buffalo, MC, and I have four statements to show for this excersize:

Feminist pornography is possible.

Possible problems with objectification.

Objectification depends on the viewer.

Viewer access to non-creepy porn.

Porn …?

This is what Friggin sushi, bluebox and I came up with!

Feminist pornography is possible
Possible or maybe possibilities
Possibilities foster hope
Hope requires change
Change takes time
Time is money
Money is power
Power is evil
Evil is anti-feminist
Anti-feminist is anti-feminist
Anti-feminist degrades people
People watch porn
Porn is produced for pleasure
Pleasure… 

Flavia Dzodan's article at Tigerbeatdown on "penis centric" porn for cis straight women.

A podcast in which Amanda Hess discusses porn and feminism. 

Autostraddle has NSFW Lesbosexy Sunday, a weekly series discussing sex and porn. Since it's directed toward a lesbian/bi/queer/queer-friendly audience it would be interesting to know what other people think about it and its consumption.

Jill Filipovic on "outsourcing porn". 

Feministing's interview with Tristan Taormino, editor of Best Lesbian Erotica and feminist pornographer.

What makes feminist porn feminist? at Feministing

Feminist Porn Awards qualifications for feminist porn, link here: 

"In order to be considered for a Feminist Porn Award, the movie/short/website/whatever!  must meet at least one of the following criteria:

     1)  A woman had a hand in the production, writing, direction, etc. of the work.

     2)  It depicts genuine female pleasure

     3)  It expands the boundaries of sexual representation on film and challenges stereotypes that are often found in mainstream porn. 

And of course, it has to be hot!

Overall, Feminist Porn Award winners tend to show movies that consider a female viewer from start to finish.  This means that you are more likely to see active desire and consent, real orgasms, and women taking control of their own fantasies (even when that fantasy is to hand over that control)."

I would suggest looking into all of Janelle Monáe's album The ArchAndroid both for musical/cultural value but also for its message and presentation (especially if you plan on reading the Moya Bailey article). It's very readily available from standard music venues, or just ask around for people who have the album. 

Mentioned in class:

Double Rainbow was the blog series done by Caroline Narby for Bitch Magazine's blog about the autism spectrum. 

Vampires and Cyborgs: Transhuman Abilities and Ableism in the Work of Octavia Butler and Janelle Monáe by Moya Bailey at Social Text Journal. 

I was looking through this serendip blog (all the way back...) and thinking "this is a literacy class"...if we were to make a class glossary and define these terms, what terms would we choose? How would we define them/choose these definitions? Would there be multiple definitions?

I thought of this when I was still trying to figure out in my head how to define "literacy" - finding a definition for literacy was also part of my goals for my midsemester evaluation. I also thought of this when I was looking through the Gee reading,  remembering that I really didn't understand any of the terms - primary discourse vs dominant discourse, secondary discourse, literacy - because I felt he was using these terms to define his terms.

Class thoughts on this?

As I was watching this film, I constantly asked myself a question, "Where do I stand in terms of sex work?"

Before watching this film, I was strongly against the idea of sex work, because I thought it objectifies women. And I believed that the sex workers make money by "selling" their body parts. But, after watching this film, I am not really sure where I stand anymore. Some part of me is still against the idea of sex work, and the other part of me is not so against it. As stated in the film, it is the women's rights to do whatever they want to do with their bodies. No one and no law should make any boundary of what is okay and what is not okay. If the women can pay the rent and support their families by doing so, I think the sex industry is actually helping women become more independet (financially). But still...it still objectifies women...I guess I'm okay with the strippers, because there is a glass between the customers and the strippers. But, I am not okay with the "private service," where the customers and the sex workers physically can meet each other. I think I'm more against the idea of "private service" because ANY thing can happene during that time, including rape, insault, and even murder. 

Where do you stand? Did watching this film change your view of sex work industry?