Pornography, “Family Values”, and a Sexually Liberal Society

[Textcritic]

First off, I just wanted to formally thank all the participants in this thread for what has been a fascinating and thoroughly engaging discussion. Well done, CP!

Originally Posted by Daradon

...First, I do believe the action of a crime or sin is worse than the thought of it. We all get tempted, we all have bad ideas, we all lose our path.

This gets close to the heart of why I broached this topic in the first place. I am becoming increasingly uncomfortable with growing emphases on targeting thought crime in Evangelical churches, and the increasing access to sexually explicit material in our culture has provided a prime target. I have personally seen people's lives utterly ruined—not because of internet pornography, but because of their inability to cope with the guilt, a viciously circular cycle of self-loathing, and public shame that they also must deal with.

Invectives directed toward thought crimes are demoralising and destructive.

Originally Posted by Daradon

It's the struggle and the overcoming of it that makes us human and is a moral triumph. Without the temptation, there would be no triumph. There would be no free will, no point, and no reason for Jesus to even have to teach us.

In a contemporary context I think Jesus's teaching might be redeemed on the condition that it is an effective hyperbole. The lesson being that all actions are rooted in ideas. Ideas are not benign, as they have the potential to produce tangible fruit. It's a thoughtful observation, but too easily pushed to an extreme: Thoughts and ideas ought not be discouraged, and distasteful behaviour cannot be eliminated by way of their repression.

[bcsoda]

Originally Posted by gargamel

I'm not denying that there are bad people involved in the porn industry, but that doesn't mean that the industry itself is bad or that people who watch porn are implicitly condoning that behavior. Have you read about the way that migrant farm workers are treated? I'm going to guess that you blame the specific farmers who treat them that way, and don't jump to the conclusion that tomatoes are demeaning to men.

I think that if you have the information about a subject and the means to stop supporting it then that's something you should consider. You don't need porn, but you do need food, and if your options are limited then I do think you should eat rather than starve yourself. If I know enough about an industry to disagree with its practices and the means to stop supporting it, I do.

Originally Posted by gargamel

As for the on-screen stuff, I suspect that our perceptions of what is demeaning differ greatly. For example, is the woman being demeaned if she's on her back while one man has sex with her and another pumps away at her mouth? What if a man is on his back and one woman has sex with him while another rides his face? I suspect that you believe that none of the three men in those two scenarios are "demeaned," while at least one if not all three of the women are. Why is that? Is it because you view sex as something that is more for the enjoyment of men than for women? If so, that's very sad, not to mention sexist.

I'm not sure why you make assumptions about my thoughts and then go on to question them and call me sexist for a thought I don't even have. Were you actually interested in hearing my answer or opinion, or did you just want to make a point?

If it appears that they're being forced into it and treated as sexual objects (which from your description it sounds like they are) then it sounds pretty demeaning to both the woman and the man in those situations respectively. Demean is defined as "to lower in dignity, honour, or standing", and forcing someone to perform a sex act if nothing else lowers their standing, and one could argue it would lower their dignity and honour as well. Also, I think breaking it down into one sex act is overly simplistic. Even if the specific acts you described weren't demeaning to anyone, I imagine the majority of pornographic videos don't consist of solely one moment or sex act.

[peter12]

Textcritic, don't you think that pornography is damaging to the overall theology of love in Christianity?

[bubbsy]

i have a hard time judging anyone on their thoughts.

I think it is human, in fact, straight biology for our minds to wander. If it wasnt' for this great phenomenon, who's to say human progress would have occurred the way it has. Heck, we might still think galileo was a great sinner for even thinking that mankind and earth are NOT the center of the universe.

now onto the nastiness of porn. being a guy, i don't know what it is like for every other guy, but i think we're fairly sexually charged beings (can't speak on the other gender). being in a long term relationship, and then being married, i think it's only natural for our minds and eyes to wander. I actually would hope it's the same it's the same with my wife, as without such urges, how can we remain sexually charged.

Naturally, i expect my wife, just as she expects from me, not to act on these urges. the partner can't be expected to be always willing, available, or around, when the other is wanting. If porn is an easy "outlet" it's just an extension of what people might be thinking anyways.

