What do you think?
Rate this book
The Porning of America: The Rise of Porn Culture, What it Means, and Where We Go from Here
Sarracino, Carmine, Scott, Kevin M.
272 pages, Hardcover
First published September 1, 2008
10 people are currently reading
251 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews
June 6, 2008
I gave up on this book.
First, I found the authors' constant statements of how pornography is a valid area of study to be intrusive, and ultimately apologetic. Even whining.
Next...I found that they way too often used the very non-scientific method of linking specific instances onto America as a whole. Too many moments of "such and such girl said or did this, and therefore all girls of her age in America feel this way." Listen, where I come from, (and I come from Portland, Oregon, which is fairly progressive) if I walk up to a woman and call her a slut, she will NOT think I'm complimenting her, no matter what the authors believe.
Points are often made, then remade, then restated, then given contextual basis, then readdressed, then discussed. Aaargh! If you have something to say, say it and move on. Even porn gets boring when it's on a loop.
I was further bothered by how the authors often confuse nudity for pornography. I find that attitude rather uptight. An instance that springs to mind is when they talk about the trend of odd groups of people (knitting societies, fire houses, etc.) getting together and raising funds (often for charity) by doing nude calendars. This gets labeled as part of the porning of America, but I beg to differ. When I see such things, the message I get is that we are all just regular people...just average folks trying to get through life and have a few smiles. In fact, in many ways I see such exhibitions as BREAKING DOWN the porning of America. The problem with America is that it has become so sexualized that nudity of any type is regarded as obscene. Now, some people are for that obscenity, and some people are against it, but the "fact" of it being obscene is conceded by both sides.
Which I find ridiculous. The human body is not obscene. It's merely a document of humanity. It's social taboos that make body parts obscene, and I wish that the authors could have better divided the attitude of "porning" from the simplicity of being nude.
What's really strange is that there are so many examples of actual "porning" out there, such as the Bratz dolls (which the authors bring up multiple multiple multiple times)---so why are they digging into spurious areas in order to make their cases.
No, I find their vision to be off. Unfocused. And I find their bias to be on the page. This is neither science nor philosophy, just both of them pretending to be the other.
First, I found the authors' constant statements of how pornography is a valid area of study to be intrusive, and ultimately apologetic. Even whining.
Next...I found that they way too often used the very non-scientific method of linking specific instances onto America as a whole. Too many moments of "such and such girl said or did this, and therefore all girls of her age in America feel this way." Listen, where I come from, (and I come from Portland, Oregon, which is fairly progressive) if I walk up to a woman and call her a slut, she will NOT think I'm complimenting her, no matter what the authors believe.
Points are often made, then remade, then restated, then given contextual basis, then readdressed, then discussed. Aaargh! If you have something to say, say it and move on. Even porn gets boring when it's on a loop.
I was further bothered by how the authors often confuse nudity for pornography. I find that attitude rather uptight. An instance that springs to mind is when they talk about the trend of odd groups of people (knitting societies, fire houses, etc.) getting together and raising funds (often for charity) by doing nude calendars. This gets labeled as part of the porning of America, but I beg to differ. When I see such things, the message I get is that we are all just regular people...just average folks trying to get through life and have a few smiles. In fact, in many ways I see such exhibitions as BREAKING DOWN the porning of America. The problem with America is that it has become so sexualized that nudity of any type is regarded as obscene. Now, some people are for that obscenity, and some people are against it, but the "fact" of it being obscene is conceded by both sides.
Which I find ridiculous. The human body is not obscene. It's merely a document of humanity. It's social taboos that make body parts obscene, and I wish that the authors could have better divided the attitude of "porning" from the simplicity of being nude.
What's really strange is that there are so many examples of actual "porning" out there, such as the Bratz dolls (which the authors bring up multiple multiple multiple times)---so why are they digging into spurious areas in order to make their cases.
No, I find their vision to be off. Unfocused. And I find their bias to be on the page. This is neither science nor philosophy, just both of them pretending to be the other.
March 10, 2011
Other than the cover, there is nothing original in it.
Wait, I take that back.
[image error]
Wait, I take that back.
[image error]
December 1, 2013
It is painfully obvious that this book was written by two straight men.
This book tries to cover too broad of a subject while representing far too view viewpoints and research. It bounces back and forth without any focus, often throwing in completely irrelevant paragraphs just so that an additional porn-related subject can be named. Many chapters have no direction or clear unifying factor. Because the authors jump around so much, they do not provide enough detail or examination to prove any of their theories.
