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

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Not that monogamy is "wrong" or "unnatural", but is it becoming an increasingly unrealistic ideal?

It's funny, I often ask this too. There are biological and anthropological reasons for both monogamy and polygamy.

I think, like a lot of things us humans have to put up with, it's a dilemma between our animal selves and our human selves. Both of which are important and have equal right over our thinking and our existence. I don't use either term as a 'lesser self'. The curse of an organism that got a little too smart for it's world, but is still tied to it.

EDIT: Ack, buried my own response on the previous page. If anyone was looking for a response of mine to other topics, it's just before this.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by photon

For sure, the chances that they'd be identical are pretty much zero.

I don't think they'd ever be identical, but I think it's probably a good idea for them to both be in the same ballpark, or else you end up with resentment issues on both sides.

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by troutman

I think this might be a relatively recent development in human history. Before that, I think humans lived and raised families communally. I'd be interested to see more anthropological research on this topic.

'Sex at Dawn: The Prehistoric Origins of Modern Sexuality'

Forget what you think you know about the origin of species. "Sex at Dawn" sets out to prove that our prehistoric ancestors were happy and healthy, thanks in no small part to lots of egalitarian, polyamorous, noisy group sex.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newswee...sexuality.html

The survival benefits were immense: since there was no way of telling who fathered which child, children were raised by the community of foragers rather than single monogamous pairs. Everyone had lots of orgasms (women most of all). Women weren’t used as property or bartering chips, which led to more equality between the genders. That’s why men today are more interested in pornography featuring group sex scenes with multiple men and one woman, and why many people have a hard time staying faithful. It’s just not natural. Whew!

That's fine for a group of nomad humans, living in a hostile environment. However, as the population increases, I believe you have to have more structure in society to create stability, and religion has provided most of that structure to date.


I believe the sexually liberal society which has been influenced by the sexual revolution, of which pornography (particularly hard core) is a part, is not going to cause the downfall of humanity, however I believe it is a contributing factor in many of the problems in todays society. Some of the changes I see are:

- the tendendy of the young to form uncommitted commonlaw relationships in spite of potential legal, emotional, and childbirth hazards.

- increase in teen pregnancies

- increase in fatherless children

- increase in number of grandparents raising children

- virginity looked down upon

- increase in sex during first date

- reducing the sanctity of marriage

- increase in std's. etc.

I believe Western Society is starting to suffer to a degree because of the relaxation is basic ethics and morals that guide society. As evidenced not only in changes in the family, but also in business etc.

It's not easy to pin point the causes and how they all relate to each other. I believe it's the complex interpay of rising population, rising affluence, sexual attitudes, drugs, advances in technology, movement away from religion, etc.

In my opinion, there has never been a more important time in our history where society is more in need of the morals and ethics that come from religion and other sources. I think without the ability of humans to find some way of periodically recalibrating their moral and ethical compasses, they have a tendency to drift off course.

I can fully appreciate all the problems caused in the name of religion today, but to ignore or discount all the good it has done, and abandon it altogether is akin to "throwing out the baby with the bath water". I believe the answer is to participate in it, and influence the changes that bring it up to date, so that it can provide a more positive and guiding influence in society.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I believe it is.

I don't have much more to add than that, but I see it all over.

Again, I think this all comes down to sexual compatibility and affirmation. There are some studies that have shown that infidelity, especially on a man's part, is usually borne largely out of insecurity or low self-esteem. If you combine that with a bit of frustration, due to either a lack in frequency or satisfactory sex, then you pretty much have a recipe for infidelity. I would also argue that you're probably likely to see higher porn consumption in a relationship where one partner receives very little affirmation from the other.

Not to veer too far off-topic here, but I think this goes back to the damage that Western society's collective perception of masculinity causes. As men we're taught that we should be self-affirming, but that women need to be complimented on a regular basis, when in fact both parties need equal amounts of affirmation. Now, to speculate a bit, I think this attitude is also present in women and it manifests itself in a way that they end up consciously or sub-consciously believing that their partners do not require compliments, flattery, etc.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

- the tendendy of the young to form uncommitted commonlaw relationships in spite of potential legal, emotional, and childbirth hazards.

Really? How is a young common-law relationship more hazardous than a young marriage.

- increase in teen pregnancies

- increase in fatherless children

- increase in number of grandparents raising children

- increase in std's. etc.

These actually decrease in countries that are more liberal regarding sex because there is increased awareness and better sex education (i.e. Sweden).

- increase in sex during first date

So?

- reducing the sanctity of marriage

How so? And, really, what's wrong with that exactly? These are normative statements used empirically, which is poor logic.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

- the tendendy of the young to form uncommitted commonlaw relationships in spite of potential legal, emotional, and childbirth hazards.

