From: pilgrim@daimi.aau.dk (Jakob G}rdsted)
Subject: Re: Catharine MacKinnon, Playboy and feminist propaganda
Organization: DAIMI: Computer Science Department, Aarhus University, Denmark
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 92 19:31:22 GMT

{{{
Note to the Alternatively Ironically Gifted(PC): In the following string
of ASCII characters, remarks by me may contain irony/sarcasm without
 specific marking/warning, however it should be directed not at a
specific sex, but at my text itself. So it should not cause any problems.
If you have any, inform me and I will help you out
}}}

mec6@quads.uchicago.edu (rini) writes:

(I better add, that this is not really only/just a reaction to what rini
says, but more of a comment to the thread) 

>Okay, from the context it's clear to me that he meant "INEQUALITY of
>representation" -- that is, there are far more females in porn than
>males.  Is that an invented non-issue?  Nope.  It's a fact.  It
>may or may not be a problem.

Yes. It seems to me, that women generally have very little interest
in pornography; it varies, but on the whole, their interest in
it seems to apply to a minority. I'm curious as to if the 'complainers'
want more 'porn for females', or wish to decimate(?) the amount available
for the male population. It seems to me, they want the last thing, or
better, they want it changed to something 'politically correct'
(comments/corrections anticipated(?))

(Curious digression here: binaries.erotica.pictures contains, effectively
due to gay demand, a large proportion of male pictures. If we ignore
the 'action pictures' with more than one man participating, I'd still
believe that the remaining pictures of men are mostly appealing to
gay men. The hypothetical( :-) ) women, who have any interest/desire 
in looking at pictures of men, would want another kind of picture, is
my guess(assuming that gay men, and het women value different aspects)
End of digression.

>It's a problem from my perspective, as a female consumer... not
>enough merchandise.. :)


>Um, he didn't say that anything *in* either magazine is wrong.  He said
>something more like: There is something wrong with our world when zillions 
>of men want to go down to the corner store and buy some nekked lady pics, 
>but zillions of women, for whatever reason, don't do the same with nekked
>men pics.  Kinda leaves open the question of whether the problem is in 
>the men, for buying it, or in the women, for not buying it, dontcha think?

The following is a proposition(?), not a fact/opinion.

Couldn't it perhaps be, that men and women, in some ways, are different?
I've noticed this is the case in a number of ways:

 -  Men tend to be(statistically) about twice as strong as women.

 -  Women give birth to far more children than men does.

 -  Men tend to be higher than women.

 -  Women have larger breasts than men have.

 -  Men tend to have less fat, and more muscle on their bodies than
    women do (though I sometimes doubt it).

 -  Women live longer than men(measured in years).
 

On this note, one could argue, that it is not impossible, that mens and
womens psyche (again, in a dull, statistical way) differ in some
aspects. For example, it seems, that men are relatively more 'interested'
in sex 'rightaway' (I'd hate to elaborate without seing a particular
need, for the reason that it'd take me some time to formulate it
correctly). As some of you are aware, books dealing with the subject
sex exist, and I have, time ago, perused(?) some. I remember having read,
that the reason for pornography's existence is no mystery; the reason
supposedly being, that mens arousement is strongly connected with
the visual senses( :_) ) and visual processing areas of the brain(?),
at least compared to women, and similar that womens arousement is
more connected to feeling/touching. I know this is a gross simplification,
but I think that was the conclusion of what I read. Note, I did not
claim this to be solid facts; I said I believe they were. Correct me
right away if the above is very very in the slightest way wrong.

BUT BUT BUT: I agree strongly, that it is a problem, that traditional
porno sanctions(?) stupid, obsolete sex roles, and confirm some
men, with wierd, wrong perceptions of what women are, in their errorneus(?)
and fatal beliefs.

Generally, I think porno(+films) are boring and flat. A shame really,
because it is possible to create good(TM) erotica.


Hi.
--
      Jakob Gaardsted   .    .  | Black Rainbow(TM)     .         .      .
  Computer Science Department . |. Invaporated      .        .        .    .
University of Aarhus, Jylland(!)|   .            .      . Cordless Life  .  .
 .  pilgrim@daimi.aau.dk   .    |          .    .    .     Pointless Mouse .
Newsgroups: alt.feminism