There are huge chunks of information that these authors ignored. Throughout the book, there was no mention at all of:
- The sheer existence of WOC. Any time the book discusses women, they are setting white women as the default. This is apparent over and over again in the progressive scale that the authors use when describing the average female porn star’s career: girl/girl, girl/guy, anal, mixed race, etc. They talk about how it is debasing for women to have sex with black men, but they never actually say that it’s only white women is fall into this situation. It is simply assumed that white women are the topic of conversation, that white women are the only porn stars worth looking at.
- The fetishization of WOC. Considering that non-white women are not discussed, it is no surprise that the authors failed to research the role that minority women play on porn. "Spicy" latinas, "Jungle fever," "Yellow fever," "Exotic" women of all backgrounds are going to be placed in their own categories on every porn site. The authors here ignored the tendency of non-white women to so often be seen as hyper-sexed animals who exist solely to please white men
-Slut shaming, virginity and the social stigma of sex. Over and over again, it makes the implication that it is completely acceptable in our society for women to view porn and even participate in it. At one point, they outright say that the average teen girl around the year 2006 would think that the label of “slut” was a compliment, that she wanted to dress that way and be seen that way. There is no discussion of how such a label would haunt her or lead to abuse within her social circle.
- The virgin/whore dichotomy. The book starts to discuss this a little bit during the section on the Olsen twins, but they skirt around the issue without ever explicitly examining it.
- The male gaze. There are only brief and shallow discussions of the power structure in porn where the assumed audience is a straight man. There is no discussion concerning how women will, in turn, look at themselves through the eyes of men. Given the high prevalence of POV porn, this should have been a huge focus of research.
- The sexualizations of lesbians, or the forced bisexuality of many female porn stars. In fact, there is no discussion of queer porn at all. The authors ignore trans individuals, the role of queer performers in porn, or the use of queer sex as a way of appealing to straight male audiences.
To be specific, the author's limited scope and bias was most apparent during their section on Paris Hilton. The authors cite Hilton as one of the leading figures in pornography, listing her as an important figure next to Jenna Jameson. However, there was no mention of the fact that her sex tape was released without her consent or that it wasn’t filmed with the intention of public viewing. There was no acknowledgement that she sued her boyfriend of the time for defamation and recieved no money from the sale of the video. Nor did they discuss the significant age difference between Hilton and her boyfriend, how the power dynamic of pornography and sex may have influenced her decision to approve a video, or how her later publicly actions may have been influenced by having this “slut” label forced upon her.
This book outright says that Paris Hilton did porn for the attention. The authors mention how Paris Hilton and Lindsey Lohan “exposing their shaved genitals" in public, referring to the paparazzi creepshots that were taken and shared without their consent. All discussions of Paris Hilton assume that she is vapid and explicitly doing these things for attention, without any consideration that she may have experienced abuse (at the hands of Rick Salomon's decision to release the tape without her consent) and how her later over-sexual lifestyle was a fairly common response that many victims go through. Painting Hilton as a literal attention-whore is a disgusting interpretation of her story.
There were a few sections that I was impressed with, such as the analysis of advertising and the “Popping Rosie’s Rivets” chapter on porn and comics, but these parts were few and far between. They were not enough to justify the book’s overall lack of balanced rhetoric. This book desperately needed the input of a strong female editor or contributor - How could they have thought is was a good idea to name a chapter “Women and Porn” and then spend the majority of the time discussing feminist anti-pornography leagues? If anything, this book serves as proof that porn represents a culture that values women and POC far below white men on the social ladder.
This book tries to cover too broad of a subject while representing far too view viewpoints and research. It bounces back and forth without any focus, often throwing in completely irrelevant paragraphs just so that an additional porn-related subject can be named. Many chapters have no direction or clear unifying factor. Because the authors jump around so much, they do not provide enough detail or examination to prove any of their theories.
There are huge chunks of information that these authors ignored. Throughout the book, there was no mention at all of:
- The sheer existence of WOC. Any time the book discusses women, they are setting white women as the default. This is apparent over and over again in the progressive scale that the authors use when describing the average female porn star’s career: girl/girl, girl/guy, anal, mixed race, etc. They talk about how it is debasing for women to have sex with black men, but they never actually say that it’s only white women is fall into this situation. It is simply assumed that white women are the topic of conversation, that white women are the only porn stars worth looking at.
