More on "Zoos and Eyes"

Originally I saw no connection between zoos and pornography other than the fact that I dislike both. After our class discussion I understood a little bit better, but still disagree. I feel that a better analogy would have been circuses and pornography.
There is another way in which the argument could have been better. Hannah brought to class the definition of pornography. According to her definition, pornography is essentially obscenity without any artistic merit. If this was the case in the argument in the essay, the argument would have been stronger. The essay specifically used sexual pornography that objectifies women. This is a bad example because it is far too specific. Pornography is no longer just for men to look at women. Women look at women, men look at men, women look at men. Also, because it can be anything obscene, I do not understand why he used the sexual type. People will read it and automatically connect it with sex and be confused as I was when I first read it.
I agree that with both, what is being looked at is an image of what is real, and is not actually true to life. Even with this, I think that pornography is an extreme example. So, I feel that it is pornographic in the sense that it is obscene without artistic merit, but I still feel that it cannot be compared with the sexual pornography.