The defnition of Porn

07.26.05 (6:07 am)   [edit]

This article might invite you to the discussion that I raised as the title of today's entry. Fascinating, isn't it?


http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_1467522 .html" title="http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_1467522 .html" target="_blank"http://www.ananova.com/news/s...


It's part of a new police tactic of trying to prevent pornographic movies from being screened.


Instead of prosecuting cinema-owners, the police are trying to scare their audience away.


This reminded me of Andrea Dworkin's Pornography, which mentioned the origination of the word 'porn' in the&n bsp;opening; the word porn comes from Greek word for a prostitute. The word actually means some kind of 'documentation of what a lower ranked prostitute does.' Ok, so it could refer to some kind of derogetory representation of sex and women based upon the male and authoritative persepective on them. It cannot be about sexworkers in any higher position in the hierarchy but inevitably specifies who and what the whores of the bottom of the pile.


The funny thing about the idea is that it only proves to be men's pshyce and anatomy that create the pornographic images, which even involve the certain detailed dynamics with women: those women who help them ejaculate cannot possess any power over them: men cannot jerk off when any threatening presence is around. Therefore the defnition of porn was rigidly phrased as something related to 'the lower whores' as opposed to be whores, or women, in general. We working girls just accomodate to materialize the fantasy and assimilate to their vocabularies, to collect money. That does not mean working girls are lower form of human beings by nature. We are acting according to someone else's ideas and needs no matter how they are pathetic or boring. We are offering just a service.


The most thought provoking part of the article was who was to be punished for 'sexual fantasy', which would never go away from people's mind and has been documented, say, ever since the time of ancient Greece until today's India. In NY law, only hookers get arrested in terms of prostitution. The buying side (clients) can also get into some kind of trouble theoretically, but it scarcely (almost never) happens. This makes me think indeed: who is to be blamed for guy's sexual fantasy and its materializing? The dirty minded or the dirty doers? By the current NY law, only the selling side, which inevitablly involves a huge number of women, are crucified unnecessar ily. I would rather have done ten sit ups in public or whereever than  getting busted, that was for sure.

2 Comments

nobody's baby

07.21.05 (6:51 am)   [edit]

I have been feeling too wretched to blog so kept on working unusually hard. Now I am trying to straighten my mind up. 


http://chyma.blogspot.com/2005/07/nobodys-baby.html" title="http://chyma.blogspot.com/2005/07/nobodys-baby.html" target="_blank"http://chyma.blogspot.com/200...

0 Comments

Bust-ed

07.11.05 (6:23 pm)   [edit]

The story will be reported in detail later on, so stay tuned.

2 Comments

is it for fun? or a technical trouble?

07.02.05 (7:31 pm)   [edit]

I can still check what is going on in the office even when on the shift. But, what is going on with my tblog account?


Visit below. I might have no patience to come by this defected tblog.


www.chyma.blogspot.com/

0 Comments