The Paradox of Porn and Women's Rights--a short exploration requested.

[DuaneBidoux]

Bear with me while I go through this because it is puzzling and fascinating to me:

I love erotica (porn) and my wife enjoys it too. It has been an enjoyable (although limited) part of our married life for some years now. We never watch anything that is violent and are both quite offended by that type of porn.

I know however that there are many feminists (as well as obviously female fundis) who find it degrading and offensive but I am trying to wrap my mind around something that has interested and puzzled me since I had an anthropology class where I learned about this.

There is a virtual 100% correlation between women’s rights and the acceptance of porn in a society. These two things mirror each other absolutely. When women’s rights are on the upswing in a society then pornography is nearly always becoming more available and more acceptable. When women’s rights are lessening there is nearly always a decreasing acceptance of porn and it will be less and less available and increasingly criminalized.

Scandinavian countries, as opposed to Middle Eastern countries, is the perfect and obvious example: There are virtually no countries that have more women’s rights than the Scandinavian countries and this is where porn has been accepted the longest and where it is now the most open (porn is available on regular non-subscription television). India is somewhere between the US and the Middle East and they now have porn but it is still extremely hidden and shameful and public displays of affection, while rarely dealt with criminally, are considered unacceptable.

And then we come to the Middle East, where porn can be punishable by death—and these are the same countries that repress women (to the point of genital mutilation so that women cannot take pleasure from sex) to the point of turning them into virtual slaves and farm animals for simple breeding.

The pattern is everywhere and there appears to be no exceptions (that I can find--but anyone that has an example of an exception and I would be interested in knowing about it). There doesn’t appear to be a cause and effect either. When porn becomes less acceptable, the falling rights of women follow. When women’s rights are declining then a decline in acceptance of porn will follow. So far (according to my follow up reading from my anthropology class) there doesn’t appear to be an exception.

This is especially interesting in view of the popular image of a dark gathering spot where men leer at naked women in sexual acts while they are objectified—men who one wouldn’t think care a damn about women’s rights.

But there also has never been a good explanation given for this. For those feminists out there reading this who are offended by sexually explicit material I am asking for your take on why this could be.

I wonder if it is not because the people who are most against porn in a society also generally have a repressive value system against women and when they come into power they act against both. But this would seem to be a cause and effect theory and it really appears to not be easily cause and effect.

If anyone has ever seen some reading on this topic I would welcome some further reading. I have read Susie Bright who as many of you know is a very liberal sexually open feminist and I have looked at several books by radical feminists who believe porn is evil (including “Pornography: Men Possessing Women” by Andrea Dworkin who seems to feel the very act of sex itself is an oppression of women (and who doesn’t appear to be at all familiar with the above pattern)).

Thoughtful points of view are welcome-and please nothing directed at people with any given viewpoint.

[Taverner]

1. I agree

And add to it that most of the porn in the US is produced, and now funded, by women. Add to it that Playboy is run by Hefner's daughter (he gave up controlling interest the minute he found he could hang at his mansion all day with the bunny of the day.)

Ever know a stripper? My roomate in college was a stripper who paid for law school 100% (and had extra cash stashed in savings). Her only regret was that her first couple years as a lawyer would be a step down financially from her dancing days.

If you're going to argue that porn exploits and degrades women, then you might as well go full on Labor Theory Value and argue that all wages exploit workers.

[keithjx]

2. Just a guess

But I'm thinking that the greatest problem isn't the filming of sexual acts, it's the exploitation that the film industry utilizes (here and in many places abroad - I have no clue what the Scandanavian skin flick industry is like). I can't get really write an essay on this right now, but I'd guess that it isn't the content of two folks getting it on (barring violence, etc.) so much as what goes on when the camera isn't rolling.

my $0.02.
KJ

on edit: this is still the case even if the great majority of producers are responsible. The 10% that are bad actors are the ones that make the reputation. (It's like being a lawyer, kinda....)

