<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!-- name="generator" content="blosxom/2.0" -->
<!DOCTYPE rss PUBLIC "-//Netscape Communications//DTD RSS 0.91//EN" "http://my.netscape.com/publish/formats/rss-0.91.dtd">

<rss version="0.91">
  <channel>
    <title>Notebooks   </title>
    <link>http://bactra.org/notebooks</link>
    <description>Cosma's Notebooks</description>
    <language>en</language>

  <item>
    <title>Pornography</title>
    <link>http://bactra.org/notebooks/2002/04/15#pornography</link>
    <description>
&lt;P&gt;Who consumes what?

&lt;P&gt;&quot;Multi-media revolution&quot;.  Many sources (e.g. Stewart Brand, &lt;cite&gt;The Media
Lab&lt;/cite&gt;) claim porn was instrumental in the commercial success of VCRs, but
I can't find primary sources for this claim.  Is there any reason pornographers
would have preferred VHS to Beta, and so given it a market advantage? &amp;mdash;
The story seems to be repeating itself with CD-ROM.  [That was writen in the
mid-1990s!  Obviously, things have changed a bit by 2008...]

&lt;P&gt;Does it influence people's thinking, and if so, how and whose?  Does it
influence people's practices?

&lt;P&gt;Physiology &amp;mdash; written smut especially.  How is it possible that looking
at squiggles on paper can do that to primates?

&lt;P&gt;&lt;em&gt;Content.&lt;/em&gt; Presumably, most pornography is not the work of highly
original minds.  (Very little of anything is the work of highly original minds,
but perhaps this is more true of smut than, say, chamber music.)  Also
presumably, its content varies from time to time and place to place.  Has
anyone tried probing the (as it were) soft dark underbelly of culture through
comparing smut? &amp;mdash; Karel Capek attempted something like this in his essay
&quot;Eros vulgaris&quot; (collected in &lt;cite&gt;In Praise of Newspapers&lt;/cite&gt;), but the
result is disappointing, perhaps because he didn't employ proper scientific
methods.  The English, he says, like to read about punishment, the Germans
about discipline (not at all the same) and the French about being clever; so
far as I can recall, he was patriotically silent about the Czechs.  It's not
clear how much time his samples spanned, or indeed how large and diverse they
were in the first place.  Cf., with the above stereotypes, &lt;cite&gt;Fanny
Hill&lt;/cite&gt; and &lt;cite&gt;The Story of O&lt;/cite&gt; &amp;mdash; but perhaps any work with
any trace of literary merit should be excluded from the sample.

&lt;P&gt;One obvious approach would be look at the Usenet groups,
e.g.  &lt;a href=&quot;news:alt.sex.stories&quot;&gt;alt.sex.stories&lt;/a&gt;, but the problem is
that we don't know how many people read (never mind enjoy) each article, and
one suspects writers with odd tastes are unusually prolific (the lunatic de
Sade being the supreme example).  Statistics on downloads from,
say, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.asstr.org/&quot;&gt;ASSTR&lt;/a&gt; would evade that problem, but
still raise problems of sampling bias (and privacy).  &amp;mdash; Incidentally, the
evolution of the on-line porn writing community would probably make for a
fascinating study in literary sociology.

&lt;ul&gt;Recommended:
	&lt;li&gt;Stewart Brand, &lt;cite&gt;The Media Lab&lt;/cite&gt;
	&lt;li&gt;Robert Darnton, &lt;cite&gt;The Forbidden Best-Sellers of
Pre-Revolutionary France&lt;/cite&gt;
	&lt;li&gt;Kathy Foley, &quot;&lt;a
href=&quot;http://www.nua.ie/surveys/analysis/weekly_editorial/archives/issue1no140.html&quot;&gt;Porn:
Not What It Used to Be&lt;/a&gt;&quot;, &lt;cite&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.nua.ie/surveys/&quot;&gt;Nua
Internet Surveys&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/cite&gt; 21 August 2000
	&lt;li&gt;Ned Polsky, &lt;cite&gt;Hustlers, Beats and Others&lt;/cite&gt; [Polsky's
chapter &quot;On the Sociology of Pornography&quot; (written in 1968) is about the only
decent thing written on the subject.  It begins: &quot;Samuel Johnson once informed
James Boswell that he could recite a complete chapter of a book called
&lt;cite&gt;The Natural History of Iceland.&lt;/cite&gt; The chapter was entitled
'Concerning Snakes,' and consisted in its entirety of the following: 'There are
no snakes to be met with throughout the whole island.'  I can be similarly
brief concerning studies on the sociology of pornography: there are no such
studies to be met with throughtout the whole of sociology.  What we do have
... is an abundance of offhand 'sociologizing' about pornography, on the part
of contemporary journalists, cultural historians, psychiatrists, literary
critics, lawyers, and judges &amp;mdash; especially if they are of liberal
inclination and don't like censorship.  This material isn't worth much.  In
fact its chief interest for sociologists ... is that the sociological
interpretations most often found in it are demonstrably wrong.&quot;  &amp;mdash; The
2nd edition of this book has commentary, &quot;30 Years On,&quot; with valuable notes on
changes since he first wrote, and the continuing dismalness of the literature
purporting to address the subject.]
	&lt;li&gt;Jennifer A. Zimmerman, &quot;The Effect of Television on Sexual
Behavior,&quot; &lt;cite&gt;Annals of Improbable Research&lt;/cite&gt; vol. 8 no. 2 (2002) [&lt;a
href=&quot;http://www.improbable.com/airchives/paperair/volume8/v8i2/tv-sex.html&quot;&gt;Online&lt;/a&gt;.
Not strictly on-topic, but funny enough to deserve a link &lt;em&gt;somewhere.&lt;/em&gt;]
	&lt;/ul&gt;

	&lt;ul&gt;To read:
	&lt;li&gt;Lynn Hunt (ed.), &lt;cite&gt;The Invention of Pornography: Obscenity and
the Origins of Modernity, 1500--1800&lt;/cite&gt;
	&lt;li&gt;Juffer, &lt;cite&gt;At Home with Pornography&lt;/cite&gt;
	&lt;li&gt;Lane, &lt;cite&gt;Obscene Profits&lt;/cite&gt;
	&lt;li&gt;David Loftus, &lt;cite&gt;Watching Sex&lt;/cite&gt; [&quot;Viewer-response&quot; study of 150 men's reactions to and interpretations of porn]
	&lt;li&gt;Debbie Nathan, &lt;citE&gt;Pornography&lt;/cite&gt;
	&lt;li&gt;Roger Shattuck, &lt;cite&gt;Forbidden Knowledge: From Prometheus to
Pornography&lt;/cite&gt;
	&lt;li&gt;Lisa Sigel, &lt;cite&gt;Governing Pleasures: Pornography and Social
Change in England, 1815--1914&lt;/cite&gt;
	&lt;li&gt;Steele, &lt;cite&gt;Fetish: Fashion, Sex, Power&lt;/cite&gt;
	&lt;li&gt;Stoller and Levine, &lt;cite&gt;Coming Attractions&lt;/cite&gt;
	&lt;li&gt;Nadine Strossen, &lt;cite&gt;Defending Pornography: Free Speech, Sex,
and the Fight for Women's Rights&lt;/cite&gt;
	&lt;/ul&gt;
</description>
  </item>
  </channel>
</rss>