Obscenity Crimes on Campus

Note:  I wrote this Friday afternoon, and then lost my internet connection.  I saved it, and thus am publishing a rare Saturday post.  (Hence the Friday date at the top.)

This morning, I noticed several "hits" to this site coming from Obscenity Crimes, the anti-pornography arm of the conservative Morality in Media organization.  Specifically, the hits came from an article by Sharon Secor entitled New Lows in Higher Education which linked to this March post of mine where I debated whether or not to offer a course on pornography.

Secor, in breathless prose, reports that American college campuses are filled with the decadent young who produce their own pornography, mentioning in particular Boink Magazine (link may offend some readers) which has just seen its second issue produced by students at Boston University.  Secor suggests that the students are only following their professors' encouragement:

"That students are willing to participate in the production of pornography shouldn’t be too surprising in light of both our culture and the types of accredited college courses that have sprung up on campuses from coast to coast. Recent years have seen such offerings as the Wesleyan University class –discontinued after a public outcry – in which the final project, according to a May 8, 1999, Hartford Courant story by Eric Rich, required students to create their own work of pornography. An October 2001, Accuracy in Academia article by Joe Jablonski described a San Francisco State University course “which seeks to introduce them to the world of the Internet's sexual underground. Students actually learn how to navigate the underworld of cybersex and get a guided tour through the world of porn sites.”

What Secor doesn't mention is that most college classes that focus on pornography and erotica don't focus on viewing and creating explicit material.  Rather, they focus on critical analyses of the historic and contemporary role of pornography in human culture, focusing on (depending on the instructor) a variety of different perspectives (feminist, Marxist, film studies, etcetera.)   Lots of folks who teach these classes use texts like Lynn Hunt's magisterial The Invention of Pornography, 1500-1800: Obscenity and the Origins of Modernity.   The human libido expresses itself in many and varied ways, but I've read Hunt cover to cover and I challenge anyone to find anything remotely arousing within its 400 pages.  Yes, it fits Secor's agenda to pretend that these courses are taught by the irresponsible, the libertine, and the lecherous to the immature, the impressionable, and the horny!  Alas, Ms. Secor, a review of the syllabi of most courses on pornography at the college and university levels will reveal oodles of theory and precious few "dirty pictures."

Secor's article also touches on the growing number of sex columns appearing in college newspapers nationwide.  She decries columns like Heather Grantham's "Cornellingus" (not hard to guess the Ivy League university in whose paper that appears), and points out that dozens of other colleges have had explicit "sex columns" for years.  I'm told that UCSB -- where my father has taught for four decades -- was the pioneer in this field with its "Wednesday Hump" column.  (If any readers have contrary information, please provide.)  My own Pasadena City College has entered the sex advice world as well this semester, with our new "Sexpert".  (This week's topic: straight men and anal sex; some readers of this blog may not wish to click the link.) 

By mixing together three only marginally related developments (the academic study of porn, student involvement in producing amateur pornography, and graphic advice columns in campus newspapers), Secor is failing to make some vital distinctions.  There's a difference between teaching courses to educate, producing porn to titillate, and writing columns to infuriate! Though I am not, for the reasons I've given before, ready at this time to teach a class on pornography, I do think it a subject very much worth the time and attention of the academy, particularly from those of us who teach and write from a feminist perspective.  As far as the student production of porn (e.g. Boink Magazine) is concerned, I think there's an enormous difference between erotica that is student-produced and distributed and porn that is produced by off-campus commercial entities using students as actors and performers.  Agency matters a great deal, and students are, I think, far less likely to be the victims of commercial exploitation when they are in charge of all the artistic and production decisions.  Of course, I see no reason why those students who do not wish to subsidize the creation of campus erotica ought to have to subsidize it with their fees.

As for the columns themselves, from what I can tell, they are a mixed bag.  Few are genuinely educational.  Most, and I think this certainly describes our own rather feeble effort at PCC, seem to be written more to infuriate conservative readers than to enlighten curious members of the student body!  Given the ubiquitousness of thoughtful, sound advice on the Internet about sex, it's not as if many of today's college students are likely to become better lovers as a consequence of reading these columns.  The raison d'etre of all of this seems to be the delight in tweaking the blue noses of the likes of Sharon Secor and Morality in Media.  Developmentally, that makes sense; I expect 20 year-olds to take genuine pleasure in horrifying their elders. 

I'm convinced that porn studies, as a field, will continue to grow.  As pornography, in all its many and varied forms, continues to exert a powerful influence upon our culture, examining it is worth our professional time and our intellectual energy. As we continue to talk more and more about the subject, some students might well be inspired to produce their own pornography; others might just as well be inspired to campaign against the commercial sex industry.  If I ever do teach a course on porn, I'll be scrupulous about attempting to observe the distinction between education and titillation, recognizing that different folks will perceive different material in different ways. But if some students do seek to produce their own erotic material, as an amateur and authentic counterbalance to the glut of commercialized pornography, I'm not sure that's such a bad thing.  And if some want to infuriate and exasperate their elders with graphic columns in campus papers, those of us old enough to know a little better ought not to take the eagerly proffered bait.

