News Flash: Boink: College Exposure

This article describes the rise of sexually explicit magazines produced by college students for college students. Sporting names such as H Bomb and Boink, these magazines are an interesting reflection not only the changing face of society, but also have important implications about gender roles in modern society. Boink, a magazine printed by students at Boston University, is run by students and designed to be viewed by students. During its short time in publication the magazine has only had female editors and depicts both male and female models, being designed for male and female audiences with both heterosexual and homosexual preferences. Similarly, H Bob is not only has sexually explicit photographs, but an assortment of articles about sex, sexuality, art, and other work which pertains to the human body.
Ariel levy and Andrea Dworkins both vilify pornographic material as a step back for the feminist movement (Schneir, pg 420). Yet the ideals of these aging feminists are coming into conflict with a new wave of women who have drawn different conclusions from the sexual revolution of the 70’s. One of the founders of Boink, Andrea Oleyourryk, states in the article “Nobody could accept that it was for entertainment value. Why is that not O.K.? It’s just so unsettling, it seems, for people, that it’s just like, Oh, it’s porn for porn, enjoy it, masturbate to it, whatever.” She goes on to say “A body is a body is a body, and I’m proud of my body, and why not show my body?”. This view seems to capture the beliefs of many women in their 20’s today. If women are equal, than why should they be ashamed of their bodies? Oleyourryk defends her work, pointing out that the models in her magazine are normal, natural women whose photos are not photo shopped or altered in any way. “We don’t put makeup on them, we don’t do their hair, we don’t Photoshop them. We aim for honesty and truth”. Her goal was not to show the “surgically altered” women who are depicted in mainstream porn. Perhaps the stigma which Levy and Dworkin’s attach to pornography is not as prevalent or as negative today as it was in their time. Oleyourryk explains “It’s not, like, ‘The Scarlet Letter’ anymore”. This is in contrast with Levy’s critiques of modern feminists. Levy explains “Woman are now doing this to ourselves isn’t some kind of triumph, its depressing” (Levy, pg 44). Yet this view is inherently biased as it centered on the belief that there is something inherently wrong when women choose to depict their bodies in sexually provocative ways.
But perhaps the idealistic views expressed by many of these young women are flawed. The author of the article delves into the lives of a few of these men and women who whose picture was taken on the magazine. One of the male models depicted in Boink reported that “I’m a guy. There’s a lot less stigma attached to it. A chick, people think ‘slutty,’ whereas a dude gets associated with male bravado.” This seems to indicate that the ideals expressed by today’s feminists are not perhaps a true reflection of society today. One of the female models said that while she was proud of the artistic nature of many of her shots, she was unhappy that “her image was associated with some other, more explicit shot.” that occurred during her shoot. These real life experienced seem to indicate that the mantra expressed by the third wave feminist editors and photographers of these college sex magazines really doesn’t account for the experiences of those who are actually depicted in the magazines. The negative connotations associated with women who are featured in these magazines is clearly still an issue. Furthermore, the fact that men had a much different experience after being photographed than women has important implications for gender issues. It is clearly sexism at work, yet the problem lies not in what the women do and think, but the men. It is men who label these women as “slutty”, and unless their patterns of behavior and thoughts are changed, than it would seem that little progress can be made through such publications. While many of the women interviewed explained that they were more interested in the artistic nature of the photographs, the interviews also showed that perhaps this artistic side of the magazine was lost to many.
Yet these magazines are different in that they are not the traditional pornographic magazine. First, they are designed for college students of a particular university and are for the most part disseminated within that university. Thus they are not mainstream pornographic publications. Instead they are more tuned for the small intellectual communities within which they are created. Furthermore the stated goals of the magazines is to move towards breaking the stigmas surrounding the human body and pornography. Furthermore, magazines such as Boink depict both men and women and are designed to satisfy people of all sexual orientations. Interestingly enough, Boink won the approval of Boston University’s Women’s Center and many of its feminists because it catered to all. The President of the Boston University’s Women Center explained “It was sort of alternative. It kind of equalized it: gay men could look at it, women could look at it, and that was great.” This modern view of sexuality clashes with many of Ariel Levy and Andrea Dworkin’s view of feminists and sexuality. Both Levy and Dworkin’s do not seem to think that there is some for of equality that arises from both genders being able to participate in what Levy would describe as “raunch” culture. But maybe their views are clouded by their own experiences and views on the role of feminism. Harvard professor Marc Hauser noted “Nowadays, what constitutes porn? What does a 21-year-old think porn is?”. It is important to question whether these explicit images mean the same thing to the last generation as they do to this generation. As each generations experience and outlook on life is different, perhaps the view of today youth of pornography is much different than that of the last generation. Levy is quick to criticize other women for taking on male traits in the office and participating in other “male oriented” activities such as pornography, yet this view seem to be limiting. By attempting to define male and female characteristics and behavior patters, these feminists are falling into a trap. Is not true equality the belief that anyone should be able to act in whatever manner they want without being criticizing as long as they are not harming others? Individuality must be praised and fostered as freedom of individual expression is the means through which equality is gained. In the case of these magazines, there does seem to be some sort of equalizing factor if these magazines created to please other audiences besides males. Levy criticizes much of modern pop culture as being media which is created through a male lens and then distributed to female audiences. By creating “porn” which is made through a number of lenses, the stigmas surrounding sexuality in modern culture can be addressed.
One of the important messages that I took take away from this article is that media is interpreted by the individual. Thus, since the same image can mean vastly different things to different people, it is hard to understand exactly what effects and implications result from pop culture. A man who has been taught to treat women as objects will likely use pornographic images to reinforce their beliefs, just as men with a more liberal view of sexuality will likely view pornography in a much different manner. Similarly, the experiences of the feminist movement show that the controversy surrounding sexual expression among women will not end soon. Women, too, view all the media presented to them through their own individual perspective and thus each piece of media has a distinct and unique meaning to each viewer. While there are clearly system wide forces affecting media, I believe that media and art are much more open to the individual’s interpretation.