A unit of Lasting Forests
Sustained forests; sustained profits
evolving since March 30, 1999

Educators' Fiction
Life in a High-Tech Teaching-Learning Space

Cafeteria - 1

"How're sales in the porno shop?" Harold Klick had just put down his tray and was precisely organizing the dishes and utensils beside Bruce Turner. He then laid aside the tray and carefully unfolded a paper napkin and placed it on his lap. It fell to the floor as he adjusted his seat to get some imaginary proper distance from his vest to the table edge.

"I've had just about enough of these remarks," his voice making it difficult to tell whether he was going along with a gag or was retaliatory.

Harold was evidently needling Bruce, the bookstore manager, as had been his custom for six years. He had a religious resolve, a mission against pornography, but no understanding of it, no creative solutions, and least of all, the nerve for a real fight. His solution was to pick at it. Some preacher three decades ago had said that "red ants pick a carcass cleaner than a red lion." He was picking. Bruce thought of him as an ant.

Bruce had been hired in The Didactron as the bookstore manager. Most campus bookstore managers seem to be inventory clerks; he had been hired to market media. Little more than the name,

Pricing structure in the Media Mart to encourage continuing learning and to continue growth of personal learning resources

bookstore manager, survived among the things he once did elsewhere and what his predecessor on campus had done. Students called him "M-quad": Mister Media Mart Manager. He was viewed as a faculty colleague in a role similar to the librarians. His role was to expand the personal learning opportunities for students and faculty both while in The Didactron and in their later pursuits of knowledge. He was one of the major agents in this thing to which the faculty genuflected decades ago, continuing education, but did little more. He was building a computer-aided marketing strategy based on student and graduate ability-to-pay. The members of The Didactron were given the benefits of a form of educational cooperative. The student was not to be "gauged" but the greater the success of the graduate, the higher went the price (but not so as to be discouraging and always competitive with other markets). The objectives were to maximize learning (thus to have students gain certain personal, prescribed, media) and to continue that learning through life. Marketing to non-Didactron members was extensive and from these sales some of the "profits" were made that fed back into the media mart to keep costs down for students and graduates. The feedback loop encouraged students and graduates to be salespeople and a part of the marketing strategy; they benefitted in reduced prices to them of the media they needed. At one time, stock in the mart was to be issued to students and faculty. This had high maintenance costs and other problems with retaining control over the proper responses to students and faculty needs. Profits were all now targeted to reducing media prices and expanding Internet resources for the growing students and graduates of its alumni. Major costs were usually decreasing (e.g., mortgage, storage, administrative management, and media as the per-item production costs decreased in a mass market).

One of the groups of media for which large sales were regularly reported were those on mutualism by Dave Sabinoff. The mart not only carried his video discs, cassettes, manuals, microfiche and audio tapes, but provided catalog mail order sales for physical models of the male and female genitalia. It also carried Dave's computer software services for health evaluation, preliminary knowledge about intercourse, personalized evaluations of Ganina, and a new weekly subscription to a personalized set of suggestions for perfect intercourse.

It was this last, recently offered service that Harold had heard about. He had remained gentlemanly about the video discs of the hundreds of pictures of male genitalia, less so about the couples demonstrating the significant coital positions. He had never seen any of them and operated on heresay only, a topic he dismissed at length in his law class.

"Here come de jug; here come de jug," quietly joked the students to each other as he would enter class continuing the folklore, 50 years later, of a television skit about a silly judge entering court. By subject area, shape, and piety he was "de jug."

"Well, a few more such remarks won't overload you, will they?" continued Harold.

"No. Just kidding. How're you doing?"

"Fine, just fine. Nan is fine, kids are fine, dog is fine, lawn is dry, but just fine." He began to eat.

Bruce did not underestimate him...or any one. His code: everyone has a flaw or fallacy but everyone is formidable.

"How are sales? You know...in your so-called mutualist department?"