But the hits they keep on coming.

Comments

[joe]

If I were thinking of a rhetorical equivalent, it would have been closer to Stalinist Communism, a leftist extreme. ;)

Diversity in education is like the tired canard “more is better”. Many still hold fast to diversity as the ideal in education. The concept has permeated so far as to be antiliberal. Diversity exists outwardly and potently to the extent that few recognize its many disadvantages. Do we really need a porn class? A gay and lesbian course? A Chicano American etc. studies course in undergrad, or even lower division education ( though I could see some variety in upper division courses). Public education has been watered down for the disadvantaged and is being further watered down by diversity. So instead of focusing on those already at a loss, educators further dumb students down by ensuring an early and well diversified education. For example, instead of reading and writing about traditional literature in an introductory writing course, one may read a half talented writer whose subject is multiculturalism--emulate this and not that. Here’s one in your field. Introduction to American Government, is now about political socialization and the vast diversity of ideas. The structure and formation of how and why WE have arrived where WE are is fading.

Why is this happening? Or why doesn’t Traditionalism and or Conservatism hold equal, or near equal weight in the diversity of ideals. Is it a myth that the social sciences are inundated with “liberalism”. Are my experiences leading me astray? I live in Southern California, I am diversified beyond tolerance and my skin is as thick as an elephant. I am ready for a good education now, not a diversified one.

My question should have been straight forward. At a community college with a truly diversified and enlightened administration, faculty, social or political ideal do you think a class on pornography would be allowed to be taught, should it be taught?

Anyways, being well rounded is like the “jack of all trades”. I probably extrapolated meaning far beyond your comment and my apologies if I did.

[Hugo]

Believe me, joe, if I had wanted to teach it, it would have been taught. Having taught gay and lesbian history (in fall 2005, I'll teach it again), I'm no stranger to trouble. It would be allowed -- but should it be allowed?

What standards would you employ to suggest that it shouldn't?

[joe]

Hold them horses, Hugo. Back up! Your assumptions betray you, diversity, and liberalism. You say“…if I had wanted to teach it, it would have been taught” would that be totalitarianism? Was the offering of the class debated among a truly diverse and enlightened faculty and administration? Should the community have some say also in the matter? Would you welcome the challenge of referendum or are the masses not up to the intellectual acuity of the wealth and importance of a Gay and Lesbian course in a community college.

“…I'll teach it again), I'm no stranger to trouble.” take some of that courage and teach a white nationalist or white separatist course (your allowed to grow your hair out too, but don‘t challenge any in your youth ministry J )--or even another separatist or minority and conservative leaning cause as example. I’m thinking of the academic sort of Carol Swain’s book, The New White Nationalism, but you would have to edit much of her research--it would be hard for many to swallow what she is uncovering ( I don‘t mean to be throwing the book at you or anyone else). I think it would be a great start, and alternative to multiculturalism and racism, and furthering the engagement of diverse ideas. It could help youth to define what is important to be learned or cultured in the mass marketed term of multiculturalism, i.e. do we need groups like Mecha, BSA, or Spartacus to understand and appreciate pluralism or celebrate individual identity.

So, “What standards would you employ to suggest that it shouldn't?” is not really a question you and I don’t know. From what side do we pull the diversity curtain? The current engagement begs reproach!

[joe]

the "J" after ministry was a smile on the word processor

[djw]

Good lord. I first posted in this thread because someone compared a sexually explicit newspaper column, and now Hugo teaching a class on porn is totalitarianism. Can we all just step back and agree that whatever we think of how American universities handle topics related to sex, it's just not in the same league as political opression?

I took Hugo's confidence as simply a statement about his ability to get a new course approved given the institutional hurdles. Nothing more, nothing less.

As I've said before, Joe, I'm in no position to engage in a curricular debate about PCC with you. More obviously isn't always better, and one perspective often falls quite short. Designing a good course is a balance between including lots of good stuff and allowing sufficient time to cover in depth. I can't fathom why you think studying the history and culture of certain ethnic groups inherently and necessarily means "watering things down." You must have a pretty low opinion of the discipline of anthropology, since that's pretty much all they do.

[joe]

could we keep sex and sexual orientation somewhere else other then the universities

i wouldn't call a speed bump a hurdle.

i think this debate goes beyond PCC

i am not at all concerned with the design or quality of a course that many others also would think inappropriate or unnecessary.

maybe my argument wasn't clear. i'll take the blame. but if schools (specifically JCs, and and cal state equivalents) were more apt to teach good reading, writing, and critical thinking skills by quality examples other then using these same platforms to spread poor "liberal" nonsense or maybe also genrel ed electives like history but then gay or porn studies is really going to get me abest job. i sure am glad however though of my whale roundness makes me abetter person and so you see the importance of good eduction at lower level of the great ivory tower of academia.

read any of these types of papers. i have read graduate student work not much better. how did they ever get a degree. what went wrong? i guess you could continue to idealize or proclaim all's well here--we be enlightened.