Math Magazine and 'good' porn.

Pass peer review it did, which implies to me a degree of academic merit I am not as eager to dismiss. It resonates very much with my experiences of discussing this issue with young people. My anecdotal experiences are backed up by this research.

Felas I'm sorry you think I want to polarize the debate, I feel I have been bodging about between ideas. I have asked how the debate can move forward with practical ideas though, after 19 pages I thought it might be a good idea.

I am also taken aback that according to the research I cited above:
"In terms of psychological characteristics, porn actresses had higher levels of self-esteem, positive feelings, social support, sexual satisfaction, and spirituality compared to the matched group.'

It's a self selecting study, but even so, indicates the " porn performers are abused" hypothesis is not as clear as I thought it was. I thought a small percentage were not abused, this indicates that the percentage who are happy in their work may be significantly higher.

theghost the thread is about whether or not Porn can be feminist. We have strayed onto banning Porn at points (mostly because bitof wants to polarize the debate I think) but I think most of us here would agree more education is necessary.

That study is terrible.
Asking a large people about Porn use and then about their attitudes to women only shows that people with more egalitarian beliefs are more likely to watch Porn. It doesn't show whether or not Porn causes attitudes to women to change. To do that would require controlling for things like religion, political beliefs etc and then asking the questions. That goes back to Buffys point on the other page - Porn is so pervasive that it's impossible to find a like-for-like control group to test any theory that Porn causes greater objectification of women.
The authors also make lots of references to "radical feminist theory" without citing where they are getting that from and some of those references don't seem consistent with radical feminism as I understand it.
The whole thing comes across to me as an exercise in justifying their theory rather than a good piece of objective research. Correlation does not equal causation is research 101. Surprised that paper got through peer review.

As an ex Marxist I am very aware that moral and religious aren't the same thing, and also that religion and/or morality can be used for social control.

The point being that feminist morality is taking over from religious morality to control what women can do, say and enjoy. Although there is still a strong religious block that opposes porn on the grounds of morality.
In both instances, religious and feminist, women's voices are dismissed as false consciousness.

TheGhost research I have been doing indicates media literacy is the key to helping young people navigate on line sexual experiences.

I think I'm more in line with you Bitofacow. I think there needs to be a discussion with young people about porn as part of sex education. It needs to be brought out into the open because then you can have a conversation about the societal context in which porn exists.

I'm not saying this is likely to happen but it's much more likely than a ban on porn. As was mentioned pages ago it is starting to happen more in some countries.

Link to my last point about the "damaged goods" hypothesis.

www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00224499.2012.719168?journalCode=hjsr20

I don't look down on people who use morality as an argument they scare me too much. Morality when applied to women does not usually work in our favour. The book thread are reading "Handmaids Tale". Moral arguments usually involve women being criminalised. Criminalising prostitution always means women end up in prison.

www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00224499.2015.1023427

Journal of sex research from the abstract of the above article.
"" users held more egalitarian attitudes—toward women in positions of power, toward women working outside the home, and toward abortion—than nonusers of pornography. Further, pornography users and pornography nonusers did not differ significantly in their attitudes toward the traditional family and in their self-identification as feminist. The results of this study suggest that pornography use may not be associated with gender nonegalitarian attitudes in a manner that is consistent with radical feminist theory."

Also, puts forward an argument that radical feminism is taking over from the radical right as traditional religion declines.

Also, has some interesting research suggesting UK porn performers have higher self esteem and better body image than non performers.

This discussion could go on and on (I'm just adding to it) but Italian Greyhound post sums up my thoughts too.

Slavery was 'abolished' in the British empire less than 200 years ago. Seems quiite recent to me. And, of cours, it continues to this day anyway.

What can we do (about porn)?

To me it is a case of not pretending it is ethical, just as prostitution to me is not 'sex work'.

For my part I won't watch porn, take part in it or knowingly be with a man who supports it. I'll bring my kids up to respect their own bodies and minds, and those of others.

If there are petitions or campaigns I can join, I will.

I think porn de-humanises those in the industry and the voyeurs who watch.

Whether my own views will make any difference to others, I do not know. But morals are not simply things we hold to make ourselves feel good about ourselves, and are certainly not there so we can look down on others!

They are not simply codes of conduct for ourselves but rather are something far more personal and ingrained. It is for me a desire to uphold the dignity and humanity of all.

So watching my fellow women being fucked and flmed goes completely against this view of of dignity and humanity.

I know this view may make me unpopular. But it is, for me, not something I can change my views on. And I recognise plenty of people will take issue because they feel they should have freedom to watch what they like etc. As others on the past would have felt their freedoms were legitimate, but which we, today, would take issue with. Of course a nice slave owner is better than a bad one, but neither make slavery ethical. If you see what I mean.