"They are excellent and far beyond my expectations. Sabinoff said he knew it would be this way, but I'm surprised."

"Pornography always sells." A chip-shot.

Bruce ignored him. "What is happening, apparently, is that people are starved for what is being offered. They've either not had access to such information, or it was so laciviously presented, or its authoritative base was so questionable that it was irrelevant. Our sales parallel the change in sale of condoms when they were taken from behind the counter."

"This is hardly the time to talk about..."

Bruce ignored his uncompleted sentence, wondering why, exactly, condoms should not be mentioned at a cafeteria lunch conversation.

"I just cannot get over your place selling that pecker disc!"

Bruce could not smile. Was it possible that this distinguished old gentleman was so ignorant of anatomy and the nomenclature of the body that he would refer to the videodisc of male genitalia as the "pecker disc"? It was vulgar. In contrast to his remark about condoms it was an anacronism.

"Well I have similar problems in other areas of media," Bruce said, not promoting a confrontation at lunchtime. Perhaps later. "I sell The Bible and if you follow The Way, it will get you nailed to a cross. I sell Marx texts and reproductions of Ruben's beautiful nudes. Along another aisle I sell descriptions of the Holocaust and the beautiful intellectual pathway to radioactive medical tracers ... and the nuclear bomb. I sell the beautiful and the beastly."

"Cute phrase."

He had not intended it to be cute. He was offended. He spoke to himself, "You have never been successful at anything when angry."

"Some lines are hard to draw but I do not think smut should be sold from The Didactron's media mart. Explicit displays of people having at each other..." ("The word is 'coitus' ", thought Bruce)

"...is inappropriate. I've even heard you show them in the dog position!" Harold was warming to his task. As if given a Sunday assignment, he was now, several days later, on the field of battle. He would argue for a cause but never take other action.

"Wait a minute. I'm not going to defend Dave Sabinoff's units, or philosophy, or quality of the media he produces. I am saying, though, that he has conscientiously produced materials he uses in his work, and it is part of a program here with peer review, and not only do I have no grounds for not selling it, but I also have the Bill of Rights grounds to sell It."

"Not if its pornography, you don't."

"You know better than I the law and you know how difficult are some of the interpretations."

"I'm saying that we in The Didactron have a responsibility that is above the limits of the law and that these are to set examples of propriety, and decency, and cleanliness, and modesty befitting us and a better society." Harold was beginning to profess, as was his role.

Bruce was becoming angry...mostly because he was bored by this part of the conversation which he had heard before. He was also angry because Harold had not thought enough of him to remember he had said it to him before.

"Harold, we have needs in The Didactron to set examples. With that I agree. Now the example of ... we ... want from you --- and I mean this in all sincerity --- is a normative theory of communicating all of the aspects of what Sabinoff calls 'perfect intercourse'. From your perspective of the law and your religious position, write down for me and all of us to see a scholarly, precise, cohesive statement by which any medium in my mart can be studied and likely judged -- as you call it -- pornographic."

If Harold had not dropped a piece of bread in his soup and was wiping the splashed droplets, Bruce would probably have been interrupted.

"Pornographic is a much too big and sloppy word. It is about as meaningful as grouping algae and oaks as 'plants'. What is needed is the scholar's scalpel to separate aspects of intercourse that are destructive, mutualistic, and those that are related to each person -- individualist. Then you need to elaborate those that are physical and mental and perhaps that cannot be separated. Then, acknowledging that these flow together, exist along some continuum, write about how to distinguish the "goods" and the "bads." Perhaps a philosopher can help. What I think is that the criteria are needed. We'll not argue that rape is bad. I want you to say explicitly how you know that or how have you decided. I want to know when the explicit written details of a rape case stop being good for research in rape prevention and bad when presented specifically for the arousal of some males. I want you and our little community here to attack the issue for the media mart but to hit it in such a way that the answer can be useful for society in general."

