University of Iowa Makes Waves
Judging
from reactions on radio and television, there is one way to garner
attention – put the name “pornography” in a class title.
According to the San Francisco Chronicle: ” U. of Iowa to Offer Pornography Course“.
First, the course background:
Jay
Clarkson has had no trouble getting students at the University of Iowa
to sign up for his fall class examining pornography in popular culture.
…
Clarkson, a graduate student, says students seeking a cheap thrill should look elsewhere.
“There are probably some students who will be titillated by the title,” he said. “They will be disappointed.”
The one-time course is being offered by the communications program at
the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences — and it's already full with
20 students, and a growing waiting list.
Clarkson said his goal is to get people to think about how pornography
has moved from the adult bookstore to everyday advertising.
“It's not a class about enjoying or viewing pornography,” Clarkson
said. “We will certainly be talking and reading critics who are against
pornography.”
This
class is likely being offered through the “Issues” courses offered by
the University of Iowa to lead a class of undergraduate students
through what can be rather controverisial material. These classes
are usually interesting for the discussions and readings alone –
sometimes class discussions can get rather in depth and heated.
(These are not courses for students that don't want to be engaged.)
What is more striking from the same article is the reaction from House Leader Christopher Rants:
One
person who isn't a fan, however, is Iowa House Speaker Chris Rants, who
is questioning whether tax dollars should be spent on the elective
class.
“Do
they know that we're not done with their budget yet?” Rants, R-Sioux
City, said. “I'm pretty sure we don't need to increase state funding by
$40 million to teach critical pornography studies.”
Knowing
how these courses go, this is something I would think someone
“conservatively” tilted might actually encourage. I, for one,
think that courses like this are a good idea – particuarly when
offering courses to students who are studying mass media.
Why?
For one, pornography is everywhere
in 2005 America. Commercials for a long time – particuarly those
geared toward males – have relied on a tried and true formula:
whenever you want to sell something, it has to involve “sex”.
It's to the point where I am squeamish about watching televised
sporting events with my nieces and nephews. Now, when you walk
into the local bookstore, books written by pornographic “starlets”
appear on the best-seller shelves. When I check my e-mail, my
“Junk Mail” folder is full of solicitations (sometimes explicit
solicitations) for pornographic websites. Pornography in the
unrestricted free market is inescapable.
So, if
you're a young college graduate trying to make a career in media and
advertising, one message seems to come through crystal clear: sex
sells without negative consequences.
Of course, that's not true. We know that there are consequences
to the use of pornographic images in media and advertising –
particularly in the social development of gender roles amongst children
and increasingly in adults. College students who plan to make a
career in media and broadcasting should be forced to address the issues
related to the marketing techniques they will one day use to buy and
sell airtime – maybe this course, if well done, should become a regular
offering.
Making
blanket threats to cut funding because of the mention of the word
“pornography” is nothing more than a cheap political ploy – Rants needs
something to justify his attack on the education budget, even if it
means attacking a good idea.
Blog For Iowa 