Why is pornography considered a degrading thing?

I think maybe you're misinterpreting what I am saying. First off, I'm NOT saying it's a bad thing to pay for sex, since we all do it in one way or another. It matters not at all if the woman, (or man,) needs the money, or whatever else we are using to pay. That was never my point. Nor was I saying every woman, (or man,) in the world is a whore. I am simply stating that we all pay for sex, in one way or another. If buying the lady at the bar three dollar margauritas all night is simply part of the game, then you are paying for sex, whether she makes more money than Bill Gates is completely irrelevent.

And on the topic, I know I have said this before, but pornography is only considered degrading by people who don't like the idea of it. It has absolutely nothing to do with it actually being degrading, since it isn't.

Pornography glorifies and normalizes rape.

Um, no it doesn't. This has been shown time and time again, and still someone always has to come along and try to get people to believe this. It is simply NOT TRUE. It is a "fact" invented by people who wish to ban something they personally don't like, and nothing more. Complete hogwash.

Pornography degrades women by equating them to be only sex objects.

Does this mean car commercials are porn? What about women's magazines? Cosmopolitan must be porn, because it's only reason for existence is to help make women look and feel more glamorous. In fact, even commercials for such items as Kellog's Special K cereal have used attractive women to get people to buy their product. If you eat their cereal, you will look like this woman, who is obviously better than you. Her look is desirable because she is a sex object. A jeans model can be viewed as only a sex object, but that has nothing to do with porn, does it? Porn doesn't make women sex objects; people do.

Pornography causes mistrust and dissatisfaction in relationships by creating an unmeetable expectation for the man and a dissatisfaction with one's self for the woman.

Pornography invites openness and communication in relationships by giving a starting point for partners to discuss their sexuality openly with each other.

Pornography is addictive, and just as one needs more and more of a drug to get high, porn addicts must go from soft porn to hardcore porn to things like child pornography, beastiality, and rape porn to get the same effect. Any addictive substance causes dependency upon the users and there must always be an escalation to reach the same high.

Where did you get this misinformation? In no way is this true. People who watch porn do NOT have to jump from regular porn to those other abominations you mentioned. The people who spread lies like this, whoever it was that told you this, they are FAR more dangerous to people than porn could ever be. These are the sort of people that cause mistrust, people who need to spread outright lies to get people to dislike something they personally dislike. There is ABSOLUTELY no fact in this at all.

Pornography and drugs both release endorphines in the brain, and because the brain is lazy it isn't going to make it's own when you are giving it tons for free and there will also be less need for so many receptors.

What? So basically any stimuli at all is bad? I don't get it.

 

Windue:

About time I answered the original question.

Pornography, depicting adults having consensual sex, ought to be legal and is legal, here in the States. Principally for the reasons outlined by Justices Potter Stewart and Hugo Back in the sixties and seventies-first, because it's almost impossible to define satisfactorily and second, because it's speech. However, I don't think it's harmless, I certainly don't think the current state of the industry is remotely acceptable and mainstream porn is degrading to women, who are depicted in the basest and most submissive sexual position. They're there to please male actors and male viewers, and their willingness to do whatever is asked of them is misnamed "liberation" by men who want their girlfriends or wives to give them anal.

It's disgusting. It doesn't have to be, certainly, and there's nothing inherently wrong with either sex or the depiction of sex. But I think there's a lot of confusion in this thread, and in modern society, of two very different things-one, a culture that is sexually open and liberated (good) and two, a culture that is saturated in sex and that expects, demands, prizes it in the way traditional culture expected, demanded and prized virginity and chastity. It's all about choice. And suggesting a girl ought to put out and engage in any kind of sexual act, whether she wants to or not, because otherwise she's "repressed" and "frigid" is despicable.

