Porn Performers As Meat: The Infamous Analogy
It was trendy for a time in the 1970s for people who campaigned against porn to draw disgust-tinged analogies between porn performers and meat — so much so that Larry Flynt famously lampooned them with the infamous 1978 meat-grinder Hustler cover. Of course anti-porn campaigners blamed pornographers for associating women and meat, but we now understand enough about psychological projection to know that when a bizarre analogy like this suddenly appears in a discourse, we should look primarily to the brain behind the lips whence it came to see who has the twisted worldview where the bizarre analogy makes sense. It is, of course, mostly the opponents of porn who view women as meat, and especially it is they they who view carnally fleshy attributes as bad things for people to have or embody or display.
It is therefore telling and interesting that I should find, in the back pages of a 1973 British music magazine about which I otherwise know virtually nothing, a parodic porn magazine cover making strong use of the porn/meat association. Admittedly in less courageous fashion than Larry Flynt, they prefigured him in the meat grinder department by no less than five years:
Found in the inside back pages of the final (November 1973) issue of OZ magazine, published in London.
Similar Sex Blogging:
Shorter URL for sharing: https://www.erosblog.com/?p=18469
I would not have called Oz a music magazine. It was an underground newspaper full of outrageous articles of every kind, mostly pro-hallucinogen/cannabis and pro-sex. The music came with the territory. The Schoolkids Issue, where they let a bunch of children edit it and put in anything they wanted, was the one that got them finally prosecuted.
Studying the history of Oz is mandatory for your class State Censorship of Sex and Rebellion 101.
http://www.bl.u....html
http://www.hera...o_Oz/
It is a shame that the article with John Mortimer, the defence barrister, is behind a pay wall.
https://www.indexoncensorship.org/2014/06/archive/
Very possibly an error on my part — I just dipped into several issues and they all seemed to have music and musicians as a primary focus, much in the same way that Rolling Stone magazine today could be characterized as a “music magazine” despite running articles about politics and pop culture and many other things. Certainly it’s not a description I’m prepared to try and defend, given that I’d not heard of the mag before today!