vendredi 2 octobre 2009


I have a class with a eccentric American teacher, who's apparently dabbled in porn (as an actor), is a script doctor, writes sociological inquiries about high-class SM practices and owns a crumbling villa in Morocco. He wants us to write a presentation on a subculture, and he gave us a handout about some of the themes already done in his previous classes:
Pro-ana, gothic lolitas, steampunk, gay skinheads, transsexual Iranians, pedophiles, neo-vampires, dykes and lipstick lesbians, trekkies, nerds, frats etc.
On the whole I don't find it an uninteresting topic and I'm thinking of writing about Furries. But what got me ticked off was the way he described some of the subcultures he supposedly "studies". For someone who's worked in the porn industry, he's pretty narrow-minded, describing transsexuals as people who have to work through their issues and mocking the Amish. Excuse me? Yell about pedophiles all you want, but no one is hurting anyone by wearing Spock ears and nerding out at conventions. GAHHHH. At one point he told a student that queer was a synonym for gay. No context, no detailed explanation. I wonder if I'm overreacting.

Maybe those who belong to a subculture can be even more intolerant than mainstream people. As a sociologist, he has no reason to let any judgement enter his field of work. So, shut up, teacher. Or rather, shape up and open your mind.

Aucun commentaire:

Enregistrer un commentaire