positive feedback loop that inevitably makes things worse. Now, I am not saying the pornography is necessarily evil in itself, but rather something that should be shared with a significant other. And, it is not something that you look at in the dark, alone wearing your wizard’s hat. It goes on from there, but I don’t really want to talk about it any more at this point.
Now, if you want to talk about erotic art, or erotica, or whatever the “hip cats” are calling it these days, well that is an entirely different issue. I look at these things from a purely chauvinistic perspective. I think of the depictions of women in a purely objective way. The girls are essential no more important as individuals than trees, or rocks. Thus, there only worth in the images is their form. Having established that point, I do have a great appreciation for the female form, it is indeed one of nature’s great designs, or at least great when considering the line of hair apes that we are. One image particularly comes to mind. Imogen and Twinka by Judy Dater. This image is actually quite stunning. Aside form the pure beauty illustrated in the photograph, there are also layers of more abstract beauty. You see, there is a careful concurrence of age and youth, smooth and rough, clothed and unclothed, etc…all things considered it is quite a wonderful piece. But, I know that there are a few people who do not care for it, so say what you will art is relative.
All things considered, I guess that this post is more of a rant than a coherent argument for or against anything. But, that was never really the point. I suppose that my ulterior motive is a little more insidious, as I hope that by having added a few words in here that someone my inadvertently waste their time by stumbling on to this site. Though, in retrospect actually trying to misdirect legitimate Internet traffic is a little below me. So, I have removed several of the “keywords” in this point to tone it down a little bit, so that I will only screw with people digging deep into Google. Or, Zammie.


Recent Comments