A tool in the hands of the authorities

[imomus]

The Observer yesterday had a leader written by Rafael Behr which examined an issue I find very interesting: sex. Not just sex, but whether things have gone too far in the direction of disinhibition, and whether it might not be time to reclaim some ground traditionally thought of as conservative: old-fashioned stuff like modesty, discretion, and virtue.



"For all that the liberal intelligentsia might have congratulated itself for prodding the establishment into incremental reform," says Behr, "the [sexual] revolution was actually driven - even in the Sixties - by market forces. The twin agents of change were then and still largely are music and television. It was the penetration of subversive pop music into people's homes, via the TV, that did more than anything else to challenge taboo, aggravate moral conservatives and push the boundaries of public decency, from Elvis's gyrations and Mick Jagger's leer, via Jimi Hendrix humping a guitar, through the Sex Pistols' profanity and Frankie Goes to Hollywood."

Behr then traces how Thatcherite Tories in the 80s were torn between their economic liberalism -- which opened the Pandora's Box of sexuality because sex sells -- and their social conservatism, which wanted the sex genie put back in the bottle pronto. "The market encourages instant gratification while the essence of sexual conservatism is deferring satisfaction - or denying it. Because Thatcher's Conservatism was socially illiberal, the artistic and cultural elite in Britain continued to see attacking taboo as part of the political struggle of the Sixties."

The contradiction in the right's position on this (economic liberalism, social conservatism) is matched by a contradiction in the left's position, which is that in our desire to be socially radical, we supported the economic exploitation of sexuality in ways that we perhaps shouldn't have done. We met the Tories half way: our social agenda dovetailed with their economic agenda. I lived this contradiction by subscribing to a cable sex channel in the early 90s (it was called VLC) that owed its existence entirely to Thatcher's deregulation of UK broadcasting.

In my work as a recording artist I've certainly used sexuality, and certainly tried to pass it off as "subversive" (a weapon against "the establishment") rather than purely commercial. To some extent this has been true -- I very deliberately introduced homosexual themes into my work in the late 80s, for instance, to counteract the Thatcherite Section 28 legislation which sought to create new taboos around the issue.

Sometimes the motive is neither commercial nor subversive -- it's something more robust and ribald. Pop music should contain earthy medieval smut -- for me, that's built into the medium. There should be lots of Villon and Rabelais and Chaucer in pop music, lots of filth. My new album abounds in references to "fucking on a table" and "fisting in the park" and "cunts all sloppy and yeasty", and -- screw the 60s, screw the 80s! -- I really do see unrestrained libidinal vulgarity as an absolutely integral part of pop's purpose. It's supposed to be rude and cheeky and explicit and bawdy, and the sap is always supposed to be rising. That was as true in 1569 as 1969 (annee erotique), and it's as true of my forthcoming novel as of my forthcoming album.

At the same time, I'm giving lectures -- like the recent AA lecture -- which talk about "repressive desublimation", and I tend to see sex as it's represented in mainstream commercial culture as, somehow, totalitarian noise, Pavlovian pabulum placed there to undermine the will of the subject-consumer. I totally screen out Nuts and Zoo magazine, in fact 90% of magazines on British news stands, with their bronzed, blonde, semi-naked winner-predator-trophy-fantasy cover stars, the formulaic sirens and pin-up girls for a social philosophy (Darwinian, opportunistic, greedy, with everything for sale) I reject.

It's different when we're talking about Japanese popular culture or Japanese porn, of course -- somehow I feel I'm evading social control when I'm consuming that -- but I filter out 99% of western ads on western billboards and 100% of western porn, to the extent that, in the typical western media environment (a British newsagent, for instance) I feel homosexual or asexual, so little do the "exciting" images connect with my id. I filter for aesthetic reasons, but also for political ones -- this stuff is pure mind control, a tool in the hands of the authorities that's calculated to get my tool in my hands, but never will, because, well, I'm a rebel! Wanking to a copy of Nuts would be a slippery slope to consumer-slavery and "the life of ugliness". I hope you hear a little D.H. Lawrence in my tone!