My main concern is if people are being harmed in the creation of porn. That's where the debate becomes much more tangible for me. oddly enough this article came up in the sun today:

http://www.calgarysun.com/2012/11/25...er-women-study

[bcsoda]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

My main concern is if people are being harmed in the creation of porn. That's where the debate becomes much more tangible for me. oddly enough this article came up in the sun today:

http://www.calgarysun.com/2012/11/25...er-women-study

I don't know if one article is enough to convince me that its fine, especially when that one study had a contributing author who was previously a porn actress and also the founder of a company that would benefit from the porn industry thriving (the person being Sharon Mitchell, the company being the Adult Industry Medical Healthcare Foundation - it's closed now, but was obviously open during the study as that's where they got their sample of porn actresses from). It's kind of like when studies on weight and obesity are done by people associated with diet companies, it seems a bit sketchy. I'm also curious how big the "sample of women" was that they compared the porn actresses to and who was included in this sample.

This person http://neuroskeptic.blogspot.fr/2012...s-happier.html also had a good point. He/she obviously had access to the full article (I don't), and said that every porn actress they surveyed was from LA. How much better are the conditions for porn actresses in LA than in other parts of the world? Are porn actresses who are happy with their job more likely to volunteer for the survey than porn actresses who aren't (if it's something you find demeaning, but you continue to do it, is that something you'd be psychologically willing and ready to confront just for a survey)? Are they more likely to emphasize how happy they are in order to justify what they're doing (same point as the previous question)?
Also, if the sample of women that they compared them to were also all from LA, is it possible that these women had particularly low self-esteem? If you live in the city of the stars where physical attractiveness is deemed so important, would you be more likely to grow up with lower self-esteem than populations in other places where it's not quite so in your face? I have a lot of questions about the whole thing I guess.

[vektor]

Originally Posted by gargamel

Why is that? Is it because you view sex as something that is more for the enjoyment of men than for women? If so, that's very sad, not to mention sexist.

This is just an ignorant straw man argument. Men aren't getting beaten and abused on porn sets, women are. Imagine signing a contract because you don't have enough money to eat then you keep getting smacked in the face, if you complain you don't get paid... oh my god I'm so sexist.

[bubbsy]

Originally Posted by bcsoda

I don't know if one article is enough to convince me that its fine, especially when that one study had a contributing author who was previously a porn actress and also the founder of a company that would benefit from the porn industry thriving (the person being Sharon Mitchell, the company being the Adult Industry Medical Healthcare Foundation - it's closed now, but was obviously open during the study as that's where they got their sample of porn actresses from). It's kind of like when studies on weight and obesity are done by people associated with diet companies, it seems a bit sketchy. I'm also curious how big the "sample of women" was that they compared the porn actresses to and who was included in this sample.

This person http://neuroskeptic.blogspot.fr/2012...s-happier.html also had a good point. He/she obviously had access to the full article (I don't), and said that every porn actress they surveyed was from LA. How much better are the conditions for porn actresses in LA than in other parts of the world? Are porn actresses who are happy with their job more likely to volunteer for the survey than porn actresses who aren't (if it's something you find demeaning, but you continue to do it, is that something you'd be psychologically willing and ready to confront just for a survey)? Are they more likely to emphasize how happy they are in order to justify what they're doing (same point as the previous question)?
Also, if the sample of women that they compared them to were also all from LA, is it possible that these women had particularly low self-esteem? If you live in the city of the stars where physical attractiveness is deemed so important, would you be more likely to grow up with lower self-esteem than populations in other places where it's not quite so in your face? I have a lot of questions about the whole thing I guess.

definitely agree. Hard to judge off one article, and it is probably more likely that there are more negatives that can be derived than positives for the people/woman in that industry.

if we set aside this side of the debate though. Love and christianity - do people believe that monogamy is the completely natural state of human mating/courtship? If so, why do we continue to have urges after finding the "one"?

Why is it that since the feminine revolution (woman are less and less depandant on her husband for survival, and can be self-sufficient economically) over the past 50 years, that we are seeing more and more divorce?

also, there was a period, perhaps even the biblical period, where polygamy (multiple wives) was condoned. i think it's difficult to take a literal approach off religous text to such topics, since circumstances of the given time when the texts were written that caused certain social concepts to be considered (ie. multiple wives) acceptable.

[gargamel]

Originally Posted by vektor

This is just an ignorant straw man argument. Men aren't getting beaten and abused on porn sets, women are. Imagine signing a contract because you don't have enough money to eat then you keep getting smacked in the face, if you complain you don't get paid... oh my god I'm so sexist.

If you're saying that some women are horribly mistreated in porn, then I agree with you. Women getting smacked in the face is disgusting, but, while I'm sure that it does happen, I firmly believe that is not the norm. If you're saying that porn as a whole is demeaning to women, then I don't think that I've made a straw man argument at all. For the most part, men and women in porn are treated similarly, so I think society's biases regarding the proper sexual roles of men and women are very much worth noting.

Originally Posted by bcsoda

I'm not sure why you make assumptions about my thoughts and then go on to question them and call me sexist for a thought I don't even have. Were you actually interested in hearing my answer or opinion, or did you just want to make a point?

Fair enough. I was basing my assumption on your previous statement in this thread that most porn is disrespectful of women and my perception that most porn is more tame than the two scenes I described. Since male-female-female scenes are at least as common as male-male-female scenes, I thought you'd have said that porn is disrespectful of men and women if you really thought the man was being disrespected in either of those scenes, but I shouldn't have made that assumption.

Originally Posted by bcsoda

If it appears that they're being forced into it and treated as sexual objects (which from your description it sounds like they are) then it sounds pretty demeaning to both the woman and the man in those situations respectively. Demean is defined as "to lower in dignity, honour, or standing", and forcing someone to perform a sex act if nothing else lowers their standing, and one could argue it would lower their dignity and honour as well. Also, I think breaking it down into one sex act is overly simplistic. Even if the specific acts you described weren't demeaning to anyone, I imagine the majority of pornographic videos don't consist of solely one moment or sex act.

I don't think it's fair to assume that any of those parties are being forced to perform a sex act. Just as a man can enjoy being in a threesome with two women, a woman can enjoy being in a threesome with two men. Just as a man can enjoy being temporarily treated as a sex object, so can a woman. If they don't feel that their dignity is lowered, who are we to say that they're wrong? If their honour or standing is lowered, it's only lowered by other people imparting their own sexual values onto them. I don't think any less of a woman who has filmed a porn scene, and if she doesn't think any less of herself, then the only one lowering her standing is the bystanders who say that she has been demeaned.

[yads]

Some insightful comments on Reddit about that study. Some from current/former workers in the porn industry.

http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comm..._content_than/

[Itse]

Originally Posted by gargamel

Women getting smacked in the face is disgusting...

This here is a big problem in trying to discuss pornography. Not the specific sentiment, but the whole line of thinking.

You can't tell whether something is disgusting by judging the act alone. You can't even tell if it's okay if you know the people, because sometimes it can be okay and sometimes it's not. It's extremely difficult to tell from the outside.

The most vanilla imaginable missionary-with-foreplay porn can be a terribly traumatizing experience to someone who is doing it for the wrong reasons or against his/her will. I don't think the abusiveness is in the act itself, but it's something between the people involved which you can't necessarily see from the outside.

Which is actually why I'm uncomfortable with a lot of porn, rough or vanilla.

I consider myself above average in reading people and with above average experience with submissive women and rough sex, but I still often can't tell what's really going on in the porn I see. And if I can't tell, I'm guessing most other people watching it can't tell either, and that kind of bothers me, especially considering how much rougher the mainstream of porn has gotten.

(There are some stars with whom I can relax and just enjoy the show. And they tend to indeed be stars, because being able to project that enjoyment through the screen is what brings in the star status.)

However, I know enough about BDSM and BDSM-oriented people to know that there are surprisingly many people who specifically like being "treated badly". And I don't mean being just aggresive and unapologetic, I mean specifically making them feel used and abused.