A modern society ought to be open and enlightened about sex. Not as orthodox and controlling in its favor as it once was in opposition. And I think there's a lot of self-righteousness in this idea that anybody who objects (or even merely dislikes) pornography or particular sexual acts or fornication or strip clubs or whatever has just been misled and supressed by religion. The argument that we're animals, afterall, and sex is a biological impulse logically suggests that religion is too, and that the moral strictures and taboos of society reflect genuine and deeply held feelings that are not any less valid that libertinism.

Personally, I love sex. Can't get enough of it. And before I was married, I did some pretty strange stuff. Hell, my wife and I still do some pretty strange stuff. But that's what I want. It's no less presumptuos and tyrannical to impose that worldview than it is the chaste and reticent worldview of religious orthodoxy.

 

I have yet to see or hear any compelling argument about exactly HOW porn is harmful to society. The only arguments out there are the same ones zealots have been trying to pass off as fact for years, and they aren't any more real now than they were when someone first uttered them. In no way am I suggesting that all the people who use these arguments are zealots though, that's just where they got started. A lot of people use them because people they believe they are supposed to trust use them, sometimes to intentionally mislead people, and sometimes because they themselves are ignorant of the truth.

The truth is that women control most of the prorn industry these days, so if anyone wants to claim it is degrading to women, then they have no one but woment to blame for it. In my job, I see a lot of porn, and yes, there is some that could be seen as degrading to women, but this is the CHOICE of the actress. No one MAKES them do these things, they have chosen to. But it cannot be said that this is the only option open to them, because most of them also do more straightforward porn as well as the kinkier stuff. I also see a lot of women BUYING the same porn, so once again, if it is degrading to women, (and I am NOT saying it is,) then who's fault it it, really? Or is anyone really AT fault, or is it simply yet another choice?

The actresses have the right to refuse to do anything they don't want to do, and they can still make a good living. In the seventies, this might have meant the end of their career, but that simply isn't the case any more. I have talked to too many of these women to believe that situation exists anymore. Not in the mainstream adult business, and for the most part not in the smaller companies either. I don't doubt that if you looked hard enough you could find an instance or two of that still happeneing, but you can find it in ANY profession, so that in itself is not enough to condemn all of porn.

And I agree wholeheartedly that "...suggesting a girl ought to put out and engage in any kind of sexual act, whether she wants to or not, because otherwise she's "repressed" and "frigid" is despicable." It IS despicable, and reprehensible, and these people should be made aware of the barbaric way they are acting But it is NOT the majority of viewers who are like this. It might be the majority of college kids, but they are going to be like this whether there is porn or not. Once again, I see too many people coming into my store day in and day out who do NOT behave the way some people would have us believe the average porn viewer behaves.

But this, "And I think there's a lot of self-righteousness in this idea that anybody who objects (or even merely dislikes) pornography or particular sexual acts or fornication or strip clubs or whatever has just been misled and supressed by religion." is simply not true. I agree there is probably SOME of that going on, but most of us are saying hey - if you don't like it that's fine. That's your choice and I'll respect that. Just don't try telling me or others that it's "bad", and then quote a whole bunch of misinformation to us. Seeing as how I work in this industry, I'm going to be a little more well-informed about it than the average person. Especially an average person who doesn't want it to exist, and that's where the problem comes in. If someone doesn't want to watch it, that's cool. It's not for everyone, obviously. But when they try to take that right away from others, then we have a problem, and that person has turned into a mindless fanatic. It's a simple case of don't judge me and I won't judge you, and we can all be happy.

 

I basically agree with Cantador.

I like how I am brainwashed and you are are "enlightened."

Look, I realize not everyone who looks at porn is going to go out and rape someone, and I also realize that not everyone who smokes pot is going to drop acid. That isn't the point.

But when they try to take that right away from others, then we have a problem, and that person has turned into a mindless fanatic

I like how any attempt to control pornography is labled a "mindless fanatic."
If it was kept to the back room of a store where kids couldn't go I would be fine with that, but the fact is that it has so proliferated that it is all over the internet and in many places you just can't escape it, and that is where choice is being taken away.

