is pornography good for us
how does pornography effect us
how does the sex industry effect us
how does sex work impact society
how do anti and pro stances impact the sex industry
what is the “problem” with pornography
is there a threat to “healthy sexual development” in pornography
what is the effect of polarization in sex industry research
is porn harmful? is it linked to other things? what is porn?
why do we need to research the sex industry?
is an unbiased approach to researching the sex industry possible?
why should sexual material be “offensive”?
How does a scholar of pornography establish her boundaries in social, academic, and networking environments?
How does the scholar of pornography maintain critical distance in their research without ignoring the critical issue of arousal?
How does the teacher and scholar of pornography avoid becoming unwitting sexual object, subject, and disseminator of pornography, and why precisely is this a problem?
How can educators turn problematic situations and experiences into teachable moments? How can the way gender and age problematically factor into these experiences create new avenues of research?
‘Did we respond to the film the way you thought we might?’, ‘Did you?’, or ‘What did you notice about what we said?’ or ‘How did we respond as a group to the film?’ ‘What was it like for you, Bobby, to be in the space with us through that performance?’.
It just asks the same questions. Is porn harmful? Is it linked to other things? Then it doesn't define what porn is and, if it finds the link, it doesn't really explain anything. There's a lot written and very little known."
academic research vs common sense and emotional intelligence in sex work criticsm
polarization in porn studies
sex wars in sex work
exceptionality of sex
gender fundamentalism
even though many anti-pornography critiques cite gender justice, protection of children
and sexual equality as their goals, their operation through the harm frame and calls
for increased government regulation can reinforce gender, class and sexual
inequalities.
Gilbert recently observed in an
introduction to a New Formations’ special issue, the pornography industry’s:
promotion of modes of sexuality … might be regarded as wholly consistent with
neoliberal culture, treating sex itself as a consumptive rather than a relational act, and
participating in the general commodification of sex which
Yet there are still areas in which there is remarkably little work. In
particular (and ironically given the frequent condemnation of the industry for its
sheer size), the industry has received little detailed attention (Voss 2012).
How has amateur production impacted the labour conditions of professionals? How might
we rethink categories of labour and work and, crucially, ideas of creativity in the
pornography industries? What are the changes in the pornosphere and how can we
trace and map them over time?
van Doorn, Niels. 2010. ‘Keeping it Real: User-generated Pornography, Gender Reification,
and Visual Pleasure.’ Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media
Technologies 16 (4): 411–430.
It just asks the same questions. Is porn harmful? Is it linked to other things? Then it doesn't define what porn is and, if it finds the link, it doesn't really explain anything. There's a lot written and very little known."
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/09/is-one-of-the-most-cited-statistics-about-sex-work-wrong/379662/
anti porn documentaries as porn (as in they cause the same kind of exploitative violence as, in their minds, porn does to serve their message)
The fourth look is the imagined social scene of the looking. To frame this
differently, Willemen writes:
[T]he fourth look gains in force when the viewer is looking at something she or he is not
supposed to look at, either according to an internalized censorship (superego) or an
external, legal one (as in clandestine viewings) or, as in most cases, according to both
censorships combined. In this way, that fourth look problematizes the social dimension,
the field of the other of the system of looking at work. (1992, 174)
that the administrative bodies anxiously scrutinizing Porn Studies
course proposals function in the shadow of an imagined fourth look (a public outside
itself that may critique the school); but they also become that fourth gaze, creating
an institutional quasi-censorial backdrop against which students and porn studies
scholars alike shape an additional pedagogical and epistemological network of
looking.
what kinds of porn-y practices
emerge when we de-centralize teacher-as-hero and consider instead the space of the
classroom and its multiple pedagogical bodies as context, scene and text? And
second, mindful of the argument by Williams, that porn itself as an object is always
already deeply embedded in a threesome between truth, power and knowledge, what
might happen pedagogically if we defer viewing the object of porn (i.e. films and/or
clips) until after a deconstruction of the talk of porn-y–ness where we deconstruct the
terms by which we think we encounter a self-evident object in the first place?
‘Did we respond to the film the way you thought we might?’, ‘Did you?’, or ‘What did you notice about what we said?’ or ‘How did we respond as a group to the film?’ ‘What was it like for you, Bobby, to be in the space with us through that performance?’.
Taormino especially interesting is the way that she is located precisely at the
overlapping pedagogical functions flagged by Johnson in the opening epigraph of
this paper: Taormino as producer of her own work but also self-made pedagogue in
her work. As such, ‘Tristan Taormino’ as text signals that complex performative
tension between ‘the teachers of the text and the teacher in the text’ (Johnson, 76).
This strategy of poaching images to recontextualize their meanings is evident in many antipornography
feminist documentaries. Recent anti-pornography films follow a disturbingly
similar formula: The Price of Pleasure (directed by Miguel Picker and Chyng Sun, 2008) is
especially troublesome on two fronts. It is without a doubt very questionable to see it as a‘feminist’ text claiming harm done against women, especially when that text itself does
harm to recognizable feminist porn workers with public profiles by including their images
in a documentary without their consent and against their own political articulation of
feminist self-location. But not only are such recognitions problematic, they lead one to askabout the ethics of such projects that use footage under the Fair Use provisions of the
Copyright Act of 1976, which states that the use of copyrighted work ‘for purposes such as
criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use),scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.’ While perhaps ‘legal,’ suchan alibi of ‘fair use’ continues to raise questions about feminist ethics and best practice, thelikes of which I raise here about Tracey’s condemnation of Not a Love Story. See ‘The Price of Pleasure Feedback’ (accessed October 12, 2013; http://thepriceofpleasure.com/feedback_qa.html)
how does pornography effect us
how does the sex industry effect us
how does sex work impact society
how do anti and pro stances impact the sex industry
what is the “problem” with pornography
is there a threat to “healthy sexual development” in pornography
what is the effect of polarization in sex industry research
is porn harmful? is it linked to other things? what is porn?
why do we need to research the sex industry?
is an unbiased approach to researching the sex industry possible?
why should sexual material be “offensive”?