But I think Behr missed a trick when he failed to mention Herbert Marcuse's 1960s concept of "repressive desublimation", because the 60s wasn't all the Lady Chatterly trial and Mick Jagger and that Philip Larkin poem about fucking starting in 1963. I know those are the soundbites, and I know leader articles in broadsheet papers don't tend to go beyond soundbite-level history, but the 60s -- the left wing, radical part of the 60s -- also contains New Left critiques of repressive desublimation, critiques of "letting it all hang out", as well as lots of identity politics (the gay movement, the feminist movement, the lesbian movement) which rejects commercialized sex.

Marcuse's repressive desublimation idea isn't puritanical (as the anti-porn parts of feminism were supposed to be), it's a clever amalgam of Marx and Freud. Late Freud didn't believe that society could survive if you lifted the lid on the id, let the genie out of the bottle, opened Pandora's Box. And Marx saw religion and other social distractions as "opiates", keeping the people happy, preventing them from thinking in class terms. He would certainly have seen commercialized sex as an opiate; true revolutionaries have to be disciplined, to defer gratification, to plan and organize.

The genius of Marcuse's idea is that it turns common sense on its head: if desublimation is really repressive, freedom is really unfree, and being delivered up to one's own appetites is being handed over to one's enemies. What's really repressive is failing to repress. It's paradoxical and counter-intuitive, yet it makes perfect sense. And with the New Left concept of repressive desublimation on our side, it's no longer conservative to want a return to modesty, discretion and virtue. It could, in fact, be revolutionary.

I'd add that there's nothing more sexy than modesty -- just ask your local ingenue. And, to the looming question "Why, if sex is so counter-revolutionary, have you made a sexy record, Momus?" I'll have to answer with a piece of sophistry: if modesty and understatement are the really sexy things, being bawdy isn't being sexy, and therefore is, and therefore isn't, and therefore is, and so on forever.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

"there's nothing more sexy than modesty"

This, a thousand times this. Maybe it's just some primordial interest in the thrill of the unattainable, or maybe it's that on some level I'm more interested in the emotional connections between people than the physical, but the best part of anything intended to be sexy generally tends to be before the nudity rather than afterwards.

[(Anonymous)]

6AM is a very early time to think about sex; is it the Berlin sexual clock?

Love from Paris,

Gilles

[imomus.livejournal.com]

Hello Toogy!

I wrote the piece between midnight and one (after doing the entire numbering system for my Book of Scotlands, effectively finishing it), went to bed, got up at 6 for a cup of tea, did the picture research and posted the LJ piece, went back to bed, got up again 11ish, more tea, respond to comments...

It's basically: naked girl in bed > computer and cup of tea > naked girl in bed > computer and cup of tea...

[kumakouji.livejournal.com]

"It's different when we're talking about Japanese popular culture or Japanese porn, of course"

I believe you're deluding yourself if you seriously believe you have the ability to "screen out" certain porn as an "objection to the social philosophy" it supposedly represents. You present yourself as having the super-human ability to turn your sexuality on and off depending on whether what you're seeing happens to meet your strict moral code. You sound like one of those ex-gays who left the homosexual lifestyle behind in favour of Jesus.

The truth is, you don't find the way women are packaged to you in the west attractive. That's all it boils down to. You like the unintimidating, child-like figures of Japanese porn because they fit into your sexual fantasies. If you're gonna cast scorn and judgment on western porn for its "Darwinian, opportunistic, greedy, with everything for sale" women That's perfectly fine, but I also think you should be "abstaining" from Japanese porn for its suppressed, dumbed-down, callow, ultimately dehumnanised women.



"as well as lots of identity politics (the gay movement) which rejects commercialized sex."

You're completely off the mark with this comment. I can't think of a culture as highly sexualised as that of gay male culture.

