Garbage
I can't believe that the "Thinking Person's" newspaper would stoop so low as to advertise—your whole issue except for Jack Neely (thank goodness)—for those creeps who are doing "Homegrown Porn" [by Coury Turczyn and Herschel Pollard, Vol. 9, No. 24].
Disgusting, nauseating garbage.
You must be getting a cut from the Web Mistress and Naked Ladies for all that free advertising.
If this continues, I and others will be ex-readers.
Betty H. Barber
Knoxville
Ed. note: While we are, unfortunately, not getting a cut from any of the companies we wrote about, we were inspired by them to start our own "PulseCam" on the Metro Pulse website. While there's no nudity to be had (no, Jack won't take off his shirt, no matter how nicely you ask), you can get a peek at the very exciting lives all of us lead here at Pulse HQ. Check it out here.
Irresponsible
People in a messed up world like ours are bound, it seems, to try to work out their various quirks and unresolved neuroses through sexuality—that may not in itself be bad, "so long as nobody gets hurt." But people do get hurt and the exclusion of this consideration makes the "KnoxSmut.com" edition irresponsible journalism. Jeanna and Becca seem happy as clams to be selling their naked images for fun and profit. Fine. At least they are being compensated for their exploitation of females' objectified sexuality and the display of their own bodies (rather than a man like Bill who makes a profit by displaying hookers' naked bodies or like husbands who make their money as "agents" of the women who sell sex to other men—what's the moniker for that occupation again?). Sadly, those of us who because of such work are looked at a little less seriously and are seen more as sex crazed bodies than individuals are not compensated. When someone makes a profit, somebody else is paying. The article overlooks the impact of viewing women as "easy access naked sex utensils" (even if they are married)—especially the influence on young people trying to figure out what sexuality is and how men and women relate to one another.
It is arguable that naked pictures on the net don't objectify women any more than beer commercials do generally, but the net doesn't stop at "live nude women." The ease with which someone online can move from naked women, to bound women, to battered and near dead women is far too smooth. How can Joe Nobody (especially if he happens to be an adolescent) figure out where "simply objectifying" women becomes real hatred of women? All of these sex workers seem to be enjoying sex, all the time, in any manner—that's what I gather from your article and friends who are more connoisseurs of such media. Men may reason "and why wouldn't women enjoy making $90,000 a year for two hours 'work' a day, with all of that attention to boot?" Why isn't it questioned that this is about the only way a woman, short of a professional degree and some really high connections, could ever hope to make that kind of money? Why isn't it a concern that men who see women enjoying their own exploitation won't understand why the same thing doesn't apply to non-cyber women? Why wasn't there a look at people who get so caught up in this whole cyber-world they lose the "real life relationships" they had to begin with?
I understand that there was probably an attempt to be objective or "non-judgmental" by just reporting what goes on in the web porn industry, but objectivity does not exist. What is put in, who is interviewed, and what is left out is necessarily editorial. The web porn article could have been made less offensive if the attending article(s) had dealt with some of the issues above. Instead, the supporting article was on a strip club ["Bare Naked Ladies"] and was at least as unreflective in its approache as the first article. There may be a theme here but it's not sex. Readers are shown how women's defense against a sexist society is to exploit their own bodies and create the illusion that men want to see "p—-y power" as one of your writers put it. Such power is not real power—it may help some women in the short term but it is always turned against us ultimately. It doesn't give women options or offer a health or pension plans; it does seem to make men feel they have access to our bodies if they know us or not because in the world of "p—-y power" women are almost always interchangeable.
Nancy Dumler
Knoxville
Not Fit for Decent Folk
I was extremely disappointed to see the article "KnoxSmut.com" featured on the front page of the June 17 issue. Does this element of our society need free publicity? I think not! Do the writers of the Metro Pulse need new ideas for informative articles for decent folk? I think so! Are you writing to serve yourselves or to give us information that serves us as a community?
Let me be clear. Sure, I believe in free speech. That is why I am writing this letter and expecting you to publish it. However, I don't think a paper such as Metro Pulse should be FEATURING this kind of information and making it more accessible to people of any age. Anyone wishing to pursue indecent material of this sort does not need help from a community weekly newspaper. I am sure they are aware of how to use their browse options to surf the net. Anyone writing for MP that needs some decent alternative article ideas, read on.
1. There are great young people all around us who get overshadowed by the media's efforts to feature the "bad" youth of our society. Why not be proactive and ieach Knox county high school and profile their achievements and college/career plans?
2. Local farmers all around East Tennessee are fighting to keep their land. Many come from families who have farmed for generations, but are having to sell their farms due to high taxes, "development," etc. What does this mean for our community? How can we support these small, local growers?
3. Several families from Kosovo have arrived in Knoxville. Why not profile them, the churches that sponsored them, and the refugee agency that brought them here?
These are just three ideas off the top of my head. If you need more, just let me know. There are a lot of decent, positive things you could be writing about that you have not even touched yet!
Karen Dhyanchand
Knoxville
Post Card Imperfect
I was happy to see some discussion among the citizenry recently in the pages of Metro Pulse regarding the possible ill-placement of cell phone towers in neighborhoods within our city.
But I am talking now not of the residences in Sequoyah Hills that are currently under siege by these structures. Rather, it is of a cluster of Victorian houses on the edge of Fort Sanders at 11th Street, dutifully preserved as at least a remnant of what was once the prevailing architecture in that neighborhood.
One of these houses is home to the Beautification Board of Greater Knoxville. You can sit on the front porch there and close your eyes and imagine something pleasant and inspiring before you. Perhaps a small park with a statue of Knoxville's own Pulitzer Prize winner James Agee, standing erect in his home neighborhood to gaze over the city of which he wrote so well. Something to further complement the encouraging trend of sculptures in the city such as the recent commemoratives to Alex Haley and to the signing of the Treaty of the Holstein.
But open your eyes and what you will actually see is a cell phone tower surrounded by a chain link fence. Yep, there is a cell phone tower in front of the house designated for Knoxville's Beautification Board. What's wrong with this post card?
Charles Thomas
Knoxville
Special Bonus Letter!
Gosh darn it, we do love getting mail from our readers but we just can't print it all. Sometimes the missives are unsigned, run too long, don't relate to any of the issues we usually cover, or verge on the loopy. Rather than let these bits of personal expression go unread, we will now start posting them here. Enjoy!
Don't Mess With The Force
I waited until after I saw Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace before reading the article in the May 20th issue and boy am I glad that I did. The four pieces that were written destroyed all credibility that the Metro Pulse has ever held for me, not because I disagree with the opinions that were given but because of the way in which they were written. None of the four pieces actually examined the film. They merely trashed it. A film review, in case anyone has forgotten (which it appears that these four writers have) contains evidence for the opinion being expressed, not just a list, and a film review should not belittle the readers. (After all, if you are going to alienate your audience why bother writing in the first place.)
| 
