Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Porn Under a Bad Sign
There's a fascinating running debate at Slate about a couple of new books on the mainstreaming of porn, the "masculinization" of female sexuality, and What It All Means. Laura Kipnis is particularly on point.
A couple observations. Wendy Shalit writes:
Girls today have so much anxiety about appearing "hot" and servicing boys correctly, it never even occurs to them that they should actually experience--or wait for--their own desire. Is this not a problem?
Now, if she's talking about 13 year olds, maybe that is a problem—but she's obviously casting a net that includes college-age women as well. In the rather rhetorical way it's framed, of course, it is a problem, since it's presented as a sort of self-abnegation. But Shalit also seems to be hinting that there's something unsettling about people's wanting to look attractive for members of the apposite sex or wanting to sexually satisfy their partners. Now, I do both these things, and it's never occured to me to regard either as unhealthy or degrading or self-objectifying. It's nice to go out and feel as though you look attractive—whatever your gender. And what would we think of a man who said he wasn't particularly concerned with "servicing" his partner "correctly"? Certainly, there would be a problem if this were a one way street, and it was only women who were thinking about these things—but wouldn't it be a problem with the thoughtless men? (As Kipnis observes, recent data on sexual behavior suggests this isn't the case: Oral sex, for instance, is largely reciprocal.) There's also a strange double standard in play in some of the discussion: The authors of the books being discussed (and Shalit) seem to assume that when women are aggressively sexual, this is a kind of performance to meet cultural expectations; when they exhibit uneasiness with that overt sexuality, they're expressing the true "deep down" feelings an oversexed culture has demanded they suppress. Well, doubtless some are. And doubtless in some cases, it's the other way around. Ambiguous or guilty feelings about one's own sexuality are neither new nor the exclusive province of women, after all.
Ditto with people's desires of their partners, porn-fueled or otherwise. The narrative we get from Shalit focuses on women uncomfortable with partners who want them to (say) shave or accept their porn-viewing. Cross-apply from above: Are we really supposed to be shocked that couples are going to need to work through different sexual desires and expectations, whatever their source? I've had various requests from partners to do things that weren't immediately super-appealing: Some, I discovered I liked; others weren't really my cup of tea, but I'd do because the other person liked them; a couple times, I said I wasn't into it. But I always regarded it as part of the ordinary give-and-take of a sexual relationship, not some kind of strange imposition produced by last week's technologies.
A brief note on the "desensitizing" effects of porn: First, if you find that you prefer sitting at home with a box of kleenex and Field of Reams to sex with a real-live partner, your problem probably isn't porn. Millions of men out there have been exposed to their fair share of porn, and it seems a safe bet that this particular preference ordering has never occured to the majority of them. Second, surely this cuts both ways: If porn can make sex boring through overexposure (so/mehow, I'm not bored yet), or get one partner excited about something the other doesn't want to try, can't it also spice it up? And to the extent porn is causing sexual problems, isn't it, in a sense, weird to focus on the porn and not the men for whom porn consumption is a problem, as though porn were some sort of alien brain-slug that had crawled in through the genitals and taken over the central nervous system? How about a sex-ed curriculum that includes a lesson on reflective, responsbile porn watching?
|9.21.05 @ 3:29PM|#
Porn doesn't kill people; people kill people.
To me, the problematic issue has aways been the way that porn is
created. There is evidence to indicate that a lot of porn is the
product of victimization and generally unhealthy self-images. Now,
I think people should be able to do what they want with their
bodies, and just because I think a given sexual act is unseemly
doesn't mean that it's psychologically unhealthy for others to
engage in it. But if a lot of porn is the result of victimization,
what then?
|9.21.05 @ 3:38PM|#
NaG: "But if a lot of porn is the result of victimization, what
then?"
Create more victims... :)
|9.21.05 @ 3:38PM|#
We also shouldn't forget the equally real and equally present porn that's directed at women. I know I feel incredibly inadequate every time I walk past a 'Romance Book' with some well-abbed Dionysus on the cover. Or worse yet the manly, yet sensitive hunk that always gets the girl in romance movies.
|9.21.05 @ 3:47PM|#
All I know is, if we're approaching a time when men are expected to wax and shave like I see in pron nowadays, I and my 70s Burt Reynolds chest are in trouble. Or are we at a point where a pro-bodyhair backlash is in the offing?
Larry Horse|9.21.05 @ 3:52PM|#
Yeah, unless the women have someone threatening to kill or hurt
them or someone they care about if they don't do the porn, then I
don't see any exploitation.
On a side note, the first time I masturbated was when I was twenty
and my first wet dream was at 21. I'm guessing I'm in the company
of less than 1% of American males when it comes to that. The funny
thing is that I watched a bunch of internet porn back when I was a
teen, but I never figured out the whole jerking thing. Go
figure.
|9.21.05 @ 3:53PM|#
I suspect body hair will never be a bad thing. Unless you approach Robin Williams levels of coverage.
|9.21.05 @ 3:55PM|#
With few exceptions -- the NFL, NASCAR, and "porn" jump to mind
-- the whole of American popular culture is pornography for
women.
This Slate circle-jerk and the stroke-books it's about are fine
examples.
Leave us to our flickery pixel-butts, caviling crypto-Popes --
this world is already yours.
|9.21.05 @ 3:56PM|#
Umm, ok, I'm a bit confused. For most of human history women were taught (and forced) to resist sex at all costs. Anyone who had the audacity to seek out or enjoy sexual behavior were regarded as sluts or whores. Finally, after decades of effort, social norms are being changed and young women are feeling free to persue sexual fufillment in the same way as boys. I think viewing this trend as girls being somehow forced by society or by porn into sexual situations they don't want is an atavistic tick back into the same tired virgin/whore dichotomy that many modern feminists (rightly) fight.
|9.21.05 @ 3:58PM|#
On a side note, the first time I masturbated was when I was
twenty and my first wet dream was at 21. I'm guessing I'm in the
company of less than 1% of American males when it comes to
that.
There's a pretty funny running joke in the movie "The Big Hit" that
revolves around a similar situation.