"Scholarly escapism!" summarized Harold. "Selling this stuff is wrong, and you know it. You just want to talk life into it." In some inner recess, he knew he had fallen under his own judgment. Hans Cliner would have said this was a guilt feeling, that he had sinned, and that it was reasonable to analyze what he had just done was recognizing and recording in one of his brain spaces a major incongruity in his life pattern and life practice. Harold didn't know Hans. He would later, as he came to realize that his teachings, also sold in the media mart, were not just pornography but blasphemy. Hans didn't know Harold Klick, but he would.

"I am asking for your guidance, something other than saying 'stop.' I've thought a great deal about the problem and while I have some general answers, I am not the scholar you are. I truly would like a completely reasoned, thorough analysis. I have read that films displaying detailed rapes lead to more rape cases. First, I think such films should not be shown. I think no one is so dull that even part of a rape scene suggests all that is necessary to bring revulsion, anguish, and other negative emotions. Dissection of the event is for reseachers and therapists, not for public display. My view is personal but I think it is shared by many thoughtful people. Some would argue that no rape should be displayed on film. If displayed to initiate or motivate a powerful story I say it is good. If it is displayed as instruction in effective rape, I say it is bad. My question though, remains, how did I tell? What were my standards or criteria?"

"My God, Bruce! Rape is intolerable in any form, and it has no business being sold here."

Calmly: "Yes, but how can all people in a modern society agree? On what grounds? What if any of those students there (pointing to another table) were so repulsed by a detailed explicit reenactment of a rape that they devoted their lives to social-psychological research leading to major advances in its prevention; or what if one created a new school of effective counseling of rape victims?

"How can I ask the question? I know you don't approve. You do not have to repeat that. Now tell me all of the rational criteria by which you and other thoughtful people can arrive at the same conclusions -- or perhaps more importantly, show exactly why we disagree.

"I don't want to agree to disagree -- not In The Didactron. I want to agree to try to understand...to pursue understanding. I don't want you to agree with me. I may never agree with you, but I do truly want to learn why we disagree."

"I have to get back to the office but I'll tell you why."

Bruce's spirits sagged. Harold could not tell him 'why' quickly. He had suggested, asked for, a serious, group, scholarly, researched, written effort.

"Pornography leads to rape.

"But that's not proven by any standards of proof."

"Violent pornography does!"

"What is violent pornography?"

"Oh, you know -- when women are stripped, tortured, mutilated."

"Men or women -- Harold -- that is awful! I've never thought of that as pornography. Pornography is media to arouse sexual desire. Anything arouses sexual desire in some people . . . from thumb sucking to pictures of naked people. Let's not lay the pressures of never triggering any abberant or abnormal thought on any medium. They sell hot dogs over there -- but my goodness that isn't the porno counter!

"Let's not be extreme.

"There is a relationship between pornography and sexual violence." Bruce let all of the difficulties of the statement pass. "Pornography dehumanizes women.

"Why not men, Harold? Have you ever seen Sabinoff's disc on women?"

"I'll not muck around in such stuff."

"You ought to. It humanizes women. It says we are all out here, different, unique, and beautiful in our own ways. It says we are all miracles, all with wonderful parts, God-given if you insist, and isn't it wonderful -- the specialness and novelty and sameness -- and he's saying at the same time that we can feel good about ourselves and our genitals...

"Not so loud," Harold said looking around, embarrassed. Only one person paid any attention.

Bruce had become more excited than he had realized.

"That's just it. The genitals...as you say...are private. They are not for display. They may remain private. What is private is opened in pornography to the public. What is private between men and women is now public."

What men and women look like and do has been known for eons. There is nothing new -- except to a society that prevents such knowledge and makes it hidden and secret and raises such levels of curiosity that all manner of abnormalities arise.

