You won’t find adult magazines or X-rated films at Target, but you will find that which is comparable. According to Webster’s, pornography simply is: “the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement.”
For some reason(s), we’ve generally labeled and judged as “adult” or “mature content” only that which men tend to consume. Thus, such material is decried and kept far away from everyday life–like, say, trips to Target.
But then I go to Target and I see this:
See, that which we call “pornography” is actually only one side of the coin. And because we neglect to consider books like “Fifty Shades of Grey”as pornography, despite it just as appropriately meeting the definition of the word, content like it shows up as casually (not to mention promoted heavily) as if it were a Disney movie.
I don’t point this out to judge books like this (not do I care that Target sells it.)
I do so to point out the absurd inconsistency of it all.
If Target sold Playboy, it might make the news. But books that describe acts and anatomy in ways more graphic and egregious than most pornographic films are somehow able to float by as something other than pornography.
This is subject of my editorial that was published in today’s Star Tribune.