From: uunet!infmx!robert@ncar.ucar.EDU (Robert Coleman)
Subject: Re: Archetypical anti-anti-porn comment
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.
Date: 27 Jan 93 19:34:28 GMT

tittle@alexandre-dumas.ics.uci.edu (Cindy Tittle Moore) writes:

>In <robert.727750054@labyrinth> uunet!infmx!robert@ncar.ucar.EDU (Robert Coleman) writes:

>>	May I suggest that pornography, being a symptom, is probably
>>not the problem?

>>			   |=> pornography
>>	Repressive culture |
>>			   |=> targetting of women

>Which actually kind of leads to the thought that maybe the reason men
>*in general* like pornography is that they're much more comfortable
>with this culture [which at least celebrates their sexuality, however
>twisted it's become] than women *in general* [because their sexuality
>has been twisted in such a way that they're not even supposed to
>enjoy it] are and who *in general* do not enjoy pornography.

	In the rest of my article, that you quoted above, I suggested
the pornography was a symptom *and* a rebellion.  Hugh Hefner would
tell you that the entire culture rose up to try to stop what he was
doing.  Only in these modern times, when dissatisfaction with our
culture is being expressed in so many ways by so many people, could he
have succeeded.

	At any rate, if this is true, then I'd come to the exact
opposite conclusion that you've come to.  If men are *more* prepared
to support this *rebellious* movement, then it suggests that they're
less comfortable with the sexually repressive aspects of the culture.

	I could suggest that for those of us men who want to follow
the rules, who aren't prepared to commit crimes, women seem to have
great sexual power.  I know several women who have told me that they
feel this, and the converse, that *they* themselves feel that they
have great sexual power, to be true.  One woman told me once that she
thought that *any* man could be "had" (not necessarily by her); an
impressive statement when you consider how much some men have to lose.

	Our old sexual rules served to "geld" a married man, who, not
being dependent on his wife economically, could otherwise freely mess
around.  The married woman, on the other hand, was bound by her
economic dependence.  To women used to the idea of sexual power buying
economic security, the idea of pornography could represent a loss of
power.  This could explain why some feminists, opposed to any loss of
power by women, could be on "the same side" as fundamentalists, who
would prefer a return to the old economic/sexual power model.

	Evidence?  Nothing specific.  I believe there has been a
trend, as women gain more power in the economic area, for women to
more be interested in pornography.  There are (questionable) stats
that suggest that a lot of x-rated movie rentals are shared by
partners; there's a huge trend for "amateur home x-rated movies", and
even Ms. magazine implicitly recognized a trend by writing an article
legitimizing women's attendence at male stripper shows.

	And in my experience, the belief in the "old" system and
resistance to pornography and new sexual ideas are directly correlated
among women in the non-feminist community.

	I think I understand where your idea comes from; a belief that
"most" men commonly step outside the system, and are often admired for
doing so.  Yet it's still death to the career of a public official to
have an affair.  Is the admiration of some men (and women, for that
matter) for the man who successfully sidesteps the system actually
admiration for the "rebel", the same way that society "idolized"
Bonnie and Clyde, etc.? I think so.

	Pornography is normally considered "antisocial"; the only way
the conclusion you've offered would make sense is if pornography was
really "prosocial".  I really haven't seen any evidence for a
"prosocial" belief. :-)

>Yes, you could argue that it's one of the sicknesses of this culture
>that women are not supposed to like sex and therefore condemn it.
>But is it because they've been raised to be prudish WRT sex or
>because they recognize, however unconsciously, that it puts a target
>on them, as Janis so cogently pointed out?

	...Or because it represents the attack against one of the few
forms of power that women have, consciously or not, considered to be
their own?

Robert C.
--
----------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: My company has not yet seen fit to
	    elect me as spokesperson. Hmmpf.

--
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments should be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.