This is an entry I meant to write last year already, but didn't write. In January last
year “The Revenant” came out with Leonardo DiCaprio. I haven't
seen the movie. Although the movie is based on a true story, which
usually interests me, it didn't interest me at that time. But I have
noticed discussions about a scene or a moment in the movie. Namely a
scene with a bear and that context there was talk about rape. In the
end it just seems to come down to what could be called an
inconvenient camera angle and nothing more. On English websites there
were writings of “porn”. Carole Cadwalkadr wrote in her review
for The Guardian even in the headline already “The Revenant
is meaningless pain porn“
(https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/17/revenant-leonardo-dicaprio-violent-meaningless-glorification-pain).
German webistes as well mentioned the amount of violence in the
movie.
http://www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de/neu-im-kino-the-revenant-wuchtiger-kampf-ums-ueberleben.2150.de.html?dram:article_id=341768
used the word “Gewaltporno” (“violence porn”). Apart from the fact that I had little interest story-wise,
the mass of violence, which reviews already focussed on a lot, was
just another reason for me not to watch the movie. What puzzled me
however was the word “porn” with all of this. A reference to the
bear scene and with the connection of the amount of violence making
it “pain porn” and “violence porn”?
I am one of those
people who noticed Mark Gatiss rather late through “Sherlock”.
Once I was searching the internet for pictures of him and found a
website with a collection of pictures of his hands. “Hand porn”.
I understand that someone is impressed, if not to say obsessed with
another person. I too may like certain aspects of a person or I may
not like them at all. But “hand porn”?
Dear me! I just
typed in “food porn” on google to find a certain article again.
There is an article on that on the English Wikipedia!
Prefaced with the notion: “Not to be confused with Food and sexuality.“ The following headline from The Guardian a
while ago made me think of the porn thing again, namely: “Unicorn
lollies and six million avocados: our insatiable appetite for
Instafood“.
(https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2017/aug/01/all-food-fit-to-instagram-have-we-reached-peak-food-porn-photography).
I didn't find a picture of the unicorn lollies in the article, but it
is about food and lately it seems that the word “porn” isn't far
away. As it's the case in the article. I don't really get it. Maybe
I'm just naïve or clueless. After all I'm one of the few people who
don't have an account on Facebook, also I'm not on Instagram or
Twitter or any of those other sites where everything is shared. Can
somebody please enlighten me.
Maybe I'm thinking
too negative about this or something. I don't know. But regarding sex
I've watched a couple of documentaries. One was about young people
with sick abnormal sexualities. Not criminal, but not normal either.
I remember a young man in that context who saw a young woman while
driving in the car and he had to stop and left the film crew for a
short while to go to the toilet and shortly after that he came back
again and I think he even excused himself at the film crew. He was
very aware that this wasn't normal behaviour and I think he felt
sorry about that. I felt sorry for him. Another program was about
teenagers, sexuality and porn. With the internet children and
teenagers have easy and unnoticed access to porn and “sex movies”.
Such movies, the teenagers told openly, are shared with others, too.
Someone in the documentary made the comment that shaving, for example of
the legs of a woman and also young girls has its roots in porn. They
shave for such movies for a good view. I didn't see it that way until
then. Certainly that's not a thought most women have when they shave
today.
Back in my school
time a company would drive me to school and back home again. I
remember when I was in my final years the drivers and boys on the
drive were talking about women and girls they saw on the street.
Words like “Schlampe” (“slut” or “bitch”) were used. Not
always, not necessarily weekly even. But regardless the fact that I
was a young woman and present with them, the word was used freely. In
English the word “bitch” is equally freely used for a certain
type of women or also girls. On the other hand there's also time and
again discussions if a victim of rape may have provoked this act
because of their behaviour or their clothings.
What does that mean
for our society and it's progression? I'm getting the word
“sexualisation” in my head. But I don't get any further than that
with my thoughts. I don't understand it. Can't the encounter of a
bear not simply be the encounter of a bear? Can't hands and food
simply be hands and food? I don't think I like this progression.
Maybe only because I don't understand it. Maybe because I really
don't like it.
Comments more than
welcome. I think I'm open and I would like to understand more.
No comments:
Post a Comment