However the rest of the movie is unwatchable crap.
|9.21.05 @ 4:01PM|#
There's subcultures for all kinds. Hairless men with A+F shirts
make up one segment, overtly masculine and hairy bears make up
another. It's more cultural than sexual.
Lets face it, more than half of all cultural acts and works were
done to get someone in bed.
|9.21.05 @ 4:04PM|#
what i get lost in is this idea that sexuality along gender lines is some kind of monolith.
|9.21.05 @ 4:09PM|#
Girls today have so much anxiety about appearing "hot" and
servicing boys correctly, it never even occurs to them that they
should actually experience--or wait for--their own
desire.
Yes, and girls in the old days had anxiety about the horrible,
disgusting do-it-for-the-sake-of-motherhood things their husbands
were going to do to them on their wedding nights. Sounds like
Shalit won't be satisfied until every woman is completely lacking
in all forms of sexual anxiety.
|9.21.05 @ 4:10PM|#
I am not a psychologist, but my experience as a government lawyer leads me to believe that porn does illicit compulsive behavior. In the close to 50 cases of child porn and adult porn found on government computers I dealt with, I never once saw a case involving two or even a hundred pictures. They were always thousands of images. So many that there is no way that the guy could have gotten off over even a fraction of the pictures. Only compulsive behavior could cause someone to risk their careers and lives for pictures they don't even get off over. Clearly, lots of people see porn and are unaffected by it. But, I think that there is a certain percentage of people who do seem to withdraw from the real world and loose their ability to have real relationships due to porn. I don't believe that porn causes otherwise normal people to be violent towards woman or any of that crap, but I do think that it can and does socially stunt some people. All and all, it is probably no worse than people who pursue other otherworldly pursuits such as video games heads and fantasy football degenerates. Not an argument to ban it, but probably a good reason to keep your kids away from it.
|9.21.05 @ 4:13PM|#
One of the arguments Pornified makes is that early and frequent exposure to porn reduces the interest boys will have in eventual sexual encounters. Okay, I don't know about the rest of you gentlemen, but I saw my first Playboy when I was 10 and my first Hustler when I was 12 and my first bit of hardcore when I was 13 and when I did lose my cherry several years later I can tell you the experience was more thrilling than any of those images made it out to be. Indeed, the girl I lost my virginity to wondered how I could be so practiced from Day 1 and I could only ascribe it to the years of 'abstract research' I had conducted.
|9.21.05 @ 4:14PM|#
John--
Aren't you confusing correlation with causation? By which I mean,
if these guys weren't obsessed with porn, do you think they'd be
obsession-free? I think they were just obsessive personalities to
begin with.
|9.21.05 @ 4:18PM|#
I suspect that the individuals who had 1000's of images on their hard drives had problems that were created by more than just pornography.... similarly I think that the social stunting aspect is certainly a concern, and I think that in many cases a reliance on porn can certainly be a symptom of that sort of social inability. But I also think that maybe this is an example of a trend in our society - technology has given us a lot of advantages, but it's also made us, dare I say it, lazier. Why bother going for a hike when you can watch the "Nature Channel"? Why bother having a relationship when you can watch porn and chat on an instant messenger program? It an instant gratification situation based on, perhaps some innate utilitarian prgramming. You get some of the benefit of a sexual relationship - namely a sexual experience, but at a mere fraction of the effort and cost.
|9.21.05 @ 4:22PM|#
I'm not a psychologist either (yet) John, but I think theres a
bit of misunderstanding in your argument. When it comes to the
number of images, you need to look at pornography not as some kind
of unique object, but as a form of media. How many movies do you
own? How many baseball cards did you have as a child? Have you ever
known a music geek? How many CDs, and records did they own? People
who collect porn collect as much as they can get their hands on,
its the nature of collection, not porn.
As for porn being something that a "certain percentage of people"
seem to be adversely affect by, can you name something that isn't?
Does every recreational pot smoker turn into Tommy Chong? Does
every social drinker turn into an alcoholic? For that matter, does
every socially stunted introvert become "addicted" to porn? Of
course not.
I know that there is temptation to treat porn as something
"special" because of the stigma that is attached to it in our
society. The fact of the matter is, its just another form of media.
Like action movies, gangsta rap, or penny dreadfuls, some of it is
good, some of it is criminal, most of it is just cheap, low quality
stimuli.
|9.21.05 @ 4:22PM|#
"There is evidence to indicate that a lot of porn is the
product of victimization and generally unhealthy
self-images."
I don't know about the evidence, but it does seem to me that most
of the women I've known--given other opportunities--would choose
another route. Still, for those who have few opportunities--for
whatever reason--who am I to judge? ...So long as they're over 18
and not the victims of human trafficking or white slavery or
whatever they're callin' it these days.
And even if men are becoming increasingly desensitized, doesn't
that just leave more women available for other guys? Even if it's
married men we're talkin' about, guys take themselves out of
competition by losing jobs or via poor health or by isolating
themselves socially all the time. ...So some of 'em wank themselves
out of the competition, where's the danger?
Every year, some of the male Salmon don't make it all the way
upstream--too bad. ...but we could recreate society with 20 women
and 2 men, right? ...I understand it's tougher the other way
around.
If women were becoming increasingly desensitized, now that
would be a danger!
|9.21.05 @ 4:24PM|#
But, I think that there is a certain percentage of people
who do seem to withdraw from the real world and loose their ability
to have real relationships due to porn.
Or maybe their lack of ability to have "real relationships" causes
them to withdraw from the real world and turn to porn ?
What is it that makes you think that its the porn that causes
someone to withdraw instead of porn being a release for someone who
is socially inept or awkward and already withdrawn ?
|9.21.05 @ 4:25PM|#
E. Steven: Your story sounds familiar. After my first time, I had to explain where I had learned certain things. I claimed it was from reading the Joy of Sex. Hey, it was at least partially true.