Someone who is a porn addict isn't going to just settle with soft porn, and is going to have to escalate it somehow.

It's not like I am an old woman that has never seen a dirty picture, and I know that it degrades and impersonalizes women.

I would like to see the statistic of rapists who didn't look at hard core porn before commiting those acts.

Now I know you are going to jump on this, it isn't pornography's fault that someone commits rape, it is the individual, but someone who constantly thinks about rape is eventually going to do it.

 

Rape is about control. Not sex, mmk? Get it through your head.

 

And pornography demostrates that that total control is acceptable and normal, because after all they like it.

And while control is a main component, rape by it's nature has something to do with sex. I hope I don't have to draw it out on a chalkboard.

 

I would love to see your supporting argument that pornography demonstrates the acceptability and normality of total control. Surely you aren't taking a niche within the porn industry (domination?) and extrapolating your facts based on that? Or perhaps you're using hentai to justify this blanket statement?

I would probably clarify Fire_Ice_Death's post by saying that rape is about power, but otherwise he's spot on.

 

Jedi-Monkey:

Don't misunderstand me. I thought I was clear about this in the opening of my post, but evidently not clear enough.

I think pornography is protected speech. Even if it weren't, I think banning it is a terrible, terrible mistake. And generally unnecessary. There are far more sinister forms of sexuality with which the state ought to concern itself than a bunch people of jerking off to dirty pictures. Rape, for one, which is a crime as old as **** sapiens and one that certainly predates pornography. Incest for another. And, a little less forcefully, the sexualization of children and young adolescents.

Porn, even if it is a bad thing, is so far down on the list of bad things it's not worth mentioning. And I don't, and I think I was pretty clear about this too, consider pornography inherently bad. Nor do I think all the women working in the industry have been degraded and coerced into it-I think some have, particularly outside of mainstream, commercial outfits, and I think many, many more are victims of incest, rape and abuse. Which isn't to say-and I think it's pretty smug to say-that any woman choosing to work in porn or to strip or whatever, is necessarily the victim of anything, is necessarily psychologically unhealthy. It's just that the possibility nags at me whenever I see it, and so my reaction is definitely not excitement. That's just personal taste.

On the other hand, if friends of mine made a tape and swapped it with my wife and I, for everybody's enjoyment... Well, that's something else entirely. Particularly if my sister-in-law is in it. It's the circumstances more than the fact of it that bothers me, Jedi-Monkey, and if I came off a self-righteous moralist, I do apologize. I'm not condemning pornography or folks who watch it, although I do think consumers of rape, snuff and child pornography belong to quite another class.

The first point you quote was a more general concern. The expectation of girls and young women fifty years ago was to remain virgins until their wedding nights and sexually reticent even after they were married. This was a terrible, terrible evil. You'll get no argument from me. But by the same token, the pendulem has swung so far the other way that the expectation of girls and young women now is to behave like Paris Hilton, and that's just as terrible. I don't think pornography is itself responsible-of course not-but I do think it contributes to a culture that is oversexed. When I was a kid, we lost our virginities on prom night. Fifteen, sixteen, seventeen, eighteen years old. Now, it's eleven, twelve, thirteen, fourteen. And one substantial component in this, perhaps the most substantial, is biology. Puberty is what charges up these kids. And as they become physically capable of having sex, they're going to experiment, they're going to do their research and ask their questions. But another component is the cultural saturation of children in sex, from a very young age, and social pressure to move not at their own chosen speed but at an unnecessarily brisk one set for them by the New Normal.

Children are physically capable of various kinds of work at four, five and six years old. They're physically capable of starting families at twelve and thirteen. The boys, and in modern warfare even the girls, are ready for war at fifteen, sixteen. Being biologically equipped to do something does not necessarily mean it ought to be done. Sixteen is the Gold Standard, and I think it's a good barometer age. Sort of the bell curve for sexual preparedness. But an individual maturity and desire ought to be what brings boys and girls into the backs of their cars. Just as it ought to be perfectly acceptable, morally and socially, for folks to sleep with whomever they want whenever they want, it ought to be perfectly acceptable not to. And that just isn't the way it is in modern Western culture and I think the consequences are devastating.

