In many ways I agree with Lucas that gay porn may be an outlet for young men attempting to discover themselves sexually as a gay man. He is absolutely correct when he claims that society will offer no direction when it comes to this issue. But, does it offer direction to Heterosexuals at the same time? In mainstream television and movies, there have been no real visual representations of male on male sex with the exception of “The Crying Game” and more recently “Brokeback Mountain.” It is almost common place now to see men and women engaging in sexual acts in movies, and even women on women in movies such as “Basic Instinct” and “Wild Things,” but do these heterosexual sex scenes in movies give any actual direction or education on sex between a man and a woman? I would have to say no. It is not like the media (film producers and magazine writers) is out there as an instruction manual for heterosexuals to use for sex, if I really wanted to know a new sexual position, I would not watch R rated film waiting for the sex scenes.

On another topic of Lucas’s “On Gay Porn” he glorifies the gay porn star as someone to be admired and adored. Personally I would never view any porn star as a person who I would want to emulate, yet I guess that’s just personal preference. Lucas goes on to complain about movies that portray a bad ending for homosexuals, and I would have to agree with him again, that most films treat homosexuals with ill regard. I guess that is just a combination of religion and society (media, which drives society) holding back the inevitable and necessary acceptance of the homosexual world. But until that day comes, it will remain a “closeted segment of society” and gay porn as an outlet to a sense of community (“On Gay Porn” page 1).

It seems that Lucas will continue to regard himself as a “hero” in this story for providing one of these outlets for young gay men. Although I disagree with some points Lucas makes, I agree that these movies could be a positive and a feeling of normalcy, while society and religion tend to ostracize all gay men.

In a recent post by Blogging4class (April 9, 2006 at 7:52pm) he/she writes about a woman who was fined for selling vibrators in the state of Texas. Most of the states that prohibit the sales of 3-D self-stimulation objects are southern states, such as Alabama, Kansas, Georgia, Louisiana, and Mississippi (which bogging4class left out). The majority of Armed forces participants are also from the south. Are these young men and women getting mixed signals? Is the United States making the obscenity issues illegal to its citizens on one hand, yet promoting it to its soldiers on the other? Again, I don’t know how accurate of a portrayal of Desert Storm Jarhead is, but I do recall earlier in the semester (Ch. 10) the acknowledgment that WWII soldiers were sent pornographic materials by their country in order to keep up the morale of the men. This of course was a catalyst for softer pornographic magazines such as “Playboy” so come into mainstream USA in1953.

Jarhead makes me think about a country involved in keeping pornographic and obscene materials out of the eyes of the public even if it means stepping around freedom rights, yet it encourages men to partake in these materials who are preserving those exact rights. It is an interesting issue that remains continues to repeat itself in American history!

There were many excellent articles that led to greater insight to these myths, but I wanted to focus on two: “Fool for Love” by Craig Horowitz, and the story by Kim McKeller. Kim’s story is an incredibly moving piece that seems to be an autobiographical tale of her life living with pedophile father selling his child’s (Kim’s) body acting as a pimp. Despite being of blood relation, Kim was basically a sex slave for high paying older men. The word ‘slave’ made appearances in several other supporting articles that involved the topic “Women who chose to be strippers and hookers chose these careers, so who are we to judge them?” Any time this word is used, you know there is nothing good that comes from it. Many of the articles described thousands of young women being trafficked for sex slavery at a very young age, but in my opinion there were none more compelling and upsetting than a father selling his 6-year-old daughter’s body over and over again.
It is amazing that Kim ever made it out of that situation alive, let alone with the ability to write a well-composed short autobiography. This story shows us that some people have no choice over prostitution, and their lives can be manipulated from the youngest of ages to serve as a slave.

