Naked Old Mature Women

When the famous “Hays code”, which had suppressed the representation of sex in Hollywood for more than three decades, was repealed in the mid-1960s, it not only meant that society was “liberating” sexual representations (in fact, few years, pornographic works such as Deep Throat, the emblem of GarardDamiano, would be exhibited in commercial cinemas), it also meant that society needed to sublimate practices that could not be embodied in everyday reality (RR). Pornography, more than being a pedagogical genre that teaches gestures and acts, is a screen on which the desires that go through a society are exhibited. We may not like some of those wishes, but they can no longer be hidden. Then there is also the cam2cam chat.

What does this reflection on the means of thinking about virtual sex come from?

The very formulation of the question shows its absurdity. The answer is: on account of everything. There is no virtual sex without the intervention or participation of the medium. What relationship do the media have with our sexuality? The first empirical relationship conceives the media as a factory of social and sexual stereotypes, which the masses imitate and copy. Bodies become improved commodities, attitudinal models, which are traded in the market for visual desire. This naive idea that privileges the content displayed and imagines the media as simple aseptic devices that do not intervene or modify what they mediate is still in force. In any case, we stop holding the owner of the medium responsible to blame the hegemonic algorithm.

We still believe that the use or non-use of the smartphone depends on our will

We still believe that television can transmit “good” content and not the informational junk it transmits, as if this information does not reflect an explicit social desire. We remain trapped in the illusion of what we see and neglect the influence of what allows us to see. The influence of the environment is not ideological, it is practical.

It is easier to change the contents that a person thinks, than the way of thinking of that person. From the medium or technique come our ways of bonding and our ways-of-being. The great researcher of technique L. Mumford stated that in the technical or media phenomenon the relationships that the machines, works and instruments order and organize are more important than the machines, works and instruments themselves. The media apparatus, the material instrument from which the audiovisual situation is organized, is less important than the links organized by it, the ways of acting that it projects and the belief systems that it imposes.

Conclusion

The network of “invisible” or unspoken relationships that the artifact guides and over determines is more important than the same material apparatus that we consume in a fetishistic way. The camera / screen / smartphone is there, acting and determining what is seen, and therefore who it sees and especially how it sees it.