Date: Sun, 29 Mar 1998 16:23:43 -0500
From: Yoshie Furuhashi <furuhashi.1-AT-osu.edu>
Subject: Re: M-TH: Listen, phallus! (was: Art and Pornography)


Hugh wrote:
>>Could it be that the
>>exposure of an erect penis might introduce a homoerotic element which
>>>would disturb the heterosexual economy of pornography? Other ideas?
>
>Weird. What about female reactions to exposed cunts? Don't they "introduce
>a homoerotic element that disturbs the heterosexual economy of pornography"
>by the same argument? Or is pornography just male perspective one-sided
>exploitative sexual oppression? If a woman is expected to get out of her
>own skin and observe female sex organs as part of arousal rituals, why
>shouldn't a man observe male sex organs? None of this has got anything to
>do with what's immanent to pornography, but everything to do with
>oppressive patriarchal structures in society as a whole.

Most pornographic films are not made and marketed with women consumers in
mind. Besides, simulated 'lesbian' acts are part of porn image vocabulary
that are meant to arouse men, not women; on the other hand, there are
usually no simulated 'gay male' acts in straight porn. I think that Leo is
right that there is a taboo on male homosexuality and homoeroticism in
straight porn, whereas the same cannot be said about simulated lesbian
eroticism.

Yoshie




     --- from list marxism-thaxis-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---