What I learned in Philosophy today.
How to tell if an ad is pornographic:
Can you switch out the woman in the ad for a man without the man looking ridiculous?
If not, the ad is pornographic because it demeans and degrades the role and expectations of women in society.So, technically, women shaving their legs is pornographic, because if a man did it he would look ridiculous.
I love the things I learn in this class especially in this unit, because it aways makes me really think.
this is stupid
1 - anyone will agree, i think, that the term “ridiculous” is completely subjective
2 - even if we accept a given standard for it, i don’t think this example qualifies. male/female specific products to be more precise. (you cant swap the guy in a Gillete commercial with a girl without it seeming kind of silly, yet you would not call that pornographic would you?)
Good criticisms.
(Note: Contemporary definitions of pornography are almost always very weak. This one isn’t unusual in that regard. But it doesn’t have to be this way. See: link.)
