Porn - I use it and feel bad - help convince me porn is wrong

Although some women are like men in that respect.

No amount of negative research will stop (most) men from using pornography - it's a sex aid pure and simple and men are very good at separating sex from 'feelings/empathy. Did Bill Clinton think about his wife or daughter when he was getting sucked off by an intern? - he was the most powerful man in the world and he still risked everything for sex, ( and insisted he hadn't done anything wrong when found out ) men always use the - 'it didn't mean anything' - line, because to them, it doesn't mean anything - that's why it's almost impossible for men to see sex/porn in the same way women do.

Ok prosperina - if you really think there was nothing problematic, privileged, or entitled about the way OP started this thread, then NO WONDER you think we're all unreasonable harridans. And if you think it was our responsibility to explain 'nicely' to him the reasons that women are actually as human as he is, then, again, no wonder you probably think we'ere all setting 'the cause' back. This is Feminism 101.

I also hugely appreciate the women on here who tirelessly respond to the unconvinced, the pro-porn, and those who believe that we who wish to change the status quo must dismantle EVERY pro-porn argument EVERY time we discuss this.

Great comparison vis a vis race discussions Alice. As I'm sure you know - that sort of discussion happens very frequently in that world too. Have you read the 'Stuff White People Do' blog?

Dittany, I'm going to do some research on this, it's clear that this discussion isn't going anywhere

Amen diving and Alice. As we keep saying to you, go and read some stuff before deciding that it's good or bad research. It's really simple but you won't do it though you keep saying you want evidence. I seriously wanted to know why defenders of porn would think it wad ok so I went and read some stuff too, as much as I could though it is difficult as researching this kind of stuff on the net or even looking for references brings up some pretty nasty stuff. I have made an informed judgement on this by getting off my arse and finding stuff out. Why don't you?

I'm putting across pro-porn arguments (even though I'm anti-porn in general) because we don't live in a black and white world - all porn = evil, all porn = great.

As for the OP, there was so much projection going on - Where did he say, other than in your mind, that he "couldn't be arsed?" Jesus, he'd read Dworkin.

If you are anti-porn prosperina why are you putting forward pro-porn arguments?

If you are anti-porn why are you trying to find a "balance" to the argument?

If you are anti-porn why are you not accepting the evidence offered - the numerous accounts from ex-porn stars; the thousands of hits on the web showing gonzo porn (just found by typing in the word porn); Gail Dines/Robert Jenson excellent research looking at the entire industry and the effects rather than just porn users?

If you are anti-porn why are you not trying to find more evidence to back up your anti-porn claims?

If you are anti-porn why are you fixated in proving that there is "good" porn - despite the fact that all porn objectifies women and reduces them to the sum of their body parts?

If you are anti-porn why are you fixated in trying to prove that porn doesn't do any damage to the women involved (or to women outside the industry) - whilst in contrast saying that no woman should suffer (despite all evidence to the contrary)?

You can say you are anti-porn until you are blue in the face but your speeches on this thread belie that.

Changing the subject to put the focus back on the OP - who was being arrogant and priveleged at the very least, is distractionary. "Tell me why I shouldn't look porn"; "I haven't told my wife"; "I can't be arsed to do the work my self - you do it for me because I can't actually see what is happening in front of my face because I choose not to". And I find it quite telling that you have more empathy with him than the women being abused. In fact you are doing exactly the same as him - being presented with the evidence but not actually seeing it. Wanting us to do your reading and research for you. Wanting us to "convince" you.

There's a range though between being applauded and being attacked. The OP didn't come on to say "hey porn is great, you women are wrong". If he had, he would have deserved a pasting, but he didn't. After two or so pages, he was accused of being a potential rapist.

Then read about it. Don't attack the people who have done so and have formulated their opinions.

I have read this thread. Every day. Every single post. I find it very productive. I do not need to rethink all of my views I have established over lots of research, reading, discussion and thinking, all of the time. The fact that there is a space where these things can be said, and for people to see that you do not have to accept porn as 'normal' is extremely productive.

The reasons the OP was replied to in the way he was have been covered several times. If I went on to a forum where people discussed their experiences of racism and how to deal with it, and said I still like to tell racist jokes to my friends, and could they help me see the error of my ways, I would not expect them to applaud me for trying to change. That would be an abuse of my privilege as a white person.

Because I want to know about porn and its effects ...

and if I'm being frightfully honest, I find the attitudes of the anti-porn consensus on here unproductive. Take this thread and read it.