[Warpy]

3. Porn doesn't do a thing for me

but neither do Brussels sprouts. I have no interest in banning either one unless the Brussels sprouts were grown in toxic sludge and the porn hurt people to produce.

If I can reasonably avoid things I don't particularly like, I'm perfectly capable of coexistence with them.

[DuaneBidoux]

5. As the OP I can tell you that it does a lot less for me now than it used to

when I was young and not getting much. The reason it doesn't do much for me now, I think, is that I have been fortunate enough to have a great marriage for many years and sex now has very little association to sex. That is to say that for me and my wife it is truly "making love" and it is so much better than just sex, so a lot of porn leaves me cold. I think that some of the women "oriented" porn can sometimes get my engine going a little.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[duppy]

6. My first post ever!

Hi everyone! Never posted before although I have been reading DU for a few weeks now. Got the day off work today so finally got around to registering. Great website and I am happy to be a part of the community :hi:

As for the topic, sorry for my digression, I think DuaneBidoux has given this a lot of thought but I disagree with the conclusion that society with porn = a society with women's rights.

Free society = women's rights & the right to view/make porn. It is freedom that allows people to choose whether or not to participate in porn and that freedom cannot be taken away because other people may claim moral disagreement. Women's fight for equality also cannot be refused because of things like fundamental religious beliefs (i.e. the middle east) in a free society.

I personally don't like pornography but I would never deny another's right to view it. We all find someone in life who shares our sexual interests whether it be traditional, swinging or watching porn together. That's freedom.

[Beer Snob-50]

8. first off welcome to teh wonderful world of du.

you will find that many here will post while at work and in fact they may post more than they work.

gotta agree with the premise of your post, but do you have the right to make something that is degrading to a portion of society? and then the next question is, who decides what is degrading?

[iverglas]

9. ah, the straw argument

It is freedom that allows people to choose whether or not to participate in porn and that freedom cannot be taken away because other people may claim moral disagreement.

Set 'em up, knock 'em down.

Yes, only fundamentalist religion-nuts want to take away people's freedom to "participate in porn", and any objection to any form of participation in porn must be a moral disagreement ... "participation in porn" being such a big wide notion that it kinda amounts to a straw thingy all by itself anyhow, when what some people might object to, and even want to interfere in the practice of, is really much narrower and better-defined than "participation in porn" ...

You should fit right in.

[Katherine Brengle]

41. Feminist anti-pornography stances have nothing to do with the social construct of morality.

That's what so many people so often miss in these discussions.

I oppose it because in a patriarchal society in which women are devalued and objectified, it serves to further that objectification. It also seeds unrealistic sexual ideals in both men AND women (but particularly men as they are the primary consumers of pornography), leading them to potentially destructive behavior, including at the extreme end, rape and violence.

As I've said in other pornography discussions - in a perfect world, where binary thinking does not seed men and women as opposites with men as the greater, where women are not oppressed and delegated to the sex class, pornography including consenting adults doing legal things would be fine. But it also wouldn't look anything like the pornography we have in our culture right now, because this pornography requires the subjugation of the female in almost all cases. It requires that she be humiliated and used in the least dignified possible ways in order to arouse men.

There's nothing "equal" about it.

[iverglas]

7. just one little observation for now

There is a virtual 100% correlation between women’s rights and the acceptance of porn in a society. These two things mirror each other absolutely. When women’s rights are on the upswing in a society then pornography is nearly always becoming more available and more acceptable. When women’s rights are lessening there is nearly always a decreasing acceptance of porn and it will be less and less available and increasingly criminalized.

It might equally be argued -- and I would argue -- that the upswing in the availability and acceptance of pornography that "mirrors" advances in women's rights is, in fact, a backlash to advances in women's rights.

[Scout]

13. Ding! Ding! Ding! backlash it is n/t

[DuaneBidoux]

22. I would then bring up the parallel example of male gay porn.

Where gay rights (and here I would especially like to refer to male gay rights) are more accepted there is also a parallel increase in gay male porn. Would then one assert that when a man engages in watching gale male porn it is a backlash against other gays in general and gay male rights? And effort to, as you would perhaps put it, to reassert the secondary citizen ship status of fellow gay males?

