Holy crap. Congress has way too much time on it’s hands. Don’t they have bigger things to worry about, like war or terror or something? I don’t even know what to quote from that article, it’s such a mass of concentrated stupidity. Let’s see…
Mary Anne Layden, co-director of the Sexual Trauma and Psychopathology Program at the University of Pennsylvania’s Center for Cognitive Therapy, called porn the “most concerning thing to psychological health that I know of existing today.”
Forget mental illness, rampant divorce, child abuse, widespread government and media-sponsored paranoia… net boobies are gonna drive us all mad – MAD, I tell ya!
“Pornography really does, unlike other addictions, biologically cause direct release of the most perfect addictive substance,” Satinover said. “That is, it causes masturbation, which causes release of the naturally occurring opioids. It does what heroin can’t do, in effect.”
So what you’re really saying is that people are addicted to masturbation. I hate to break it to ya, but 99% of the adult male population was addicted to jerking off long before the printing press came along, let alone the internet.
Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kansas), the subcommitee’s chairman, called the hearing the most disturbing one he’d ever seen in the Senate.
Aaaaah! Do they administer basic sanity tests to these people before electing them?! Children are being starved and enslaved in Sudan, civilians being bombed in Iraq, terrorists are plotting our doom, Adam Sandler is still making movies – and THIS is the most disturbing thing he’s ever seen?! This guy deserves to be recalled for incompetence.
Judith Reisman of the California Protective Parents Association suggested that more study of “erototoxins” could show how pornography is not speech-protected under the First Amendment.
I give up. This is beyond mockery. Worse than crack? These people should know – they’re all clearly on drugs. Just in case you were wondering, the domain name erototoxin.com has already been bought, allthough there doesn’t seem to be anything there.
Look, pornography addiction is real. Some people’s heads really do get messed up by the stuff. But this is rediculous. I would like to think the highest legislative body in the land is occupying it’s time with more pressing threats than “erototoxins” (hey, that might make a good name for a band!).
I can just imagine…
“Hi, my name is Kathryn and I… I … I am addicted to porn!”
Re: I can just imagine…
Just say, “No.”
The next thing you know… we’ll have porn pushers on the streets. What is this world coming to?? (hehhehhehe)
Re: I can just imagine…
Porn pushers on the streets??? WHERE??????
I NEED MY PORN FIX!!!
*salivating*
while i agree certain aspects are outrageous, i do believe there is such a thing as porn addiction that exists in sufficient severity to damage self and relationships. a man who jacks off to a variety of things feels the effects but does not link them to a very narrow subset of triggers. a man who consistently uses a single type of porn will in fact link the chemical release to those specific triggers.
“erototoxins”….. I love it.
Guess we’re all gonna burn in hell for sure now.
“causes masturbation”
*giggle*
that…is *the* most ridiculous thing i’ve seen in days.
i love the assumption that pornography is intrinsically connected to pedophilia (“The campaign should combat the messages of pornography by putting signs on buses saying sex with children is not OK”)- really, what better way is there to scare people away from their own sexual expression (masturbation) than to connect it to some such deplorable act?
they might as well have said that it makes you go blind and grow hair on yer palms, for all the insipid bullshit they’re standing up for. i can’t fucking believe they quoted a representative for NARTH! again, way to bring in scare tactics- they might as well have just said “hey you, big tough hypermasculine frat boy- if you jerk off to net porn, yer gonna turn yerself gay!”
of course pornography can depict images that are distasteful to others- i think to some degree, that’s the *point*, as it creates a *safe* outlet for sexual fantasy (again, masturbation) related to aforementioned distasteful images so that the person with said desire won’t go out and do it (and by “it” i mean things like pedophilia and bestiality and rape and so on and so forth) for real. i’m really big on that concept, since it’s something fairly deeply connected to what i do; short of shock therapy (which doesn’t work anyway), you can’t completely clear anyone of their desires, and i do believe that they need a sane and safe outlet for expression that doesn’t impact anyone but the person with the fantasy. i don’t think porn/masturbation/etc. necessarily cures the desire, but it does make it less pervasive.
if they want to freak out about dangerous non-drug addictions, what about television? talk about a powerful influence; people base their entire lives over the propaganda fed by the media, and act out messages in far more destructive ways than just jerking off.
so cool that the article had carol queen as the rebuttal; she’s an amazing sex-positive activist. it sounds like they skewed her language a bit, but still…at least there was *one* voice of reason shining through.
can you smell justification to regulate the internet?
and in terms of their being most disturbed, they were probably showed the worst of the worst – tubgirl, goatscx, the like. the quoted man is a Republican – from Kansas. even money, he’s never *heard* of anything but the missionary position. your average pr0n site would boggle his mind!
meanwhile watch that deficit zoom upward … watch government spend more and become more powerful …
Oh please
As liberal and progressive as it may sound and make you feel to belittle the effects of porn, the fact of the matter is that it DOES have a profound effect on the viewers.
