Tuesday, June 06, 2006
More on Host Clubs in Japan
I'd like to take the liberty to comment on Jee Hyun Kim's very interesting post on Host Clubs in Japan, below.
"Phallocentric" is not necessarily just something where men lead and women follow. "Phallus" has many meanings of which the two that are perhaps the most important are: 1) the penis and 2) the active creative principle dubbed "male" as opposed to the passively creative one dubbed "female" (in sex the "female" arouses the "male" so his phallus becomes serviceable for sex and procreation). The videos shown in class were phallocentric in the sense that by their very structure they privileged the penis. They were phallocentric even though the video shown during the break had been described as "feminist pornography" because the woman in it takes active charge of the sexual activity. The reason that video was still phallocentric is that it focused on the penis in exactly the same ways as other "non-feminist" porn videos. So with the Host Clubs if we stay at the purely sexual level the question would be if the relative focus on female vs. male bodies is reversed in them. My bet would be not. Now when we look at the second meaning of "phallus" then "phallocentric" is that which focuses on the active creative principle. On this count, too, the Host Club likely remains phallocentric. Here the women play exactly the same role, it seems, as men play in "Hostess Clubs." It is an active, i.e. phallic role. The difference is that here the phallic role is played by women. In fact the ability of women to play a phallic role is the whole point here. It does not speak against phallocentrism though it does against male privilege at another level.
Host Clubs may be liberating or not, but they're still phallocentric, it seems to me.
"Phallocentric" is not necessarily just something where men lead and women follow. "Phallus" has many meanings of which the two that are perhaps the most important are: 1) the penis and 2) the active creative principle dubbed "male" as opposed to the passively creative one dubbed "female" (in sex the "female" arouses the "male" so his phallus becomes serviceable for sex and procreation). The videos shown in class were phallocentric in the sense that by their very structure they privileged the penis. They were phallocentric even though the video shown during the break had been described as "feminist pornography" because the woman in it takes active charge of the sexual activity. The reason that video was still phallocentric is that it focused on the penis in exactly the same ways as other "non-feminist" porn videos. So with the Host Clubs if we stay at the purely sexual level the question would be if the relative focus on female vs. male bodies is reversed in them. My bet would be not. Now when we look at the second meaning of "phallus" then "phallocentric" is that which focuses on the active creative principle. On this count, too, the Host Club likely remains phallocentric. Here the women play exactly the same role, it seems, as men play in "Hostess Clubs." It is an active, i.e. phallic role. The difference is that here the phallic role is played by women. In fact the ability of women to play a phallic role is the whole point here. It does not speak against phallocentrism though it does against male privilege at another level.
Host Clubs may be liberating or not, but they're still phallocentric, it seems to me.
# posted by Ivan Davidson Kalmar @ 3:47 PM 
