In response to editorial comments on complaint about ‘pornographic’ penises in the Vanguard:
Who stole the Cookie from the cookie jar? Oh wait, it’s on the Pillow.
Where does influence stop? At what point does the little satan in our heads stop reacting to images and words? Perhaps the word pornography is so imbued with sinful negative connotations that the mere mention of the word turns monasteries into brothels. Obviously the word “pornography” as an obscenity in of itself is ludricous, or is it? Perhaps it’s as obvious as, “Pornography is any graphic image that sexually arouses an individual by viewing it,” except, of course, painted nude images of women. Of course it is OK to objectify women, and isn’t everybody sexually aroused by women, already?
I’m not sure how to laugh. Maybe, a sensual violent explosion of laughter or a diminutive little chuckle in rounds. The penis and the vagina make me laugh. One is an excessive amount of skin dangling, the other a fold inside. But this we all know. The funny thing? There are about 3 billion penises and 3 billion vaginas and yet we pretend, blink, blink and *poof*, they are not there. Except maybe in the movies and in advertisements and on TV and in the park and on the sidewalk and at the store and at home and … oh.
More comedy (or tragedy): the legal definition of pornography claims any graphic image that sexually arouses. The vagueness of this sentence allows the law much room for interpretation and leaves the reader dangling. How else does Britney Spears sell albums – or Ricky Martin for that matter?
What is the obsession with clothing in certain advertisements? Marketers make it seem like wearing particular clothing is more sensual, arousing and pleasurable than sex. Need I talk about shiny hair and boots? Are these pornographic? What about Pocahontas in the Disney movie of the same name that exhibited her in a sexualized state with an inhuman (or maybe unhuman) body and tight-fitting outfit. Fine for business? Bad in art?
Maybe it has to do with those parts mentioned above. Yes, I do apologize for using such vulgar terms, perhaps I was being pornographic. A switch of wording may suit this letter better. We must use harmless words devoid of offense, like “fresh baked cookies” for boys and “cuddly cute pillows” for girls.
What could be more harmless? Or, are the pillow and the cookie pornographic in themselves? They certainly are images and they do sometimes arouse.
Yes, perhaps they are. They are offensive because they strip us of our identity and whisper strange similarities between us. Pornography in all its shape – shifting, thought-shifting forms provoke in the mind wild passions and murderous thoughts. And since we cannot control ourselves, we should control our environment. So, tomorrow, I am installing a flood light on the bottom of my shower to blind my eyes and prevent me from seeing my fresh baked cookie for fear that I may have thoughts of getting crumbs on the cuddly cute pillows.
Zach Sanders
English,
junior