That’s not to say it’s going to turn everyone into a pedophile or rapist, but let’s say it affects Bob by 2 points. Al is affected by three points (points meaning how much it affects a healthy view of sex, women, etc). To them, sure it doesn’t seem that big of an effect. Sure it’s okay to think of women as being always spread-eagle ready to take it in any orifice the man desires. Psh, that’s just sexual exploration and freedom.
But start adding these points up. And these changes are multiplied by the fact that porn is so accessible to men (and women, sure) of ALL ages. Young teens who don’t even know which way is up and have mind-blowing hormones at the helm are pounding their brains with images of women being tied up, smacked around, and done every which way. And that forms their basis of what sex is about—Women who don’t talk with iron vaginas that can take any sort of rogering.
So start adding up all these “points” that porn adds to men, a whole society of men and wouldn’t THAT create a profound effect?
As a female, I would really love to be able to watch Comedy Central or E! after 9 PM and not have to see 700 ads for Girls Gone Wild as Snoop Dog presides over them.
The fact that the internet is so vast makes it hard to police in situations that need policing. Like, child porn. The internet creates a nice anonymous avenue for people with such leanings to EASILY feed those desires, whereas before, it was hard to access those images and much more likely for a person to get caught because showing up to a place with those images in person could easily lead to an arrest.
One of my best friends in college lied to all of us and so we were all shocked when, right before graduation, he was arrested for having and distributing child porn from his computer at school. He’s now in jail. So I’m more than a bit familiar with this whole process. And in case you don’t know, child porn is images of ACTUAL children. Not drawings, computer images, cartoons—ACTUAL children. Which means that there are children who have been traumatized for life with this sexual crime. If THAT’S not something that merits Congress’ attention, then I don’t know what does.
My point is this..they compare porn to a drug. And yes, there are casual drug users..some people can shoot up or toke once in a while, put it down and walk away. And there are those who becomes so addicted to drugs that they commit crimes, kill people for money or while high, etc. etc. And THOSE are the ones that cause trouble in huge amounts for everyone.
But then again, where do the casual drug users get their drugs? Hmmmmmmm
Re: Oh please
you talk about disenfranchisement of womyn via pornography: as a woman, i say that’s ludicrous. how is it furthering womyn’s rights and privileges in society to say that we can not/should not participate in/enjoy pornography, or to assume that those of us who do are suffering from internalized oppression?
*porn* does not turn anyone into a pedophile or rapist, nor does engaging in BDSM- from the giving *or* recieving end- turn anyone into a murderer or a misogynist. believe me. if that was the case, i- and again, i am a *woman*- would be a serial rapist and extremely violent murderer, running rampant among communities of female children.
porn is representative of a fantasy that people already have; it wouldn’t be out there if there wasn’t already a market for it. and sure, you could argue this from the-chicken-or-the-egg standpoint- which comes first, the fantasy or the expression of it?- but i think the answer is quite clear- if there is not a market for something, it would not be sold. the end.
the fact is…there *are* people who fantasize about and even engage in such acts as pedophilia and the like; taking away porn is not going to change that. what needs to change is the social standpoint that non-consensual sex (which porn is *not*- even in stories involving power play, the performers are *acting* out a fantasy and are all paid a tidy sum to do so) is OK, that misogyny is OK. we need to examine gender roles, and the ways in which they influence people to take on certain expressions of themselves and their sexualities (by which i mean the guys who go out and rape, not the ones who fantasize about it but never, ever do it- there is a *huge* difference between the two, as rape is rarely about sexuality but much more frequently about anger, and the fantasy is more about being able to be in control of one’s life than it is about hurting another individual).
porn may be a symptom of something larger, but it is by no means a cause…
Re: Oh please
speaking of chicken and egg – someone whose anger and emotional issues make them illsuited to live interaction is likely to become increasingly dependant on porn. therefore your highrisk people for acts of sexual violence and maladaptiveness are going to be more likely to rely on and adapt to porn.
and you can’t really be arguing that bdsm has *nothing* to do with control issues?
porn is NOT just representative of existing fantasies – it shapes and strengthens certain fantasies, often to a point dangerous or unhealthy. you want to argue plenty of people do it safely – great i agree. you want to claim its totally harmless and never reinforces negative sexual behaviour, i’d have to say you are dreaming.
Re: Oh please
actually, yes- i am *wholeheartedly* arguing that BDSM has *nothing* to do with control issues. the prime tenets of the BDSM “scene”- safety, sanity, and consensuality- preclude the existence of an unfair or cruel power dynamic. a submissive is never truly out of control- in fact, i would argue that someone taking on a submissive role is *more* in control, since their dominant partner is playing solely to their limits and desires. sure, there are people who abuse the practice…but as a whole, it’s about sensation (including the sensation of being taken care of, rather than acting as the aggressor) and connection.
i think it’s impossible to make an all-encompassing statement about anything-there are people who are going to twist *everything*, no matter how benign the originaly intent. however, i have yet to witness an example of porn being dangerous or unhealthy…and until one is presented to me, i disagree with you.
Re: Oh please
the tenets of SSC relate to managing those desires legitimately – the desires themselves are still bourne of a desire to have or relinquish control.
i have not made an all-encompassing statement – i acknowledge there are healthy users as well as unhealthy and dangerous. I know in my experience I’ve seen plenty of both and honestly must assume if you truly swear you’ve only seen one side you are either new or turning a blind eye to some examples you don’t want to incorporate into your view.
Re: Oh please
are you saying that the desire to participate in BDSM is unhealthy?
Re: Oh please
no, i am not. i’ve fought and worked hard for the cause of public acceptance and legislation regarding bdsm for many years. i am saying it is rooted in control issues – even if those issues are being explored in a healthy sane consensual way.
Re: Oh please
again, i disagree- the desire for BDSM is not related to wanting or wanting to lose control, because neither partner truly loses or gains control over the other. at all times, the submissive (so called disempowered) partner has the ability to stop whatever is going on in a scene; the second the dominant partner is not willing to oblige, it transcends BDSM, and enters the realm of rape.
i take offense to your statement that i am turning a blind eye to reality- i not only know but work with (i am a phone domme) a plethora of individuals who enjoy pornography and never once have i encountered *anyone* who has taken said enjoyment to an unhealthy or dangerous level.
Re: Oh please
speaking to someone on the phone tells you nothing about what they do to people around them in person. speaking to someone in person doesn;t always do that. hence the fact that so many predators neighbours say later “he seemed so nice” and “we had him watch our kids, our dogs, pick up our mail”
I stand by what I said – i’ve sen plenty of both and plenty of both exist. if you feel you have NEVER seen a bad case, you are new or not seeing the bad cases for whatever reason.
Re: Oh please
if you feel you have NEVER seen a bad case, you are new or not seeing the bad cases for whatever reason.
the personal attack is unnecessary. i am not naive, nor am i closed-minded.
i don’t think either of us are going to convince the other of anything, here; rather than continue a pointless and obviously unending battle, i’m just going to say to each her own, and peace to you.
Re: Oh please
I didn’t consider it a personal attack, merely a clear labeling of the only statistically plausible possibilities.
My regrets that you felt attacked. Peace to you as well, and perhaps some later day when we have a better sense of each other we can enjoyably banter on this or other topics.
Re: Oh please
perhaps some later day when we have a better sense of each other we can enjoyably banter on this or other topics.
agreed. 🙂
Re: Oh please
It appears you’re being a bit sensitive here. Has touched a raw nerve? It looks like there’s more to it than you’re letting on.
As someone who knows‘s communication style somewhat, I can say without reservation that what she said to you about being either new or not seeing the bad was certainly not a personal attack. OTOH, you have every right to take it how you choose. All I’m doing is vouching for her sincerity. Not that my word means diddly.
Re: Oh please
much appreciated avivahg but as we also know batgirl has foot in mouth disease 😉 and often comes off as more aggressive online than she realises or intends to – especially when enjoying the discussion.
i can see why she thought that (unlike the more frequent case where someone says they felt attacked and i look at it six ways from sunday and dont see it) but i am glad both for her concluding attitude and your vouching for me 🙂
Re: Oh please
i appreciate your comment; it’s really hard to determine one’s intentions on the internet, as there is no way to hear vocal inflections or see a visible response. not really knowing *anyone* involved in this debate, i have no clue how certain words- “issue”, for example, is a highly stigmatized term- are meant, and that makes it doubly hard to read meanings behind words.
as for there being more to anything than i’m letting on: this is a topic about which i am very passionate, but not to the point of irrationality. i don’t like creating or perpetuating bad blood, and the internet is rife with the potential for undue drama caused by misconceptions; as batgirl stated, i think it’s best left to an in-person debate, if such an occasion ever were to arise.
Re: Oh please
That satisfies my curiosity as to whether there’s more to it than what appears. 🙂
And for the record, like
Re: Oh please
Gah! *ehem*
that last went something like this…
Re: Oh please
i think we were in the same room, once (drowning season/ego likeness/cruxshadows at the ottobar?)…but i dont know if we’ve ever officially met. but who knows, matthew introduces me to a lot of people and i am *terrible* at first introductions…
Re: Oh please
Just learned, I was thinking of a different person. My mistake.
But! It is possible that we saw each other @ the Cruxshadows show. Do you remember a couple who brought their kids? That would be us… and our lil’uns.
Re: Oh please
Honestly, I don’t agree with much of what you say, though I do see where you’re coming from. Even more honestly, I did not want to start a long rambling debate about this topic when I posted.
My main point was this–Porn can be addicting and I have heard from people who were formerly addicted to it that they said it was stronger than any drug. And I’ve heard about the effects it had on their marriages, views of the opposite sex, etc. And since porn is available on a wide scale now due to the internet, I see the problem that the Senate was adressing.
Unfortunately, I went on a bit of a tangent…ANYWAY, that’s all I gots ta say. Let us argue/debate no further… 🙂
Re: Oh please
As liberal and progressive as it may sound and make you feel
I think the meat of your comment has been adequately addressed by others. I just wanted to respond to this line. Let me be absolutely clear: I don’t write to prove my progressive/liberal cred or any other credentials. I write what I think. I welcome disagreement on my journal; but I do ask that you respect the sincerity of my statements.
Re: Oh please
How does that doubt the sincerity of your statements? It simply seems to me that what you wrote stemmed from a knee jerk reaction…
But I’m way too tired to get into it right now and I just don’t care anymore…
Re: Oh please
You suggested I wrote it because it made me feel “liberal and progressive”. That pretty clearly implies that I wrote it for how it made me feel to write it, rather than because I actually believe in what I said.
There’s nothing knee-jerk about my reaction. In all of my writings I am consistently and vehemently against censorship and against the government frittering away it’s time and resources on anything of lesser than grave national importance. This struck me as a particularly egregious example of both, which accounts for the tone of my commentary.
Re: Oh please
“I give up. This is beyond mockery. Worse than crack? These people should know – they’re all clearly on drugs. Just in case you were wondering, the domain name erototoxin.com has already been bought, allthough there doesn’t seem to be anything there.
Look, pornography addiction is real.”
This is what of your original commentary bothered me. You first belittle the commentary made about porn addiction then put the weak addendum of “Porn addiction is real, by the way.” even though you just said that their studying of it indicates that they must be under the influence of mind-altering substances.
Do you think there is really any difference between being addicted to a chemical (i.e. nicotene, the chemicals in crack, heroin, etc) and the addiction to the chemicals released in your brain by porn? It doesn’t matter what causes it, the physiological dependence of one’s brain chemistry to a certain stimulus is one and the same. You hear of people having “addictive personalities”? That’s because their brain chemistry leans toward this physiological need to have a substance to be addicted to–be it porn, cigs, food, gambling, etc–substance being the endorphins and such things that are released the in brain.
I have seen with my own eyes and heard with my own ears the effects of porn addiction–it’s as bad as being a druggie or alcoholic or widdlign away your income on incessant gambling. But I agree with the article when it says, “You can remove a drug from your system, but porn images stay on the brain forever.”
Unfortunately, not everyone in the world can look at porn and have a wank and walk away, unaffected. Wouldn’t that be nice. But there are people with confused sexual pasts (maybe victims of abuse or rape), emotional disorders (depression, OCD, etc), or simply naive people (teens with no sexual experience) and porn is not a stable enough force to be put in front of them. It is like give car keys to an 8 year old.
But unlike hard drugs like coke, porn is easily attainable now, you don’t have to leave your living room and pow! it’s there. It’s not about censorship. That’s BS. It’s about protecting people from a potential dangerous substance. I could go and write a book about how all black people should be killed because I hate them (this is an example, i do NOT feel this way!!) and the best way to go about ridding the earth of them. Constitutionally I have that right. That doesn’t mean I have the moral right to go to the middle of the most potentially racist group of people and shove copies of it in their hands.
Freedom of speech/expression/porn demands responsibility and accountability for one’s actions. THAT’S what I’m saying.
Anyway, I have expressed myself and I don’t want this to become an endless debates, so let’s have done with it.
Re: Oh please
What I object to is hyperbole – which I feel the people quoted were manifestly guilty of.
And I maintain that it is, indeed, about censorship. Nobody is forcing porn into anyone’s hands here. Ease of availability is not the same as forcing, or even encouraging, someone to view it.
But I agree that we should have done, because we have hit a genuine impasse. I see that you are one of many that believes people need to be “protected” from dangerous substances and influences. And that is something I will never agree with.
Re: Oh please
Oh, see, I was going to let it go but that little stab of self-righteous just pissed me off.
Do you think that the people who make and put out porn even have the slightest inkling of responsibility in what they do? No, they only think about money. Same as big corporations that outsource, or drug dealers that shoot pee-ons, or anyone else with a lot of power and greed.
As important as it is to have the constitutional right to videotape women fucking dogs and putting in on public forum, I am a sincere believer in that one has to take responsibilities for their actions and screaming “No censorship!” at every corner prevents exactly that from happening.
But whatever, I’m tired of arguing about it. I just detest being patronized.
Re: Oh please
As I said, You believe in regulation. I don’t. There’s no self-righteousness in that, it’s just a difference of opinion.
I would ask you though, out of honest curiousity – when did having an authority step in and say what you can and can’t see ever promote responsibility? It would seem to me to have the opposite effect. If I have someone telling me what I can do or watch, I have no incentive to make responsible decisions on my own. I really would like an answer to this, because I don’t get it.
Re: Oh please
Okay, we’re cool. I don’t want anyone on my friends’ list to hate me…LOL
I didn’t say PROMOTE responsibility in a parent-like way. I’m saying that the porn industry has been slipping under the radar for years as something kept behind closed doors so it doesn’t need to be addressed. Now there is a notable problem being caused by it…
So, I’m saying the industry needs to TAKE responsibility for their actions and product. We require the drug companies to say “Take this. It has been proven in clinical trials to help with depression. HOWEVER, it can have side effects of weight gain, amnesia, nausea, and death.”
They put a powerful, yet potentially harmful product out on the market and are REQUIRED to say that there is a risk involved. Why doesn’t the porn industry have that same requirement. Yes, some people can take aspirin and feel absolutely fine in the same way that some can watch porn and have no ill effects. However, some will take aspirin and get stomach bleeding and die in the same way that some will watch hardcore porn and something in their minds will click and BAM! There’s a huge problem.
How does aspirin a product we put into our bodies need to be regulated and carry weighty disclaimers whereas another product we put into our bodies and minds–porn–go without having to take responsibility for possible side effects?
Re: Oh please
Thanks for the response, it really does help me understand your point of view. I see your point. Also, thanks for clearing up that it’s industry self-regulation you’re advocating, not government regulation of the internet. I do still think that free-speech advocates and advocates of more responsibility in the porn industry can stand side-by-side without undermining each other’s cause.
I should point out that I’m a hardcore enough libertarian that I would like to see the FDA abolished. That doesn’t mean, however, that I don’t believe drugs should have warning labels – there’s a reasonable assumption that unless placarded otherwise, a product is safe. If it’s not, that’s fraud. And libertarians do NOT like fraud.
I would put this forward for consideration: I think the kind of warnings you’re talking about cross a line that, for whatever reason, our society has been hesitant to cross thus far. To wit: movies, television, and video games carry warnings that they may not be appropriate for children under a certain age. What they don’t carry are FDA-style “viewing this material may cause desensitization” warnings (just as an example). As a rule we don’t label media as psychologically dangerous – for whatever reason. Perhaps because it’s a lot harder to prove causation. I think there’s some wisdom in this hesitancy. It’s all too easy to skapegoat serious underlying problems on what someone watched on a screen.
But granting that porn can be problematic for some small percentage of the population, the question remains: what can the industry really do to mitigate the detrimental effects? Besides for putting out a less misogynistic product (something I’m all for), it’s hard to see how, in a free society, they can prevent any adult who wants to from getting their hands on it. And a warning label is likely to attract the very people who least need to be watching it.
This is not to demean your points. It just seems, from where I’m standing, that there’s little that can practically be accomplished on that front. It seems like more headway might be made partly by by addressing it as various groups have addressed alcoholism and smoking, by educating people; and partly by removing the stigma from it so that people feel comfortable talking about it, and seeking help if they have a problem.
Re: Oh please
There is an essential difference between preventing people from having any access to harmful things, and denying that they ARE harmful.
I smoke. But If I put up a post saying smoking might harm my health, I sure as hell wouldn’t get a nearly uninamimous string of people scoffing at the mere concept. Most of your respondees can’t seem to even consider the concept that any danger even exists. For austenian to bravely try to correct that hardly makes him/her an advocate for preventing people from having access to harmful things. It is potentially dangerous. seeing someone whose addiction is destroying them is ugly and painful. and self-released brain chemicals are every bit as addictive as external chemicals, and harder to manage in recovery.
