Aurel Kolnai Against the Porn in your Pocket
What happens to our culture when pornography defines sex
I t is no secret that we understand the genitals as summing up our entire person, as metonymic symbols for our whole selves. Lovers say, “I want you inside me.” This is not a euphemism for “I want your penis inside of my vagina” — the two phrases do not have the same meaning. The latter takes the penis and the vagina as distinct objects — tools that a person has and extremities that he or she operates. The former use of “you” and “me” takes the genital organs as symbols of the self, representing and summing up the total person signified by the words.
Metonymic vision allows sense to be found in otherwise puzzling terms. The pornographic use of the word “cum” is simply a misspelling of “come,” a word for orgasm that has puzzled linguists and etymologists. Early erotic use can be traced to the 17th century, but there is nothing particularly “pornographic” about it; a genital organ cannot “come,” cannot “arrive.” It can only “come” if it is an icon for an entire act, describing the person who “arrives” in fullness at the completion of the sexual act. “I want you to arrive inside of me” might sound like a vague description of an awfully specific action, but when we are describing the total person — rather than the detached genital action — the phrase…