Interestingly, though, before I'm accused of zealotry again (som

 

And pornography demostrates that that total control is acceptable and normal, because after all they like it.

And while control is a main component, rape by it's nature has something to do with sex. I hope I don't have to draw it out on a chalkboard.


Go ahead and draw it out on a chalkboard. You're still wrong. The sexual act in rape is akin to a tool as opposed to getting any sexual gratification out of it.

 

Fire_Ice_Death:

While I don't believe pornography has anything to do with rape, what you're arguing is pop psychology. Power is an enabling force-it may even be an exciting one-but rape is by its nature a sexual act. And its purpose, generally, is sexual gratification. Rape as a fetish, yes, is a fixation on control, and as far as rape fetishists go you may have a point. But remember, only a very small minority of rapes are committed by fetishists, just as only a small fraction of sexually abused children are sexually abused by paedophiles.

Sex is a strong impulse all its own, perhaps even the strongest, and coercion and violence are certainly no strangers to it. Date rapists, who commit by far the greatest number of sexual assaults, feel empowered to do what they do for their superior strength or their social rank or their machismo, but they do what they do because they're horny.

 

Pop psychology? Sorry, as a psych major for a good portion of three years and having numerous psychiatrists for professors I'd have to say I take their word over yours. Unless you have credentials to prove you're as well versed in psychiatry as they are.

 

Fire_Ice_Death:

In order to compare credentials, I'd need to know what university you attend, who your professors are (and a lot of psychiatrists for undergrad psych?), what their persuasions are and what they've actually said on the subject. It's a lengthy discussion, but if you think it's necessary I'm game.

Also, a psychologist is not the best authority on rape itself but on the psychology of rape victims and fetishists. What you need is a criminologist, and even then any fairminded professor will tell you profiles of crime and criminals are very difficult across populations rather than in individuals. Frankly, I would be enormously sceptical of anyone claiming to have built an accurate picture of The Rapist, at least as much so as I would of The Murderer.

Rape, like homicide, is an act. Not a point of view.

 

Well this certainly explains why the Senate is so active...

 

I think pornography is protected speech.


Your right. It is. Thats how the people in the pre-1980 porn industry saw it, too. They genuinely thought of themselves as part of an anti-censorship movement. Porn very nearly came to the mainstream because the directors and actors were actually becoming more skilled with each film they made. Betamax and VHS was really what changed everything on both sides of the coin for better and for worse - not a conservative outcry or protest. The federal goverment correctly realized that it would become a billion dollar industry and severely toned down its campaign against porn while on the other hand the money people in the industry itself realized that if it acqiesced to the newer merchants and distributors, who dealt solely in video - who were, in the eyes of the goverment, " legitimite " buisness people ( i.e. people willing to endure the heavy tax ) - they would become very, very rich. Thats why a brand new porno costs 50 bucks - and always has for the last thirty years - despite how obviously cheap it was to make. Porn, to the goverment, is like drugs. On the surface they denounce it, but they know very well it isnt going anywhere and that if it did go anywhere it would be finacially disastrous on so many different levels outside of the medium itself. So they'll make sure, on the quiet tip, that it will never be truly threatened. So in actuality pornography really degraded itself, like so many other people and institutions, by selling out.

 

Pornography glorifies and normalizes rape.

No, power glorifies and normalizes rape.

Pornography degrades women by equating them to be only sex objects.

If it's so degrading to them, then why do they do it? Your morals say it's degrading. The people who do it obviously don't mind, so let them do it instead of trying to force your morals on them.

Pornography causes mistrust and dissatisfaction in relationships by creating an unmeetable expectation for the man and a dissatisfaction with one's self for the woman.