- The fetishization of WOC. Considering that non-white women are not discussed, it is no surprise that the authors failed to research the role that minority women play on porn. "Spicy" latinas, "Jungle fever," "Yellow fever," "Exotic" women of all backgrounds are going to be placed in their own categories on every porn site. The authors here ignored the tendency of non-white women to so often be seen as hyper-sexed animals who exist solely to please white men
-Slut shaming, virginity and the social stigma of sex. Over and over again, it makes the implication that it is completely acceptable in our society for women to view porn and even participate in it. At one point, they outright say that the average teen girl around the year 2006 would think that the label of “slut” was a compliment, that she wanted to dress that way and be seen that way. There is no discussion of how such a label would haunt her or lead to abuse within her social circle.
- The virgin/whore dichotomy. The book starts to discuss this a little bit during the section on the Olsen twins, but they skirt around the issue without ever explicitly examining it.
- The male gaze. There are only brief and shallow discussions of the power structure in porn where the assumed audience is a straight man. There is no discussion concerning how women will, in turn, look at themselves through the eyes of men. Given the high prevalence of POV porn, this should have been a huge focus of research.
- The sexualizations of lesbians, or the forced bisexuality of many female porn stars. In fact, there is no discussion of queer porn at all. The authors ignore trans individuals, the role of queer performers in porn, or the use of queer sex as a way of appealing to straight male audiences.
To be specific, the author's limited scope and bias was most apparent during their section on Paris Hilton. The authors cite Hilton as one of the leading figures in pornography, listing her as an important figure next to Jenna Jameson. However, there was no mention of the fact that her sex tape was released without her consent or that it wasn’t filmed with the intention of public viewing. There was no acknowledgement that she sued her boyfriend of the time for defamation and recieved no money from the sale of the video. Nor did they discuss the significant age difference between Hilton and her boyfriend, how the power dynamic of pornography and sex may have influenced her decision to approve a video, or how her later publicly actions may have been influenced by having this “slut” label forced upon her.
This book outright says that Paris Hilton did porn for the attention. The authors mention how Paris Hilton and Lindsey Lohan “exposing their shaved genitals" in public, referring to the paparazzi creepshots that were taken and shared without their consent. All discussions of Paris Hilton assume that she is vapid and explicitly doing these things for attention, without any consideration that she may have experienced abuse (at the hands of Rick Salomon's decision to release the tape without her consent) and how her later over-sexual lifestyle was a fairly common response that many victims go through. Painting Hilton as a literal attention-whore is a disgusting interpretation of her story.
There were a few sections that I was impressed with, such as the analysis of advertising and the “Popping Rosie’s Rivets” chapter on porn and comics, but these parts were few and far between. They were not enough to justify the book’s overall lack of balanced rhetoric. This book desperately needed the input of a strong female editor or contributor - How could they have thought is was a good idea to name a chapter “Women and Porn” and then spend the majority of the time discussing feminist anti-pornography leagues? If anything, this book serves as proof that porn represents a culture that values women and POC far below white men on the social ladder.
July 20, 2011
When I saw this title on the shelf, I knew I had to read it. The authors present a convincing case that much of modern advertising and culture has been deeply influenced by porn, in terms of the image and text selection, and in terms of the steady downward definition of deviancy. The authors are hardly the sex-negative type - they spend a decent amount of time differentiating between erotica and porn, and also differentiate between filmed sex acts and the ever increasing degradation which underlies much of the extreme porn set (don't google either "pinkeye" or "ATM" - I think my life was complete before I knew the meaning of those terms), and they go so far as to present a pretty convincing case that many of the actions at Abu Ghraib had their antecedents in the extreme porn world. They also make an example of thong underwear for the kindergarden set, ads which implicitly or explicitly feature highly sexualized themes, and the notion that one should always be ready for a spontaneous, anonymous sexual encounter.
The authors also consider six people who are involved in the directing of public opinion, and I found the contrast between Jenna Jameson and Paris Hilton to be particularly illuminating.
There are a couple of flaws: in a throwaway paragraph on the topic of sexuality in comic books (a topic I happen to know something about) they include this howler:
That's definitely guffaw-inspiring, because Marston was a bit of a kink, and Wonder Woman was explicitly created as a vehicle for him to portray bondage fantasies - in service to his notions of appropriate sexual outlets for men being related to the submission of strong women. Marston, instead of being an outlier to the book's premise, is in fact an excellent example of how subtle conditioning via marketing can effect those who read it - remarkably the thesis of the book.
