Comments on: NOW AVAILABLE: “25,000 YEARS OF EROTIC FREEDOM” by Alan Moore

By: Dispatches From the Stacks | The Contrarian

Dispatches From the Stacks | The Contrarian — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:48:28 +0000

[...] his extraordinary collection Lost Girls most certainly is. Just this month, he published 25,000 Years of Erotic Freedom, a book expanded from his original essay for Arthur Magazine. Point being, Mr. Moore has proudly [...]

By: Ian Thal

Ian Thal — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 17:41:53 +0000

Moore is one of my favorite living authors, but I hope his argument is more sophisticated than the excerpt indicates.

Lots of theorists have tried to apply Freudian, or Freudian-influenced theories of sexuality to political science, trying to demonstrate some strong correlation or causal relationship between sexual repression/freedom and either the left/right political axis or the liberty/authoritarian poltical axis. I don’t think anyone has been particularly successful in that regard. Remember that Weimar Germany had some of the most liberal attitudes towards homosexuality in Europe, but then look at the 1933 elections.

There’s a far more complex argument presented by Michel Foucault in his “History of Sexuality” left incomplete by his untimely death, the second volume of which goes quite in depth with regards to some of what Uland alludes to.

By: Uland

Uland — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 05:05:39 +0000

Various Fascist regimes have in fact been very permissive regarding sex and reproductive rights. It’s a very broad-brush statement Moore is making here; Greece, the home of Western Philosophy, for instance, while allowing for many different variations of sexual behavior, did so within a pretty rigid, hierarchical social framework. The slaves weren’t buggering the Priests, in other words.
As far as the literature claim goes, I have no idea what he’s trying to say. Plenty of literature has come out of “sexually repressive” cultures, it’s just not the kind Alan Moore likes.
It’s ideologically motivated revisionism..

By: Trelek Taus

Trelek Taus — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 23:37:57 +0000

Venus of Willendorf is not a realistic portrayal of a woman or a female body. All of the sexual organs are exaggerated, which has led most to believe it a fertility totem. Fertility = Sex. Unless it was created by a woman whose intent was to show the parts of herself unfairly paid attention to by others, a paleo-parody. In the essay, Moore deals with the diverse feminist perspectives on pornography. I would recommend reading it.

By: Condition Red

Condition Red — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 22:21:08 +0000

Oh yes, Venus of Willendorf is “erotic” art, eh? Because it’s the image of a woman, and women’s bodies = sex. I call bullshit. Nobody knows what the cultural significance of the Venus was, and calling it “erotic” is just the projection of straight male douchebags’ extremely limited imaginations. Fie on that, I say!