Timothy|9.21.05 @ 4:26PM|#
You know, I'm not that into porn past your soft varieties, but it certainly doesn't make me less eager to please my gal. Porn and self-servicing are a pale substitute for the real thing with somebody you love, hell, even a pale substitute for the real thing with somebody you're just doing to pass the time. Mostly I feel sorry for the porn obsessives, but they certainly don't deserve to get any. I say leave them to it, less competition for the rest of us.
|9.21.05 @ 4:27PM|#
don't know about the evidence, but it does seem to me that
most of the women I've known--given other opportunities--would
choose another route.
Having worked as an exotic dancer back in school, I've known a few
porn "actresses" and one girl who wanted to become a porn
actress. Yes, they were basically fucked-up (though usually quite
nice) bimbos with serious "issues," but it's not like in a
porn-free world they would have gone on to become doctors or
anything. Actually, without porn movies and strip clubs they'd be
working at Wal-Mart for five bucks an hour. Instead, they made
decent money and got some attention which they enjoyed; I wouldn't
do it myself, but the worst you could say about their being in porn
was that it was a symptom of a problem, not the problem
itself. But you could say that about most crappy jobs, really.
|9.21.05 @ 4:33PM|#
fantasy football degenerates
Well, now you're really getting into freak territory.
Seriously, few things amaze me more than seeing a guy appear
undisturbed by the sight of the football team he grew up devoutly
rooting for get taken to the woodshed by a rival, on account of the
fact that the opposing team's QB/RB/WR was on his fantasy
squad.
|9.21.05 @ 4:44PM|#
We also shouldn't forget the equally real and equally
present porn that's directed at women.
HAHAH. I'm assuming this is a joke, right? EQUALLY present? Equally
REAL?
HAHAHAHAHA!
|9.21.05 @ 4:48PM|#
"Seriously, few things amaze me more than seeing a guy
appear undisturbed by the sight of the football team he grew up
devoutly rooting for get taken to the woodshed by a rival, on
account of the fact that the opposing team's QB/RB/WR was on his
fantasy squad."
That's why I can't play fantasy football.
It's not just the guys on your squad either. What if the
guy on the squad you're up against has one of the players on your
home town--aw hell--what if they have a player on the
Redskins?
...There might be a small part of me somewhere deep in the recesses
of my mind that might hope that that player plays badly--I think
I'd develop multiple personalities or something!
...yeah, yeah, some people think I already have. ; )
|9.21.05 @ 4:49PM|#
But seriously, I thought the Slate discussion was very representative of a lot of the thoughts/feelings that modern women have on the subject. Though none of them (nor I) have any firm opinions, solutions to 'problems', etc., most women I know seem to have pondered similar issues at some point.
Jeff P.|9.21.05 @ 4:51PM|#
(sniff) and they he took it out (sniff) told me to touch it (sniff) then the producer cut me a check...(sob)
|9.21.05 @ 4:57PM|#
"Even if it's married men we're talkin' about, guys take
themselves out of competition by losing jobs or via poor health or
by isolating themselves socially all the time."
...and even if a lot of women don't see it as a competition, it is.
I suspect many of them don't see it for what it is because--in this
society--they pick the winners. (That is, of course, as it should
be.) ...and the guys that don't treat it like a competition are
usually the losers.
...and like ol' John Wooden said, "Success is never final. Failure
is never fatal."
B.D.|9.21.05 @ 5:00PM|#
I haven't gone over to look at the original link, but it seems from the conversation here that it's assumed that A) women don't like porn, B) women who do like and view porn don't ever view it at the same rate as men, and C) even if women did view it at the same rate, porn would not have the same effects on women as it has on some men.
|9.21.05 @ 5:33PM|#
I am not a psychologist, but my experience as a government
lawyer leads me to believe that porn does illicit compulsive
behavior. In the close to 50 cases of child porn and adult porn
found on government computers I dealt with, I never once saw a case
involving two or even a hundred pictures. They were always
thousands of images. So many that there is no way that the guy
could have gotten off over even a fraction of the pictures. Only
compulsive behavior could cause someone to risk their careers and
lives for pictures they don't even get off over. Clearly, lots of
people see porn and are unaffected by it. But, I think that there
is a certain percentage of people who do seem to withdraw from the
real world and loose their ability to have real relationships due
to porn. I don't believe that porn causes otherwise normal people
to be violent towards woman or any of that crap, but I do think
that it can and does socially stunt some people. All and all, it is
probably no worse than people who pursue other otherworldly
pursuits such as video games heads and fantasy football
degenerates. Not an argument to ban it, but probably a good reason
to keep your kids away from it.
Hypothetical Redux:
I am not a psychologist, but my experience as a [NOTHING
WORTHWHILE] leads me to believe that blogging does
illicit compulsive behavior. In the close to 50 cases of
political blogging and other
blogging found on government computers I dealt with, I
never once saw a case involving two or even a hundred
posts . They were always thousands of
posts . So many that there is no way that the guy
could have read over even a fraction of the
posts . Only compulsive behavior could cause
someone to risk their careers and lives for posts
they don't even read . Clearly, lots of people see
blogs and are unaffected by it. (sic)
But, I think that there is a certain percentage of people who do
seem to withdraw from the real world and loose their ability to
have real relationships due to blogs . I don't
believe that blogs cause otherwise normal people
to be violent towards woman or any of that crap, but I do think
that it can and does socially stunt some people.
All and all, it is probably no worse than people who pursue other
otherworldly pursuits such as video games heads and fantasy
football degenerates. (You got that right!) Not an
argument to ban it, but probably a good reason to keep your kids
away from it.
My point in doing this is to illustrate that many things are
accused of being "addictive". I think the real issue is with the
person himself who is allegedly "addicted"....it's a
compulsive/obsessive personality issue, as Jennifer
suggested.
And so what if someone is addicted to their computer? Keeps me off
of the streets...
|9.21.05 @ 5:33PM|#
Seriously, few things amaze me more than seeing a guy appear
undisturbed by the sight of the football team he grew up devoutly
rooting for get taken to the woodshed by a rival, on account of the
fact that the opposing team's QB/RB/WR was on his fantasy
squad.