I was most interested in the "where do we go from here?" section - the authors do not have a magic bullet or single solution, but many of their recommendations boil down to rediscovering sexual privacy - very much the same approach (although via a different route) as Manis Friedman's seminal work Doesn't Anyone Blush Anymore. They propose embracing the tantra while shunning degrading porn - and of course this means a more active role in the parental selection of media for their children. All in all, I thought this was a good book which lays bare the truth about culture in the form of modern advertising: it works.
The authors also consider six people who are involved in the directing of public opinion, and I found the contrast between Jenna Jameson and Paris Hilton to be particularly illuminating.
There are a couple of flaws: in a throwaway paragraph on the topic of sexuality in comic books (a topic I happen to know something about) they include this howler:
William Moulton Marston, the psychologist who created Wonder Woman with the explicit purpose of promoting a feminist philosophy, never allowed her to be presented as a sexual object.
That's definitely guffaw-inspiring, because Marston was a bit of a kink, and Wonder Woman was explicitly created as a vehicle for him to portray bondage fantasies - in service to his notions of appropriate sexual outlets for men being related to the submission of strong women. Marston, instead of being an outlier to the book's premise, is in fact an excellent example of how subtle conditioning via marketing can effect those who read it - remarkably the thesis of the book.
I was most interested in the "where do we go from here?" section - the authors do not have a magic bullet or single solution, but many of their recommendations boil down to rediscovering sexual privacy - very much the same approach (although via a different route) as Manis Friedman's seminal work Doesn't Anyone Blush Anymore. They propose embracing the tantra while shunning degrading porn - and of course this means a more active role in the parental selection of media for their children. All in all, I thought this was a good book which lays bare the truth about culture in the form of modern advertising: it works.
December 12, 2013
Summary:
America has a long history of porn creation and usage (often associated with an equally long history of lots of men going off to fight in wars). Increasingly porn is becoming integated into America's every day culture. Porn usage/creation can be an antecedent or a symptom of sexual objectification. Sexual objectification can be an antecedent to dehumanisation. Dehumanisation is unhealthy for a society, which, by definition relies on connection/empathy between individuals. Regardless of whether porn is an antecedent or cause of dehumanisation we should be concerned and watchful of its increase use and integration into America's societal norms.
Wow that was mouthful, but I had to write it all down like that cause it's been bouncing around in my head for a week.
Things I liked:
* Nice light literature review of feminish literature across the decades (good way to generate a future reading list).
* Caused me to recontextualise and think about an old topic with fresh eyes (like I said I've been having a good think for about a week after I put down the book, I think that's always a good sign).
Things I think could have been done better:
* I think the author spent too long developing both sides of an arguement so as to seem impartial, but as a result made that argument difficult to observe and understand. I was probably about two thirds through the book before I really had a clue where it was going (in a non-fiction book I think that's a problem).
* I think the book relied too much on its sensationalist topic (porn) to the detriment of what I found its more interesting topic ('othering' and 'dehumanisation'). I think a better book would have been a bit more abstract and used porn as an example of rather than the whole subject matter.
Highlight:
For me the highlight was probably the observation/allegation that violent porn was really born out of a reaction by American soldiors returning from WWII to the increasing presence of women in the workforce. This idea was entirely new to me and really was the starting point for me to start to engage with what I consider the books central ideas.
America has a long history of porn creation and usage (often associated with an equally long history of lots of men going off to fight in wars). Increasingly porn is becoming integated into America's every day culture. Porn usage/creation can be an antecedent or a symptom of sexual objectification. Sexual objectification can be an antecedent to dehumanisation. Dehumanisation is unhealthy for a society, which, by definition relies on connection/empathy between individuals. Regardless of whether porn is an antecedent or cause of dehumanisation we should be concerned and watchful of its increase use and integration into America's societal norms.
Wow that was mouthful, but I had to write it all down like that cause it's been bouncing around in my head for a week.
Things I liked:
* Nice light literature review of feminish literature across the decades (good way to generate a future reading list).
* Caused me to recontextualise and think about an old topic with fresh eyes (like I said I've been having a good think for about a week after I put down the book, I think that's always a good sign).