Again, this is your personal opinion. There are plenty of couples who don't mind their spouse looking at porn and don't find it insulting. Again, if it works for them, why do you care? Why are you making absolute statements about what other people think?

Pornography is addictive, and just as one needs more and more of a drug to get high, porn addicts must go from soft porn to hardcore porn to things like child pornography, beastiality, and rape porn to get the same effect. Any addictive substance causes dependency upon the users and there must always be an escalation to reach the same high.

Masturbation is also addictive. Yet we go to work/school for 10 hours without it. And someone should be able to decide for themselves if it it's too addictive for them to get started on. And it's not addictive to everybody, not even close. Porn is nothing like cigarettes.

 

I like how I am brainwashed and you are are "enlightened."

I am looking and looking and for some reason cannot seem to find where I said I was 'enlightend' and you were 'brainwashed'. The only statement I made that comes close is when I said since I work in this industry, i just might know a little bit more about it than people who do not. The same would go for almost any other profession out there. If we were discussing plumbing, I would expect someone who works in the plumbing industry to have more knowledge of it than I do, since I am in no way connected to the plumbing industry. (Unless we count slang terms.) This doesn't make me 'enlightened', so stop trying to twist words around. It means exactly what it says, that I know more about it than people who don't work in the industry. I talk to and hang out with people in all the different areas of this industry. so instead of acting all indignant, why not try looking at what I ACTUALLY wrote, and don't interpret it the way you want to.

I like how any attempt to control pornography is labled a "mindless fanatic."

But it IS controlled now. There is nothing more that needs to be done about it. You changed the wording of what I said. I said people who want to take it away are mindless fanatics. And 99.9% of the time, that's exactly what they are. People yammering on about something they know nothing about, and do NOT understand. They have no real facts, only urban legend and popular myths and misconceptions to back them up, but they will still come on like they are an authority. I didn't name any names. I didn't point any fingers at anybody. Why are you getting all defensive?

If it was kept to the back room of a store where kids couldn't go I would be fine with that, but the fact is that it has so proliferated that it is all over the internet and in many places you just can't escape it, and that is where choice is being taken away.

That's where it is kept in any store that I have ever been in, with the exception of adult stores. And kids cannot go into them period, so what's the problem? It's not like NBC is showing Deep Throat Sunday night at 7:00 or anything, so where's the problem here? Maybe some pay cable channels do show that stuff, so what? And what about the Internet? I don't understand how I can manage to be surfing all over the Internet for hours at a time, and yet NEVER come across any porn. And I am sometimes LOOKING for it specifically to help me with my job!

At some point in time, this has got to become the parents' problem, and not society's. Parents need to stop what they are doing, and pay attention to what their kids are doing. I'm not saying this is easy. I have a son, and I know exactly how difficult it can be. But that's the job of a parent; looking out for and raising your own children. Raising YOUR children isn't my concern, and I'm not going to go out of my way to do your job for you, or for anyone else. I'm not asking for help with my kid, and I don't ask people to change their lives so i don't have to take responsibility for him. All I ask is the same courtesy in return. That shouldn't be too much to ask for.

Cantador:

I think we BOTH may have misunderstood each other here. The first point I quoted I was AGREEING with you. I'm not certain why you felt the need to clarify it further, but I thought you were right. People who entertain that mindset about women are WRONG, plain and simple. I'm not arguing that at all.

However, after talking with many of the performers in the adult film industry, I do know that there are very few who had anything other than a 'normal' upbringing. This is a popular misconception that has been prepetuated for years, because 30 years ago it WAS like that. That simply isn't the state of the industry anymore, no matter who may think or say it is so. But you say it's the possibility that bothers you. That possibility is there no matter what line of work a person is in, so why should this one be treated any differently? That's the part I don't understand. They

 

Porn is nothing like cigarettes.