You've obviously never played role-playing games. There is nothing
more disturbing than watching a 300 lbs 35-year-old get pissed off
when his Level 18 Dwarven cleric gets dissolved in acidic spit of a
black dragon after blowing his Reflex saving throw.
|9.21.05 @ 5:40PM|#
My point in doing this is to illustrate that many things are
accused of being "addictive". I think the real issue is with the
person himself who is allegedly "addicted"....it's a
compulsive/obsessive personality issue, as Jennifer
suggested.
Exactly! When the complusion/obsession makes your life unmanagable
or directly harm others (and I'm talk REAL physical harm, not this
"moral decay" crap we keep hearing about) that's when you got the
problem. Even then it's not the object of the obsession that needs
to be controlled. It's the obsession itself.
|9.21.05 @ 5:42PM|#
I think mr. Sanchez is missing the point that Shalit was making regarding young women's compulsion to "service" men sexually. That's not a give and take, and the inherent mentality leaves no room for give and take because nowhere in the equation is she being encourgaed to explore her own sexuality and what really turns HER on. She's left to a state of performance anxiety about how well she's giving him a blow job, etc. for reasons that go beyond her affection for this hypothetical him. It IS a shame, and seems specific to young women under 26 or so. I don't think porn is the problem--I think American culture is not raising a generation of men who pride themselves on being 'lovers;' in fact, if they DO get tips and lessons from porn, they're in trouble. Most porn that I've seen is kind of gross: not because of any explicit nudity or sexually, but that sexuality is depicted andd 'celebrated' in such crude, mechanical positions. There is little eroticism in most porn. And ironically, it's eroticism that seems to be the most frightening thing for men and women--a form of sexuality that is not easliy 'scripted" and routine, that is terrifying.
Timothy|9.21.05 @ 5:46PM|#
You've obviously never played role-playing games. There is
nothing more disturbing than watching a 300 lbs 35-year-old get
pissed off when his Level 18 Dwarven cleric gets dissolved in
acidic spit of a black dragon after blowing his Reflex saving
throw.
What on earth was the Cleric doing close enough to get hit with
that? Wait, no, what's an 18th-level Cleric doing going into a
fight against a black dragon without Resist Energy (Acid),
Protection from Energy (Acid) and Energy Immunity (Acid). If you
ask me, that Cleric had it coming.
Timothy|9.21.05 @ 5:46PM|#
You've obviously never played role-playing games. There is
nothing more disturbing than watching a 300 lbs 35-year-old get
pissed off when his Level 18 Dwarven cleric gets dissolved in
acidic spit of a black dragon after blowing his Reflex saving
throw.
What on earth was the Cleric doing close enough to get hit with
that? Wait, no, what's an 18th-level Cleric doing going into a
fight against a black dragon without Resist Energy (Acid),
Protection from Energy (Acid) and Energy Immunity (Acid)? If you
ask me, that Cleric had it coming.
Timothy|9.21.05 @ 5:51PM|#
Bah, 3.5 at least made Ranger and Bard playable. Plus if I never have to compute THACO again I'll die a happy man. Good thing I didn't play enough in junior high and high school for THACO to be much of a consideration.
|9.21.05 @ 5:54PM|#
I've known at least a few women that find giving blow jobs to be very erotic and stimulating. And given the reverse situation - not to open up too many details of my own life - reciprocating certainly isn't a chore. I don't mean to sound too rude here 'gracious', but I think you might be making a rather arbitrary distinction between what is 'erotic', and what is 'mechanical, crude' sex. That is to say if it's even possible to say that 'mechanical, crude' sex can't also be erotic. Porn isn't "sexy", it's 'sex'. That's what guys - and some women watch it for. It's not supposed to be a replacement, and yes, guys that think that sex is supposed to go the way porn depicts it are probably in for a surprise. I haven't met one women after all that that genuinely likes to be spanked during sex. Maybe I just date more conservative women.... But at the same time that doesn't mean that pornograhy in particular, and America in general is failing to raise men who 'pride themselves on being lovers'. Frankly that's a bit insulting to the legions of men out there who do know that there's a real difference between porn and sexuality. In much the same way that theres a real difference between watching a war movie and serving in a forward area.
|9.21.05 @ 5:54PM|#
gracious: Your argument boils down to the fact that women have
performance anxiety in bed. Men do too.
What's your point?
Timothy|9.21.05 @ 5:56PM|#
In much the same way that theres a real difference between
watching a war movie and serving in a forward
area.
Does that mean I'll have to stop listing "Full Metal Jacket" as
military experience on my resume?
|9.21.05 @ 5:57PM|#
Gracious--
But there always have been and always will be young girls and young
women with low self-esteem, and they'll always do stupid shit based
on what the culture does or the people around them do. If these
women lived in a porn-free culture they'd do something else--throw
up five times a day to achieve some skinny ideal, or something. I
knew a girl once who had a mirror instead of a personality--she
reflected who she dated. When she dated a guy into metal music, she
listened to nothing but metal. Then she dated a country guy and
listened to nothing but country. And so forth.
But if Wendy Shalit wrote about this girl, she wouldn't blame the
girl's low self-opinion--she'd blame the music industry.
B.D.|9.21.05 @ 6:12PM|#
[I]Does that mean I'll have to stop listing "Full Metal Jacket"
as military experience on my resume?[/I]
Yes, and you cans top listing Jenna Jameson amongst your "sexual
conquests".
|9.21.05 @ 6:15PM|#
...and even if a lot of women don't see it as a competition,
it is.
I think I originally read a different meaning in this than what you
meant, but it gave me a thought. Are women likewise competing with
porn, on an evolutionary scale? What happens to a species if the
sex drives of so many males are permanently diverted to
non-procreative activity...
...but that'd never happen. Right? Right?
|9.21.05 @ 6:17PM|#
Walrus: I've known several girls that like getting spanked,
before, during and after sex. One girl I'm seeing now actually came
out after sex all giddy about the bright red handprint on her
ass.
Of course she likes it a bit rough and nasty at times.
|9.21.05 @ 6:18PM|#
Most porn that I've seen is kind of gross: not because of
any explicit nudity or sexually, but that sexuality is depicted
andd 'celebrated' in such crude, mechanical positions. There is
little eroticism in most porn.