There is also an increase in female directed porn for the consumption of females (although to a much lesser extent). This kind of porn is much different in emphasis but would still have to be considered oppressive to other lesbians on the part of lesbians who consume it?

And in Sweden, one of the most "porned out" societies on the face of the Earth you would be hard pressed (EXTREMELY hard pressed indeed)to find ANY males who would want secondary status for women (many fewer such males than here).

My hypothesis is that sexual values in general tend to be much more a phenomena of liberal people and that when liberals tend to have sway over society an outlet is created for what is a profoundly biological phenomena, especially for males. I have studied evolutionary psychology in depth and still see something of a connection between non-obvious estrus in women (not the case in other primates) and the need to constantly more closely observe signs of estrus.

[iverglas]

23. "parallel"

You're a cunning one, Mr. Rankin. Although I sometimes wonder ... maybe you really are persuaded by your own arguments.

Would then one assert that when a man engages in watching gale male porn it is a backlash against other gays in general and gay male rights?

Scusi: "a man"? You mean, a GAY man? When a gay man engages in watching gay male porn ... that being parallel to a man watching material involving women ... how?

And effort to, as you would perhaps put it, to reassert the secondary citizen ship status of fellow gay males?

Yeah. That makes sense. I mean, IF gay men are the oppressors/exploiters of gay men. I seem to have been missing something all these years ...

This kind of porn is much different in emphasis but would still have to be considered oppressive to other lesbians on the part of lesbians who consume it?

Again ... lesbians have been the source of all of the problems suffered by lesbians? Mm hmm.

Y'know, a pomegranate may look a lot like an apple, but it really isn't one.

Have to go. Untangling your knots is sometimes fun, but on a Saturday afternoon I have other fun things to do.

[DuaneBidoux]

33. Mr. Rankin is is? I appreciate the debate, and if you promise to not call names I won't either.

It just seems to me there are far too many people on DU with preestablished opinions who are unwilling to think too hard about why they believe what they believe. If you wish to convince me with your positive arguments why your theories are correct I will be happy and listen. But don't just try to, like creationist against evolution, knock my argument down without a corresponding example to support your own theory.

Okay if,in straight society porn is a backlash against women's liberation or the increased status of women who is generating this backlash? Some general and unseen societal force? Or would it be the consumers of that porn who are instigators of and participants in that backlash against women by way of their consumption of that porn as a way to "to again reassert their superiority to women"? I assume, and perhaps incorrectly, that when one says that porn is a backlash agasints women it is a backlash BY someone (men consuming straight porn) AGAINST someone (women experiencing higher levels of status and rights)?

Now to make a point: I didn't say gays were not oppressed--but I would not imagine the backlash against them is evidenced by increased consumption among straight people of male porn. Sodomy laws have been overturned in recent years, a number of states have recognized same sex unions, companies are increasingly providing same sex benefits. i.e., the rights of gays, while far short of fair, have incresed. All indicators are that during that period male gay porn increased dramatically. Why? Backlash? Against who, by whom?

I guess the point that I was then trying to make is why would one see an increase in backlash by the consumers of porn (in my example gay males) against other gay males (the objects of the backlash against male gay rights in general). In all three examples there were two things in common: consumers of the porn, and the objects displayed in that porn. In gay porn, or lesbian porn, the consumers and objects are same sex (well on lesbian porn there is obviously a huge male consumption--but lesbians too, studies show, consume porn above average for other women).

If you are saying the consumption of porn in straight society rises as a backlash against the increased status of women why would it then be incorrect to say that the increased consumption of gay porn in the result of a backlash against the increased rights of gay males (or females). Would we not assume that those who would want a true "backlash" against increased rights for gays would not be gay people consuming that porn but conservative bigoted straight people--and then I would imagine that backlash would not surface in the form of consumption of a product they find morally repugnant but instead an increase of episodes of dragging helpless unconscious gay people from the back of their cars (Now THAT is a backlash).