Things I think could have been done better:
* I think the author spent too long developing both sides of an arguement so as to seem impartial, but as a result made that argument difficult to observe and understand. I was probably about two thirds through the book before I really had a clue where it was going (in a non-fiction book I think that's a problem).
* I think the book relied too much on its sensationalist topic (porn) to the detriment of what I found its more interesting topic ('othering' and 'dehumanisation'). I think a better book would have been a bit more abstract and used porn as an example of rather than the whole subject matter.
Highlight:
For me the highlight was probably the observation/allegation that violent porn was really born out of a reaction by American soldiors returning from WWII to the increasing presence of women in the workforce. This idea was entirely new to me and really was the starting point for me to start to engage with what I consider the books central ideas.
April 5, 2012
This is a weird book. I kind of felt like the authors were really naive about pornography, it touched on some issues I think are interesting but overplayed things I think are insignificant.
One chapter was about how the ubiquity of porn informed military treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib. I still don't even know if this is true or not but it would explain a lot. I found that interesting, they basically said it was open knowledge that military personnel at Abu Ghraib were sort of watching porn 24-7 and it informed the way they tortured prisoners, the images that they created and the dissemination of the images.
The authors are two men whose attitude is sort of 'hey, we're red blooded american men who love healthy sexuality as much as anyone'--it seemed a little too wholesome or something.
There was also some funny stuff about how the tropes of porn have permeated 'regular' culture, and they actually did talk about high school students 'HOOKING UP!!' in the most ridiculous terms---did you know that high school girls service boys in the stairwells at your local high school, and they learned this behaviour from porn, which is nowadays thought of as american as apple pie?? I just couldn't take it seriously. In the end that tone was what killed it for me. They also spent a segment deconstructing Paris Hilton, who isn't exactly a cultural touchstone. Another segment was devoted to Jenna Jameson, which probably was more significant in terms of how both she and porn are viewed....it does seem true that she is considered more of a businesswoman than anything else, and somehow her image has become so known that it's somehow sanitized....
Anyhoo, I didn't really like this one at all!
One chapter was about how the ubiquity of porn informed military treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib. I still don't even know if this is true or not but it would explain a lot. I found that interesting, they basically said it was open knowledge that military personnel at Abu Ghraib were sort of watching porn 24-7 and it informed the way they tortured prisoners, the images that they created and the dissemination of the images.
The authors are two men whose attitude is sort of 'hey, we're red blooded american men who love healthy sexuality as much as anyone'--it seemed a little too wholesome or something.
There was also some funny stuff about how the tropes of porn have permeated 'regular' culture, and they actually did talk about high school students 'HOOKING UP!!' in the most ridiculous terms---did you know that high school girls service boys in the stairwells at your local high school, and they learned this behaviour from porn, which is nowadays thought of as american as apple pie?? I just couldn't take it seriously. In the end that tone was what killed it for me. They also spent a segment deconstructing Paris Hilton, who isn't exactly a cultural touchstone. Another segment was devoted to Jenna Jameson, which probably was more significant in terms of how both she and porn are viewed....it does seem true that she is considered more of a businesswoman than anything else, and somehow her image has become so known that it's somehow sanitized....
Anyhoo, I didn't really like this one at all!
October 31, 2008
Here's the book in a nutshell: As porn becomes more mainstream, we become more porned. That is, we view ourselves and our culture in increasingly sexualized terms. Accurate? Yes. Depressing? Yes. Do the authors have any suggestions for what can be done? Not really.
I guess that's what makes this book a rather futile read. Sarracino and Scott make it pretty clear that they're in favor of "good" porn: porn that shows people who respect each other and are both interested in receiving pleasure. And they're definitely against "bad" porn: the degrading, misogynistic fare that makes up most of the market. But they're also against censorship. So... huh. Now what?
The most informative part of the book was the discussion of how violence and porn are increasingly connected, and how that is the next step in our collective "porning." They make a good case for the fact that the infamous pictures of Abu Gharib are partially a product of this trend, and that similar scenes must be expected in the future. But once again, they really don't offer any suggestions on how to change this. An essay or article focusing on this aspect would have been much stronger than this rather drawn-out and (sorry, I can't resist) anti-climactic book.
I guess that's what makes this book a rather futile read. Sarracino and Scott make it pretty clear that they're in favor of "good" porn: porn that shows people who respect each other and are both interested in receiving pleasure. And they're definitely against "bad" porn: the degrading, misogynistic fare that makes up most of the market. But they're also against censorship. So... huh. Now what?