You've obviously never watched lesbian porn. I would classify the
stuff I've seen as "erotic".
|9.21.05 @ 6:23PM|#
haha yeah Erock. I mean maybe I just date more conservative women... or perhaps I'm just not brave enough to try it and realize that despite their front they kind of like it.
|9.21.05 @ 6:27PM|#
As with any other vice, a lot of reaction to it comes from a religious notion that is pretty deeply imbedded in many different societies- that the tempter is just as sinful as the one who succumbs to temptation. Libertarians are fond of saying "if you don't want it, don't look/use it," but Christianity and as far as I can tell Islam holds the tempter equally responsible. And I think there are secular examples as well- look at the hatred of junk/fast food and its advertising. I think it's a concept pretty well ingrained. Now, whether *gov't* should be involved in assigning "sin" both religious and secular, is obviously another story...
|9.21.05 @ 6:29PM|#
Oh, I forgot to quote, that was in response to the last question
Julian posed:
isn't it, in a sense, weird to focus on the porn and not the
men for whom porn consumption is a problem, as though porn were
some sort of alien brain-slug that had crawled in through the
genitals and taken over the central nervous system?
|9.21.05 @ 6:30PM|#
Akira:
get pissed off when his Level 18 Dwarven cleric gets dissolved
in acidic spit of a black dragon after blowing his Reflex saving
throw
Well, heck, who wouldn't?
Thomas:
a fight against a black dragon without Resist Energy (Acid),
Protection from Energy (Acid) and Energy Immunity (Acid)
Duh, 'cause they don't stack. What a geek! Read your PH.
;-)
Back to your regularly scheduled discussion of porn....
Larry A|9.21.05 @ 6:31PM|#
I thought she was saying something far more reasonable: that
if men weren't learning about sex from pornography at age 8, or 10,
or 13, then at least they'd have more of a chance to forge real
intimacy with women.
I think the key may be this statement in Wendy's
contribution.
The present ideal is that once a boy is weaned he should have no
further contact with or sight of a female breast, etc., including
movies, photos, drawings, and computer generated images, until his
wedding night which should be after he graduates from college at
age 22, two decades later. Most specifically, even after
puberty he should never imagine or dwell on the subject of
breasts, etc. to the point that he "abuses himself." Then on his
wedding night he's supposed to be a caring and accomplished
partner, who takes care of the needs of his spouse.
We do have "sex ed," but that's taught on a don't-try-this-at-home
level. The alternatives are illegitimate ones: pornography and
pre-marital experience.
Stephen King would be interested, but I have problems with the
concept.
I personally am also dismayed at the thought of 8, 10, or 13
year-old males reading pornography. Not because the characters have
genitals, but because the stories suck. Once again, prohibition
(which decrees that any story available to anyone under 18 be
completely neutered) is producing a toxic result. If we don't want
young males (and young females) learning the wrong stuff from
pornography, give them realistic stories about the way sex
should be.
|9.21.05 @ 6:39PM|#
To get back to what Jennifer was saying about her acquaintences
who wanted to get into porn, and how they were all pretty much
"fucked up," I think this is the real issue. A lot of the women --
not all, just a lot -- who go into porn do so because of abuse
they've suffered in the past or some other kind of emotional
problem. Porn clearly does not help with either, and most likely
exacerbates it greatly. Witness the suicide rates in porn. Witness
also how most aspiring porn stars perform once and then never do so
again because of the negativity of the experience.
I suppose that the overall result could be seen as good since porn
allows such damaged women to make quite a bit of money -- more than
they might be able to make in any other profession. And certainly
there is demand for porn, and that demand and consumption is not
usually itself harmful. But...it's hard to weigh this compared to
the emotional damage that porn inflicts upon its actresses.
|9.21.05 @ 7:08PM|#
so, what are the suicide rates in the porn industry, NaG?
Jennifer, not only is John confusing correlation with causation, as
you pointed out, but he is also confusing illicit with
elicit.
typographical errors are one thing, using the entirely wrong word
another.
|9.21.05 @ 7:35PM|#
John-
Could it be that the people who lack the discipline to keep porn
off their work computer also lack the discipline to limit their
downloads?
Or that the only ones who get caught are the ones with prodigious
amounts of porn?
|9.21.05 @ 7:59PM|#
thoreau,
Just so you know, I sent you a time-sensitive email this afternoon
about the DC gathering. You might want to check your spam/junk
folder for my message if you haven't gotten it already. Or maybe
you got it and found it completely worthless. Anyway, just wanted
to let you know.
|9.21.05 @ 8:04PM|#
I haven't gone over to look at the original link, but it
seems from the conversation here that it's assumed that A) women
don't like porn, B) women who do like and view porn don't ever view
it at the same rate as men, and C) even if women did view it at the
same rate, porn would not have the same effects on women as it has
on some men.
Well, those things are true, in general. Also, men don't make
quilts as often as women. This is not to say a man has never made a
quilt.
The only thing new to me in this Slate dialogue was that one of the
women was proposing the idea that masturbating to porn is a form of
cheating on your woman. WTF? Who thinks that?
|9.21.05 @ 8:13PM|#
"Bah, 3.5 at least made Ranger and Bard playable. Plus if I
never have to compute THACO again I'll die a happy man. Good thing
I didn't play enough in junior high and high school for THACO to be
much of a consideration."
Not to derail the conversation, but the only thing I use D20 for
right now is for Traveller. Other than that it's Savage Worlds,
Fuzion, and I like the system for the new Serenity RPG.
OK, I'm geeking out here.
B.D.|9.21.05 @ 8:39PM|#
"The only thing new to me in this Slate dialogue was that
one of the women was proposing the idea that masturbating to porn
is a form of cheating on your woman. WTF? Who thinks
that?"
That's old news. I heard that one a long time ago. It's bull, of
course, but there are some that hold that opinion.