As a REAL backlash against women I would expect not to see porn but actual physical violence. And while physical violence against women by men has always been a real problem, and while it still is a real problem, there is no comparison to the kinds of domestic physical violence experienced in traditional marriages of old (I know there is a great deal of statistical evidence here but my own is anecdotal--I know what the marriages of my grandparents were like--women were "spanked" just like men (we're talking 40s and 50s here).

Now, I know there are probably issues in my arguments that can be taken up--but let me also hear why you are right, not just why I am wrong.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

35. Was this intended to be a reply to my post, or what?

NT

[DuaneBidoux]

37. It was intended to address at least one of the issues you responded to. n/t

[Iris]

16. I thought that as well. n/t

[Donald Ian Rankin]

17. I'm fairly sceptical of that.

I think it's a bit too trite, as an explanation, and that it certainly isn't the whole story, or probably even a large part of it.

My view, FWIW, is that the reason for correlation between women's rights and pornography (which I think is less strong than some people make out - my belief is that e.g. the Romans, and some ancient Greek cultures, had lots of porn but not many rights for women, whereas e.g. certain native American cultures may have been the reverse) is that in a male-dominated society, attitudes to women and attitudes to pornography are both going to be facets of attitudes to sex - the more taboo it is, the more both women and pornography (and also homosexuals - I think there's also some correlation with gay rights) are likely to be suppressed.

I don't think backlash is likely to be a major factor - it would imply that the people who were making porn were consciously doing so as a result of hostility to women or women's rights, which I don't think is the case in most cases. My impression is that most pornographers are opportunistic, not idealistic.

I don't think porn causes women's rights.
I think that women's rights may have a slight causative effect on porn.
I think that attitudes to sex have a strong effect on both, causing correlation.
I think that trying to suppress porn might effect attitudes to sex, having a negative effect on women's rights in the long term, but only indirectly.

[DuaneBidoux]

20. Okay--don't know if I agree but you are one of only several who stayed on topic

I would consider your hypothesis a little more strongly if it covered both ends of the spectrum (i.e., why does the real oppressioon of women then happen in the countries I mentioned? Is not true oppression the "real" backlash against the assertion that women are equal human beings?

And the other thing is that it doesn't seem to be a cause and effect either way. Backlash would seem to indicate the later arrival of porn after the iniation of full women's rights and it seems to be instead truly coincident with that arrival of full rights--and in many case the later the development of the porn in the "cycle" the more fully involved in the business end women seem to become involved.

And consider for a moment gay porn (especially male). It is also much more accepted where there is higher status and acceptance of gay rights. Are the men who watch gay male porn having a backlash against the acceptance of their own partners and lovers?

[nashville_brook]

44. KNOW YOUR RIGHTS!

you have the right to beg for facials.

you have the right to being called (whore, cumslut) while being "fucked."

you have the right to want rough sex, gag sex, and any other sex being sold by Vivid Video.

you have the right to dress like a stripper, until that becomes really sad, b/c you're 40.

you have the right to want it harder/faster/raunchier...

...but you DON'T have the right to criticize any of this, because that would make you a prude.

you don't have the right to point out what's wrong with this, b/c that would make anti-free speech.

you don't have the right to be treated sweetly/gently b/c you're not in charge here.

you don't have the right to complain about this stuff, b/c you will be cited for "suppression" (read: just like andrea dworkin)

------------


what a great time to be a woman!

[Scout]

45. thank you n/t

[Lydia Leftcoast]

50. Women's rights and porn?

Have you ever seen Japanese porn? Nasty, nasty stuff, mostly S&M.

Victorian England and America had thriving porn industries at a time when women couldn't vote, own property, receive more than an elementary education, serve on juries, work at most jobs, testify in court, or have access to their own children after a divorce.