How does a scholar of pornography establish her boundaries in social, academic, and networking environments?
How does the scholar of pornography maintain critical distance in their research without ignoring the critical issue of arousal?
How does the teacher and scholar of pornography avoid becoming unwitting sexual object, subject, and disseminator of pornography, and why precisely is this a problem?
How can educators turn problematic situations and experiences into teachable moments? How can the way gender and age problematically factor into these experiences create new avenues of research?
‘Did we respond to the film the way you thought we might?’, ‘Did you?’, or ‘What did you notice about what we said?’ or ‘How did we respond as a group to the film?’ ‘What was it like for you, Bobby, to be in the space with us through that performance?’.
It just asks the same questions. Is porn harmful? Is it linked to other things? Then it doesn't define what porn is and, if it finds the link, it doesn't really explain anything. There's a lot written and very little known."
academic research vs common sense and emotional intelligence in sex work criticsm
polarization in porn studies
sex wars in sex work
exceptionality of sex
gender fundamentalism
even though many anti-pornography critiques cite gender justice, protection of children
and sexual equality as their goals, their operation through the harm frame and calls
for increased government regulation can reinforce gender, class and sexual
inequalities.
Gilbert recently observed in an
introduction to a New Formations’ special issue, the pornography industry’s:
promotion of modes of sexuality … might be regarded as wholly consistent with
neoliberal culture, treating sex itself as a consumptive rather than a relational act, and
participating in the general commodification of sex which
Yet there are still areas in which there is remarkably little work. In
particular (and ironically given the frequent condemnation of the industry for its
sheer size), the industry has received little detailed attention (Voss 2012).
How has amateur production impacted the labour conditions of professionals? How might
we rethink categories of labour and work and, crucially, ideas of creativity in the
pornography industries? What are the changes in the pornosphere and how can we
trace and map them over time?
van Doorn, Niels. 2010. ‘Keeping it Real: User-generated Pornography, Gender Reification,
and Visual Pleasure.’ Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media
Technologies 16 (4): 411–430.
It just asks the same questions. Is porn harmful? Is it linked to other things? Then it doesn't define what porn is and, if it finds the link, it doesn't really explain anything. There's a lot written and very little known."
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/09/is-one-of-the-most-cited-statistics-about-sex-work-wrong/379662/
anti porn documentaries as porn (as in they cause the same kind of exploitative violence as, in their minds, porn does to serve their message)
The fourth look is the imagined social scene of the looking. To frame this
differently, Willemen writes:
[T]he fourth look gains in force when the viewer is looking at something she or he is not
supposed to look at, either according to an internalized censorship (superego) or an
external, legal one (as in clandestine viewings) or, as in most cases, according to both
censorships combined. In this way, that fourth look problematizes the social dimension,
the field of the other of the system of looking at work. (1992, 174)
that the administrative bodies anxiously scrutinizing Porn Studies
course proposals function in the shadow of an imagined fourth look (a public outside
itself that may critique the school); but they also become that fourth gaze, creating
an institutional quasi-censorial backdrop against which students and porn studies
scholars alike shape an additional pedagogical and epistemological network of
looking.
what kinds of porn-y practices
emerge when we de-centralize teacher-as-hero and consider instead the space of the
classroom and its multiple pedagogical bodies as context, scene and text? And
second, mindful of the argument by Williams, that porn itself as an object is always
already deeply embedded in a threesome between truth, power and knowledge, what
might happen pedagogically if we defer viewing the object of porn (i.e. films and/or
clips) until after a deconstruction of the talk of porn-y–ness where we deconstruct the
terms by which we think we encounter a self-evident object in the first place?
‘Did we respond to the film the way you thought we might?’, ‘Did you?’, or ‘What did you notice about what we said?’ or ‘How did we respond as a group to the film?’ ‘What was it like for you, Bobby, to be in the space with us through that performance?’.
Taormino especially interesting is the way that she is located precisely at the
overlapping pedagogical functions flagged by Johnson in the opening epigraph of
this paper: Taormino as producer of her own work but also self-made pedagogue in
her work. As such, ‘Tristan Taormino’ as text signals that complex performative
tension between ‘the teachers of the text and the teacher in the text’ (Johnson, 76).
This strategy of poaching images to recontextualize their meanings is evident in many antipornography
feminist documentaries. Recent anti-pornography films follow a disturbingly
similar formula: The Price of Pleasure (directed by Miguel Picker and Chyng Sun, 2008) is
especially troublesome on two fronts. It is without a doubt very questionable to see it as a‘feminist’ text claiming harm done against women, especially when that text itself does
harm to recognizable feminist porn workers with public profiles by including their images
in a documentary without their consent and against their own political articulation of
feminist self-location. But not only are such recognitions problematic, they lead one to askabout the ethics of such projects that use footage under the Fair Use provisions of the
Copyright Act of 1976, which states that the use of copyrighted work ‘for purposes such as
criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use),scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.’ While perhaps ‘legal,’ suchan alibi of ‘fair use’ continues to raise questions about feminist ethics and best practice, thelikes of which I raise here about Tracey’s condemnation of Not a Love Story. See ‘The Price of Pleasure Feedback’ (accessed October 12, 2013; http://thepriceofpleasure.com/feedback_qa.html)
No comments:
Post a Comment