Re: Oh please
For austenian to bravely try to correct that hardly makes him/her an advocate for preventing people from having access to harmful things.
I would ask you to re-read this thread. has been explicitly advocating regulation. I quote:
If THAT’S not something that merits Congress’ attention, then I don’t know what does.
It’s not about censorship. That’s BS. It’s about protecting people from a potential dangerous substance.
Not to mention that stating that opposition to censorship is a direct impediment to responsibility has a pretty clear implication, to me at least, that censorship is necessary for responsibilty to be cultivated.
There’s a fallacy, all too common in conversations of this nature, that to oppose certain means of addressing a problem is tantamount to denying the problem exists. I’m seeing that here. Everyone who’s written a dissenting comment seems to be trying to prove that yes, there really is a problem. You know what? I never denied there was. But this post isn’t about that. This post is about an apparently heavily biased and hyperbolic panel of “experts” being given an audience by the highest legislative body in the land. You don’t make a case to congress that something is a major problem if you’re not trying to get them to regulate it. And THAT is what I oppose, because this is the internet they are talking about, and I want to see it stay a free zone as long as possible. If you or anyone else wants to start a dialogue about the problems of porn addiction, fine. But that’s not what this is about, and I see nothing brave about imputing that people who oppose censorship must, ipso facto, think there’s no such thing as pornography addiction.
I really don’t get this. Is it that I didn’t give equal space to saying “pornography can be bad”? Is it that I waited until the last paragraph? What part of saying “these people are blowing this out of proportion, and congress shouldn’t be influenced by it” suggests that there is no problem at all? And how does agreeing with me equate to “scoffing at the mere concept”? Should all my commenters have prefaced their statements with “Porn can be addicting, BUT-“?
I don’t mean to be combative, I’m just seriously confused about this.
Re: Oh please
i think you’re misreading what I’m saying.
I don’t like porn, I never plan to view it or use it. However, ironically, I do feel the effects of it as I have to live in a world full of men (predominantly) who have been mentally affected by it, either in the way they view women (as merely objects to screw) or as that one borderline nut-case who watched some rough hardcore porn and that straw broke the camel of sanity’s back and now he’s wandering the street, looking to fulfill violent fantasy he now has. Who’s to say he and I won’t end up on the street someday?
So, yes, I am not a porn customer but I am more than concerned about its effects and I think they DO need to be addressed. No one else is doing it, so why not Congress?
Re: Oh please
No one else is doing it
I don’t think that’s a true statement. AFAIK, there are a number of groups addressing the problem. They just don’t have the prominence of congress.
Could you supply some specific examples of how porn has effected you in the form of men who have been influenced by it? I’m genuinely curious. As a man, I’m not able to see the effects from a woman’s point of view.
Re: Oh please
stalking women who fit the description of women in favoured and long-term imprinted porn films
becoming sexaully afunctional within a relationship to the point of lying about and hiding porn as an alcoholic hides booze in a toilet tank – ashamed to admit they cant have regular sex anymore and have to use what theyve conditioned themselves to
setting unrealistic sexual expectations (same vein as playboy bunnies re body image)
becoming numb and acclimatised and then having to go further and further to get ‘the high’ an inherent part of many offenders paths
becoming so conditioned to a specific style or atmosphere associated with porn that he cannot function sexually unless the real life atmosphere matches it
Re: Oh please
Damn straight, yet again. Unfortunately, for women (such as myself) who don’t need this drama in potential relationships, it’s really difficult for us when more and more men are watching more and more porn and displaying these undesirable traits.
I have heard of a few occasions where sexual offenders (especially of the rapist/murderer ilk) have watched porn to get themselves revved up for a crime and/or when their place was searched, large stashes of porn was found. Unfortunately, I can’t remember where them so I couldn’t argue the point in court. LOL
Re: Oh please
Oh lord, where do I begin? Personally, I find even softest of softcore porn (aka “Girls Gone Wild”) to be extremely degrading. Encouraging women to believe the only way they can achieve “fame” is by pumping them up with booze and giving them beads and making them flash their boobs is disgusting. And seeing as how these tapes have become quite a little financial empire…
Where, at any point in porn, does a woman’s mind come into play? It doesn’t. Women just sit there and receive and that’s it. They disappear when you’re done with them…
Ugh, I could go on for hours about this but I’m totally exhausted.
Re: Oh please
For the record, I have a similarly low opinion of “Girls Gone Wild”. Setting aside the demeaning light in which GGW portrays women, IMO there’s something far more blatantly exploitational about those than even most hardcore porn. At least in regular porn, the actresses have (hopefully) made a sober, deliberate decision to take part. GGW just takes advantage of drunken irresponsibility to make a buck.