The other article within Myths Of Porn is “Fool of Love” by Craig Horowitz. “Fool of Love” tells the story of your average man, with a loving wife and children. At work he was a successful Real-Estate attorney, who worked hard and earned a great living to bring home to his family. The man, Mitchell Rothken, currently resides in a prison somewhere because he fell in-love with a stripper, who turned out to be playing him the whole time, and embezzled money from clients to support the stripper’s needs. Mitchell claims to have no control over his obsession with this stripper. The interesting part of the story was that nobody knew the details of his life, other than himself. At home he led a normal life, where his unknowing wife had no idea about Mitchell fully supporting and spoiling his stripper girlfriend. This whole story relates back to the myth 4, which says “men like variety in women so porn use helps a man stay faithful to his woman.” It would be interesting if you could do a case study on this case and many others like it, and deduct whether or not there was a direct correlation with the use of porn, or lack there of.
Another famous case that comes to mind is that of Lou Pai, an Asian-American corporate executive who had an obsession for strip clubs. He ultimately got a stripper pregnant, left his wife, and ran away with the stripper. Lou Pai may be more familiar to you when I mention that he was formerly an Enron executive before the company’s seemingly inevitable downward spiral. Both of these cases involve a gateway that some men tend to use for “variety” needs in order to stay “faithful to his woman.” Apparently, these two men did not know the meaning of faithfulness, nor did they honor resort to porn to repress their need for a variety of women.

Each one of these stories shows how common myths can be misleading, and downright inaccurate! Myths Of Porn does a great job stringing together a series of examples and articles that debunk these misconceptions, and tell truths about what really happens in the shadows of porn.

A person commits the offense of distributing unlawful sexual devices when he knowingly sells, advertises, publishes, or exhibits to any person any three-dimensional device designed or marketed as useful primarily for the stimulation of human genital organs or offers to do so or possesses such devices with the intent to do so.

There are several violations of rights issues that surface in this instance and you also have to question what effect this will have on the single community.

It is hard to believe that the state of Mississippi can disregard such a major aspect of life. Yes, self-stimulation can be frowned upon, and is inappropriate in a public venue due to the indecency and possible exposure to children issues, but should it not be allowed in the privacy of one’s home with the help of a safe device?

Say for second that I lived in Mississippi, I was against pornography and the use of 3-D objects to pleasure ones self, and had 3 children of my own. Aren’t there greater, more pressing issues out there that pose a greater concern and threat to my children and me? Are the people of Mississippi focusing on the wrong “evil?” Dan Abrams brings up the fact that this state has the lowest tax on cigarettes, has the highest percentage of obese citizens (64% of the population is obese!), and continues to make sex and living with a significant other illegal to those who are unmarried. Talk about a state with mixed priorities. Is the statewide obesity problem less important to address than an individual’s personal use of sexual objects?

Personally, I believe that an inability to overlook another person’s sexual lifestyles and focus on more important issues like general Health, is ignorant. It’s sad that the state of Mississippi has these ignoramuses running the state’s legislation and deny one’s right to harmless possessions and ignore their health as a whole!

For the past several weeks Steven Baldwin has been sitting outside of his local Adult Film store taking pictures of every patron that walks into the building. He has made it obvious that he is there for the sole purpose of “exposing” these patrons, by setting up a tripod and aiming it at the storefront. Baldwin claims that he “has no problem with the people making the films”, the only problem he has is the store being too close to his children, and the children within the community. The store owner has complained that Mr. Baldwin has no right to bother the customers, and it is hurting the business.

Despite having little, to no visual profanity, or indecency on the outside of the buildings, the general public tends to frown upon their local Adult video stores. This subject involves one of those gray areas that Professor Halavais brought up in the 3rd lecture dealing with context. People tend not to have problems with pornography and erotica in general, the problem arrives when the context changes, especially when children are involved.

Personally, I believe that people have the right to shelter their children from the pornography images, and industry as a whole. If a local Adult Film store resides too closely to one’s family, that person has a right to do what is necessary to ethically protect their children from these images. By hindering the foot traffic to and from the store by setting up a camera, Mr. Baldwin has possibly helped stave off Adult images from local children’s eyes.

Do you think he should be allowed to do this?