I don't know much about everyday life in Middle Eastern countries, but I would not be at all surprised if there is an active underground porn industry there.

My attitude towards porn is informed by encounters with teen-aged prostitutes, some of whom drift into the porn industry. A girl doesn't become a prostitute at age 14 because she's so eager to have sex with strangers. She's usually doing it to survive on the streets after fleeing a home where physical and/or sexual abuse are everyday occurrences. It is NOT considered a fun job. In fact, there was one pair of street kids who formed a couple, and everyone said that the boy must really love the girl, because he went out and sold himself to chickenhawks so that his girlfriend wouldn't have to be a prostitute anymore.

If a prostitute has a pimp, she doesn't have to sleep in doorways, but the pimp will replicate the abusive conditions that she grew up with and try to induce Stockholm syndrome in her, so that she believes she can't live without him.

The young prostitutes stay in the business first because they're too young to get any other job and later, they have no education or training and believe themselves unworthy of any other way of life. If they're conventionally attractive, they may drift into porn or nude dancing.

I'm sure there are Mayflower Madam-type prostitutes who do it just for easy money and could do other things if they decided to, but I suspect that they're in the minority.

It can't be that much fun to perform oral sex on strangers. I wonder how many men who defend prostitution and pornography would be willing to do that.

[TygrBright]

10. "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar..." What turns people on...

...is what turns people on. There's only so far you can go with the equation of co-occurence with causality.

I think it's undeniable that cultural attitudes about gender and equality DO influence, and are influenced by, cultural attitudes about erotic triggers. But I'd be incredibly wary of going beyond that simple statement and trying to empirically link the concepts of what stimulates our sexual urges and why; and how that influences a larger cultural determinacy of gender and its role in our social and economic structure.

"Dark desires" are part of everyone's sexuality. Whether those desires are "dark" because of conscious cultural taboos or unconscious pragmatic evolutionary selection is largely a moot point when the triggers are activated and the hormones cascade.

If we're smart, we'll concentrate on understanding the endocrinological functions and the benefits of learning how and when it's a good idea to let them into the saddle, and how and when it's a good idea to keep them on a rein. Understanding the difference between a concept as a sexual trigger, and a reality as a sensory experience is critically important.

Our society's psychosis about all things sexual has kept us from a lot of important social and physiological research about how individuals respond sexually and how people relate sexual experiences to their larger social matrix.

Pornography exists in the large gray vacuum between that psychosis and the progress we could be making in better understanding the hows and whys of sex, desire, and human culture. For some people, porn is a comparatively harmless sexual trigger that provides harmless occasional pleasure alone or with a partner(s). For some people, it becomes the instrument of infrequent, semi-traumatic catharsis, and the resulting guilt and shame get sublimated into other outlets, some less healthy than others. For some people, it becomes the drug required to produce endocrinological effects powerful enough to produce a form of addiction that can be quite harmful to their ability to function socially. And for a very few, it is a factor in severe mental dysfunction that makes them a frightening danger to others.

But because we're so twisted up with inhibitions and cultural attitudes about sex and gender and porn and blahblahblah we aren't studying the hows and whys of all these phenomena. We're not learning what makes one person respond in such-and-such a way to particular sexual triggers, and why another person responds in a completely different way.

Until we learn a lot more about that, we're still groping about in a fog, believing in a (metaphorical) flat earth carried on the back of a turtle, as it were.

abstractly,
Bright

[duppy]

11. Well said. Real societal changes come through honest discussion

and education and our society is very "uptight" about having sexual conversation.

[undergroundpanther]

15. Yeah

Either it's uptight or over sexualized and explicit.
Conversations like this go to either extremes and both extremes defend their particular slant to the death..

But nobody seems to want to discuss porn as a social issue or a psychological thing.THey just want to talk about sex or kink or their up-tightness about sex

It never gets to the roots of why porn exists at all.We have Each other sex existed before pictures of sex existed you know. Nobody wants to talk about what porn does to effect RELATIONSHIPS between human beings or society in general.
Maybe because porn has an addictive quality for some? Drunks will defend the right to drink in similar off the point arguments as do the people who want to abolish bars. I see the same defensive patterns when porn is discussed I wonder why?

