Lacrosse ugliness at U.Va.

You want the Mossberg 12-guage.

 

Well played, hon.

 

Since this now appears to be the Whitney Houston thread (the other inexplicably locked), this was interesting.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2012/02/16/whitney_houston_s_death_is_the_american_public_responsible_.html

 

Here is what feminist author and academic Gail Dines wrote in her book "Pornland: How Porn Has Hijacked Our Sexuality." Dines is writing about images, but I don't think it is too far of a leap to extend the general concept to song lyrics, young adult novels, or magazine and newspaper copy:

Academics who study the media tend to focus on the ways that images construct reality for the viewer. Media scholars accept that images have some effect in the real world. By telling stories, images help to shape how we think about ourselves as gendered beings, as well as about the world that surrounds us. What is of interest is not necessarily the overt message of one particular image but the cumulative effect of the subtextual themes found in the system of images, which together create a particular way of looking at the world. For example, one fashion advertisement may not be that influential in itself, but add up the hundreds of fashion ads that we encounter daily, and you begin to hear a particular story about women's bodies, feminimity, and consumerism. Human beings develop their identity and sense of reality out of the stories the culture tells, and while pornography is not the only producer of stories about sex, relationships, and sexuality, it is possibly the most powerful. ... By the time they first encounter porn, most men have internalized the sexist ideology of our culture, and porn, rather than being an aberration, actually cements and consolidates their ideas about sexuality.

She compares to racist pop culture of the first half of the 20th century, which helped give structure to and legitimize Americans' feelings about race.

I was actually fortunate enough to hear Dines speak at one point, and challenged her during the Q-and-A on the idea that this was a gender-specific problem. After all, I noted - as Double J did here when bringing up the Beatles - I open Esquire and GQ each month, each a highly respected glossy magazine, and am bombarded with images of objectified male physiques. My answer to Double J about the power structure in place largely comes from Dines's answer to me, which I found pretty convincing.

"Pornland" is a really interesting book if anybody is inclined to pick it up. I certainly don't agree with everything in there, and I think that sometimes she takes off from some pretty broad assertions that lack empirical evidence (ex. In most porn, women give, but do not receive oral sex. That's what Dines writes, but I have no idea if it's the case or not and she doesn't really back it up with much other than anecdotal evidence that seems to be drawn from some of the most horrific porn in cyberspace.) However, it's pretty thought-provoking, intelligent, and eye-opening. The material on child pornography, though it doesn't have a great deal of relevance to this discussion, should almost be must-read material for every parent (and even the most casual viewer of porn. It's frightening to think that you are at risk of "going there," but it isn't that far-fetched.)

 

There was a feminist (name escapes me right now) who spoke to one of my journalism classes in college. After the talk, I asked her to sign a copy of The National Review. She did, reluctantly and with a dirty look. Ah, college.

 

What is interesting is that a lot of feminists have become strange bedfellows with the religious right because they share an interest in eradicating pornography, both for very different and sometimes overlapping reasons.

 

I just tend to think there's a huge gap between hardcore porn and a stupid love song about a girl with a crush.

 

Beat you by almost a full day on this one.

 

No, I know. I wasn't disagreeing with YOU. Just saying that using her quotes as proof of some insidious plotting to destroy young women is a bit of a leap.

And I think our main disagreement lies in the meaning of How Will I Know. You see it as a girl basing her self-worth on a boy. I see it as a girl with a crush. And having been there, you can still like yourself plenty and not know if "that boy" likes you back.

 

Sure. But she's not just talking about porn. She sees porn as the logical end of the rest of it - fashion ads and so forth. The culture at large. She thinks that the narrative spun by the rest of it grooms us, so to speak, for porn's messaging. Plus, I don't think she thinks it's an insidious, conscious plot. Just a manifestation of the cultural norms we've internalized over the centuries.

To me, this is kind of like "I say potato, you say pot-ah-to." Is it possible to like yourself and not know if "that boy" likes you back? Perhaps. But it's a danger zone, right? Especially for someone with a developing self-esteem?

This book looks like it might be an interesting read on the subject:

http://www.amazon.com/Development-Relationships-Adolescence-Cambridge-Emotional/dp/0521181259/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1330280836&sr=1-1