- increase in teen pregnancies

- increase in fatherless children

- increase in number of grandparents raising children

- virginity looked down upon

- increase in sex during first date

- reducing the sanctity of marriage

- increase in std's. etc.

STIs have actually dropped dramatically really, with few exceptions. Also, grandparents raising children is not a negative or positive on society. Same goes for virginity being viewed negatively or sex during first dates.

To me, the valid points above are "fatherless" children and the legal, emotional and financial hardship faced by common law partners who simply viewed moving in together as a "natural step" in the evolution of the relationship without longterm forethought. At least marriage first would cause some long term thinking and acceptance of risk

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

I believe the sexually liberal society which has been influenced by the sexual revolution, of which pornography (particularly hard core) is a part, is not going to cause the downfall of humanity, however I believe it is a contributing factor in many of the problems in todays society. Some of the changes I see are:

- the tendendy of the young to form uncommitted commonlaw relationships in spite of potential legal, emotional, and childbirth hazards.

- increase in teen pregnancies

- increase in fatherless children

- increase in number of grandparents raising children

- virginity looked down upon

- increase in sex during first date

- reducing the sanctity of marriage

- increase in std's. etc.

I believe Western Society is starting to suffer to a degree because of the relaxation is basic ethics and morals that guide society. As evidenced not only in changes in the family, but also in business etc.

Still trying to gather my thoughts on this, but I just want to point out that these points you bring up aren't driven by pornography. It's a very suspect and circuitous route to say that an ability to watch porn eases your guilt about leaving your children fatherless.

Very generally speaking, the issue of pornography and family stability, I think, stems more from the inability of partners to articulate, without shame, their "out of the ordinary" sexual desires. In a way, this is echoing Photon's comments. I do think unsatisfied desires eat away at people over time.

I need to think about this further, but I don't think it's the availability of pornography that's driving the issue. I would wager that the acts that people watch through pornography came into their heads first before they saw the porn.

Excuses for the disjointed post, but I'm reluctant to blame the availability of pornography as the root cause of the problems.

[Pacem]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

This last part plays into my earlier questions. We have a tendency to construe what is ancient or "natural" as correct over and against those things that have developed in accordance with society and culture. I am wondering if we are on the verge of witnessing a similar such development. Are traditional conceptions of love and marriage, and the connections between lust and infidelity becoming obsolete in a more sexually liberal society? Not that monogamy is "wrong" or "unnatural", but is it becoming an increasingly unrealistic ideal?

I dunno, maybe the traditional concepts are going against natural human desires. Maybe we're just seeing society buck the trend because the trend was unnatural in the first place. The % of the population that is not religious is growing and at the same time we are see'ing people go further away from these traditional concepts. Could be a coincidence. Maybe it is a sign that the teachings within religions are not the natural desires of the human race. Perhaps they are the teachings are of a dictator that wanted to keep people in line by limiting their freedom. The main argument against that would be that these human desires are the devils doing. I don't live in a world where I believe in a magic man in the sky and some demon ready to make my life miserable because I enjoyed my life contrary to these teachings.

Of course, a person of faith is going to disagree with my opinions and there is no way of either one of us winning any argument that is based on religion.

Originally Posted by flamesfever

- the tendendy of the young to form uncommitted commonlaw relationships in spite of potential legal, emotional, and childbirth hazards.

- increase in teen pregnancies

- increase in fatherless children

- increase in number of grandparents raising children

- virginity looked down upon

- increase in sex during first date

- reducing the sanctity of marriage

- increase in std's. etc.

http://www.health.gov.on.ca/english/...report/tp.html

Downward trend for the last 25 years. I can't find it but I'm pretty sure STI's are going down too. Not sure about the trend of fatherless children or grandparents raising children. The others on your list seem like minor issues.

It seems like the more information you give children the less harm happens. Lots of kids are dumb asses. Lots of kids are going to #### up. In the end tho, it seems best to give them as much info as possible and have them make their own choices. When given all the facts and information, they aren't as dumb and are going to have more tools to be able to make the right choices in life. I say give children all the information and tools you can, the odds are in their favor that way.

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.

Still trying to gather my thoughts on this, but I just want to point out that these points you bring up aren't driven by pornography. It's a very suspect and circuitous route to say that an ability to watch porn eases your guilt about leaving your children fatherless.

Very generally speaking, the issue of pornography and family stability, I think, stems more from the inability of partners to articulate, without shame, their "out of the ordinary" sexual desires. In a way, this is echoing Photon's comments. I do think unsatisfied desires eat away at people over time.

I need to think about this further, but I don't think it's the availability of pornography that's driving the issue. I would wager that the acts that people watch through pornography came into their heads first before they saw the porn.

Excuses for the disjointed post, but I'm reluctant to blame the availability of pornography as the root cause of the problems.

I'm not saying that pornography is the root cause of the problems, but is just a part of the overall trend to an "anything goes society". I remember reasoning in University, that one should have the right to do anything that doesn't harm others, including oneself, so I've gone through that thought process. However, I do believe there is an overemphasis on rights without the corresponding responsibility which come with them.

As far as my views on pornography in particular, it has probably been with us since ancient history in one form or another. If used in good taste, e.g. art forms, sexual scenes and descriptions in movies and books, etc, I believe it has the potential ability to improve the sexual experience, which is an important part of marriage. However, I believe most of the modern hard core is an affront to the dignity of man, and is potentially harmful to society.

I also believe education is the key. I certainly don't want to convey the idea that I have all the answers. We all see the world from different angles, and I respect that everyone has something worthy to say and contribute. Please consider my posts just an old guy trying to join the conversation.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by polak

Judging on how my earlier post was ignored, I'm going to say the fundemental flaw in this discussion is the christian definition of "family" and how a person should live there life in that aspect (nuclear family).

I think that you have missed the whole point of this discussion. I'm not sure why you are bothered by the fact that no one considered your post worthy of much of a response, especially considering that you had already deemed the topic "flawed" by investigations and comparisons of religious perspectives.

[troutman]

Now when I Google "porn", I get Calgarypuck links.

[Flash Walken]

googling 'porn'? amateur.

[photon]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I don't think they'd ever be identical, but I think it's probably a good idea for them to both be in the same ballpark, or else you end up with resentment issues on both sides.

Probably, but why would it necessarily end up with resentment issues unless someone has unreasonable expectations? People's libido changes over time, ebbs and flows, so even if they were in the same ballpark they won't stay that way.

If one partner makes advances and the other is not in the mood, so they go have a bath with their iPad and entertain themselves instead, how should that breed resentment in either one?

I could see if there was no communication or if someone was deceiving themselves ("their libido will improve when we get married") I could see it being an issue, but that's not strictly a problem with unequal libido (which is almost guaranteed to happen), it's a relationship problem.

Or is a problem with unreasonable views of masturbation or poor self esteem issues (if they're masturbating and they're not thinking of me that's cheating).

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by photon

Probably, but why would it necessarily end up with resentment issues unless someone has unreasonable expectations? People's libido changes over time, ebbs and flows, so even if they were in the same ballpark they won't stay that way.

If one partner makes advances and the other is not in the mood, so they go have a bath with their iPad and entertain themselves instead, how should that breed resentment in either one?

I could see if there was no communication or if someone was deceiving themselves ("their libido will improve when we get married") I could see it being an issue, but that's not strictly a problem with unequal libido (which is almost guaranteed to happen), it's a relationship problem.

Or is a problem with unreasonable views of masturbation or poor self esteem issues (if they're masturbating and they're not thinking of me that's cheating).

But what's an unreasonable expectation? If someone has a higher libid, but doesn't enjoy masturbating, or subconsciously needs the increased oxytocin that comes with sexual interaction with a partner, and subsequently want sex more than their partner does, is that an unreasonable expectation? And I think the resentment comes from the rejection of the advances, which again goes back to my point about reciprocal affirmation.

I think there's probably also Pavlovian effect to that as well. If one is rejected to many times, there's going to come a point where porn produces a more consistently positive outcome, which would therefore become a more enticing proposition and likely lead to less attempts with the partner.

[rubecube]

I guess that also comes back to TC's question regarding the sustainability of monogamy. Are there actually any moral grounds on which someone shouldn't pursue polyandry if they are unsatisfied? I realize it's against our cultural norms, which are based heavily on Christian scripture, but is there actually a rational argument against it?

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I guess that also comes back to TC's question regarding the sustainability of monogamy. Are there actually any moral grounds on which someone shouldn't pursue polyandry if they are unsatisfied? I realize it's against our cultural norms, which are based heavily on Christian scripture, but is there actually a rational argument against it?

I don't have an answer as to whether or not any argument exists, but it seems to me there is little sense in looking for moral grounds or universal rational grounds. What matters is how practical that arrangement would be in a person's life and I expect that would vary from person to person based upon their own values and the values of the people they care about. That context and the practical results of a person's choices within it are what determine how rational it is.