[Captain_Nemo]

12. I am a feminist and I don't believe pornogrpahy should be made illegal. However, your post

brings up some interesting topics.

First, the women's liberation movment (feminists) got to the issue of pornography through the issue of violence against women. Andrea Dworkin and Catherine McKinnon proposed legislation that would outlaw pornography because, in their opinion , it led to violence against women (and they had statistics proving the link between violent porn and violence against women (Example: Hustler Magazine in those days had an infamous cover of a woman being put through a meat grinder) and they got a lot of flack from it.

The outcome of this introduction of their legislation was the misconception that feminists hate sex. This is a major misconception that is actually reflected in your words "feminsit fundies."

A fundamentalist believes that their way is the moral and right way and everyone who doesn't believe their way is "less than" or a moral degenerate. Feminism is the antithesis of this thinking. I think your phrase "feminist fundie" is probably referring to an idea, (an idea that developed as part of the backlash against feminism) that feminists are a "my way or the highway" type of persons.

Feminism is about the equality of women to men politically, socially and economically. In all of these areas women do not have equality to men in our society.

Violence against women is a huge social problem. And, depictions of women and girls in advertising, to show an example, is a reflection of our society'snegative thinking of femaleness.

One could bring this theory (that depictions of women and girls in advertising is a reflection of our society's negative thinking of femaleness) into the area of pornography. But, violent porn is much different that lesbian erotica written by lesbians for lesbians. Or, erotica written by Collette, or Anais Nin.

That's the problem with outlawing pornography - it outlaws the non-violent poetic erotica too.

I believe pornography should be legal and the impression that women and girls are sex objects to be demeaned is the topic that should be addressed through social dialogue and the raising of our national conciousness.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Warren DeMontague]

19. So was it "quite cool" for the Vatican to engage in widespread conspiracy to help pedophile Priests

escape law enforcement and, in many cases, continue to have access to kids?

Because, dude, here's MY ideal- what consenting ADULTS want to do with THEIR OWN BODIES is THEIR OWN BUSINESS. Period. That means if they want to have a wonderful, monogamous, heterosexual married life together, right on. If they want to have a wonderful, monogamous, homosexual married life together, they should be able to do that too.

And if women- or men- who are, again, consenting adults, want to appear in consenting adult porn or get off on the same, as long as they're not doing it on the MUNI, I have no problem with that. Not legally, not morally, not anything.

Unfortunately, this planet that is riddled with control freaks of all stripes downright obsessed with controlling the sexuality of consenting adults. But out of all those folks, I would say that almost NO organization is as poorly placed to be lecturing consenting adults on their sexuality and birth control choices as the hypocritical, Pedophile-enabling Vatican. :eyes:

Good Grief.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[uppityperson]

28. "GayMarriage/Abortion = same thing" per provocare, seems hypocritical to me.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x870616#874823

GayMarriage/Abortion = same thing

Hey, I grew up in the Bible belt and now live in SF -- I am convert to the Catholic Faith. Certainly, other Christians do get on my nerves especially people that put others down. If you read my posts, I try to sketch out an ideal -- an apply this to people's lives. Gay marriage and abortion are just two sides of the same coin. What is sexuality and how does it fit in with Modernity? After much thought, I hold the Catholic positions -- and I enjoy talking about them. What is the ideal of human sexuality to you? That which you desire for yourself? If you REALLY hold a firm position, you will want to share it with others. Many liberals have no clue here, and just respond essentially "whatever floats your boat." That's not a strong response, but just another way of saying, "I don't know, ask someone else."

[Warren DeMontague]

31. You know what, dude? Anyone can lay out a whole big line of authoritative-sounding bullshit

and say that it is the capital-W WAY THINGS ARE. But you know what?

To some of us, it's always going to be a giant load of baloney.

