The Divine Inspiration of Porn and the Beginning of Sexual Metaphysics
Some things are simply wonders. Sex is one of these. Since the dawn of civilization it has been moralized and demoralized beyond all the other wonders of human nature combined, and then some. In William H. Davenport's eye-opening report Sex in Cross-Cultural Perspective, we learn that 'sexual behavior often becomes loaded with special cultural meanings and relevancies that have no direct relationships to either the gratification of desire or its function in the reproductive cycle.' Were we then able to completely peel away every inessential piece of meaning and culture from sex, including all moral regulation from without, would we find what Alan Goldman claims in his stripped-down analysis of sex, Plain Sex, that: 'There is no morality intrinsic to sex'?
In The Divine Inspiration of Porn and the Beginning of Sexual Metaphysics, I argue that that morality is no excess, but a necessary part of sex, which turns out to allow for the whole idea of porn. That is, pornography requires sexual morals to hang from. What this leads to is a very different approach to considering the existence of God: There could be no pornography without God. This strange assertion follows from the character of pornography and the existing moral qualities it draws from, along with a phenomenological inquiry into sex and sexuality examining such concepts as nature, purpose, gender, and beauty to arrive at a sure definition of sex and the essential features of human sexuality in action.
Diligent philosophers are owed a core metaphysical framework to take on sexual matters with in the real world. What I hope to offer is the proper framework, and the basis for that framework, to thinkers everywhere interested in the essence of sex if there is one, and the meanings necessarily entailed therein.
Nicholas Acocella works with his hands at his father's shop in northern New Jersey. Instead of college, he toured America playing music in some of its best and some of its worst cities. For the time being, he thrives on the most daunting intellectual pursuits he finds, and the love and grace of his dear wife Tracy.
Rachel Browne writes:
'Having been in touch with Nick Acocella I gather that this book is much appreciated by people who have read it, but nobody will actually support it. The argument that there would be no porn without God is probably regarded as too outrageous. I have had a violent reaction from a theologian because of my support of this book.
[Request a copy]
'It is beautifully written. It is a mix of analytical and continental philosophy and theology, but it is also literature. There are sentences that will grip you so much that you have to read them out to someone, anyone near, to share appreciation. You only do this if you love literature and find something great.
'The book captures the nature of sex better than any other book on philosophy of sex and is slightly pornographic in itself — in a very beautiful and sensitive way.'