The most informative part of the book was the discussion of how violence and porn are increasingly connected, and how that is the next step in our collective "porning." They make a good case for the fact that the infamous pictures of Abu Gharib are partially a product of this trend, and that similar scenes must be expected in the future. But once again, they really don't offer any suggestions on how to change this. An essay or article focusing on this aspect would have been much stronger than this rather drawn-out and (sorry, I can't resist) anti-climactic book.
May 13, 2010
The "What it Means" in the title of The Porning of America is very misleading. The authors provide the crucial sociocultural impacts of the rise of porn at the very end of the book - basically in the last chapter, which I found very disappointing. The rest of the book gives a nice history of where porn arose from (i.e. beginning in underground networks then surfacing to the public in the form of comic books). One of the highlights of the book is the somewhat repetitive, but nonetheless informative, discussion about the authors concept of "universal sexualization" describing the process in which nearly all catagories of groups in society- male, female, young, old- are valued and judged increasingly by their ability to elicit a sexual audience. The other great thing about this book is its pro-femininst stance. For example, the book contains a balanced discussion regarding the effects of porn on women and the divergence of opinions in the female community regarding whether porn is good or bad - whether it is a form of uninhibited sexual expression or whether it furthers neo/patriarchal objectification and humiliation of women.
November 18, 2016
Fallacious generalisations, biased viewpoints, unjustified opinions... the list goes on. As I read through this, I constantly found myself rebutting almost every point made because there were just too many claims which were false or sensationalist, with no real evidence to back things up. There are majorly false extrapolations on the perceived effects of porn, its effects on society, etc. Probably the only thing I found interesting was the history of porn in America.
November 27, 2011
With exception to the final chapter the book is clearly written by heterosexual men! The primary group holding the least amount of discriminatory history in the area of sexuality. To speak of how women and gay men feel about things without citing actual women and gay men is ridiculous. Not to mention the lack of cited work (They mention a Susan Sontag text but do not cite it or even give a name!). The APA case studies are constantly used and when it comes to sexuality and if you have read other texts you would know that Psychology is sometimes behind on the times, still listing transgendered as a disorder and only recently removing homosexuality. True this book came out in 2008, but it already seems like a historical text then what we should do. This book reads as two men trying to protect their children (primarily their girls) from what the world really is. Yes they make some good points about BRATZ dolls and such but these things should be rite in front of our faces. As for shunning hardcore bondage porn.... shame on them!!! If they actually opened some good psychology texts they would know that bondage play is healthy for some people and that fantasy including rape fantasy is a normal function and these pornographic images help in these processes. Basically I am saying that this is a point of view, one that to me seems outdated, verging on sexist and homophobic at times. Do not tell me how a group of individuals feels you can not group all women or all gay men into something and claim thats how they all feel, especially when they aren neither female or gay. I have a degree in psychology, who has read many texts on "porning" and there are way better texts to be read then this one. Look for something else, preferably more specific to what you re looking to learn. This text is very broad making it vague and does not explain itself. If you are looking for a broad overview look for one that markets itself as such.
July 22, 2016
Es un buen ensayo acerca del desarrollo de la pornografía (en los Estados Unidos) desde la Guerra Civil hasta el año 2007, con algo de estudio cultural un poco light.
Tiene algunas falencias dadas por la fecha de publicación: notoriamente señala que MySpace.com se había convertido en el sitio más popular del mundo sobrepasando a Google. A Facebook le dedica un párrafo. Es lógico, en el momento de escritura el escenario era otro.
Hace hincapié en cuestiones superadas como la violencia en la pornografía, el torture-porn y lo relaciona con los abusos a prisioneros de la Guerra de Irak.
Es decir, todo el análisis es medianamente bueno (aunque se nota a veces cierta tendencia conservadora en los autores) pero quedó un poco datado.
Se convierte así en un libro interesante en cuanto a historización del fenómeno pornográfico pero no demasiado respecto a los análisis semiológicos y culturales que presentan los autores.
Tiene algunas falencias dadas por la fecha de publicación: notoriamente señala que MySpace.com se había convertido en el sitio más popular del mundo sobrepasando a Google. A Facebook le dedica un párrafo. Es lógico, en el momento de escritura el escenario era otro.