[uppityperson]

24. You do realize that The Church has, even among the highest in it, differences of opinion and actions

The church's official position, according to what you write, and what the pedophile priests do is quite different.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[uppityperson]

29. Sure helps me understand you.

You can do anything, absolutely ANYTHING you want at any time and say "Satan made me do it, was in me, I repent" and all is ok. No personal responsibility, ever. Why are you on DU?

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[uppityperson]

32. Pedophilia is "naughty"? They can "repent" and all is fine? pshaw

[DuaneBidoux]

21. Sorry I wasn't clear. When I said fundies I meant religious fundies (a notoriously anti-woman...

and anti-sex group). In fact for the first time I thought about this correlation: fundamental religious groups tend to be anti-sex AND anti-woman. Two different values? Two different emotions? I wonder.

I in no way mean to assert that feminists hate sex (although I am sure that, like any other "group" there are some who do!) I think Susie Bright is an excellent example of a feminist who makes her belief in equal sexual rights and the equal right of women to bask in the pleasures of their own sexuality.

Overall I think your post is provocative and well thought out (and definitely more of what I had intended than a question of whether anal sex and stiletto shoes are degrading to women--which I wonder if that would not be more appropriate in an entirely different forum.)

Reflect on this parallel with the female example: gay male porn is also much more acceptable in societies that give greater rights and equal acceptance to gays. Is this an entirely different phenomena than female porn and increased female societal status? After all, one would hardly argue that acceptance of gay porn by males is a backlash against greater rights for their gay partners--and thus a way to "put them in their place" and reassert the inferior societal position of gays.

[undergroundpanther]

14. For me

Porn watching for the most part is self absorbing activity It does not encourage relating.
Porn creates an unspoken competition to be like the women in the pictures to be desirable enough to draw attention away from the photos.And if the woman who's mate by his actions says he loves pictures better than relating to her this sets up a internal competition that can be painful. If she cannot be skinny enough, made up enough , be kinky or be a Victoria's secret model some women might feel insecure about sex or their bodies because the mate has stated maybe not directly or openly that he values a photograph of sex and an airbrushed figure of an ideal that for the most part is unattainable , more than he values sex with her as a person and that can be very dehumanizing.

Also some people use porn to avoid intimacy,It might be a 'marital aid' for you but for some it is a barrier to intimacy.

I myself find porn is destructive to relationships. I don't like it.I can do without it. Sex to me is about a relationship not glossy pictures of people pretending to have relationships and sexual intimacy.Because I know pictures of people having sex is NOTHING compared to a real intimate relationship with another warm living human being that can say yes or no to my requests.A picture of a woman legs splayed cannot say no to your imaginings even if it's a rape fantasy.So porn can in some people desensitize them to what consent is..and is not.
Porn isolates people sometimes.Porn for the most part does not involve going out of yourself or engaging to relate.. it's more like two separate people using separate imaginations and using each other's bodies as props for each individuals fantasy in each single head and calling that"making love".

Your situation might not apply to what I wrote but some do.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DuaneBidoux]

34. I think everything you say is true (or can be). But I also tend to feel that this can be the case..

for many things used in addictive and unhealthy ways be it food, alcohol, drugs, or (apparently now) the internet (not me not me, I promise!). Believe me food can be an isolating factor in life. Someone can grab their chips, beer, and get in front of the tube for hours can be decreasing his/her connection with humanity or loved ones and isolating him/herself.

All the bad things that you say are possible with porn I believe are possible and perhaps even likely--for us it has not (yet) been true. We have never consumed porn of "ideal" women or men-which we both find as discusting as watching some rich prick who cares nothing about the poor driving a Ferrarri (and I see a lot of similarities too). (Edited to ad: I must emphasize too that for us it has been a very minor part of our 28 year marriage)

But if I might, for just a second, because I do enjoy thinking of real social science occassionally, could you give some thought to my original post and the reasons this paradox might exist? My hypotheses is based somewhat on my readings in evolutionary psychology that I have done but I still don't know. Your issues are kind of "one-on-one" personal issues, my particular issues were at a broader societal level. Some people responded they thought the paradox was a result of "backlash" and I have elsewhere made a few posts responding to this idea. I have nothing inherently to say that it couldn't be the case. I'm just trying to gather a variety of thoughts.