You're right in your analogy about not all men make quilts, which
was my point as well. There are over generalizations in this
article and discussion that bother me.
|9.21.05 @ 9:00PM|#
Cryptic Ned and B.D.,
I would say that it's more than "some" who hold that opinion. I
would bet that most fans of the Harpo (Oprah & Dr. Phil) shows
would accept that masturbating to porn is cheating. And they would
consider it a self-evident fact, like, "the sky is blue when it's
sunny." The general idea is that if it's something that you
wouldn't do with your wife/S.O. being right beside you, it's
cheating. Reasonable people can disagree with that, of course, but
if your S.O. believes it, it may be perilous to the relationship to
do so.
Don't discount that voting block. The difference in their votes for
Bush and Kerry was probably larger than all the votes Badnarik
got.
|9.21.05 @ 9:22PM|#
Quoth John: "I am not a psychologist, but my experience as a
government lawyer leads me to believe that porn does illicit
compulsive behavior. In the close to 50 cases of child porn and
adult porn found on government computers I dealt with, I never once
saw a case involving two or even a hundred pictures. They were
always thousands of images."
Isn't that analysis arguably a bit suspect? I've heard the same
thing from prosecutors re: child porn offenders: That the
invariably huge stashes of this (reprehensible, in my view)
contraband found in defendants' computers prove that pedeophiles
typically have tons of material that they keep indefinitely.
But isn't it equally likely that anyone with a huge amount of
contraband is more likely to get caught than someone with just a
small amount?
No rhetorical Q here -- I may well be wrong. Let me know if you
think I am, and where my understanding is going awry.
|9.21.05 @ 9:58PM|#
You'd think a lawyer would know the difference between "illicit"
and "elicit."
Oh, government lawyer. That explains it.
TallDave|9.21.05 @ 10:32PM|#
Girls today have so much anxiety about appearing "hot" and
servicing boys correctly, it never even occurs to them that they
should actually experience--or wait for--their own desire. Is this
not a problem?
No, it's a natural expression of the dating market, not much
different than focus on clothes, body, health, and hygience. A
young woman who wants to attract quality men has to be able to
provide what the man wants, even it's not what she wants; she
sacrifices that utility for the utility of having the man she
wants. Otherwise, the men will gravitate to others who can please
them. It's the man who must focus on the woman's
pleasure, because if he's poor at sexually pleasing his
partner, that can easily destroy his market value as well as it can
hers.
Also, young men want sex a lot more than young women. A man's sex
drive peaks around 16-19, a woman's in her late twenties or early
thirties.
|9.21.05 @ 10:32PM|#
SY:
obviously, even for a lawyer, and even for a government lawyer,
John's not very smart. his claims here and on other threads are
idiotic.
J. Goard|9.21.05 @ 10:49PM|#
I personally am also dismayed at the thought of 8, 10, or 13
year-old males reading pornography. Not because the characters have
genitals, but because the stories suck... If we don't want young
males (and young females) learning the wrong stuff from
pornography, give them realistic stories about the way sex should
be.
Larry --
Are you serious? When I couldn't (or can't) get laid for a long
time, the last thing I'd want to see is a whole bunch of couples
having erotic, passionate, thoroughly fulfilling sexual
connections. For the typical awkward teenager, I imagine it would
be thorough torture. Frankly, I don't know why it's not obvious to
more people here that a major function of porn is as a palliative
for losing streaks in the sexual ballpark, and that its typically
unemotional tone and simple power dynamics are not deficient with
respect to this purpose.
|9.21.05 @ 11:29PM|#
Gracious:
Not only did I not miss that point, I thought I made that
point. As I said, though, the problem is not so much the focus on
satisfying your partner--that's, you know, a nice, thoughtful way
to think--whether one has an equal willingness to express one's own
desires and whether the partner is as concerned about satisfying
them. My puzzlement was that the (negative) focus perversely seems
to be on the one thing that actually is an aspect of a healthy
relationship.
|9.21.05 @ 11:31PM|#
Learning about sex by watching porn is probably a lot like
learning about medicine by watching medical shows on TV.
But wait: There are all kinds of medical shows out there. And there
are all kinds of porn. Certainly it is possible to learn real
things, especially technical/technique things, depending on what
you watch. IIRC, many years ago there was a news story about a very
young kid (age 5 to 7, I think) who saved his mother's life by
giving her CPR -- something he had learned how to do by watching a
popular medical show.
And I'm not sure porn is much more damagingly inaccurate or
incomplete than your standard sex education course. In both junior
high and high school, we boys (the classes were segregated for this
stuff) were told that the sex act consisted of putting Tab A into
Slot B ... and that was pretty much it.
Oh, it was also mentioned that you might have to touch her breasts
for a few minutes first, to get her ready. Of course, the most
important thing about sex for a girl is emotional context. And
commitment. She wants to know that she is loved. So you really
ought to marry her first.
That was pretty much the extent of formal sex ed as I knew
it.
Now, a true story: I had a friend who had lots of bad luck with
girls. He had his first real girlfriend around age 20, and when
they broke up five years later, he had a hard time getting over
it.
Around age 30, he started dating this girl I'll call Welfare Queen.
Also around this time he began watching porn. More precisely, he
began studying porn. He learned some technical things from
it.
This greatly impressed Welfare Queen. She'd gotten pregnant, then
married, at age 15. "I went directly from my daddy's arms to my
husband's arms." However, it appears that her first husband's
lovemaking technique was basically limited to the "Deodorant
Method:" Roll on. Roll off. He probably had the same sex ed course
I did. My friend opened up a whole new world for her.
The thing in my friend's favor, I think, was not only that he knew
enough to be a little creative and interesting, but that he was
considerate enough and made the effort to make the process
pleasurable for her too. Apparently this is fairly rare.
Unfortunately, Welfare Queen had a lot of issues, one being an
apparent aversion to stability. After taking advantage of my friend
emotionally and financially, she broke up with him and found
another guy more like her first husband. My friend had a hard time
getting over that, too.