Man comes on, acts very politely, and see where the first attack comes from, and who it's directed at. It's not the man who has come on recognising he has a problem and acts incredibly politely

Testimonies from people is also empirical research. Dines's work is also empirical research. You don't need some numbers and a graph for it to be empirical research. Empirical research can be done to support both sides of the argument depending on the parameters. The idea that there is some 'objective' and 'neutral' research to be found on this kind of issue is total nonsense. Research that is done about social issues recognises the sources of subjectivity, it doesn't claim to be 'objective'.

If you're anti porn, why does it matter so much to you to fight people who are arguing against porn? Why not think, I don't agree with the approach they are taking but hey ho I'll add to it with my own approach?

I've not said the Porn Report is perfect, but the point I've made is that, as problematic as it is, it's empirical research.

The accusations of lack of empathy when discussing Shelley Lubben is tiresome to say the least, because some people aren't reading what I'm writing, and accusing me of "dismissing" their evidence.

This debate is following a pattern. If you're not virulently anti-porn (I'm anti-porn btw), you're pro-porn, in the same way, I guess, we're all "pro-abortion".

I would like paying another person to perform sex acts to be illegal, yes. I would like the distribution of images depicting sex acts to be illegal, yes. (Caveat for those intended for genuine education purposes to be excluded obviously.) I can see no other solution for this problem. I also think people who have been in porn should have legal recourse and be able to sue producers/agents/pimps, etc for the damage they have suffered. I think it should be a criminal offence to distribute images suggestive of rape or underage people. I think it should be illegal to distribute images of unprotected sex and images of abusive sex or people being verbally abused whilst having sex. I think all 'hidden camera' 'voyeur' stuff should be illegal too. I think laws about hate speech should be applied to porn (using the existing ones about race as a starting point). I guess that would make about 99.9% of porn illegal then.

There are already laws in place about porn, for example in California it is is illegal for there to be exchange of bodily fluids on a porn set. This law is flouted all day every day.

HerBEggs; the problem is all porn objectifies women - from page 3 ( is that still going ?) down to the worst porn imaginable - it's all saying the same thing - " I'm here available for you "

There are some really serious problems with The Porn Report. I've read it and followed the debate around it. Many of its main points are based around the responses of a small sample group which, given that it's composed of porn users, is necessarily made up of people who think porn is ok and have no problem talking about their use of it. Should we really be comforted and surprised by their benign assessments of porn? Conclusions such as that they much preferred seeing people enjoying themselves to people being hurt or looking as though they were in pain in their porn materials are presented as wonderful proof of the basic good intentions of users. Anyone with half an analytical brain cell can see the problem with that.

All that notwithstanding, I think it's very telling that a poster is happy to accept that book at face value because 'it would seem that this is the kind of balanced non-polemical work that is required in this debate'. How can you decide that this is intrinsically a good source without having read it? It?s because you?ve clearly made up your mind before even beginning to do the research and that is something I wouldn?t accept even from one of my first year undergraduates.

Carmina my objective is to get people to look at porn honestly and stop closing their eyes to the damage that it does to both performers and viewers.

Once people stop lying to themselves, everything else stems from that honesty.

In an ideal world you wouldn't need to ban porn because no-one would want to consume something that implied such inhumanity.

In the real world you will always get people who behave with inhumanity. I would simply like those people to be marginal and not part of the mainstream.

The most alarming development about porn in the last couple of decades, is the normalisation of mysogynist porn, objectification of women and the presentation of jacking off to the torture of women as normal, mainstream behaviour. The fact that those of us who question it are shouted down as anti-sex, prudish, manhating loons, shows how all-pervasive such incredibly damaging material has become and how effective the message of the porn industry is. We have got to stop it, the stakes are too high not too. We are fighting for our right and our daughters' rights, to be considered human.

Wrong choice of word - but ykwim

Me too.

Exactly Sakura - it isn't worth it, no one 'needs' pornography.
I personally find the normal everyday porn just as damaging ( Katie Price is a role model to millions of young girls ) so I'd vote to ban the lot.
I've only used porn because it's there, it's legal, and it's easily accesable - if porn disappeared from the Internet today I wouldn't give a toss.

so I agree with you. Yes, I would like to see porn banned.

Carmina, I suppose it all depends on how important you think men's orgasms are: to the world at large, to society, and to women.

My take on it is, they're not important at all. Men's orgasms mean zilch.

If even ONE girl or woman has to go through sex even ONCE where she is unable to say "stop" because she's being filmed, and has signed a contract to say she must continue until the money shot, then that is rape, and enough reason for porn to be banned. I'm not even talking about violent, abusive porn here.

And the whole entire point of the porn industry is for men to have fun and orgasm, and for other men to make millions out of it off the backs of women.

Is the existence of the porn industry worth it for women?

no

It's a yes from me too ( and I've said it twice on this thread )