The artistic value of this film is not very high, but it is well worth watching, especially in China, a country where sex education is completely absent. How do we learn about sex? The sex knowledge of girls with boyfriends is taught by their boyfriends, and the teachers in the pornographic films about boyfriends' sex knowledge teach them. For girls without boyfriends, their sex knowledge is taught by girlfriends who have boyfriends. As a result, the teachers in porn have been sex educators for generations across the country, and their hidden influence far exceeds the pleasure they provide directly. Many knowledgeable women are dissatisfied with the sex education provided by pornographic films, believing that women in pornographic films are objectified, they are deprived of their subjectivity, and they are passive roles who provide enjoyment rather than enjoyment; and the relationship between men and women in pornographic films is distorted , strengthening the dominance of men and the subordination of women. Therefore, they advocated making more female-oriented pornographic films to capture women's desire to be respected, treated tenderly, and even worshipped in sex. Women should be the subject of desire, not the object of desire. But the crux of the question is, are women really dissatisfied with the existing pornography, and can this dissatisfaction be resolved by a simple role reversal?
I just feel that in traditional male-oriented porn, it's probably women who get satisfaction. Because if pornography really has aesthetics, its aesthetic standard must be obscene. What does obscene mean? It is barbaric, anti-civilization, and anti-social norms, and it is to completely return people to their original state. This stimulates the deepest desires and instincts. To a certain extent, it is even anti-human and anti-human, because it disdains the rationality that distinguishes humans from animals, as well as the dignity and morality built on this distinction. This is very similar to the aesthetics of violence. Isn't that kind of scene that makes people into sieves anti-human? I remember watching John To's "Underworld" in junior high school, and Gu Tianle directly throwing people to feed dogs. This kind of aesthetics based on anti-humanity and anti-civilization has opened up another world for us, a world where the value judgment of good and evil is not very clear, and a world that operates by another set of rules. Just as the routine of the gangster film is when the modern liberal law fails to maintain social order, the traditional civil community law takes its place, so the routine of pornography imagines the destruction of the kingdom of reason and the ridicule and usurpation of the highest commandment by desire. There are very obvious features of retro and nostalgia. The former is nostalgia for the ancient family-like community maintained by male friendship, while the latter is nostalgic for another system of soul communication maintained by reproductive worship and religious fanaticism. Such a virtual world constructed in works of art provides us with an exit from the real world. It is extremely short-lived, fatally attractive to modern people but at the same time extremely unreliable. The premise is that our beliefs about the real world are mature enough to be the real reason we want to rate violence and pornography. Because when we still lack accurate cognition of the real world, this constructed parallel world is very confusing and very dangerous. Therefore, those women who think that the female upper position in the pornographic film represents the female upper position in reality can only say that your psychological maturity is not suitable for watching porn, and the cowboy position is probably just to better show the woman's breasts and save men. Just a little effort. And those women who feel insulted when they see a rough blowjob can only say that you are too glassy. One of the most famous pornographic films in American history, Deep Throat, tells the story of a woman with a vagina in her throat. The film became famous not only because the Watergate whistleblower that broke out three days after its premiere ended with a deep Throat is used as a pseudonym for itself, but also because it is regarded by feminists as a declaration of women's sexual liberation. In my opinion, the meaning of "liberation" is that women can also obtain pleasure in the traditional way of sexual intercourse for men. What I'm trying to say is that if you're an independent, dignified woman in real life, you'll never be able to put yourself in the position of an object in porn, because you first distinguish the real world And the imaginary world, secondly, you know that in sex all social roles are withdrawn, and people are in a primitive equality, and finally, and most importantly, the subjectivity of one party in sex is not only reflected in its relationship with In the relationship of the other party, it is more reflected in the relationship with the self. It is more of a process of self-discovery, self-exploration, and self-knowledge. This self-knowledge is based on constantly challenging the bottom line. In daily social life, These bottom lines are often unchallenged.
The body has always been woven by words, but different people use different languages, and the deconstruction of a person or some people's right to speak is nothing more than cracking its narrative method. After the crack, we can look at the problem with a relatively relaxed attitude and find that there is nothing mysterious about the matter itself, let alone a conspiracy.
Going back to the film, in fact, many men's understanding of sexuality is like Jon's. It is constructed by pornography. It is not that they lack the opportunity to practice, but that they are brainwashed by pornography before they have the opportunity to practice. This kind of preconceivedness The impression is deeply ingrained, causing confusion between the real world and the fictional world. The same goes for women's perceptions of love, who wishfully put on Mary Sue's protagonist halo before they had the chance to fall in love. The question I've been thinking about is, since we rate violence and pornography, why not rate badly distorted romance films? They are no less harmful than pornography. The most bizarre romance I've seen so far is called Sleepless in Seattle, and the image I can't stop thinking about is if Tom Hanks climbs to the top of the Empire State Building to find out that the life partner he's never met is not Meg Ryan but Sister Feng, the film Has it become an anti-climax masterpiece that has left a name in film history? Of course you can be as crazy as you can during the two hours of watching a movie, but you have absolutely no reason to expect such a nonsensical love story to happen to you in reality. Fortunately, in our age, most people can distinguish between sex and love. We no longer assign value to physical pleasure. On the contrary, we respect the free choice of individuals, but unfortunately, we still lack love and other psychology. Feel the ability to differentiate, such as possessiveness, psychological dependence, and narcissism. What I'm trying to say is that we are disgusted by the act of objectifying people in obscene close-ups of genitalia. In fact, most people objectify each other unconsciously in love. Barbara is an extreme example, we always It is an attempt to transform the other party and make the other party meet our own requirements. We must possess the other party, rely on the other party, and obtain a good self-feeling through the other party's admiration for us. In all these activities in the name of love, the other party has always been means rather than ends.
So the film finally arranges Jon to meet the role played by Julianne Moore, and her appearance subverts Jon's view of sex. Jon said that the reason he likes watching porn is that he can lose it, which is to leave the real world and enter the virtual world, while Julianne Moore told him that the real lose it is to lose it to someone else, that is, in sex The equal subjectivity of both parties is the premise of enjoyment and satisfaction. This is the case in the real relationship, and it is also the same in the pornographic film. The most surprising thing about the film is that Jon doesn't see Julianne Moore's character as soul mate or the one or just any sweet title invented for the 2-year-old, it maintains a sober position from beginning to end, not falling into The clichés of the romance films it criticized. The premise of every healthy relationship is to fully respect the subjectivity of the other party. To put it more simply, we should love or have sex with each other as a complete and independent person. This is a distant ideal, and it is also a Real starting point.
View more about Don Jon reviews