Hace hincapié en cuestiones superadas como la violencia en la pornografía, el torture-porn y lo relaciona con los abusos a prisioneros de la Guerra de Irak.
Es decir, todo el análisis es medianamente bueno (aunque se nota a veces cierta tendencia conservadora en los autores) pero quedó un poco datado.
Se convierte así en un libro interesante en cuanto a historización del fenómeno pornográfico pero no demasiado respecto a los análisis semiológicos y culturales que presentan los autores.
July 20, 2010
The things I do for my Feminist book club - oy.
Where do I start? This book is remarkably devoid of scholarship, especially considering its broad scope. There are sections of chapters, such as the part touching on the Abu Graib debacle and its connection to porn, that could be whole books in and of themselves. The term "porning" is never definitively defined and is tossed about willy-nilly. We get the observation that tantric sex is "good" and "dark" porn is "bad." Gee, thanks for that deep insight.
I could go on and on about how shallow this supposed cultural critique is. The short version is: don't bother.
Where do I start? This book is remarkably devoid of scholarship, especially considering its broad scope. There are sections of chapters, such as the part touching on the Abu Graib debacle and its connection to porn, that could be whole books in and of themselves. The term "porning" is never definitively defined and is tossed about willy-nilly. We get the observation that tantric sex is "good" and "dark" porn is "bad." Gee, thanks for that deep insight.
I could go on and on about how shallow this supposed cultural critique is. The short version is: don't bother.
August 11, 2016
Much of this book felt like it was reviewing familiar themes of the negative impact of porn on our society, contrasting it with the Puritanical tendencies of earlier times. There are some interesting contrasts to the common view of porn as unhealthy with what is represented as more healthy treatments of sex, particularly by female directors for female consumption, as well as tantric approaches.
One thing that stood out was the treatment of the porn and power dynamics of Abu Ghraib, both among the guards themselves and also between the guards and their prisoners. This is porn and violence and objectification at its worst.
One thing that stood out was the treatment of the porn and power dynamics of Abu Ghraib, both among the guards themselves and also between the guards and their prisoners. This is porn and violence and objectification at its worst.
May 13, 2009
To be honest, this book really acts much more as a history lesson of porn in our culture. Very little of the book is spent examining the state of porn today and how it affects our culture - so the "Where We Go from Here" portion of the title is a bit misleading.
Overall an interesting, if somewhat disheartening read (on the social level). It neither defends nor attacks porn, which leads it to read quite well factually... but also seems to try too hard to not take a side that it doesn't give any sort of sense of urgency or importance.
Overall an interesting, if somewhat disheartening read (on the social level). It neither defends nor attacks porn, which leads it to read quite well factually... but also seems to try too hard to not take a side that it doesn't give any sort of sense of urgency or importance.
May 3, 2016
Though this book is very informative about the history and culture of pornography - especially in the United States, I did not enjoy the tone. The book should have included trigger warnings for the very graphic scenes of sexual and physical violence they describe. The authors, both males, also did not work very hard to examine how their cis, heterosexual male perspectives really shaped how they view porn and wrote the book. Read this book keeping in mind that there are explicit, gruesome sections of the book that may be unsettling or triggering.
January 19, 2011
In a clear, historical record of the pornography / sexual stimulating industry, Scott writes a book that illuminates how "porn" has infiltrated and become a mainstay in mainstream America.
I thoroughly enjoyed this book.
I thoroughly enjoyed this book.
April 9, 2012
A great insight on the history of pornography. It wasn't anti porn or pro porn. It is a great mix of history and pop culture. Porn is EVERYWHERE! I could not read all of Chapter 6 which was on graphic and violent porn.
February 14, 2011
Amazingly informative book. Recommended to everyone.
May 17, 2013
This is an excellent book!
June 3, 2025
The analysis in the first part of the book was helpful, but they lost me at the end. They fell into the trap of being two men writing about issues that affect women. The appeal to men by saying "our daughters" are being left with this future was the first sign. Then they didn't address the nuance of how just because you have to be aware of things like what you wear as a woman doesn't mean that that should be an acceptable standard. They just left it at a conversation about awareness. Given that the book was leading to this conclusion, it made some of the previous analysis fall flatter than I first thought.
September 16, 2023
shares how adult content went from being a back alley purchase to a billion dollar biz. mentions the people and tech involved. b/w images.
Want to read
February 7, 2012Shut up. It's not what you think.
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews