I like Ethan, who writes at Crucial Minutiae. But his post today in defense of pornography left me, well, disappointed. Ethan writes:
The male sex drive can feel oppressive, more like a visceral need than a casual desire. Moreover, I think our biology is geared to make men seek variety over consistency. Guys can A) bug their girlfriends/wives for more sex (maybe with crazy outfits or roleplay) B) seek it elsewhere from strangers, prostitutes, or mistresses or C) simply satisfy themselves with Internet pornography.
That’s as good an articulation of absolutely everything I disagree with as I’ve read in a while! The “discourse of uncontrollable male sexual desire” is a foundation stone of anti-feminist thought. Since it’s used to excuse date rape and infidelity, I suppose we ought to be grateful that it’s only being used here to excuse porn use. Now, I agree completely that men — particularly young men, and I was young not so very long ago — can perceive lust as “visceral need.” But feelings are not facts, and not every desire, no matter how powerful, requires a concomitant outlet. Ethan listed three options above, and conveniently leaves out at least two others:
D. Masturbate without pornography, focusing the fantasy on the absent partner
E. Refrain from masturbating altogether until he can be with his partner again, a seemingly impossible task that I see lived out regularly by men I know well and trust profoundly.
E is surely a level of self-denial and commitment that goes beyond what most folks, male or female, might be willing to offer. I’ve argued that it’s perhaps the best of all possible options, but a great deal of compassion and charity is needed here. Option D seems perfectly reasonable to me, however. If I were to concede that in singleness or a long-distance relationship, masturbation was a positive good, it still wouldn’t follow that porn was necessary in order to achieve arousal and satisfaction. Porn only reinforces the great lie of everlasting novelty, about which I have posted at length before.
Let me repeat what I wrote last May, this time in response to Ethan:
Ultimately, the great tragedy of porn is that it teaches the men who use it to pursue “everlasting novelty.” Ask any man who uses porn — does he want to see the same pictures over and over again of the same women? No. If looking at one beautiful naked woman was enough, Playboy could put out one issue a decade. Internet porn sites could update annually instead of daily. But as most porn users admit, what was an intense turn-on the first time quickly becomes stale and boring. The seductiveness of internet porn in particular is that some brand new woman, one you’ve never seen before, is just one or two clicks away on your computer.
The pursuit of everlasting novelty is the enemy of actual relationship. Real relationships are built on a very different premise from porn — the notion that what is really sexy is not “new skin” but radical connection with one other person. Porn says that happiness is found by having the same experience over and over again with lots of different women; true eros says that happiness is found by having different experiences over and over again with the same person.
Ethan claims that men can compartmentalize with near-impunity:
But for the average guy, the one who can compartmentalize, disconnect, and come back, I think they really can watch the ice cream every day, then come back to the frozen yogurt. Know why? When they are watching porn, the girlfriends are tucked away in their minds, safe from the taint of the unattainable images. And when they are with our girlfriends, the porn stars are unseen, unheard. It’s not a perfect arrangement. But it’s better than the alternatives.
I’m sure this is immensely comforting to your girlfriend, Ethan, and you seem like a nice young man trying to make a sincere case — for the indefensible. She may buy it; I don’t. (And um, wouldn’t she rather be ice cream than yogurt? How did that image go down with her?)
I’ve been doing men’s work for many years now. And while I may not be the average bear, I do believe this with every fiber of my being: no one, no one, no one, can just “compartmentalize, disconnect, and come back.” Many men think they do so with impunity, but it’s the consensus of both the theologians and the marriage and family therapists that no good life can be lived well in compartments. We are called to wholeness, Ethan; men — all men, even in their late teens in the throes of lust — are capable of matching their desires, their behavior, their hearts. Is it easy? Heck no. But is it possible? Yes. Is it desirable? You bet it is.
I lived my life in compartments for years, not because I was a slave to uncontrollable, visceral lust but because I was fundamentally selfish. My conversion experience and my commitment to fidelity (and not using porn) did not come about because my libido suddenly declined in my early thirties; it came about because, among other things, I realized that I wasn’t nearly as weak as I had once imagined. I could make the choice to be the same man alone in front of the computer as I was in front of the classroom. It wasn’t easy, but I did it, inspired by other men who made the same decision.
When we “compartmentalize” and “disconnect”, we stop seeing women — real women, and porn stars are real women — as actual human beings who have needs that go beyond our own pleasure. And as a pro-feminist historian, I note that when men “disconnect” from a recognition of the essential humanity of any woman, it rarely turns out well for her… or for anyone else.
I agree with you that it’s impossible to compartmentalise a life; what you do in one area inevitably, even capriciously, spills over into another. And I think you have a point about the “everlasting novelty” of porn.
I’m curious, though, as to why you believe that “true eros says that happiness is found by having different experiences over and over again with the same person” (emphasis mine). I’m not looking to argue — my own experiences have taught me that there are many, many paths to happiness and if you’ve found it, you must’ve taken one of the right ones — I just want to understand what led you to that belief.
I find Ethan’s “frozen yogurt” comment to be misguided for a pretty different reason than you do - I see no need to “compartmentalize.” I don’t want to sleep with a guy who considers porn to be the ice cream to my frozen yogurt. On the other hand, to continue the metaphor, as long as I’m his all-time favorite cherry cheesecake, I won’t begrudge his two scoops of pistachio when that’s what he’s in the mood for. In other words, there are lots of things that can give us sexual pleasure, and lots of people we’re attracted to. A good relationship doesn’t make those things go away, and I wouldn’t feel comfortable taking them from someone.
Sara, but in a good relationship, when things get tough, if you’ve got a habit of going to idle fantasy or casual flirtation or porn, you’ll find that it’s much easier to “check out” of the relationship and retreat into your own world. Porn, like flirtation or fantasy, becomes an escape, a place to “hold something back”.
For me, that’s like driving with the emergency brake on.
(And Sara, the “you” was general, and not aimed at Sara…)
Ok, first on the frozen yogurt bit: that was Courtney’s metaphor, from her new book, not mine. See the top of my post. If the metaphor was mine, you can bet my girlfriend would be the ice cream in that scenario.
But more importantly, this strikes me as a question of transcendence. I am not a religious person, but I do believe that in this day and age religion is one of the only forces calling people to rise above their petty experiences and do something for a greater good. Outside of religion, our government is not calling us to sacrifice for a greater good, just, infamously, to go out and buy more. So we are raised without learning the pathways that delay gratification, that have us sacrifice for something greater. Once upon a time religion was not the only force pulling our eyes upwards. There was the righteous compact of the state, which gave a secular face to transcendence.
So while I think we lack those pathways now, I still am left with this question: if we avoid porn, delaying gratification, for what higher good are we doing this?
So while I think we lack those pathways now, I still am left with this question: if we avoid porn, delaying gratification, for what higher good are we doing this?
Radical intimacy with another human being, for starters, the kind of intimacy that is built through a certain degree of restriction, self-control, and mental/physical monogamy.
Hugo, don’t you see some good in privacy and space for one’s own reflection?
Sara, I am a big fan of privacy. My wife doesn’t share all my interests, or I hers. (She does not join me on my mountain runs; I don’t go to her spinning classes, to name one example). Reflection is fine. Erotic fantasy about others is, I think, low-grade betrayal. Learning to be as excited by the familiar as by the novel is not always easy for either men or women, and yet it’s a great discipline with sublime and marvelous rewards.
You can find whispers of eros in the strangest places. “Porn” is a pretty broad designation. Amidst silicone nastiness and endless misogyny, you’ll sometimes catch a flicker of humor or authenticity, an idea, an emotion, a taste of possibility… An embodiment of something you can’t quite grasp yet, but want to bring into your own life and perhaps express with someone.
I’m not saying you can find that in “hardcore hoes” or whatever. But..
There’s something to be said for endless surfaces and perspectives, picture after picture, video after video, (book after book,) possibility after possibility… Yeah, you can get lost in it. But for some, it all becomes pointless, hilarious, harmless, merely titillating–that much faster. It’s a fast gateway to questioning, taking a step back from all the silliness, and looking deeper. You can use it to open up choice in your own behavior. Really. If you’re one of the lucky ones. Finally, and faster, you have to ask what do I want? How do I want to live?
I’m not saying there aren’t many, many victims amongst the viewers, creators, and performers alike. They’re still the vast majority. But I just have this funny feeling that we’re moving in the right direction…
Didn’t Jesus or someone say that what you don’t bring forth will destroy you? Don’t repress… Bring it forth and transcend…
It seems like your viewpoint isn’t all that much better than someone’s body stopping at the belly button and starting again at the knees, with everything in between being dirty and bad. I feel like you’re saying sexuality starts and ends with your partner and EVERYTHING else sexual is dirty and bad. For someone with a healthy, embodied sexuality, that’s like, “Huh?” Maybe it’s not coming through in your words, but something’s just not sitting right.
Ice cream and yogurt are both consumables. I don’t want to be either, even in metaphor.
And they’re both dairy. Wouldn’t want to be dairy.
I wouldn’t mind it if my wife thought I was her mint chocolate chip Tofutti Cutie.
“Radical intimacy with another human being, for starters, the kind of intimacy that is built through a certain degree of restriction, self-control, and mental/physical monogamy.”
Hugo: I guess I have a number of issues with this line of thinking. The first is the idea that a thought is an action. I just don’t believe that. I think we have all kinds of bad thoughts up in our head, and it was we choose to do with them that matters. And yes, I put looking at pornography in the “thought” rather than “action” category.
The other issue is that I’m a real relativist when it comes to relationships. This mostly comes from my mother, who is a psychotherapist and feminist. I believe that the presence of pornography in a relationship–or its total absence–is something that should be discussed and agreed upon within a relationship. As in, there is no outside morality that holds any sway within the confines of your relationship. Only what you and your lover agree upon matters. That’s my view.
While we may not entirely agree on it’s definition, I *love* the phrase radical intimacy.
I agree that this is where true eroticism lies. But I also think it’s a very hard thing for most couples to reach.
Broce, I’ll agree it’s difficult. But most good things were having are.
Ethan, my brother you’ve got the chinchillas in my brain running on their exercise saucers so fast my head’s exploding. Let me respond to what you’ve said here in a post later this week. Hint: I’m gonna disagree with most of what you say, and try and do so respectfully.
Couples, couples, couples; it’s always about couples! ;)
Even as a terminally single man, the metaphor is all wrong: Porn isn’t eating ice cream, yogurt, or even some phytoestrogen-laced tofu dessert: it’s you searching for and looking at images of ice cream or yogurt or whatever (except that the ice cream may really be made of plastic).
Xbox basketball is not “ice cream” compared to playing at the Y: xbox involves a joystick and screen, while the Y actually involves MOVING A BASKETBALL.
I admit to being really bad about this in a whole lot of ways due to my brain wiring, upbringing, and laziness. But I want my life to be increasingly characterized by authenticity. The phrase “Keep it real” is more than a silly saying.
Now I have some major ambivalence about where this line of reasoning goes. But I recognize real negative consequences from fantasy, pornography, and disassociation just to the individual, aside from any impact on a relationship.
As in, there is no outside morality that holds any sway within the confines of your relationship. Only what you and your lover agree upon matters. That’s my view.
Well, but you’re deluding yourself if you think most women don’t take into account “outside morality” when talking to their boyfriends about porn. They “allow” it because very nearly all the outside voices are right there telling them they have to. Just because your lover goes along with you doesn’t mean you’ve silenced the voices. For every ‘outside morality’ rule that says don’t be naughty, there’s another one that says do what your boyfriend says.
Now, I, personally, think that it is ludicrous and offensive to give a lover any rights over my masturbatory practices; my boyfriend doesn’t tell me how and when and with what accessories I may do that any more than he tells me how and when I may take a shower. Intimacy doesn’t mean creepy control over my methods of self-pleasure or my bathroom habits. I despise the majority of visual porn and its fans because of the misogyny, exploitation, and consent issues involved in its manufacture at this particular point in time, not because of any ownership I pretend to have over other peoples’ sexual imaginations. If my lover and I agreed that misogyny illustrated on real womens’ unconsenting bodies was okay with us, and screw outside morality, would that make it all okay? It would not. Things that are wrong do not become right because they get us off.
I also don’t know how you square this utopian notion of lovers’ consensus-building with the emotionally-blackmailing tone of the bit Hugo quoted above. If you tell your girlfriend that she has three choices: put out more, let her cheat on you, or “let” you watch internet porn, because come on, baby, it’s my biology, what is she going to do? I am sure that you wouldn’t, you know, say it just like that, but if that’s what you believe, and she knows that’s what you believe, there is no free agreement that the two of you can come to. There is only her capitulating or you leaving. And this is a perfect model of outside morality: your man doesn’t just want this thing, he needs it, and as a woman, your own needs aren’t as strong or as important, so you can’t understand. Your sexual desires are “casual,” his are “visceral.” That’s outside morality in a nutshell.
Two things, one important, one relatively trivial:
Important:
If the producers of pornography coerce the women (or men) who appear in their productions, then that issue really matters more than any other. We have an overriding obligation not to contribute to that kind of behavior.
Trivial:
This whole argument basically assumes that no such thing as erotic arts can exist; that at the very least, once a picture or a movie excites your sexual instincts, all the forms of “compartmentalization” such as the suspension of disbelief, the distinction between reality and fantasy on stage, and so on, lose their legitimacy. I don’t agree. However, those relate to aesthetic and psychological matters, which I regard (at least in comparison to real harm possibly done to real performers) as trivial.
Heh, I have to admit, I’d hate to have a porn actress called ice cream to my frozen yogurt. It’s not like women who aim to look like porn actresses—blonde, fake breasts, etc.—are impossible to find in real life, so why are you even with yogurt when you could be looking for ice cream?
But yeah, I don’t buy the idea that masturbation is a threat when sex is better, especially if a guy varies it up (doesn’t look at porn every time) and doesn’t make a habit of picking masturbation over real sex.
Not to be overcommenting, but this:
Amidst silicone nastiness and endless misogyny, you’ll sometimes catch a flicker of humor or authenticity, an idea, an emotion, a taste of possibility…
Maybe, and I’ve seen guys go back and watch just that sliver over and over. But more often I see distress on the actresses’ faces than humor. I get why you’d overlook that, but if you’re looking to porn to bring something to your real sex life, then you are killing your imagination.
As in, there is no outside morality that holds any sway within the confines of your relationship. Only what you and your lover agree upon matters.
I’d agree with the second half of that statement — that only agreements made within the couple matter — but the first half is either overlooking or underestimating the influence of factors external to the relationship. It’s that compartmentalisation thing again; what goes on outside of the relationship will necessarily affect what goes on inside of it, and vice versa, because spillover happens.
If my lover and I agreed that misogyny illustrated on real womens’ unconsenting bodies was okay with us, and screw outside morality, would that make it all okay? It would not. Things that are wrong do not become right because they get us off.
I think we can all agreed that porn produced without consent is also rape, and obviously wrong (not to mention illegal). Generally the most misogynistic and cliched porn is also rather boring, repetitive, and unpleasant (even if it is legal). But there is a lot of porn that is more creative and interesting. The jury is still out as to whether women who produce their own product (Jenna Jameson et al) are truly empowered, but a higher quality and less misogynistic product is available for those who are interested.
There is only her capitulating or you leaving. And this is a perfect model of outside morality: your man doesn’t just want this thing, he needs it, and as a woman, your own needs aren’t as strong or as important, so you can’t understand. Your sexual desires are “casual,” his are “visceral.” That’s outside morality in a nutshell.
A relationship is a constant negotiation and balancing act, and using an appeal to “human nature” or similar to persuade or pressure your partner is a bit of a cop-out. It is a way for someone to avoid personalizing an interest in other people by claiming that it is universal - it’s not me, your real-life partner, who wants to sleep with other people, it’s just an impersonal aspect of men’s inexorable sex drive (or, equivalently, womens’ interest in excitement and variety). It’s healthier to own your own desires and interests, without falsely appealing to (or casting blame on) some universal aspect of human nature.
But there is a lot of porn that is more creative and interesting
Sure, that’s why I said the majority of visual porn, not all of it. Written porn can be just as nasty, but it doesn’t involve the direct humiliation-for-pay of anybody real, and it’s a lot easier to find woman-authored stuff. For the visual stuff, I’m not just operating on blind assumptions; I’ve messed around with neutral search terms like “porn” or “sex” or “naked women” or similar to see if I was correct (because obviously if you run a search for “dirty whores” or “slutty girls” you’re not going to find anything non-misogynistic!) and I stand by my contention that the majority is pretty foul. And by foul I don’t mean explicit or kinky: I mean woman-hating. And racist, when it involves women of color.
In any event, decent men who make the effort to find porn whose profits actually go to the women doing the work and which doesn’t involve misogyny are also not the ones pleading that their massive manly sex drive forces them to it. I have no problem with them or their porn. They’re not the ones pretending that their desires or kinks are needs beyond the comprehension of their girlfriends.
I think Pornography is BAD. It is not bad because the human body is bad, or because nakedness is bad, or because sex is bad or dirty. Pornography is bad because women and girls and boys and probably even some men are coerced into making it. Sure, there are some people who arenot coerced….but if you look at pornography at ALL, there is very little that you can be sure wasn’t made by hurting and exploiting real people.
Additionally, pornography encourages all who view it to objectify real people. To turn them in our minds to unreal things. That hurts all people, especially women, since they are most often pictured, and APPARENTLY, men are BORN with a problem seeing females as real people. Well, maybe they are socialized into it! But there is a lot of resistance to seeing females as real people!
If you think people should not, oh, kidnap and sexually abuse runaway girls, you have an ethical obligation to not put your dollars into the hands of people who do so. Not even by driving up site numbers.
Thank you for this post, Hugo. It is hard to be ethical in this world, and most people don’t want to examine these issues clearsightedly. Because then their innate goodness would force them to give up the behavior that they would really like to keep indulging in.
FWIW, I think people in a committed relationship should be able to think about whatever they want when masturbating. In their mental minds, as Kevin Meany would say. Masturbating isn’t infidelity. But if you look at Porn while you are masturbating, you are putting money into the hands of people who hurt girls and women and boys to MAKE MONEY, and if you really thought about it, your boner would probably go down. I mean unless you are a sadist! I don’t know about everyone else, but if I thought I was masturbating to a picture of a person who was in distress and being hurt, I would feel HORRIBLE!
I guess a pretty good rule of thumb is, don’t put money into the hands of people who do awful things, because then they get rewarded for doing vicious and awful things,and they have a REASON to KEEP doing horrible things, because they get money for it every time.
(and YES, I DO have ethical problems with paying my taxes! I wish I could check a box that says, all my tax money is to go to Bridge maintenance or something! I cannot STAND that my taxes go to pay for bombs and artillary which will be used of civilians and children. Do you have any suggestions about this one, Hugo?)
I was thinking of a Savage Love quote that I remembered which applied perfectly to this situation. I finally tracked it down.
Piece-of-meat vision is a male superpower, and just like Superman’s x-ray vision, we can turn it on and off at will. While there are men I view strictly as pieces of meat — porn stars, gay strippers, young Republicans — context informs which men I view as meat. Guy at the bar shaking his ass in my face? Piece of meat. Guy on the TV selling suits (”You’re going to like the way you look”)? Not a piece of meat. Same goes for straight guys. Woman with breast implants at the strip club giving me a lap dance? Piece of meat. Woman with Parkinson’s disease at the Justice Department giving Al Gore a break? Not a piece of meat. Link
Objectification is contextual, and I find the basic intuition of this paragraph to be essentially correct. I do find my habit toward objectification to be able to turn on a dime as needed. I don’t know if that means I am compartmentalizing, but the cognitive flexibility is useful in day to day life and practicing general good manners.
Hugo, you forgot choice F: Stop making dumbass assumptions about Mars and Venus, and figure out how to make choices that will lead both me and my partner to have a happier, better sex life.
I mean, when you see “bugging her” as the only means of getting your partner to have more or different kinds of sex, your problem is right there, not with whether or not you should be using porn.
Just a couple of replies…
First, “site numbers” don’t translate into money for the “adult” industry. Advertisers outside the “adult” industry pretty much never advertise on pornographic websites, so even if “traffic” by itself generates money, that money simply passes from the producers to their advertisers. No money that actually supports the production of “adult” works comes in until someone provides a credit card number.
Secondly, while everyone has an obligation not to give actual help to people who harm their workers (keep in mind that this principle applies to all kinds of work), a corollary responsibility exists for everyone: to address the issue of oppression and exploitation of workers. In the context of the “adult” industry, this means working to design ways to ascertain the consent of the performers, and lobbying the government to make these structures mandatory. Measures already exist to ensure that mainstream “adult” works don’t use underage performers; I believe similar approaches can work to prevent coercion. At least, I can think of absolutely no reason not to try.
John, I think that legalization and regulation of the sex industry would be a fine thing, so you and I aren’t very far apart on this. We see this sort of thing in “anti-sweatshop” guidelines for, e.g., sports apparel.
IMO if the sex industry were legalized it would be better for the only people for whom it should matter, the consumer worker, etc. The only people who it would hurt are the pimps and other middle-men/women, and the professional hang-wringers who make their livlihood off of butting-in on other people’s sex lives and other personal affairs.
John, I think that legalization and regulation of the sex industry would be a fine thing, so you and I aren’t very far apart on this. We see this sort of thing in “anti-sweatshop” guidelines for, e.g., sports apparel.
IMO if the sex industry were legalized it would be better for the only people for whom it should matter, the consumer and worker. The only people who it would hurt are the pimps and other middle-men/women, and the professional hang-wringers who make their livlihood off of butting-in on other people’s sex lives and other personal affairs.
Mr Bad:
Three caveats: (1) I specifically exclude actual prostitution from the “adult entertainment” industry (in which I include virtually everything from high erotic art to frank smut). Not that I oppose measures for the safety of prostitutes, only that I see prostitution as a different situation, with different and far greater hazards for workers. (2) I see the important obligation as ensuring the safety and freedom of the workers. Nobody trafficks the readers/viewers of the adult industry, who have (in any case) plenty of protections already. (3) I support mandatory and enforced rules, not an industry code of practice.
John said: “Three caveats: (1) I specifically exclude actual prostitution from the “adult entertainment” industry (in which I include virtually everything from high erotic art to frank smut). Not that I oppose measures for the safety of prostitutes, only that I see prostitution as a different situation, with different and far greater hazards for workers.”
Such as? I might agree re. what you call “high art” but for smut, the only difference is that the product is images of sex acts, which with the exception of Anime have to be performed by real, living men and women before you can make an image.
“(2) I see the important obligation as ensuring the safety and freedom of the workers. Nobody trafficks the readers/viewers of the adult industry, who have (in any case) plenty of protections already.”
I don’t believe that the trafficking of sex workers in the U.S. is a significant problem vis-a-vis numbers when compared to other industries that exploit workers such as agriculture, mining, petroleum production, etc. As for other countries, I really don’t care because I believe that members of individual cultures should be able to determine their own destiny without outside interference. E.g., the Iraq war falls into this category.
“(3) I support mandatory and enforced rules, not an industry code of practice.” As long as those rules are applied evenly across lines protected by the Constitution, i.e., race and sex, then I agree.
I think if someone is concerned with the women who are coerced into making pornography - that’s pretty reasonable, but you’ve also got to be concerned about the women who are coerced into marriage, into sweatshops, into the “pink collar ghettoes” of the working world, and any other job.
Capitalism is an inherently coercive economic model, and I think it’s easy to see sex work as “more coercive” because it’s sexual (it’s certainly more apalling, at it’s worst), but I don’t think that’s always the case.
However, if you’re encouraging people to boycott the pornography industry completely because of this kind of exploitation, while continuing to buy from, say, the fast food industry (which is, on the whole, at least as exploitive, if you don’t believe me, talk to someone who works in a meat packing plant), then you’re really just setting up a big double standard in which prudishness about sex is more important than actually fighting exploitation.
I have a lot of respect for many anti-porn feminists, but not if they don’t have the same standards for protect other workers as they do for protecting sex workers. How many minimum wage workers consent to a life of poverty? Would the women who are driven to the pornography industry by desperation have many other options? I think some hard questions need to be asked.
labyrus said: “I think if someone is concerned with the women who are coerced into making pornography - that’s pretty reasonable, but you’ve also got to be concerned about the women who are coerced into marriage, into sweatshops, into the “pink collar ghettoes” of the working world, and any other job.”
Why should anybody who is not a sexist only be concerned about women who are coerced into work? Surely just as many men are similarly coerced, so ignoring their plight speaks volumes about character.
Labyus, your comment is one of the reasons why I see my anti-porn, pro-feminist, pro-animal rights stances as most compatible with my veganism.
Off of Mythago’s comment…
Everyone in a committed relationship who is also masturbating with pornography needs to examine why he or she is doing it.
Masturbation with pornography can often be used as self-medication, like drugs or alcohol or any number of other substances or behaviors, in order to numb, deny, and push away pain of all kinds, especially emotional.
I began self-medicating with pornography when I was young and came back to it after marrying an emotionally abusive spouse who refused sex by claiming I was lazy, stupid, ugly and immature. Pornography– along with a number of other coping strategies– enabled me to endure the emotional starvation for about 10 years. I am now divorced and sorting through the damage my and her behavior caused.
Is pornography a recreational pursuit like watching hockey or basketball– is it really harmless to you and your SO– or is it your denial mechanism? Given the real justice issues around pornography, however gray, why would you choose to continue on with it? Is there something more wholesome you can substitute?
Speaking as someone who asks himself these questions too and is working on it.
Hugo -Your kind of anti-porn stance is one I feel pretty supportive of, by and large, since you don’t demand censorship - but rather expect men to control themselves.
I think that kind of perspective is sorely missing in many anti-porn feminist circles - it’s the difference between respecting men and expecting the government to do work that society needs to do. I really don’t think censorship would solve many of the problems that women in the pornography industry face which is why I’m against it (beyond the fact that I find censoring anything to be pretty distasteful).
I might quibble with you about what sort of media fits under the objectionable category of porn, but as far as I’m concerned that’s largely beside the point. The small minority of progressive, feminist-created pornography really isn’t the issue here.
Mr. Bad - Believe me, I am concerned about men who are coerced into work, in fact, I am one (and so are you, propably). That’s why I’m an anti-capitalist. It’s why I volunteer serving food to the homeless (a majority of them, men). The fact that I didn’t mention men in a specific comment (about feminism) doesn’t say much about my character at all. The fact that you’re so quick to jump to conclusions says something about yours.
Under capitalism, virtually everyone (except a small minority of the idle rich) is coerced into working. To certain degree, nature itself coerces us - since we can’t eat without work being done, but most economic activity in today’s world has little to do with meeting basic human needs. It’s no exxageration to say that society could function with a six or even four hour work day, which could be possible in a (non-authoritarian) socialist society.
ATN, those are good questions, but don’t make the mistake of assuming that because something was true for you, anyone who says “That’s not true for me” is a liar or in denial.
You argue that “the great tragedy of porn is that it teaches the men who use it to pursue “everlasting novelty.” Ethan essentially implies that men INHERENTLY seek everlasting novelty and that porn is just catering to that.
Which of you is right? Who knows. Personally, I suspect the truth lies in the middle: men have at least SOME biological urge towards varied sexual partners, porn caters to that urge AND porn strengthens that urge through repetition.