I had a girlfriend once who's idea of really good sex meant that the next day or two she would have bruises all over and she couldn't chew properly or sit or walk without hurting. In her fantasies she regurarly got no physical pleasure at all. (Yeah, I found that odd too.) Sure, she is not the most perfectly balanced person in the world, but she's doing well in her life and seems to enjoy life more than most people I know.

Of course, most women propably don't enjoy being slapped during sex, no matter how or why it's done.

Then again, most women would never do porn either.

And I think a lot of people have had some kind of sex that had little to do with their own physical pleasure, and I don't think that's inherently bad.

What the bottom line here? I'm not really sure. But one thing is sure;

Sex is complicated, and porn is IMO even more complicated because you don't know the people and can't talk to them.

I think generalizations like "act X is disgusting" should be avoided. (Unless of course we are talking about personal preferences, which is a different matter.)

[gargamel]

Originally Posted by Itse

This here is a big problem in trying to discuss pornography. Not the specific sentiment, but the whole line of thinking.

You can't tell whether something is disgusting by judging the act alone. You can't even tell if it's okay if you know the people, because sometimes it can be okay and sometimes it's not. It's extremely difficult to tell from the outside.

...

I think generalizations like "act X is disgusting" should be avoided. (Unless of course we are talking about personal preferences, which is a different matter.)

I agree completely. Vector had mentioned previously something about a story that he (or she) had heard of a porn director hitting a woman off-screen and making her cry, presumably without her consent, and I meant that it's disgusting that anyone would treat women in that way.

S&M videos don't do anything for me, but I'm with you that there's nothing inherently disgusting about those acts or the people who enjoy them.

[bcsoda]

Originally Posted by gargamel

I don't think it's fair to assume that any of those parties are being forced to perform a sex act.

I also don't think it's fair to assume that they're doing it of their own free will in every video you watch, with no coercion whatsoever. I tend to be more cautious, and can't dissociate from the idea that this could be a forced sex act while I'm watching it.

Originally Posted by bubbsy

if we set aside this side of the debate though. Love and christianity - do people believe that monogamy is the completely natural state of human mating/courtship? If so, why do we continue to have urges after finding the "one"?

Why is it that since the feminine revolution (woman are less and less depandant on her husband for survival, and can be self-sufficient economically) over the past 50 years, that we are seeing more and more divorce?

As for love and christianity I can't really argue since I'm not religious. I do wonder if monogamy is a personal thing in the same way that sexual preference is. Not that it's something that you choose, but rather something that you're born with. I do believe that it's possible for someone to be happy in a polyamorous relationship if that's what everyone in the relationship agrees with and wants. However, non-monogamous relationships don't sit well with me. It doesn't feel right, for me. You could argue that this is because it's how I was raised in society, but other aspects of me go against what society says, and I still don't feel that they're something I could change. They're simply who I am, and no amount of wanting to change it could cause it to happen.

I also don't think that there is "the one", but I do think that there could be "the one that you want to make it work with". If you've tried to make it work, but its still not, then I think leaving the relationship is the obvious answer. Now that this is more of an option for women, it makes sense to me that there would be more divorces. They're accepting that it isn't working with this person, and potentially trying to find the one that it does work with. Monogamy is limited in my views to within a relationship, but to me it doesn't mean that there can't ever be other relationships if that one has run it's course.

Originally Posted by octothorp

Is it fair to say that amateur porn is automatically more moral, or is that simply making further assumptions about the people involved that may not be true?

I think I've already touched on everything else you posted, but I wanted to reply specifically to the question on amateur porn.
I don't think it's fair to say that amateur porn is automatically more moral. There are people who've had amateur porn posted on websites without their consent. Videos being made without their consent. Maybe the person was enjoying the act as it was happening, which makes the actual acts in the video seem less demeaning, but their choice as to whether or not that was posted online was completely taken away from them. This is another instance where I can't ignore the thought while I'm watching the video that there is a chance that this video has been posted online without the consent of one of the parties involved, and that if they did find out it could have potential to be traumatizing for them.