I hate to keep harping on this, but when you have some time and are better rested, I’d still like to hear some examples of how porn or the attitudes it engenders in men have affected you, personally. As I said before, as a man I’d like to get a woman’s perspective on the concrete effects it can have in real life.
Re: Oh please
Ugh, this is going to go on forever, isn’t it?
I think that “actresses have made a sober decision” is a BS argument that men use so that they feel less guilty about watching what women do (excuse me, have done to them) in porn.
As a woman with a D-cup, I am absolutely perplexed as to why women who want to become big in porn deliberately get painfully large breast augmentations. It’s no joy in having 15 lbs of weight pulling down on your neck and shoulders 24/7. So what would influence them to put themselves in such exorbitant amounts of physical pain? Soberly-minded people don’t undergo painful procedures and alterations simply for a job. And what other job would demand that of them?
My point is that there is an influence on them…and I hate to sound cliche, but it is a societal influence. They may make the adult decision to do porn, but do you think their fate is always entirely in their hands after that? Do you think being a porn star is being all you can be? Do you think the porn industry is setting its stars up to do great things and change the world?
I’m sure there are exceptions to every rule and I’m sure there probably is a porn company that is the cadillac of porn and treats their “actors” decently. But is that really the caliber of stuff that gets on the internet and is most widely seen?
The porn industry preys on young stupid girls (they DID coin the term barely legal) and blinds them with delusions of grandeur…but mainly chews them up and spits them out. I remember how stupid I was at 18–and I’m a fairly intelligent person. But common sense is lacking at that age.
And when did it become necessary for a woman to pose naked in Playboy just to underscore her celebrity or revive it? Isn’t that little more than just whoring herself out to the public?
The gender gap in this country is still amazingly huge and porn as a whole is only working to widen it.
Re: Oh please
“As a woman with a D-cup, I am absolutely perplexed as to why women who want to become big in porn deliberately get painfully large breast augmentations. It’s no joy in having 15 lbs of weight pulling down on your neck and shoulders 24/7. So what would influence them to put themselves in such exorbitant amounts of physical pain? Soberly-minded people don’t undergo painful procedures and alterations simply for a job.”
As a woman with a DD-cup, I agree with you.
Re: Oh please
All pertinent points and worthy of discussion. But whoever you’re arguing with, it’s not me, because I didn’t take any of the positions you are arguing with in the preceding comment.
Are you going to answer my question, or not? I’m not trying to get on your nerves here, I honestly want to know. You said:
“I do feel the effects of it as I have to live in a world full of men (predominantly) who have been mentally affected by it”
And as a man, I would like some concrete examples from your life, so that I can be more aware of these effects and how they impact women.
Re: Oh please
The fact that you’re beating this point out of me makes me think that you probably are a porn customer and therefore want justification to watch it with a clean conscience because somehow all the arguments I’m making thusfar don’t seem to fit your bill…
You don’t think that living in a society that has all the aforementioned influences via the porn industry doesn’t affect me at all? Considering a huge target audience are the men who are the age I am dating?
If I am interested in a guy but find out that he watches porn, then I have no desire to pursue a relationship with him. I saw firsthand how a roommate of mine was dating this guy and he had a bad porn addiction. It was something he had been doing since high school and could not give it up. She even attempted to watch some (under his duress) but it disgusted her. No matter how much he claimed to love her or want to make her happy, he just could NOT give up his porn, despite how uncomfortable it made her. I don’t know what’s up with their situation now.
I had another close friend who was dating this guy who was rather young and sexually inexperienced. After a couple of months, he ended up dumping her because he was done using her. He was 17, had been watching porn since 13, and tempted her with ideas of long-term commitment just to keep her around long enough to jack him off on occasion. (You know, the whole thing in porn that women are around for sex then chuck them. He ditched her and had no remorse, painting her to all their mutual friends (and his family) as a whore who had brainwashed him. Needless to say, she was really heartbroken because she actually thought he wanted commitment.
Both of these had happened within the past year or so. Though these were not my relationships, I did see firsthand the effects that porn had on them.
That is not to mention the friend I mentioned in my original post, who was busted for child porn. He did a great job of hiding it, we just thought he was this happy guy and all the girls were after him, etc etc. And out of left field, he’s been arrested. I asked him after the fact, why did he do it? What was he thinking? He said he wasn’t thinking. He was addicted. He could go through periods where he didn’t even think about it and then he’d go through periods where he’d be up all night. Part of the attraction, he said was the high you get from collecting something so taboo and illegal. He refused to get treatment because he was ashamed and was afraid of the stigma or that he would be labeled a sexual predator (which he was not, he wouldn’t have harmed a fly).