That is to say, whether or not it's rational requires case-by-case consideration and would not be universal.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

I don't have an answer as to whether or not any argument exists, but it seems to me there is little sense in looking for moral grounds or universal rational grounds. What matters is how practical that arrangement would be in a person's life and I expect that would vary from person to person based upon their own values and the values of the people they care about. That context and the practical results of a person's choices within it are what determine how rational it is.

That is to say, whether or not it's rational requires case-by-case consideration and would not be universal.

Oh I agree completely. I know for me, I couldn't handle the idea of my girlfriend sleeping with other guys. I get jealous enough when she talks about an ex. That being said, I know that how I feel is likely socially constructed and isn't very rational.

On the other hand, however, I also know my family would be very disapproving of a polyamorous relationship, so I'm sure that impacts me as well, which is really my point. I think we overemphasize monogamy.

[GGG]

I think your thought processes of how sex works are changed by watching porn and this can change how you view sex from an act of intimacy to just a physical act. Now i dont think this is limited to porn. Something like twilight can probably be just as damaging to how people view themselves in relationships.

How we think and process emotions is highly influenced on society around us. And where our society is deacying is our treatment of people as objects, dehumanizing them.

This doesnt mean that being ultra conservative is better or that sexual liberation is negative. But really within sexual liberation it should be based on personal freedom and self empowerment rather than objectification. So things like Cosmo, twillight, porn, advertising, rom coms, most television have a negative effect on the way people percieve and interact with eachother.

So using porn together in a relationship probably has postive effects if both people want to. Using porn yourself to the point where it starts influencing how you think (not sure you know the tipping point) becomes harmful.

[sworkhard]

I agree, that porn for men, graphic love stories for women, and other things that result in unrealistic expectations and/or objectifying of feelings and actions into physical representations certainly is not a good thing. However, I think these both do greater harm to individuals that are not in healthy relationships. Those in healthy relationships have ongoing real life experiences to keep themselves grounded, helping prevent an unrealistic portrayal of sex, relationships, behaviors, etc from being expected in real life. Some (but not nearly all) people that are not in such a relationship may become disconnected with what is realistic, which can certainly damage relationships if that disconnect results in expectations that are impossible to meet, potentially contributing to messy breakups.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by GGG

I think your thought processes of how sex works are changed by watching porn and this can change how you view sex from an act of intimacy to just a physical act. Now i dont think this is limited to porn. Something like twilight can probably be just as damaging to how people view themselves in relationships.

I personally considered few things as potentially more damaging to a young woman than Twilight because promotes an incredibly unhealthy idea of infatuation as love. That is another thread for another day.

This is key here, in that self-esteem and self-perception are critical to ensuring strong relationships and intimacy. But is the problem pornography, or our socially conditioned interpretation of what constitutes "good sex"? If we were as a culture collectively apt to consider pornography to be morally, psychologically, and personally benign, then does that not eliminate this problem altogether?

Originally Posted by GGG

How we think and process emotions is highly influenced on society around us. And where our society is deacying is our treatment of people as objects, dehumanizing them.

I agree. One of the most serious problems facing modern culture is the tendency towards isolation, radical individualism, self gratification, and the objectification of the world around us. But dehumanisation is not necessarily an issue with pornography, rather it is probably more accurate to say that it is an interpretation that is imposed from pre-existing perceptions about the world around us. We are pre-conditioned to classify pornography as dehumanising primarily because of the enormous stigma that is already attached to sex trades more generally. Prostitution is a black-market business that has a tendency to attract desperate people, and desperate people are incredibly vulnerable to manipulation, oppression, and abuse. It is alot more complicated than this, but I think basically that our collective repugnance for this environment, our sense of pity for those who are forced into it (Haven't you heard? No one says "I want to be a hooker/stripper when I grow up"), and our moral disgust with promiscuity produces a tendency to condemn all facets of the industry uncritically.

But what happens if our perception of sex trades becomes more nuanced? How do our feelings about pornography change if its participants are eager and willing participants? Is it possibly to "objectify" someone who has no scruples about their sexual activity?

Originally Posted by GGG

This doesnt mean that being ultra conservative is better or that sexual liberation is negative. But really within sexual liberation it should be based on personal freedom and self empowerment rather than objectification. So things like Cosmo, twillight, porn, advertising, rom coms, most television have a negative effect on the way people percieve and interact with eachother.

I totally agree with the bolded part, but I am not convinced that the examples necessarily produce the negative effects to which you allude. That is to say, I think that our interpretations of these things as negative produces negative effects like a self-fulfilling prophecy. Here I have just pronounced Twilight to be morally bankrupt, when in actual fact my own feelings about this already stem from a well worn, socially conditioned, collective prejudice.