AAG 2016 Annual Conference – San Francisco, 29th March – 2nd April
Special Session:
Sex and the City: Reactionism, Resistance and Revolt
(#GeoSex16)
Convenors: Dr. Paul J. Maginn (UWA) – @planographer
Dr. Emily Cooper (Northumbria) – @e_cooper2
Dr. Martin Zebracki (Leeds) – @zebracki
Prof. Clarissa Smith (Sunderland) – @DrClarissaSmith
Sponsored by: Sexuality and Space Specialty Group (SxSSG)
The presence and regulation of sexualised bodies, sexuality, sex work/erotic labour, porn and BDSM/fetish in the city has taken an interesting turn in the 21st century. For some, it is argued that we have entered a period of hyper-sexuality whereby highly sexual imagery and ‘deviant’ sexual practices have given rise to a pornified culture where plastic bodies (and products) engage in ‘unspeakable acts’. This has led to calls for the filtering/banning of internet pornography and the criminalisation of the recording/distribution of certain sexual acts (e.g. face sitting, fisting and female ejaculation). Relatedly, anti-porn activists have pushed for the introduction of mandatory condom use in porn production in California. Simultaneously, adult entertainment performers/producers have resisted such proposals arguing that pre-existing testing regimes for STIs and HIV/Aids are more than sufficient and that overregulation will push the porn industry to relocate elsewhere.
In relation to sex work/prostitution various (conservative) politicians and radical feminist organisations have advocated the introduction of the ‘Swedish model’ proclaiming that it will ‘end demand and exploitation’ and ‘stop human trafficking’. Canada and Northern Ireland have recently adopted this regulatory approach. There have been high-profile raids and/or restrictions of brothels/massage parlours in places such as Soho (London) and Edinburgh (Scotland) and online escort websites such as Redbook, Backpage and Rentboy in the US, often under the glare of the media. The conflation of human trafficking and sex work as one and the same issue is challenged by International bodies such as WHO, UN AIDS, the ILO, Amnesty International, and sex workers/sex work advocacy groups who have all called for sex work to be decriminalised.
There have been calls for other forms of sexual imagery (e.g. Page 3 in The Sun newspaper and ‘lads magazines’ in newsagents) and adult entertainment (strip clubs/lap-dance bars) to be banned or closed down. LGBT relationships have also been under the spotlight in recent years. Whilst Ireland recently moved to legalise same-sex marriage via a referendum, Northern Ireland and Australia have steadfastly refused to move forward on this issue. Interestingly, despite the various calls to ‘stop porn/raunch culture’ an increasing number of people appear to be consuming and/or engaging in different forms of sexual practices. For example, BDSM/fetish/kink practices appear to have gripped suburbia if sales of 50 Shades of Grey and sex toys are any measure of society’s sexual inquisitiveness.
Ultimately, what we appear to be seeing is a kaleidoscopic (sub)urban sexscape wherein the tectonic plates of conservatism/feminism/religion and capitalism/individualism are locked in deep socio-political competition with one another in relation to all matters pertaining to sex and sexuality. This special session, then, seeks papers that speak to the ideas of (i) Geographies of Reactionism; (ii) Geographies of Resistance; and (iii) Geographies of Revulsion/Revolt as they apply to the social/cultural/economic/historical meanings, consumption/production/distribution and regulation of sexual imagery, sexuality, adult retailing/sex shops; sex work/prostitution; adult entertainment/erotic labour, pornography and BDSM/fetish/kink practices within urban, suburban, rural and virtual spaces.
We welcome abstracts/papers by scholars and research-minded sex workers/sex work activists, adult entertainment performers/activists as well as those who oppose/campaign against the ‘sex industry’ from a range of ideological/theoretical/methodological/empirical standpoints.
If you are interested in taking part in this special session please send your title and a 250 word (maximum) abstract to the co-convenors at GeoSex16@gmail.com by no later than 23rd October 2015. Full details on abstract submissions here – http://www.aag.org/cs/annualmeeting/call_for_papers.