[imomus.livejournal.com]

I believe you're deluding yourself if you seriously believe you have the ability to "screen out" certain porn as an "objection to the social philosophy" it supposedly represents. You present yourself as having the super-human ability to turn your sexuality on and off depending on whether what you're seeing happens to meet your strict moral code.

I don't think this is a "superhuman ability". All relationships -- even the seduction that occurs at the point of sale -- depend on trust to function properly. If I mistrust Nuts and Zoo and FHM, I erect my cultural filters and screen out their messages. No trust, no seduction, no sale.

You'd have to be hard line Pavlovian to say that to become aroused by something or someone wasn't a choice and a decision. The human brain is a pretty amazing thing -- no sooner has some advertiser figured out a way to make me pay attention than I figure out a way to ignore his ploy.

But I will say that living outside your land of origin helps enormously with the filtration process. Because you very rarely fit the demographic being targeted or share their socialisation or get the references or can even understand the captions. And even going back to your homeland, you notice you fail to get the popular culture references there too. When I look at the Nuts and FHM covers I used today, for instance, who the hell are Kerry, Pam and, er, Blah? No idea, just like I have no idea who the Last Shadow Puppets are. Deliberately, because I don't want to be a puppet myself.

[kumakouji.livejournal.com]

"You'd have to be hard line Pavlovian to say that to become aroused by something or someone wasn't a choice and a decision."

I can honestly say that if I had had the choice to be heterosexual for an easy life back when I was a teenager, I would have made that choice. It was out of my hands.

I don't agree with you that it's a choice. At no point have I ever chosen who and what I find attractive. My sexual tastes have broadened and changed over the years, but that was a very slow, unconscious process.


I have a friend who is a paedophile and it's pretty much destroyed him inside. He hasn't abused or hurt anyone, he just happens to find young girls sexually attractive. It's something he's never acted upon. There's a huge, huge taboo surrounding this subject and even my most liberal and open-minded friends have issues discussing this without it getting extremely heated.

He can't admit it to most people because they would shun and fear him, there's also a great deal of misunderstanding surrounding paedophilia -- being attracted to children isn't a choice, and it isn't the same as being a predator who abuses and rapes children. very few people are willing to stand up and defend people like him, people who have done nothing wrong. If sexuality was a simple matter of choices, we wouldn't have situations like this.

[imomus.livejournal.com]

Oh, I'm not saying sexual orientation is a choice -- I don't think it is. What I'm saying is that, for the most part, we can control what specific sexual messages we let past our filters. That's a question of aesthetics and morality and politics, not of sexual orientation. We also have enough will and self-control to decide what to act on and what not to. Otherwise we'd be dangerous beasts! And trust (or mistrust) in the purveyor of messages, or the surrounding culture, counts for a lot. Again, that trust (or lack of it) is all tied up with aesthetics, ethics and politics.

[kumakouji.livejournal.com]

"we can control what specific sexual messages we let past our filters."

I'm not sure if you're moving the goal post by saying that. If by that you mean you can choose not to consume pornography you find objectionable on moral grounds then that's true but if you find it arousing you're just suppressing subconscious urges that exist there, regardless of the politics behind it.

You said "You'd have to be hard line Pavlovian to say that to become aroused by something or someone wasn't a choice and a decision", which I entirely disagree with. I can honestly say I have no choice over who or what I find sexually attractive. I can't have a philosophical conversation with my penis and convince it to go limp because the porn I'm watching isn't compatible with my political stance, it doesn't work like that...

I don't believe you choose not to consume western pornography because it doesn't suit your ethics, I believe it just doesn't turn you on, which leave you free to intellectualise your dislike and discuss the aesthetic and political aspects of it you frown upon, which in all actuality is secondary to it all. to make the excuse that you avoid being "controlled" by Japanese porn is also nonsense to me.



Your Japanese isn't great, so let me translate for you, it says: "look at my tits, I have a bikini on, buy me."

