Thanks for your reply.

I did not say that Lai's work is pornography either. I am not sure what it is. It is simply not helpful, in my opinion, so we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. Best, Sherree.

You have said that you do not show Lai's exhibit in your classroom, and that is quite understandable. I cannot imagine a teacher asking young female students to negotiate Lai's work in a classroom setting.

President Obama said that, in our nation, we need to have a conversation about race. We certainly do. I think we need to have a conversation about gender, too.

I have a question. Lai's work aside: how are the viewing of pornography; the industry that promotes pornographic literature; and the history of pornography taught in a course on gender? Hopefully, Larry Flynt and Hugh Hefner are not presented as feminist icons. If so, then feminists like Gloria Steinem lost a big part of the battle for women's rights.

There is a middle ground somewhere, and perhaps we will find it some day. There are also choices outside of returning to the world that Margaret Sanger worked so courageously to overcome, and the one in which a young female artist says she is promoting feminist ideas by painting herself having sex with US Presidents.

Of course, I understand that these are sensitive issues. However, there is room for debate, including Lai's belief that what she is doing is in fact art and not pornography. Like I said, I don't believe that Lai's work is best understood as pornography.

Thanks for your reply.

I did not say that Lai's work is pornography either. I am not sure what it is. It is simply not helpful, in my opinion, so we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. Best, Sherree.

You have said that you do not show Lai's exhibit in your classroom, and that is quite understandable. I cannot imagine a teacher asking young female students to negotiate Lai's work in a classroom setting.

President Obama said that, in our nation, we need to have a conversation about race. We certainly do. I think we need to have a conversation about gender, too.

I have a question. Lai's work aside: how is the viewing of pornography, the industry that promotes pornographic literature, and the history of pornography taught in a course on gender? Hopefully, Larry Flynt and Hugh Hefner are not presented as feminist icons. If so, then feminists like Gloria Steinem lost a big part of the battle for women's rights.

Add my voice to your history lesson, Kevin. Right as the Roe v Wade decision was made, so was the movie starring Linda Boreman–a movie that dominated conversations among both the supposedly enlightened and the supposedly unenlightened as well, as we, young female students, nervously laughed and tried to navigate those shoals.

Sorry, Kevin. This one hit a nerve, as in eh tu, Brute? to those men (and women) who consider themselves feminists, yet do not acknowledge the brutalizing impact of pornography.

There is a common ground somewhere and we all need to find it. There are choices outside of returning to the world that Margaret Sanger worked so courageously to overcome, and the one in which a young female artist thinks she is promoting feminist ideals by painting herself having sex with US Presidents.

Of course, I understand that these are sensitive issues. However, there is room for debate, including Lai's belief that what she is doing is in fact art and not pornography. Like I said, I don't believe that Lai's work is best understood as pornography.

Frankly, if my child brought home information from her HS history teacher involving any of these images or any that remotely resembled them I would be at that teacher, principle or superintendents office within the hour demanding an explanation. I rather expect that most places in the US such material in a non university classroom would get the teacher in some hot water. Handing it to teenaged HS students would land many a teacher in serious trouble if not outright cost them their job.

That's just my two cents.

I don't see the exhibit as either art or pornography, just a waste of talent. Your description “sexually explicit” is accurate. My main objection is that the artist framed the exhibit as one that examines a feminist theme. I consider this a pseudo feminist position. I consider myself a feminist and do not agree with Lai that the exhibit advances a critique of patriarchal power. On the contrary, I think the exhibit does just the opposite. There are many feminists–both male and female–who do not agree with my position. I respect that. This is simply the way I see the exhibit

I don't see the exhibit as either art or pornography, just a waste of talent. Your description “sexually explicit” is accurate. My main objection is that the artist framed the exhibit as one that examines a feminist theme. I consider this a pseudo feminist position. I consider myself a feminist and do not agree with Lai that the exhibit advances a critique of patriarchal power. On the contrary, I think the exhibit does just the opposite. There are many feminists–both male and female–who do not agree with my position. I respect that. This is simply the way I see the exhibit.