Lecture #4 – Pre Electronic Saturday, Jan 28 2006 

Surprisingly art played a large role in the pornographic industry.  In Europe, nude pictures or sculptures of men, women and children were not looked at as obscene or pornographic images.  However, in America, if there were paintings or sculptures all over the country of nude images, the public would not respond the same way, or as mature as the Europeans did.  As it was stated in the lecture, early erotic art was natural, however once in the West, looked at as something different.  I find this extremely easy to believe because I think about all of the immature people I know today, where if the term “boobs” or “penis” comes up, all you hear is giggles.  However, in Europe, people are so much more respectful of this “erotic art”.

Before technology, porn and erotica were shown in different ways than they are now.  I believe that before the internet, porn was not as big of an industry as it is now.  Post technology allows pornography to be all over DVD and VHS as well as all over the internet.  It is much easier to access today.  However, pre technology, pornography was seen in artistic ways.  It was also seen in Europe, in brothels, where clientele went to excite themselves.  For example prostitution was considered pornography because any type of penetration was considered pornographic.  Throughout history the definition of pornography has changed and each culture has a different view on what’s porn and what’s not.

Will we ever have a definition for Pornography? Tuesday, Jan 24 2006 

The “Definitions” lecture was one in which I opened up to a lot of terms and images I had seen before but never noticed or fully understood.  I was under the impression that there was one set definition for the term pornography, however there are many; almost every individual has their own definition for the term.  I still do not know how I would define pornography, however after watching this lecture my opinion from my first blog where I mentioned that I thought of pornography as “the sleazy men that go on porn websites to watch naked girls having sex”, has changed.

When the lecture opened, I assumed that it was a clip from a British sitcom.  The men and women were arguing over the different between pornography and erotica, and how when men are turned on by the films, it is considered pornography, but when the women are turned on it is considered erotica.  I was shocked to hear that there was such a difference in the terms used and their definitions, when talking about the same film.  This is what I talked about earlier, how every person has their own definition.

In the lecture, it was mentioned that in Cleveland, Ohio, a movie was not able to be shown because of the content being that of a man and woman in scenes together where they were naked.  The way that the police handled this, reminded me of how some states handle subjects such as homosexuality.  My mom told me that the movie “Brokeback Mountain” was not shown in either a Midwestern state, or a Southern state, because of the content of the movie. This just proves that whether it is pornography or homosexuality, I feel that someone always has something against it, and that all the controversy needs to stop.

Lastly, in response to the ads shown in the lecture, the one that I had the largest opinion on was the Calvin Klein ad with the four children jumping around in their underwear.  What makes this ad any different from a Huggie’s commercial where a toddler is walking around with no shirt on in a diaper?  I don’t think that parents starting their kids early on a modeling career is a bad thing, and I don’t think that the Calvin Klein advertisement would be considered pornography.  The little girls had their shirts on, and the boys didn’t, but we see that everywhere at every age.  What makes a Calvin Klein ad any more pornography than a Huggie’s ad?  A pedophile could see both ads and be turned on by both ads, but that doesn’t stop anyone from saying that the Huggie’s ads are inappropriate, does it?

Response to Lecture#1: Tuesday, Jan 24 2006 

After watching Lecture#1: “A course in what?” I became much more interested in what this class was going to be able. I learned a lot of things that I had never known before. I am an internet fanatic, and I never knew that it was started for the benefits of scientists to make their communication lives easier.

Without my male friends, I would not be as exposed to porn as I am. I know for a fact that they occasionally watch it, which is why I’m familiar with what it’s about such as the “story-lines” and the whole idea of the pornography stars forming a television program or film based around sexual activity. It shocked me to know that VCR and VHS films would not have existed without porn, and that a kiss used to be considered pornographic.

To me, I am not taking this class to see pornographic images, or watch pornographic films. The topic of how pornography came about, and the inside scoop on how huge of a business it is, is very intriguing to me as a student, as well as a 19-year old female. I look forward to learning more about the negative effects of the pornography industry, as well as the social effects and the society’s effect on the industry.

my first blog Sunday, Jan 22 2006 

Hello! My name is Tillie Crehore, and I am a freshman at UB. I am an intended communications major and chose to take COM497 to fulfill my elective requirement. The reason that I chose a class called Cyberporn & Society was because I thought it would be extremely interesting to learn about. We hear about the sleezy men that go on porn websites to watch naked girls having sex, but we have never heard about the effects that cyberporn has on society. When I told my parents and friends about the class, they were confused at first but when I explained to them what the class was about, they agreed that it would be a very interesting course. This is my first online course, and figuring out how everything works took me a while. I hope that I can take away from this class information that I never knew before.