Through the collection and analysis of negotiations surrounding the gay magazine Destroyer, the intention of this paper is to identify norms of sexuality within a contemporary sex-radical discourse. These negotiations are collected from interviews with individuals whom, at the time of the inter-view, consider themselves or their politics sex-radical. In order to allow for a more general under-standing of the context in which these negotiations have come about, material about Swedish law is also included in this text, together with the interview material, and serves as a base for analysis through the application of Gayle Rubin?s theory on the hierarchical value system of sexuality.Following, are the main themes throughout the paper: The meaning of the context; Sexualized children; The possibility to (not) participate: differences of power; The decision whether or not to sell the publication and The position of the pedophile and crossgenerational love/sexuality within the LGBTQ community.Key words: sex radicalism, pornography, boy-love, Kiddy porn, pedophilia, Destroyer, Gayle Rubin..

This essay deals with 18 year old boys´ experience of their usage of pornography. My main focus was the pornography found on Internet, which includes pornographic films and nude pictures.Both developmental and social psychological perspectives were applied in the study. These theoretical perspectives were chosen, because boys´ view of sex, especially during their adolescence, are influenced by the increased supply of porn and that boys understanding of porn are influenced by values present in our society. The methods used were three focusgroups and a short survey with simple questions regarding pornography. The choice of methods was based on my standpoint that an open discussion concerning porn was less offensive of integrity, in comparison of working with individual interviews.

The study aims to examine how censorship and comics have been discussed in three debates. The aim is also to identify discourses and the orders and relations of power constructed in the debates, and to examine how librarians should handle debates about censorship and comics. Selected sources are articles from Swedish newspapers and tabloids about the debates on the Pox-trial, the manga case and the debate about Tintin in Kulturhuset. The results from the analysis indicates that the debates have been dominated by two main discourses: a discourse on freedom of speech and a discourse on social responsibility. Within the discourse of freedom of speech there is a range of perspectives that emphasize: artistic freedom, the need for open and free conversations, a discussion about how the comics are assessed in comparison with other media formats as well as a discussion about moral and moralism.

The thought behind this bachelor essay regarding gender and rhetorical feminist criticism developed years ago out of the fact that I read just a little too many dirty chick lit-pockets as a teen. Those chick lit-pockets were my first introduction to sex, to gender roles, to how men and women react and are supposed to react to each other and, in some sense, even to feminism. Those chick lit-pockets, later turning into hardcore Harlequin-books, became my benchmark when I started to contemplate the fact that this is a man?s world, produced and reproduced by a male gaze which influences everything from sex, porn, advertising, gender roles, jobs and payment to dirty pockets for teenage girls.The essays aims to show how the male gaze-phenomenon could be to use for the rhetoric discipline: first combined with other rhetorical theories as a way to analyze and understand gender and objectification. The main question asked; How to put the male gaze on a rhetorical leash? This bachelor essay consists of a qualitative literature study focusing on four articles and one book in which five different male gaze-perspective appears.