It wasn't simply and everybody does it argument. It was an everybody does it so what can we do to ameliorate the harm question.

1833 slavery abolished in the British Empire.

Race not raised!

Dadwashere does people being sexually attracted to snails or trees involve more than half the human raise being viewed as little more than sex toys, always 'up for' sex or abuse, of less value than the minority sex? If not, I am not sure it is relevant.

The everybody does it argument doesn't really stand up. A few 100 years ago everybody had slaves or thought it was OK or at least almost everybody within fairly recent times. People thought women were less than men, viewed as chattle, disabled people were veiwed as cursed, everyone thought the world was flat at one time

You see porn stars claiming they enjoy their job. And you are told they aren't really they are doing it because they 'think' they like it but really they don't.

Well, some small few would enjoy what they do, but that does not mean they enjoy it on the day with whoever they are scripted to pair with. Some work days are happy and some are an utter bastard, even when you enjoy whatever your job is. Some porn actors marry other porn actors, and clearly they are not doing that simply for sex with one another. The big lie for commercial porn would be 'they enjoy it with whoever they are paired with in the movie they shoot'. No... that is how they are required to act in order to make the movie saleable.

Or, if the movie sells abuse, they are required to act violated even if they are OK or even enjoy the experience, such is the perversity of what people do Vs what people want to see them do. Human sexuality is, taken all in all, incredibly diverse and complex... should I pity or hate people who are genuinely sexually excited by snails, trees, tentacles or other species, and call their desires invalid or deviant?

There is self delusion and there is a different belief, and the two can blend over one another. Unrelated to porn, you can have people in polyamory who are genuinely comfortable with it and others who try to 'force' feeling comfortable. Even those comfortable with it can, later, find they discover jealousy where they did not even imagine it possible. Human sexuality is the most complex and varied of all things, probably because it is the most deeply personally intimate of all things.

Anyway... I probably strayed far from porn in these ramblings because of one too many cups of sake... hope this has some worth or entertainment value.

I apologise for any offence caused.

Most people have fixed views on morality, but may be changed politically, ethically, socially. I believe there are no arguments I can make to change your valid moral beliefs.

I think is sad that as a result of a long post asking for practical thoughts on how to move forward we are discussing perceived slights. I apologise, again.

Any hope of moving forward?

There is little point discussing morality, I won't/can't/don't want to change your morals

Well you are the person who suggested those of us who are anti-porn get a feeling of being "morally righteous ". If you start throwing comments like that around then refusing to discuss it when challenged is a bit odd; particularly so when you brought up the issue of morals to try , as I saw it, to discredit posters who are anti porn.

I think you have a very limited view of what is meant by morality and morals if you think considering the morality of pornography has no place in a discussion about pornography. Morality should address whether human rights and dignity are being upheld. It has little to do with sexual preferences.

Apologies, perhaps you are not angry and outraged. Please insert the correct adjectives as you see fit. There is undoubtedly a lot of emotion - from some posters - that seems to lack a practical focus.

Just reread my post.
See Buffy I had to put that last para in to feel good about myself. OMG I'm a narcissist.

There is little point discussing morality, I won't/can't/don't want to change your morals.

I fully understand your anger and outrage but, to me, it seems like wasted emotion because it gets us nowhere. Changes nothing.

You can be as angry and as outraged as you like. You can be the rightest person in the history of being right but it moves us nowhere. What is the point of this anger if the way it is directed serves no purpose?

I am frustrated because to me this is a practical issue and while I very much enjoy the sociological discussions I would like some practical ideas as to how we can ameliorate the issue.

And "just say no" doesn't work.

Buffy perhaps I am motivated by feeling good, it isn't the worst motivation in the world especially since helping disadvantaged teens makes me feel good and motivates me. Motivates me to come on here and try to find an angle I can use in discussions.

Although it might make you feel morally righteous

I don't think you have any idea how any of us here who are unconvinced there is good to be had in porn "feel". I doubt however any one is voicing an opposition because it leads them to feel " morally righteous"

Posts on forums lose nuance but I am taking from the tone of your post (and other posts where you refer to morals) that you are using "morally righteous " in a pejorative " holier than thou" way.

I think there is a very strong case for saying porn and prostitution are immoral.

I am using "immoral " in a very wide sense of the word btw as in "if these things did not happen the world would be a better place". For example caged factory farming is immoral; micro mini skirts are not.

The last bit of that post was not directed at whatnow123. The 'you' was a general 'you'.