So is there a need to make porn addiction more public and for people not to feel too ashamed to seek treatment? Definitely. Does porn addiction have an adverse effect on Jane Q. Public? From my experience, yes. I have seen enough girls get robbed of self-esteem and have their self-image ruined by the fact that the men in their lives prefer fake, electronically-imaged women over the real thing.
There…concrete enough for you?
Re: Oh please
Thank you.
I make no secret of the fact that I’m a porn consumer. I don’t know how my questions qualify as “beating it out of you” – you offered that you had been negatively effected by it, I asked for specifics. I’m sorry if it made you uncomfortable to talk about it. I can get summaries of general, societal effects from any number of groups. But I don’t find that to be as persuasive as personal experiences, because societal problems can be attributed to any number of negative influences. As a man, a consumer, and someone who is, believe it or not, concerned about the negative effects of pornography, it’s important to me to understand the concrete impact that it has had on people. The only way I can do anything about it, and the only way my opinions on the subject might change, is through having a better understanding of the subject from perspectives other than my own.
I hope I haven’t upset you in this conversation. From my point of view it has been an instructive one, but I fear from your tone that you may have felt attacked when I can assure you that was not my intention. I know from long and painful experience that it’s easy to misread the tenor of someone’s writings online. Any stridency you detected in my replies was solely the result of my desire for more information. I hope you’ll believe me when I say that I’ve valued all of your comments and I continue to respect what you have to say.
Re: Oh please
I’m not upset. I only get upset if I get personally attacked or patronized. Debates don’t hurt my feelings in the least, otherwise.
I had no idea you watched porn, guess you haven’t been on my friends list long enough.
Re: Oh please
your initial post is filled with extremely dismissive language, and almost every response clearly suggested the idea was laughable. They didnt suggest it was a problem, or even a possible problem that simply didnt require legislation – they acted like it couldnt even be taken seriously as an issue.
as for why else congress etc might be involved other than to censor – i personally wouldnt mind the equivalent of a cigarette warning on every goddamn box saying “warning – the contents of this tape may increase the likelihood you will commit sexual offenses, twist your expectations of future partners and may render you incapable of normal sex after prolonged exposure”
Re: Oh please
Do you think that such a warning would have any effect on the people most likely to be negatively influenced by pornography?
Re: Oh please
do you think any fewer people start smoking nowadays with the potential risks so clearly known? that any more quit to avoid those risks? I’d say the answer is yes and yes.
and at least those who disregard it will know thats the choice they are making. i know smoking is bad for me, but very few people realise porn can fuck them up. they think it either has no effect or only affects some extremely marginal percentage of already very fucked up people, and therefore see no risk to themselves or others. if men knew they could become incapable of real sex they might at least keep an eye on their use of it.
Re: Oh please
Right on!!! (I’m female, by the way) 🙂
Porn is definetly like a drug, it has a lot of the same phisiological effect on the body. Like drugs people get addicted. Like drugs some people get so addicted that they ruin their lives because of it. It can damage their relationshipd with other people, it can harm their work performance (late nights up looking at porn, can’t do it during the daylight hours.) They will stop paying bills because they don’t have enough for porn and bills.
Pedophiles and rapists and such all start by looking at porn, from their there’s a specific pattern they follow that eventually leads to acting out. Of course it doesn’t have those same effects on everyone and even on those that it does they don’t all “complete the pathway” and move to commiting a crime, but many do.
Pedophiles and rapists and such all start by looking at porn
statistics, please?
if you’re going to make such a broad statement, you have to include people like doctors and teachers and social workers and everyone with positions outside of the unsavory bracket…and then the point doesn’t stand up quite so well, does it?
also- i am a proud participant in the adult industry, and watch a lot of porn to boot. never once have i had a problem with my work performance (when i was working for the government, even) or not had enough money to spend on bills because of porn; i think its a *huge* and egregious misconception to say that the vast majority of people- or even a small minority of people- get so wrapped up in the world of porn that they are unable to function. and if you are going to say that…again i ask: statistics, please?
Sorry to intrude and I don’t mean to continue a debate, but here’s a site I found in a very QUICK search of the net…
http://www.protectkids.com/effects/index.htm
I think one of the links goes on about rehabilitation through faith, but ignore that at the moment. I’m just talking about the research they reference…..
“…pressing threats than “erototoxins” (hey, that might make a good name for a band!). …”
~laughs~ I agree.
ROFL.. *great* post, and Too Right. You know, though, the basis of the problem is the false morality. If they changed the morals, and made them more realistic, then we wouldn’t have this so-called problem.