When my friend was in his late 30s, he had what might have been a
one-night stand with a girl he had just met. It was totally
unplanned, and neither of them had protection. So my friend
insisted on doing nothing that might possibly lead to the girl
getting pregnant. Basically, that meant keeping Tab A well away
from Slot B. So he did other things. Basically, he made it "all
about her" -- all the orgasms were in Girltown that night. And the
girl was impressed. Partly it was that he knew how to do "other
things" and do them well -- and that was due to his pornographic
studies. But mostly that he demonstrated that he was unselfish and
foresighted.
My friend and the girl dated for several years. A year ago, they
got married.
Please note: If not for porn, my friend would not be married today!
Pornography is known to encourage monogamy and lifelong
commitment!
Although I guess it also helps to have the right attitude going
in.
As it were.
(And no, my friend is not actually me. It's weird that I know as
much about the whole story as I do, but he's not me.)
|9.21.05 @ 11:37PM|#
On a more serious and much briefer note, two words:
Wendy
McElroy.
(Main homepage at: http://www.zetetics.com/mac/index.shtml )
|9.21.05 @ 11:48PM|#
biologist-
Q: What do they call the guy who graduates at the bottom of his law
school class?
A: Public Defender.
|9.22.05 @ 12:06AM|#
"Q: What do they call the guy who graduates at the bottom of his
law school class?
A: Public Defender."
No, no, no. They call him a Public PRETENDER.
Don't you know any ex cons?
Amy Alkon|9.22.05 @ 12:10AM|#
I write a syndicated column on sex, dating, and relationships,
and I've done quite a bit of research on this and related topics.
It seems pretty obvious:
Girls want to appear "hot" for the same reason guys want to appear
rich: to appeal to the hard-wired preferences of the opposite sex.
That's why women looking for men apply Maybelline and men looking
for women apply Mercedes. (ie, If you want to catch a bear, don't
go off into the woods carrying a Tupperware container of
salad.)
Here's a quote from a piece I wrote for Hustler -- a data-based
defense of porn:
According to psychology professor Catherine Salmon, author of an extensive analysis of studies on porn and violence, "There is agreement in general that exposure to sexual violence has negative economic effects on viewers, but...it is the violence, not the sex per se that has the negative effects."
To be fair, Salmon did note that porn has a negative economic effect on women. Yes, like prostitution, porn -- as an alternate source of sexual gratification for men -- reduces the average woman's sexual bargaining power for access to a man's resources.
...But doesn't porn "degrade" women? "If there is one thing all [heterosexual] porn videos have in common, it is portrayal of women engaged in some form of sexual activity," writes Salmon. "Pornography is about sex, and not about violence or the degradation of women."
So how exactly are women hurt by pornography? According to Salmon, the same way they are when their significant other passes a lot of pretty women while walking to work. Salmon points to several studies that indicate that it's not photos of naked women which make men report feeling "less committed" to their partners, but photos of a number of "very attractive" women -- naked or clothed.
Sooo...what's the answer? Should we force any woman with above
average looks to go around in a burkha?
Amy Alkon|9.22.05 @ 12:16AM|#
scratch that word "economic" (before "effects" in first para) -- it's an error and makes it make no sense. Dunno how that snuck in there. Copied the text off Larry Flynt's site. Whoever posted it there was sloppy.
|9.22.05 @ 12:26AM|#
They were always thousands of images. So many that there is
no way that the guy could have gotten off over even a fraction of
the pictures. Only compulsive behavior could cause someone to risk
their careers and lives for pictures they don't even get off
over
You seem to be making a lot of false assumptions about porn viewing
habits.
First of all, you're assuming that a picks a single image to "get
off" to and then sticks to that particular image. That is, of
course, false. Flipping between images is very easy, and a person
may view dozens, or even hundreds, of images during a given
"session".
Secondly, you seem to think that "thousands of images" is some
freakishly huge amount. You're forgetting that porn is (a)
effectively free and (b) easy to download. Accumulating a thousand
pornographic images costs nothing and takes maybe two hours of
effort (or, if you prefer, five minutes per working day for a
month). A man with ten thousand pornographic images on his computer
has spent less time and money in pursuit of his interests than a
man who videotapes a season of his favorite TV series.
Thirdly, there is little incentive to ever delete old images, since
modern hard drives can hold tens of thousands of images easily.
Even if you don't think a given image will ever (ahem) come in
handy, unless it is actively unappealing you might as well keep it.
So images accumulate over time.
Finally, if porn illicited compulsive behavior, you'd have
encountered a heck of a lot more than fifty people with porn on
their work machines; the number of men who've viewed porn online is
equal to a pretty good percentage of all the men who've been online
at all. Porn is just one of the many things compulsive people get
compulsive about, that's all.
|9.22.05 @ 12:39AM|#
If you want to catch a bear, don't go off into the woods carrying a Tupperware container of salad.
You don't win bears with sal-ad! You don't win bears with sal-ad!
(Ahem. Sorry. As you were.)
|9.22.05 @ 7:26AM|#
DB :"Thirdly, there is little incentive to ever delete old
images, since modern hard drives can hold tens of thousands of
images easily."
Fourthly, even if you have deleted old images, since these cases
involve forensic examinations, the old images will be counted
unless they have securely wiped.
Ia gree that thousands of images means very little - anyone who
thinks otherwise, I suggest they do a search for jpg's on their pc
and see just how many appear. Rmember the police will include
thumbnails, pop-ups whatever when they describe you as possessing
thousands of images, deleted or not
|9.22.05 @ 8:11AM|#
MNG-
I think some of those same stupid people work in the purchasing
department. Everything costs 3x as much as it should and takes 3x
longer than it should.
I mean, does anybody think deficits grow on trees?
|9.22.05 @ 8:16AM|#
BTW, this is why I will most definitely leave the public sector after a few years. I like the people that I work with directly and all, but if I got promoted from postdoc to staff scientist I'd get to set up my own lab. And the thought of going through preferred vendors that charge 3x as much seems like the absolute worst way to do science. I've never seen a university throw up obstacles to scientists who want to buy their fume hood or biosafety cabinet from a vendor that isn't on "the list."
|9.22.05 @ 9:00AM|#
t:
Are you guys forced to work through GSA? That's such a fucking
joke.