[imomus.livejournal.com]

Your Japanese isn't great, so let me translate for you, it says: "look at my tits, I have a bikini on, buy me."

The sexiest thing in that picture is the snaggled tooth.

[kumakouji.livejournal.com]

snaggletooth fetish? Japan has DVDs and websites for you:



http://www.ultra-closeup.com/

[imomus.livejournal.com]

Oh, when it gets medical like that it loses me completely. Dental assistant ranks with flight attendant as a job I will never do.

[kineticfactory.livejournal.com]

Though the question does arise: do we choose our sexual aesthetics preferences consciously and deliberately, in line with our philosophical and moral views, or do we just make up a narrative to rationalise them after the fact?

The human mind is excellent at rationalising, at making up narratives of conscious will around actions forced by circumstance. Even studies in neurology have shown this (a patient's brain is stimulated, making him move his right arm; when asked why he moved his arm, he gives a perfectly good, and perfectly spurious, rationalisation; other studies show that decisions are made in the brain before the conscious/linguistic part of the mind is aware of them, suggesting the possibility that one's conscious mind may not actually control one's actions but rather just tell the story that binds them together into an illusion of control).

[imomus.livejournal.com]

Oh lawd, well, here we get into the old free will / determinism debate which, as far as I know, has never been satisfactorily resolved.

All I'll say is that I think we have a measure of free will, that we can and must filter environmental stimulae all the time, and choose what to be open to and what to be closed to, and that our ethical and aesthetic and political choices are all wrapped up with one another (which is a concession to the argument that, yes, they may well be post facto rationalisations of each other).

[eclectiktronik.livejournal.com]

"being attracted to children isn't a choice, and it isn't the same as being a predator who abuses and rapes children."

I think part of this is down to semantics - I was under the impression that a paedophile is the condition your friend has, i.e. the attraction. Someone who actively engages in sex with minors is a pederast.
Problem is, in current common English parlance at least, the terms are confused. It doesn't appear to be the case with other European languages. Co-incidentally, there also doesn't appear to be anywhere near the tabloid scaremongering and general irresponsible reporting of the topic in Europe that you find in UK....

[(Anonymous)]

Technically, pederasty refers to something more specific: men who have sex with young boys. But maybe this definition has been broadened in common usage.

[qscrisp.livejournal.com]

Too much rape fantasy in Japanese porn for my taste. If it's a choice between a sharky model and a rape victim, I'll go for the sharky model every time.

[imomus.livejournal.com]

The Japanese sex industry is enormous, the biggest in the world. It's incredibly various, thematically. If you seek out rape fantasy, you'll find it. If you seek out pregnant women, bossy nurses, powerful mother figures, women who tease men with their stockinged feet, girls who chat via webcam, people having sex with animals, food fetishes, boys, foreigners, lesbian schoolgirls, black men, you'll find those too. It's up to you.

[qscrisp.livejournal.com]

Well, I have to say, I found it without seeking it out. I suppose you'll have to take my word for that. But yes, you're right about it being various, and, although I haven't done that much comparison, also yes to probably the most various in the world.

[imomus.livejournal.com]

I just thought of another way to express this. In situations where I can control the sex levels of an environment, I tend to keep things quite restrained. I don't put sexy pictures on my desktop, for instance, or walk around the house naked, or dress in a super-revealing way, because I don't want sex to be a distraction and an annoyance. That's not to say I don't appreciate sexy pictures, or nakedness, or sexy dressing in the right context -- I love those things when I want them. But I don't want them distracting me when I'm sublimating, basically; getting on with my life.

So to encounter them in public space, to be piqued and needled by a banal and excessive sexual imagery which isn't even the imagery of my choice, and is there for commercial reasons, is a bigger annoyance, like having bad emo pop blaring out of a radio in a cafe where you're trying to talk to a friend or play chess or read the paper.

