Hysterical Literature (something I stumbled upon today)

WARNING GOING FORWARD:

This subject matter is, for all intents and purposes, not for immature audiences... I will not say those "of age" because age is a piss poor determination of maturity...

HOWEVER

I expect this thread to remain on topic and to conduct itself with SOME level of maturity... yes, the subject material begs some sort of emotive/reactive response, but I think the point behind it is much more important.

With that said, I present the spoiler tag:

Spoiler

http://hystericalliterature.com/

Hysterical Literature

I am of two minds with this... to the one, I get the point here; we, as a society, have so dramatized, fanaticized, romanticized, and made "taboo" the idea of sexuality that bringing it out into the open is, for many, almost unthinkable... but sex and sexuality is NOT some evil thing to be "hidden away"... and to be honest, I completely agree. Within the boundaries of good taste and common sense, why should someone have to fear a choice between being "sexy" and being "intelligent"? That kind of either-or mindset is simply ridiculous.

To the other hand... this project DOES take it to a rather... interesting... extreme.

Then again... as a red blooded male, I am fascinated by the varying reactions of the participants and their thoughts of the experiment (which you can find in the about section of the site).

I actually stumbled across this site from a facebook post linking to this article:

Spoiler

http://sploid.gizmodo.com/watching-women-trying-to-sing-while-having-an-orgasm-is-1573802566/all

on gizmodo, which talks about the women from the band ADAM attempting to sing one of their songs while being stimulated to orgasm. It shows an intriguing side of the human psyche - the desire to succumb to the sensations coursing through the body, yet at the same time knowing you have to continue to perform the task at hand, else the ministrations you are enjoying will cease.

I dunno, just found it fascinating (and admittedly somewhat entertaining); despite the obvious erotic nature of the content, it was not being "sexualized" at all.

What do ya'll make of this? ADAM did it as a type of Art - Hysterical Literature did it as both an Art and a Study.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Indeed if you read the faq on the site he explains the Victorian Era "treatment" as where the name came from, though it is mostly unrelated to the experiment itself

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Define "distracts".

More generally; so this is social sciences research, then.

 

Okay, who the fuck funded this?

 

I am confused by that statement Bells - by the authors own words

I wouldn't call it sexual assault either - after all they knew what was going to happen

 

Kitta, I appreciate the idea of exploring the nature of the 'hysterical boundary' (although you could achieve distracted responses by poking someone with a pin; then again that would be violence, the other side of the coin) but the more I think about this I'm not sure if it's suitable for SF. I know we have that age limit but I think it's only 13. It's not sexual assault, though.

 

Certainly not the worst topic I've seen the last few years... However, if the general consensus is that it is inappropriate, I will remove it.

 

How the hell is all sexual touching sexual assault?

 

Who deleted those posts? Ae let Bells' ridiculous assertion that the video is an example od sexual assault stand, but not the counterpoints? Seriously? That's how we run this place now?

 

I have to ask - what and how do we draw the distinction here between pornography, art, and science? Obviously, depending on the intent with which you view it, this could be considered any or all of the three.

 

I think that it's abundantly clear that this thread has next to nothing to do with science. It's out of place in this forum, though it might arguably be appropriate for the 'arts' forum down below.

I'd say that this thread looks like a strange bit of trolling. It's a moderator posting material that's calculated to stir up Sciforums' readers, along with a warning to them not to get stirred up.

The original 'art' work/performance (or whatever it was) looks like it might have been the same thing at one remove. It was the artist playing mind-games with the audience, by showing what sounds to me like pornography under the guise of high-concept art.

So is the audience supposed to dismissively condemn the work as pornography, or are they supposed to play the sophisticates, nibbling cheese and sipping from their wine glasses? If they do the former, they can be ridiculed as 'lowbrow conservatives'. If they do the latter, they can be laughed at for accepting almost anything as 'art', provided that it's packaged pretentiously enough and shown at the right gallery.

 

Whatchamawhosthat again?

I think you'd better, yeah, because I can see where this is going.

Totally fucking did. Watch, I'm gonna do it again:

How the hell is all sexual touching sexual assault?

Jeebus, I'm out of control! Next I'll be voting. Crazy.

Eh? Who's one for me?

Wait, now I'm a woman? I thought you were implying above that I was supposed to be gay for this exercise or something: "he's one for you". Okay, okay, whatever. I can adapt. I'm a woman now. Throw pillows, glass ceiling, Doctor McSteamy. I'm in the zone. I can nail this part.

No, wait! I didn't mean 'nail'. That sounds... well, you know. What I mean is -

Okay, my doctor - who is essentially a perv or very stupid - has assaulted me.

Which is... unwanted and unwelcome, then? But they told them that was what they were going to do.

I'm lost here. Am I still a woman? A gay woman? A lumberjack? A dandelion? And how is all sexual touching assault, then?

I'm sure these questions will be cleared up in the next episode.

[hr][/hr]

Heh. Sorry. It's just that with the deleted posts, well. You know. Funny.

 

Weeelll...

Yeah. Pretty much. Come on: it was always going to go this way, as much as we'd always have Paris.



I mean the author in the OP was worded in such a way that I have faith in the process as defined by the select members of the management committee that is currently reviewing all our cases.

 

This is old hat, it's already been done.

Mystery of life.

 

At this point I may as well just have the entire thread removed... Here I had hoped we could discuss the contents like rational adults. I see I was mistaken - we would rather assault one another and attempt to leverage the thread as some sort of ammunition... To which I say simply "sod that"