I agree with everything you say except for this, or at least I think we are looking at it from two different contexts. I believe the goverment looks at porn very similarily to the way it looks at the cigarette industry, hence the stupendous taxation on two products that are by all means extremely cheap to produce.

 

I am extremely offended that you do what you want with your body. Stop it right now!

Thank you for letting me trample on your rights, but please understand God likes it this way.

Oh, and it has nothing to do with religion.

 

Jedi-Monkey:

It seems we have misunderstood each other a bit, although I haven't been addressing you specifically with much of this. At least, not as a point of contention, rather a bit on my own view of things. I should've been clearer in that, since I did tag it to you.

I think we diverge significantly only in our vision of what's going on in western culture, and not necessarily what ought to go on. And that's not something that's liable to change. I will say, though, that you are likely prejudiced by your line of work and I am certainly prejudiced by mine. You encounter a range of people who make adult films and, therefore, have attitudes and experiences, as you've related them, that have been especially positive and healthy. And as an aside, if those you've met are indeed representative I'm very happy to be wrong in my dated impressions. Otherwise, if I understand correctly, you run an adult shop? Patronized, I would think, by sexually active, expressive people whose attitudes and experiences are, again, especially positive and healthy.

I tend to see the opposite side of the coin. I imagine that makes our perspectives irreconcilable.

EDIT: Oh, and I ought to have been clear on another point as well. When I say the possibility that women in adult films have been coerced, in one way or another, or have suffered terrible traumas to bring them to the screen, it is a visceral reaction. A personal reaction. Not a comment on the state of pornography in general.

I mentioned the hypothetical situation of a tape made by friends to clarify my position. It's not the depiction of sex that turns me cold.

 

I agree with everything you say except for this, or at least I think we are looking at it from two different contexts. I believe the goverment looks at porn very similarily to the way it looks at the cigarette industry, hence the stupendous taxation on two products that are by all means extremely cheap to produce.

Economically, porn and cigarettes are alot alike. But porn certianlly isn't as addictive as cigarettes. In fact, it's not a drug. The only reason you might get addicted to it is because of a desire that has always been inside you, not because of the porn!

The cry was in there because you put it so much better than I did.

 

Also, a psychologist is not the best authority on rape itself but on the psychology of rape victims and fetishists. What you need is a criminologist, and even then any fairminded professor will tell you profiles of crime and criminals are very difficult across populations rather than in individuals. Frankly, I would be enormously sceptical of anyone claiming to have built an accurate picture of The Rapist, at least as much so as I would of The Murderer.


Psychiatrists. They've earned the titles. And yes, a criminologist.....whose studied psychology. WOW! What an amazing and interesting fact.

 

Fire_Ice_Death:

The trouble may be that we're not from the same country, although I can't say for sure. A psychiatrist is a medical doctor. They don't generally teach undergrad psych classes except-although still not as a rule below the upper division level-in heavily clinical fields and in pre-clinical and pre-med pharmacology classes.

As far as the rest, surely you can have a discussion without resorting to sarcasm? Particularly when you're smug and sarcastic over a subject you clearly don't understand. A criminologists approach to crime-rape, for example-differs greatly from that of a clinical or research psychologist. Since these are the folks you say you've studied under, I suggested talking to a criminologist instead, not because he or she has no background in psychology but because it's a different and more germane discipline.

And for the record, "my professors say so" is not an argument. Particularly when we don't know who your professors are, what their perspective is, where they teach and what they actually said and on what subject. If they've all defined The Rapist as a fetishist fixated on control, and not merely explored that fixation in fetishists, they have some explaining to do. But to be honest, I doubt that.

So what I would suggest is returning to the discussion as adults. You quoted anonymous professors, I told you I'm game for a pissing contest, you made a snide and ill-informed remark. It would seem to me that it didn't get us anywhere-you haven't named the professors or the insitution where they teach, what their credentials are and what, word for word and in context, they've actually said on the subject.

Why not debate on the merits instead?