[imomus.livejournal.com]

There are subtle gradations of trust involved, though, and this takes us into branding psychology. For instance, I just got the new edition of Vice magazine, and there's the usual American Apparel ad on the back, and I quite like their ads, blatantly sexy though they are. I have a perception of American Apparel as a rogue company, somewhat subversive in the American mediascape, the sense that because Dov is genuinely a pervert, a love for sex rather than money lies behind his sexy ads. Or, a love for sex meets a love for money. I also prefer AA's white space and Helvetica layouts to other designs. And I prefer the way they style their models -- no silly plucked eyebrows, no buff greased highlights on pectorals, less digital retouching, less of that factory-farmed steroids look, more ethnic diversity, fewer bottle blondes... All this establishes a bit more trust (in their brand) and a bit more tolerance for their efforts to get below your belt and in your face (which are still slightly annoying).

[harveyjames.livejournal.com]

I like Herbert Marcuse, but I find his writing style pretty inpenetrable. Did he originally write in English? I have a book called One-Dimensional Man and it sometimes feels a bit like it's been translated from chinese.

[imomus.livejournal.com]

One-Dimensional Man is the book where he elaborates his idea of repressive desublimation. Luckily, the whole book is online (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/marcuse/works/one-dimensional-man/index.htm), and the relevant chapter is The Conquest of the Unhappy Consciousness: Repressive Desublimation (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/marcuse/works/one-dimensional-man/ch03.htm).

I find his style fairly lucid, but it depends on a working knowledge of both Marx and Freud, familiarity with terms like "alienation and reification" and "libidinal cathexis". Some people have one vocabulary, some the other, and a subset have both.

[harveyjames.livejournal.com]

Right, that was exactly the problem. He assumes a lot of the reader. I have a working knowledge of maybe Plato if I'm being generous to myself. Also he borrows a lot of words from other languages- in fact, he often quotes whole passages of books that were written in French and German, verbatim!

I bought two books with me to Korea and they were One-Dimensional Man and Umberto Eco's The Name of The Rose. I'm struggling. I'm going to go on Amazon and order a book about sexy vampires.

I'm sat here with a huge beam on my face!

[(Anonymous)]

... at the prospect of the line 'Cunts all sloppy and yeasty'.

That has to be one of the best Momus lyrics ever. If not one of the best lyrics ever period! (pun may be intended) I hope it's distinguishable and the vocals aren't buried.

I have high hopes for this record. Seriously! i just hope Cherry Red get a preorder up there soon. (They sent me Ocky Milk slightly earlier than the other internet retailers would have done.

Roll on November!

Ever yours

James x

Re: I'm sat here with a huge beam on my face!

[imomus.livejournal.com]

I'll tantalise you with a little more context on that one, it's from the song "The Cooper O' Fife" and it quotes Robert Burns:

Ye married a cower and timorous beastie
Married a cunt all sloppy and yeasty
Married a bent copper and then
Married them all over again

[count-vronsky.livejournal.com]

After a week of waiting room magazines, this piece is a godsend. US mags have conspired to try and foist the atrocity known as Megan Fox (http://www.makemeheal.com/news/images/megan-fox-nose-job.jpg) upon us as the new "it" girl. I find her soulless, plastically frightening in an uncanny valley way, and wonder if maybe she is just a digital creation Michael Bay's fevered pea brain created on his computer.

This on the other hand I find sexy, but I have always had a soft spot for octopii.

[imomus.livejournal.com]

That gets the thumbs (or do I mean tentacles?) up from me!

[electricwitch.livejournal.com]

Oh yes, you've convinced me.

"Modesty" is so much better than trying to create a different sexual revolution that is about female agency, desire and invidualism rather than being passive objects of a commercialised, male agency sex. Clearly the kinds you have outlined here are the only kinds of imaginable sex, and I am so wrong in thinking the ingenue a tool of the patriarchy.