"As long as the models for pictures and the various media agree to pose and contracts are formed and honored about the use of such media, then I do not think that in and of itself, dehumanizing. Some people, through the luck of the genetic draw, have parts or features agreed by large segments of society to be beautiful -- eyes, teeth, hair, body proportion. I see no reason to separate out a breast, mons veneris, or nate for special exclusion.

"No reason...?" asked Harold, incredulous.

"I do think, however, the use to which such pictures or materials are put can be vulgar and dehumanizing. The use should be part of the contract as I see it. It is the model's responsibility to decide on whether he or she can be photographed; the limits of the poses that will be assumed and the likely uses to which the pictures will be put."

"No uses of pictures of naked women, especially those in obscene poses, are appropriate. I tell you they are pornographic. They are rancid. They degrade women."

"There are three things going on here. Women should not allow themselves to be degraded; photographers and publishers should not use their results in degrading ways; and customers should support neither. Should, should, should...what is the foundation for these 'shoulds' and 'oughts'?"

"You can't find the spread legs of a nude woman beautiful!?"

"Whoa. The question is not beauty. The questions are the questions. How can we decide what is good and bad, appropriate or not? What is pornographic has changed greatly over time and is quite different in different societies."

"Spread legs are bad. That is all there is to it. That is pornographic!"

"Sabinoff argues, I think effectively, that such pictures satisfy deep curiosity In society because it has prevented the genitals from being known."

"Absurd, curiosity or not! He misses the point -- not the cause but the results is the problem. It should not be shown."

"I repeat," continued Bruce, "what is the morality system for your assertions of what should be and what should not. I may agree with you, but I want to know the code. Where is the fine print? How can I tell when you are capriciously judging a book of beautiful pictures of beautiful humans to be art or porno?"

"The view of the body is private. It should be intimate. It along with other aspects of sex, are to be earned."

"Interesting premise. What is the source of that? Sabinoff argues that perfect intercourse results from people freely giving of themselves to a marriage partner, not being earned or earning some rights. The difference between your concepts is wider than I ever imagined...and I think it shows in the results, not just in the subtle differences in the concepts. Displaying to teach or support such action by various media does not seem to me to be inherently bad.

"To cause pain, either mental or physical is, in my view, easily judged to be bad, whether related to intercourse or how the family budget is spent. Destructive use of a family resource -- a home, car, wife, husband, or scene from a picture window -- are bad, by my criterion. There are, because of these criteria, a variety of choices. The decision is very complex. A paper, such as you and your group might develop, would indicate how complex. The same photo of a man and woman having intercourse could be judged pornographic or not, depending on whether it does or does not cause sexual arousal in many or a few people, male or female, whether both fully consented, whether both knew its ultimate use, whether it was used as planned in teaching, as depicting one part of a humanizing marriage mutualism, or slavery, or whether it is shown specifically to cause reactions in all of a group of socially abnormal males."

"I have to go," repeated Harold, arranging his dishes and balling up his paper napkin.

"I wish you'd give writing a serious paper more thought. It could help me.

"I'm not sure anything can help you," said Harold smiling. It was a deep cutting, person-violating joke -- evil.

Bruce tried to Ignore it. "I have a job to do and I want to do it well within this wonderful place with thoughtful people such as you. We have different views on things, and in this case, both the means and the ends.

"I desire to market perceived truth. I think we need to display the fullness of the personhood of people, the genuine differences between males and females, and the intermediate sexes. We should not lie about men's or women's or homosexual's physiology arousal rates, experiences of pleasure, or the experiences of warmth, affection, sharing and caring during the complex intercourse event."

"Not so loud! How you just blurt out these words!"

"I just do it because it arouses me. I like to talk dirty." It was his small joke.

Harold grinned, said no more, got his coat, and left.

Bruce realized that he had not eaten much of his lunch. It was cold. He absent-mindedly heaped his mashed potatoes, smoothed a form with his spoon, and went back to the mart.

Go to the top.

This Web site is maintained by R. H. Giles, Jr.
Last revision July 22, 2003.