[noamnety]

36. Robert Jensen's article

I'm not going to quote it here, because it contains details descriptions of sex acts, but I would challenge you to read especially the end of it, the part that starts with "A final story:" and meditate on that for a bit.

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Nov06/Jensen14.htm

[NotGivingUp]

38. Excellent article. I only wish he HAD said what he wanted to say at the end. nt

[militaryspouse]

39. Didn't

Ted bundy say he was inspired by porn? I have read where men have confessed that viewing porn, and porn mags blurred their view of women,so much so, to where they no longer viewed women as human but objects.

[kdmorris]

46. I thought it was a great article

Too bad the other thread on it degenerated into a name calling, flame fest.I just need to not go back there anymore tonight. I'm shaking cause I'm so pissed.

Edit: Sorry, I saw his name and thought it was the one I'd been fighting about all night.

It's here:

http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/%7Erjensen/freelance/pornography&cruelty.htm

[SarahB]

40. As with all things that make a person feel good, it can be abused.

Just like alcohol, drugs, or gambling, but it doesn't mean I shouldn't be able to have a glass of wine responsibly because some twit killed someone while driving drunk.

I'd also say, "know the production of your porn". Not all porn is produced under the same standards. Gay porn is pretty prevalent and does not involve women at all. Lesbian produced erotica can be wonderful for showing real women enjoying themselves. There's other porn out there produced by women in the industry. A lot of it out there is fake and degrading (or just plain contrived and silly), but not everything.

[Katherine Brengle]

42. Here's some fun reading:

http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2007/05/07/the-secret-lives-of-prigs/

[Iris]

47. I came here just to see if anyone pointed to this thread! I'm getting lots of abuse over there.

oooh, I like it. Yes, just like that. Oh, wait, don't go any further...

:sarcasm:

[iverglas]

48. y'know, I think I'm going to have to choose to laugh

at the desperation and dishonesty of the pornography/prostitution apologists who rise up and gird their collective loins with the sophistry of the ages to defend the nastiness of it all whenever someone offers up a shred of the truth. The effort that goes into maintaining the wilful blindness and rationalization and doubletalk -- think of all the harm they could be causing if they put all that effort into actually doing something. I mean, it's not as if I imagine they'd be doing anything actually beneficial for anyone.

Really. They're a gas. A bunch of uglies preening themselves for their "liberalism" and thinking nobody notices they're the naked ones in the parade.

Ma'am.


(Oh, if only I could train DU to fix my typos the way Word does ...)

[Iris]

49. Well, Ma'am, you made me laugh!

I'm not going back there. It's just not worth it.

There was a line in a 30somethng episode (drama from the 80s) where a husband and wife were discussing porn and her discomfort with it. She said something like, "If you had any emotional maturity you'd understand" (what the difference between a me and the porn women).

So, I'm assuming they lack said emotional maturity and just hope if they are in relationships, their partners do to, so it's an even match.

[nashville_brook]

43. correlation isn't causation

you say -- "There is a virtual 100% correlation between women’s rights and the acceptance of porn in a society."

prove it. prove that a) porn is somehow "accepted" and tell me what that means -- and prove that b) women have enjoy this thing you call "women's rights."

feminists aren't offended by sexually explicit material -- trot on over to goodvibes.com if you don't believe me. the feminist critique of "mainstream, male-centered porn" is that this particular expression of pornography perpetuates violence against women by sexualizing humiliation narratives which are used as masturbatory material, thereby programming men AND WOMEN to associate sex with humiliation.

i could care less what you do in your bedroom or in your head, but i damn-well have a right to talk about on my own terms. or, does that not fall under the "women's rights" I'm afforded.