[electricwitch.livejournal.com]

PS: yeast infection sex? OW OW OW OW OOOOOOOOWWW NOOOOOOOO

"TV follows where porn leads, by about 3-5 years."

[(Anonymous)]

This theory was put forward by a book I borrowed called 'Film In Society'. I can no longer find it in print, unfortunately. It had technology/content comparisons similar to this:

Mid 1970s Porn trend: porn tries to legitimise itself - glamour, stars, filmic narrative
1980s TV trend: Dallas, Dynasty

Mid 1980s Porn trend: Gonzo basics, handheld camera, narrative free, joking voiceovers
Late 1980s TV trend: Cable access shows, cheery and wilfully amateur

1990 Porn trend: Greater, but fixed, competition. Pushing the limits, humiliation, machismo
1994 TV trend: Rude interviewers. Humiliating the public. The Dennis Pennis school.

1996 Porn trend: Circus-like stunts. 'Worlds Biggest Gangbang'. Squirting.
2000 TV trend: Jackass. Dirty Sanchez.

1998 Porn trend: Real voyeurism. Upskirts. Webcams.
2000 TV trend: Big Brother etc.

2001 Porn trend: Digital saturation, exploring the very surreal and disgusting
2004 TV trend: Tony Blackburn forced to eat bugs in a jungle

2005 Porn trend: psychobabble, direct to camera. "Look what he's doing to me, daddy."
2008 Radio trend: Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross leave torturous messages on 78-year old Andrew Sachs' answer phone, describing what a man with 'mental illness' did to his granddaughter.

---

"If porn isn't about sex, what is it about?"

[bennycornelius.livejournal.com]

All this talk of sexy pop records plus tantalising earlier references to Anthony Newley influences on Joemus has for some reason led to me imagining a Moe and Joe take on the Newley/Derbyshire classic that is Moogies Bloogies...

Night,

Ben

PS Congratulations on the sleeve for Joemus. Digipaks are much greener!

[eclectiktronik.livejournal.com]

This is interesting, as I recently finished reading an excellent book called 'Male chauvinist pigs - women and the rise of raunch culture' by Ariel Levy. Your piece mentions the very real contradiction between the right's social conservatism and economic liberalism, but I reckon a closer look at the nature of the sexuality found in the mass media, and whose agenda it represents, is needed too. I presume you noticed that every one of those mag covers you featured had a woman on the front, selling pretty much the same vision of sexuality....

I'll paraphrase a few thoughts about the book I found on the web. The basic argument is, to quote from one review, that many women have embraced their sexuality as the ultimate expression of empowerment, proclaiming that this is the new face of feminism. But Levy isn't so sure that raunch culture is as feminist as these women seem to think it is. She aims to prove that the women at the forefront of this new movement are not the ultimate feminists but the result of a misguided mutation of the feminist movement that has produced female chauvinists instead of feminists: women who espouse the same stereotypical views about women and womanhood that a male chauvinist would have. Suddenly women seem to want to be one of the boys and are desperate not to get labelled a 'girly girl' -- the ultimate slander in raunch culture.

The way to achieve this seems to be commonly believed to be dressing and act like a stripper. But where is the liberation in that? Men don't have to undress to become powerful beings -- and certainly aren't under as much aesthetic pressure as women. Instead of liberating themselves, these women are trapping themselves in the very same system that has degraded them for centuries. Wanting to act like a man implies that there is something unpleasant about womanhood that must be escaped from.

She also debunks the nonsense of the porn-star as empowered: how is imitating a stripper or a porn star--a woman whose *job* is to imitate arousal in the first place--going to render us sexually liberated? What is the definition of "sexy" that is portrayed today? Levy interviews porn stars such as Jenna Jameson to dig into the motivation behind the act. And act it is. When these women describe what they do, not once, Levy observes, do they use the word "pleasure." The reason for doing their work? The common answer is "because I was paid to.'Raunchy' and 'liberated' are not synonyms.