Call for Submissions: Participations: Journal of Audience & Reception Studies Special Issue: “Thinking about Censorship Differently”
Expected Publication Date: November 2016 (Vol 13, Issue 2)
Co-Editors: Clarissa Smith (University of Sunderland, UK); Mark McKenna (Glyndwr University, UK); Jason Zenor (State University of NY-Oswego, US)
Participations is the online Journal devoted to the broad field of audience and reception studies. It aims to bring into dialogue work and debate across all fields involved in examining all areas of media and culture. Participations has pioneered a system of open refereeing for all contributions, designed to encourage open, critical debate among researchers. It can be found at www.participations.org.
Call for Papers
Over the last few years, the issue of censorship has been looming larger. Governments have always been keen to close down arguments which they find threatening; sometimes arbitrarily, sometimes with at least a superficial attempt at ‘justification’. Recently, this has taken the form (in many places) of attempts to shut down the social media which are perceived to be beyond governmental control. At the same time, rising levels of conflict around religion have pushed the issue of ‘offence’ high on the agenda while different kinds of cultural representation involving race, gender and sexuality have been defined as ‘dangerous’. The result has been such horrible moments as the attack on the offices of Charlie Hebdo in Paris in January. It is in such contexts that governments are likely to reverse their usual rhetorics, and speak out for ‘freedom of speech’ – even when they have been happy enough to stifle it themselves in various ways.
All kinds of working assumptions about how cultural and media materials are received by members of the public are embedded within these ongoing arguments and counter-arguments. On one side, when authorities are for censorship, there are usually claims about the ‘immaturity’ and ‘vulnerability’ of the people who need protecting, often from themselves. On the other side, when the right to ‘freedom of speech’ is paraded, then come the claims that people can ‘get the joke’, can ‘see satire for what it is’. When campaigning groups of any kind denounce ‘offensive’ materials, they usually proclaim their own emotional outrage on behalf of those whom they imagine will be harmed by the offending materials.
Many kinds of voices, including those of academic researchers, are heard in the ongoing debates about all these issues: from law, political studies, religious studies, sociology, psychology, and so on. But what might be the contribution of audience and reception studies? Accordingly, we are pleased to announce a Special Issue of Participations: Journal of Audience and Reception Studies. We are interested to hear from scholars and practitioners who are studying the nexus of censorship and reception.
Possible questions to be addressed are:
- How are debates about censorship conducted, and what claims are made about ‘audiences’ in concrete circumstances?
- How does the concept/discourse of ‘offence’ work in different contexts and for different audiences?
- How do audiences claimed to be ‘immature’ actually relate to and make sense of the materials deemed dangerous for them?
- How do particular audiences claim challenging materials for themselves, and insist on making sense of them in particular ways?
- How do audiences read media depictions of censorship?
- How does audience reception of censorship differ in the context of fictional versus non-fictional texts?
- How do audiences interpret concepts such as insensitivity, incivility and indecency in mediated channels?
- How do audiences subvert censorship/attempts at censorship?
- What are individual’s and group’s experiences of being excluded from public discussion.
- What is the relationship between censorship and memory?
- How do definitions of censorship change moving from texts to platforms?
Manuscripts can cover various media (e.g. games, theatre, film, comics, music, television, social media, etc.) and genres (news, reality programming, non-fiction, pornography, etc.). Topics may also include non-mediated events such as protests, demonstrations, developing communities of resistance, navigating legal frameworks, etc. The editors welcome theoretical essays as well as empirical studies from various methodologies.
Please send a 250 word abstract to jason.zenor@oswego.edu by October 31, 2015. Please title the email “Participations Special Issue – your last name.”
DEADLINES
Abstracts Due: October 31 2015
Decisions to Authors: November 30 2015
Full submissions: May 1 2016
Final drafts: September 1 2016
Publication: November 2016