Customer Reviews

Smut: A Sex-Industry Insider (and Concerned Father) Says Enough is Enough

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

This fascinating book is the work of Gil Reavill, an author and journalist who has worked for such publications as Screw and Penthouse magazines. Mr. Reavill is a proponent of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and fully supports the existence of the porn industry that he has been employed by since the early 1980s. However, American culture has changed markedly since Mr. Reavill went to work for Screw magazine, and the pornographic imagery and concepts that were once relegated to the dark corners of society have now moved into the mainstream.

In this book, the author pleads for the right of the porn industry to exist, but also pleads for the right to not be subjected to the porn industry. Throughout the first and second parts of the book, he shows how pornography has become ubiquitous in American culture, making it impossible to shut it out from out children's lives. In part three, he explains why we are where we are, and why so many support the porn industry with militantly blind obedience. And finally in the fourth part of the book he explains what we can and should do to protect ourselves and our children from pornography (including learning to use the v-chip).

Overall, I found this to be a fascinating book. The "chattering class" will be quick to dismiss the author and his opinions for any and every reason, but he does do an excellent job of presenting his credentials in discussing the issue, defining it, and suggesting moderate and reasonable action. If you are troubled by the R-rated talk and images that appear to be ubiquitous in our society, and want to see an insider's view, then I highly recommend this book. Mr. Reavill is to be congratulated for his excellent work, and his stance on a subject where his pocketbook would normally suggest his quiescence.

I give this book my highest recommendations!

A thoughtful, interesting, mind-blowing book. Neither right nor left, but instead highly intelligent and original. Free-thinking and true.

This book reminds me in some ways of the book "Ordeal," by Linda Lovelace. In it, she says that she was forced to do the movie "Deepthroat," in addition to many other unspeakable acts. Later in life, however, she was a minor porn celebrity who hawked various adult products and movies. So is "Ordeal" to be totally believed?

Enter Gil Reavill, a former writer for publications like "Screw" and "Penthouse," to name a few. In "Smut..." he paints a vivid picture of how pornography and the sexualizing of America is having an adverse effect on our society. Television, mainstream movies, magazines, books, the internet and advertising in general are all being affected by smut. But aren't most people aware of this?

The old cliche "one can't see the forest for the trees" comes to mind when describing this book. Sometimes we actually have to be told what we are seeing and experiencing to actual be aware of it. In that regard the book completes it mission: we are surrounded with sex and pornography, yet can do little about it. The Janet Jackson episode is frequently mentioned throughout the book. After the initial outcry, what has really changed? Not much in the author's opinion.

The book is worth a read because the reader is forced to think about the consequences behind what is now normal. How quickly do we now look away from scantily clad girls on billboards? How quickly do we delete sexually explicit emails? How many times do we rewind Victoria's Secret commercials (for the TIVO-ly inclined)?

Returning to Linda Lovelace, my only question is: Is the author a true convert, or just a publicity hound? As in Lovelace's case, only time will tell.

Reavill's first job was at "Screw" magazine, and he has since moved on to writing for literary giants "Penthouse," and "Maxim." Somewhere between Screw and Penthouse he began worrying about the omnipresence of sex in one form or another - but not worried enough to quit his day job or to desire revision to Americans' right to Free Speech.

Reavill claims that more people view smut than sports. Venues include billboards, radio, TV, the Internet, video games, books, sexy clothes for youngsters, phone sex, motel movie rentals, X-rated movies on DVD-equipped autos in adjacent lanes, and raunchy songs played on high-powered automobile boom-boxes.

So what to do? Reavill points out that less than half of those with V-chips take advantage of their capability to block undesirable programs. Another problem is that censors historically end up making themselves (and their cause) look stupid - eg. banning Ernest Hemingway, James Joyce, or Geoffrey Chaucer, or criticizing the Teletubbies. However, Reavill does make a good point that overall the prevalence of smut has become overwhelming.

He's apparently made quite a bit of money in smut, but now he's shocked, Shocked! that his daughter has been exposed to lewd and lascivious material, herself. Now, ACLU membership in hand, Mr. Reavill launches into a sermon about what needs to be done to clean up America's act.

I don't buy it. I've got a daughter about Mr. Reavill's age myself, and while I'm concerned about the scope of her access to sexually-oriented materials, I'm more concerned that Mr. Reavill and those who agree with him are trying to keep me from making decisions about my daughter's access, and instead make those decisions for me.

Mr. Reavill's credentials about being a card-carrying member of the ACLU don't hide the fact that his polemic is, frankly, tiresome and unimaginative. Each chapter rails about a different bit of the mass media, how the exposure to sex is simply out of control, and how a crackdown of some kind is needed on freedom of the arts, speech, and expression. All in the name of decency, of course.

One thing I looked for, but never found, while reading this book is a discussion of how Mr. Reavill or his own daughter were HARMED by exposure to Eminem's lyrics and Janet Jackson's bare boob. Shocked, maybe. Offended, probably. But harmed? Not one word. She might be mortified that her father is apparently such a prude, but being an embarrassment to one's children is one of the joys of being a parent.

I found "Smut" to be a typical argument against freedom of speech. "We don't trust you to supervise your kids; we'd rather do that for you." Thanks, but no. This book broke no new ground in the debate.

A more useful book might have been a discussion between Mr. Reavill and his daughter about WHY he has problems with HER watching "South Park" instead of why he thinks I should control my own kids' access to that show.

Maybe I like my kids watching "South Park."

Actually, I don't. But that decision belongs to me, not to Mr. Reavill.

The author is an absolute hypocrite, doesn't put his money where his mouth is. If he is so adamant about (ab)using 1st amendment by porn industry, he should be as adamant about our 1st amendment right to be spared of materials we do not want to get.

But it is all irrelevant anyway, it comes to the root cause of the problem: parents' unwillingness or laziness to address the issue in their homes. You do not need a filter, V-chip, skewed ratings or government involvement. The feature you need is already there and it is called the plug. You need your will to pull it of the wall and stop watching the rubbish on today's TVs. Once everyone realizes that, it won't be profitable business to air (print,...) it any more and people like author will have to find other means of income.
But of course, it will never happen, because we are too stupid to stop voluntarily watch/listen/reading such garbage and people from author's industry will keep making money on our own idiocy.

Stop watching TV, listening to trash talk radio, reading porn magazines and show your children and friends that there is indeed another way of life, away from mass media bombardment. You can do it, my family and I did it nine years ago.

After all , this is the only way how to put this industry out of business.