As far as the sexual revolution is concerned, the book points out that if feminism was meant to be, among other things, an arena in which to develop a heightened sense of connection for a woman to her own body, the rise of raunch is built around male fantasy rather than female fantasy; young women seeking to be 'accepted ' by using "the slut uniform," dressing to be gawked at and touched even if it is really the last thing they want.
She concludes: "Our national love of porn and pole dancing is not the byproduct of a free and easy society with an earthy acceptance of sex. It is a desperate stab at freewheeling eroticism in a time and place characterized by intense anxiety. What are we afraid of? Everything... which includes sexual freedom and *real* female power.."

...that pretty much sums it up really. What you see in those magazines like nuts and FHM isn't just an extension of the capitalist market based sexuality, it's also quite retrograde ideology, all the more pernicious as it is masquerading as sexual freedom.

[cap-scaleman.livejournal.com]

Have you read David Foster Wallace's article Big Red Son? It is a report on the american porn industry's equivalent of the Oscars. It is not entirely about this event though, and in one note he adds this:

"the psychodynamics of porn seem always to have involved a certain degree of shame, self-loathing, perception of 'sin,' etc. This has held both on the performing end -- 'I'm a nasty girl,' 'I'm a little fuckhole' -- and on the consumption end -- recall, or get someone to tell you about, the embarrassment of being seen at the ticket window of an adult theater, or the haunted faces of trenchcoated men in Times Square, Boston's Combat Zone, SF's Tenderloin. We note, though, that the faces of todays fans at the adult CES seem different, the affect more complex. An observer gets the odd sense that the avarage fan here feels slightly ashamdes of being slightly ashamed of his enthusiasm for porn, since the performers and directors now appeared to have abandoned in favor of the steely-eyed exultation that always attend success in the great US market. Whereever else it is, porn is no longer in the shadows and slums. As Max's scarlettclad crewman put it, 'in a whay it's kind of a drag. Now everybody's watching it. We used to be rebels. Now we're fucking businessmen.'*

The thing to recognize is that the adult industry's new respectability creates a paradox. The more acceptable in modern culture it becomes, the farthre porn will have to go in order to preserve the sense of unacceptability that's so essential to it's appeal. As should be evident, the industry's already gone pretty far; and with reenacted child abuse and barely disguised gang rapes now selling briskly, it is not hard to see where porn is eventually going to have to go in order to retain its edge of disrespute. Wether or not it ever actually gets there, it's clear that the real horizon late-'90s porn is heading toward is the Snuff Film. It's also clear - w/ all moral and cultural issues totally aside - that this is an extremely dangerous direction for the adult-film industry to have to keep moving in. It seems only a matter of time before another conservative pol sees in mainstream porn an outrage to hang his public ambitions on. The AVA, after all, is not the only powerful lobby with an interest in social norms. At this point, anyway, porn's own internal contradictions (e.g., constantly offending mainstream values ---> the bilions of $ that attend mainstream popularity) look to be the industry's most dangerous enemy.

*(Max's response to this crew member's analysis, accompanied with a thumbs up: "God bless America, kid" )"

porn

[(Anonymous)]

It's easy enough to offend mainstream values in the US. Look at Janet Jackson.

Re: porn

[cap-scaleman.livejournal.com]

Well, even if that is quite old, it is a great example that whenever something that is not really a taboo becomes exposed in a place unexpected by the mainstream it becomes highly offending.

[microworlds.livejournal.com]

Have you been reading the Book of Mormon lately by any chance? I find this focus on modesty quite disconcerting. :(

[(Anonymous)]

As someone (Iggyfop?) observe on ILE years ago:

"If Momus wasn't sexually attracted to Japanese girls two decades younger than him, I doubt if he'd have bothered to work up his latter-day orientalist theorising. If it had been, say, black Americans he was into, no doubt we'd have been bombarded with posts about white American protestant work ethic vs the exotic Other of African American culture bla bla bla."

otfm