RE: Okay, NOW we're talking about porn.

["Vogel, Andrew (vogelap)" <VOGELAP@UCMAIL.UC.EDU>]

I acknowledge that some portion of 'attraction' is 'objectification', and I
feel that some measure of 'objectification' in 'attraction' is both normal
and appropriate. Especially if you allow that 'objectification' is a part of
'attraction'.

Case-in-point from my own life: When I first saw my darling Wendy, I was
attracted to her not because of her sparkling personality, tremendous
intelligence, or good sense of humor. I was initially attracted to her
...outwardly visible... attributes. My initial attraction to her
...attributes... caused me to decide to put the serious mack on her (which,
of course, she was powerless to resist (me being The Drew (tm) and all)) and
allowed me to discover, over time, the other attributes as listed above (and
more). Was I objectifying Wendy? No. Was objectification a part of my
initial attraction to her? Yes. Of course.

Now, let's turn that around. Let's say that you got to know someone MENTALLY
first -- for example, through Instant Messaging (IM). You never saw a
picture, you never spoke voice, you never met. But you chatted a number of
times. And you are attracted to the individual, either as a friend or as a
romantic interest. Aren't you objectifying that individual? You're
evaluating them on only one level. In this case it's a mental level; in the
previous example it was a physical level.

Okay... That's objectification out of the way. Let's talk about porn. Porn.
Porn. Porn.

Full disclosure time:
* I have seen porn in my lifetime.

* I don't hate porn, but neither do I love it.

* Porn is not, nor has it every been, an 'issue' for me, my beloved Wendy,
or our relationship.

* I very much respect the actor's ('actor' meaning either gender) right to
choose to participate in porn (or not). I feel it is a CHOICE for them,
fundamentally. I do not feel it is something that actors are FORCED into,
etc. As an actor myself, I've NEVER felt that acting in porn would be an
appropriate choice for me. If some other actor DOES think it's a good choice
for them, I honor their choice. Not a choice I would make, but isn't variety
wonderful?

* I don't feel that porn is demeaning to the WOMEN who act in it any more
than it is demeaning to the MEN who act in it, which is to say, NOT AT ALL.
See the point on choice, above. If I want to do something that makes me look
a certain way (for example, like an idiot), I have that right to do it. You
have the right to watch or not. I acknowledge that in the past (early 70s)
there were porn movies that _WERE_ demeaning to women (Deep Throat, anyone?)
because of the conditions under which they were produced, but that is the
exception rather than the rule in today's porn. In fact, a movie industry
insider friend of mine told me that in many cases, the actors in a porno
movie are treated as well, if not better, than an actor in a comparable
main-stream movie.

* Porn wouldn't be something I would throw into the DVD at a dinner party.
Porn, for me, is viewed solo or with my beloved (who feels the same way
about it as I do).

* Why watch it? I like seeing the naked human body. The human body is a
beautiful thing. Seeing the beautiful human body in the representation of an
intimate act is titillating and exciting. I would never make the choice to
display the intercourse enjoyed (oh yeah!) by me & my beloved, but if
someone else is willing to a> have intercourse with someone with whom
they're not romantically entangled, and b> agree to allow someone else to
film and sell it, I honor their choice. Isn't variety wonderful?

Do I think that porn is something that everyone should watch? No. If you
want to watch porn, watch porn (assuming you're of age, etc). If you don't
want to watch porn, don't watch porn. Isn't variety wonderful?

Choose things in moderation.

Variety is wonderful.

-andrew vogel
Manager of Professional Programs
University of Cincinnati College of Pharmacy

> -----Original Message-----
> From: rhys frank [mailto:shadow@teuton.org]
> Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 11:19 AM
> To: Over-the-Rhine@actwin.com
> Subject: Re: Okay, NOW we're talking about porn.
> 
> 
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 Ysobelle@aol.com wrote:
> 
> > edwardsaaron2000@yahoo.com:
> >
> > >That is, porn lowers the status of women to nothing more than mere 
> > >sex objects.
> 
> yz
> 
> > Maybe. Doesn't it depend on the woman? Doesn't it depend on the 
> > viewer?
> 
> does it?  what is the point of porn? is it to entertain? titllate? why 
> is it needed ?
> 
> i agree that the human body is not something to be ashamed of, but 
> that doesn't mean i want to parade it in front of just anyone. it's 
> valuable. i think people confuse embarrassment with shame.  
> embarrassment could just mean misplaced viewing. if you, the person, 
> are valuable, do you display that vlue to everyone who would want it? 
> who would maybe thieve it? no.
> 
> as to porn. i think it's doesn't matter who's doing it or why. and 
> this is because i tihnk the fundamental driving force of porn is the 
> sale of sex.
> 
> and i don't like that mainly because i beleive it's a beautiful 
> private thing that should be valued. it's devaluing if you can get it 
> anywhere, not so special.
> 
> is the first piece of pie yummy? hot from the oven? the 10th? what if 
> everywhere you went you had pies? you'd get sick of them, or so used 
> to them that it's nothing new. so you seek out more exotic pies over 
> and over again.  until you are hooked on something that doesn't give 
> you any enjoyment.
> 
> > Isn't saying every woman is demeaned by porn just as
> prejudicial and
> > objectifying as what the porn itself is said to do?
> 
> maybe.
> 
> it's not all the same. and i sometimes think that there's a fine line 
> between art and porn.
> 
> > Have you ever asked a porn star how she feels?
> 
> no. but i know someone who's addicted to porn to the detriment of his 
> marriage, family, community standing and ministry.
> 
> i've read the things he's written about porn and sex, and how that 
> cannot be demeaning both to himself, the woman he writes, and his 
> *wife*, i would fail to understand.
> 
> > Have you ever looked at porn either made for or by women?
> 
> don't desire to.
> 
> > I'm not saying I'm shaking my pompoms for the porn
> industry.  I'm not.
> > I'm just saying this is not quite so simple an issue to
> classify and
> > dismiss.
> 
> you're right, it's a difficult issue to think about, quantify or 
> qualify easily.
> 
> > Apropos, take a look at the first letter in Dan Savage's
> column this
> > week. I don't always agree with him in everything, but he
> makes some
> > valid points this time 'round.
> >
> > http://www.thestranger.com/current/savage.html
> 
> interesting stuff. wish i had witty and thoughtful argument'sagreement 
> words to say.
> 
> rhys
> 
> --
> The light at the end of the tunnel may be an oncoming dragon.
> ---------------
> Unsubscribe by going to http://www.actwin.com/OtR/
> ---------------
> Unsubscribe by going to http://www.actwin.com/OtR/
> 
---------------
Unsubscribe by going to http://www.actwin.com/OtR/