And it's only the tip of the iceberg. The biggest scam is
government contracting. We have bitched frequently about the huge
"none competitive" contracts, but for every one of them, there are
thousands of poorly written and enforced contracts done through the
"proper" channels. And don't get me fucking started about
politically correct vendors, and how we are supposed to pay more
for them "just because".
And I actually have a point to this rant. All this money that Bush
is shitting out for the Katrina clean-up will 95% go to scam
artists from all walks of life. From multi-generational welfare
recipients to fat-ass CEOs who are cashing in political favors. And
all of this is due to the government's total incompetance and
corruption in contracting.
|9.22.05 @ 9:16AM|#
MNG-
I haven't bought much stuff yet. I'm mostly a theoretician. So I
don't know about GSA. But from what little I have bought, and from
all the stuff I've seen my colleagues buy, I know that the process
is usually way too slow compared with a university. And on big
ticket items like biosafety cabinets and fume hoods, we were
comparing notes with a guy who just got a university job, and the
vendors that we have to go through charge way more than the guys
that our colleague is buying from.
Really, it makes no sense to stay here any longer than I need to
learn something from my colleagues and get a couple projects done.
Beyond that, I'll just be doing science that I could do anywhere
but at 3x the cost.
|9.22.05 @ 10:06AM|#
I remember when I lived with a friend of mine, he would always
refer to masturbating to internet porn as "exorcising the demons".
He had a steady girlfriend, and didn't spend hours jerking off to
porn. I think he used porn as a way to get rid of his overwhelming
sexual desire. Sort of like the part of "Something About Mary"
where Ben Stiller wacks off in the bathroom before going out on a
date.
I hate to say it, but I've seen a lot of porn. Some of it is
downright disgusting, some of it is actually quite useful for
learning various sexual techniques. You'd be suprised at how
difficult some very common porn sex positions are.
That said, Bodybouncer
|9.22.05 @ 10:18AM|#
I'm mostly a theoretician
Everyone try to say "The Thoreau Theory" five times fast.
|9.22.05 @ 10:42AM|#
"In the close to 50 cases of child porn and adult porn found on
government computers I dealt with, I never once saw a case
involving two or even a hundred pictures."
My obsessive collecting of bootleg MP3s (over 40 versions of "Gimme
Shelter") has left me unable to relate normally to real
guitars.
|9.22.05 @ 3:19PM|#
Sanchez: Thanks for yourn response. perhapps we're not in such a disagreement--maybe it's a matter of semantics. "Servicing" and "satisfying" your partner imply very different things for me. I agree that the latter is in fact one of the healthier parts of a relationship and second wave feminists are wrong, in my opinion, that for a woman to be vulnerable for her lover or want to please him in any ways suggests some inherent 'power inequity' in the relationship. Human nature and love and eros have been aroound a lot longer than some precarious political theories, and certainly will outlive them. That said, 'servicing' implies to me an element of obligation, and of....well, servitude, that is divorced completely from affection and desire--it's a commmerical transaction, and degrades the vibrant, powerful autonomy of a woman's sexuality--unless that--pimp/whore stuff turns you on, in which case those kind of role plays are just what gets you both off.
|9.22.05 @ 3:19PM|#
Sanchez: Thanks for yourn response. perhapps we're not in such a disagreement--maybe it's a matter of semantics. "Servicing" and "satisfying" your partner imply very different things for me. I agree that the latter is in fact one of the healthier parts of a relationship and second wave feminists are wrong, in my opinion, that for a woman to be vulnerable for her lover or want to please him in any ways suggests some inherent 'power inequity' in the relationship. Human nature and love and eros have been aroound a lot longer than some precarious political theories, and certainly will outlive them. That said, 'servicing' implies to me an element of obligation, and of....well, servitude, that is divorced completely from affection and desire--it's a commmerical transaction, and degrades the vibrant, powerful autonomy of a woman's sexuality--unless that--pimp/whore stuff turns you on, in which case those kind of role plays are just what gets you both off.
|9.22.05 @ 3:21PM|#
Sanchez: Thanks for yourn response. perhapps we're not in such a disagreement--maybe it's a matter of semantics. "Servicing" and "satisfying" your partner imply very different things for me. I agree that the latter is in fact one of the healthier parts of a relationship and second wave feminists are wrong, in my opinion, that for a woman to be vulnerable for her lover or want to please him in any ways suggests some inherent 'power inequity' in the relationship. Human nature and love and eros have been aroound a lot longer than some precarious political theories, and certainly will outlive them. That said, 'servicing' implies to me an element of obligation, and of....well, servitude, that is divorced completely from affection and desire--it's a commmerical transaction, and degrades the vibrant, powerful autonomy of a woman's sexuality--unless that--pimp/whore stuff turns you on, in which case those kind of role plays are just what gets you both off.
|9.22.05 @ 8:33PM|#
"Girls want to appear "hot" for the same reason guys want to
appear rich: to appeal to the hard-wired preferences of the
opposite sex."
I question this.
I once thought that women, for instance, tended to dress a certain
way when they were looking for a man, and that they tended to dress
with other concerns at other times.
...but I now suspect--and I know I'm making generalizations
here--that they tend to dress for each other more than anything
else. ...that the desire to appear "hot" is as much a desire to
appear as "hot" or hotter than other women as it is to appear "hot"
to men.
Men, generally speaking, don't ostracize women for dressing
provocatively, but haven't we all seen women ostracized by other
women for dressing provocatively? If women were primarily concerned
with appealing to men, that wouldn't happen very often. ...or would
it?
|9.23.05 @ 4:51AM|#
Men, generally speaking, don't ostracize women for dressing
provocatively, but haven't we all seen women ostracized by other
women for dressing provocatively? If women were primarily concerned
with appealing to men, that wouldn't happen very often. ...or would
it?
Women are primarily concerned with looking better than other women;
men are primarily concerned with looking more successful than other
men. Women snark at each other for the same reason men get macho
and competitive; they're trying to make the competition look
bad.
play poker online promotion|10.3.05 @ 1:53AM|#
Take your time to check out the pages in the field of tournament .
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245