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

First off, I just wanted to formally thank all the participants in this thread for what has been a fascinating and thoroughly engaging discussion. Well done, CP!

This gets close to the heart of why I broached this topic in the first place. I am becoming increasingly uncomfortable with growing emphases on targeting thought crime in Evangelical churches, and the increasing access to sexually explicit material in our culture has provided a prime target. I have personally seen people's lives utterly ruined—not because of internet pornography, but because of their inability to cope with the guilt, a viciously circular cycle of self-loathing, and public shame that they also must deal with.

Invectives directed toward thought crimes are demoralising and destructive.


In a contemporary context I think Jesus's teaching might be redeemed on the condition that it is an effective hyperbole. The lesson being that all actions are rooted in ideas. Ideas are not benign, as they have the potential to produce tangible fruit. It's a thoughtful observation, but too easily pushed to an extreme: Thoughts and ideas ought not be discouraged, and distasteful behaviour cannot be eliminated by way of their repression.

That's interesting. I never considered it to be hyperbole. Obviously, in that case, adultery in that period was as destabilizing to society as l believe it to be today. Basically it acts to destroy the element of trust in marriages, which is one of the prime elements to a successful marriage.

In my mind Jesus's words mean if viewing something causes lustful thoughts that leads to adultery or behavior that is harmful to others or oneself, then one may have to pay the price. As for targeting the lustful thoughts, I believe they are natural and somewhat involuntary...the importance being how you act on them.

As far as viewing pornography, I believe it's a matter of personal choice, and the Church has no business condemning, or instilling guilt in someone who chooses to use it for whatever purpose. Some of the practical purposes I can think of are to alleviate long term resistant impotence, to enhance the sexual experience between married couples, or to increase the rate of production if operating a sperm bank.

Again, I believe most hard core pornography is an affront to human diginty, and may be a contributing factor to marriage difficulties. Besides it's the most boring thing to witness, as the number of ways you can do it are quite limited.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by bcsoda

I do wonder if monogamy is a personal thing in the same way that sexual preference is. Not that it's something that you choose, but rather something that you're born with.

I would very much agree that it's a personal thing in the same way that sexual preference is.

Although my mildly controversial stand on this is that sexual preferences are like most other things; a combination of genealogical and environmental issues.

Though sexual preference propably has more to do with genes, and relationship preferences more to do with upbringing and environment.

Both are also very much circumstancial in that at least some people will experience variation. In certain situations polygamy will feel natural, in others that same person might feel it's completely emotionally impossible.

I would also guess that most often people end up as "polyamoric" more or less accidentally and with little clear intention before it has already essentially happened. (Of course it requires some tendencies/attitudes, but those could be hidden to the people involved before they run into them head on.)

I can however say that when we met, my wife was quite the jealous type, and was firmly against anything other than strict monogamy. And now she isn't. A decade can do that to a person it seems.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Itse

A decade can do that to a person it seems.

Well the 8 years you've been posting here has made me want to see other forums so...

Just kidding, but you served that up so nicely.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by photon

Well the 8 years you've been posting here has made me want to see other forums so...

Just kidding, but you served that up so nicely.

Now even I can't read my last post the way I originally meant it

[vektor]

Originally Posted by gargamel

For the most part, men and women in porn are treated similarly.

so ignorant on so many levels. You're obviously just talking out your ass at this point, the thing is I don't have anything against porn on a moral basis. I just have things against people saying wildly inaccurate things based on nothing but personal opinion.

[gargamel]

Originally Posted by vektor

so ignorant on so many levels. You're obviously just talking out your ass at this point, the thing is I don't have anything against porn on a moral basis. I just have things against people saying wildly inaccurate things based on nothing but personal opinion.

I'm basing my opinion on studies that I've read, women that I've talked to, and porn that I've seen. I think that we're just quibbling over the percentage of women who are mistreated in porn though, because I'm not denying that it does happen, and I don't think that you're denying that some women have made a conscious, informed decision to go into porn and are treated properly. To deny that strips porn actresses of their dignity more than anything that happens on screen, but, like I said, I don't think that's what you're doing.