The effect of porn on teenage boys and young men

So I'd like to see two issues dealt with - watching material where the viewer cannot demonstrate with any plausible degree of confidence the agreement and legality of the participants, and the violence issues outlined by Beachcomber.

True; but I think the issue is that with hubs the legality and consent is almost never demonstrated indubitably. A user cannot be sure of the providence of anything much other than clips featuring known porn actresses. Hubs are completely unregulated though completley accepted by society. Pornhub is a major corporate sponsor and sells gift cards. It's insane.

The growth of 'amateur' pornography is causing huge problems. The question of whether that material is uploaded with the participants consent or not is almost moot because the very nature of open 2.0 platforms is that one can almost never know.

I think legally distinguishing between what kind of material is and is not acceptable (beyond the very obviously illegal) is not enforceable. Apart from anything else such law will open to interpretation and therefore abuse.

As much as some of us would like to see internet pornography eradicated completely, we need to accept that this is not at present possible.

What needs to be done therefore is twofold.

1. All porn sites must demand credit card details at the point of access. Anyone who uses pornography therefore is doing so at their own risk and access to children will be completely denied.

2. All porn sites must register with an official XXX domain. Once registered it will legally their responsibility to ensure everything appearing on their site is legal and with the participants full consent. Any unregistered site is de facto operating outside the law.

This law has to implemented internationally.

There should be a change in public attitude to the hubs. Some men's magazines have discussed this, so it is not entirely beyond hope that people who watch porn could be encouraged to do this.

If a video is not clearly labelled with legal information, the viewer cannot be sure of the age of the participants, their consent and the legality of the acts. There could be a change in attitudes so that many users would refuse to watch such material and would report its presence.

For example, when videos clearly marked as being from chaturbate appear on hubs, the user must know that the person in the video did not consent to the recording and distribution of that material. They are watching it without consent. There also have to be serious questions raised about consent when watching snapchat material from a stranger that has been recorded and put on a hub.

In situations like that, there is no distinction between porn and erotica or hard and soft porn. It is watching illegally obtained material.

So I'd like to see two issues dealt with - watching material where the viewer cannot demonstrate with any plausible degree of confidence the agreement and legality of the participants, and the violence issues outlined by Beachcomber.

Oh, and also the treatment of porn performers by the public on social media - boundary pushing comments, stalking, discouragement when the performer attempts to exit pornography, engagement only based on sexual access. Users of porn need to remember they are talking to people, not characters in a video game or movie.

There is nothing socialist about the porn industry either is there. So stop defending porn barons making billions from a totally unregulated market.

"Pornography is a massive public health problem - one that is for the most part ignored by government. Why, I am not sure. Possibly because porn probably accounts for a sizeable slither of GDP. Every once in a while a politician will suggest some modest regulation, it gets shouted down and then nothing comes of it."

As are alcohol and cigarettes and all they have is a tax on them.

The Soviet's used to have pornographers shot

The Soviets were and still are fascists with an authoritarian regime. As is China. There is nothing socialist about them.

I don't see why consumption and distribution of pornography containing violent content can't be made illegal in the same way as child pornograhy is.

I think it technically is, but the law on what counts as violent is almost unenforceable in it's vagueness. And of course the kinksters were all up in arms, so it had to be watered down.

I'm a totalitarian socialist, so I'm hardly a disbeliever in society.

No you're not. If you were you wouldn't be defending the sex industries - which represent capitalism at its worst.

The Soviet's used to have pornographers shot.

I don't see why consumption and distribution of pornography containing violent content can't be made illegal in the same way as child pornograhy is. yes, I know some would still be accessible through illegal channels but it would be much harder to get hold of and much riskier for producers and consumers. Does anyone know of any campaign groups working towards this so that we can increase political pressure for a change in the law? In my opinion soft pornography with no violent content can stay but anything containing hate to any party should go.

I'm a totalitarian socialist, so I'm hardly a disbeliever in society. I'm in favour of all pervasive surveillance and law enforcement - hardly liberal positions. I'm the Orwellian nightmare most liberals fear.

But I have no desire to legislate what takes place between consenting adults, either in the privacy of their own homes or transmitted via the internet. I do not believe I have the right - nor you - to judge. You can manufacture harm, based on your warped and toxic reinterpretation of Abrahamic morality, as much as you like - but it doesn't make it real.

I came onto this thread to learn, to test my perspectives, to ensure the clarity of my values - and they are clear. Your perspectives, which you claim to be feminist, are authoritarian, restrictive and poisonous, based on a perceived moral superiority you have no basis to claim. You accuse me of pretending to support female sexuality for my own agenda, but I think it's clear that your fictional desire to protect women is just Patriarchy in a dress - it's about control. Domination, oppression and control.

Enjoy your sabbat of sexual regression - I assure you, decent people of both genders will ensure it comes to nothing more than chants and curses.

Meph you're talking rubbish in the defence of rapacious capitalism. The people who really deride women for being dirty sluts, are, believe it or not, the men who term women dirty sluts in the porn videos they make. Videos called things like 'Dirty Sluts'.

There is nothing 'sex positive' about a man jacking off to a video of a 'dirty teen slag'. Really, there isn't.

You've just hijacked the term 'sex positivity' and re-puprosed it to justify the treatment of women as pieces of meat. Amazing what you can do with words eh? I bet Margaret Atwood would be on your side here.

Any women who partake in this, because they're greedy, stupid or selfish, can piss off with their 'sex positivity' too.

Typical male, entitled liberal attitude: There is no such thing as society and I should be able to do whatever I want. Anything which infringes my rights as a Western consumer are 'Orwellian' or something. Go back to your play-pen and have your tantrum there.

Excellent posts from the likes of qwerty and Beach, I agree whole heartedly with everything you've said. I find it sad and somewhat disturbing that some people can not see how extreme mainstream abuse porn has become and the effect it is having on men, women and most worryingly, children.

I have two dd's as well as pre teen male cousins and I worry for all of them in regards to this subject. My dd's are very young. I dread to think about how things will be for them as teens in 10 years time.

And thus, wonderfully, my initial point is proved, as well as my inclusion of feminists with the priests.

Roll back the sexual revolution - the old morality won in the end. Welcome back slut shaming, the derision of the 'fallen' women - who of course can just fuck off with their sex positivity and abandonment of gender roles. Hail once more the gatekeepers of 'correct' sexuality, and down with all those who dare step outside the box. Censorship! Suppression! Shame! Shame! Shame!

It's like the Handmaids Tale all over again, and just like as in the book it's a woman leading it, just as in the book it ends with veils and violence.

Some very insightful comments.

On the issue of regulation, the problem is now the hubs. While much of the overtly illegal material has migrated to the dark web, the hubs are completely out of control. Internet porn interfaces are now more akin to open platforms like Youtube, which means they are therefore in effect completely unpoliceable. As far as I am aware, any user can upload anything they like to the hub sites within broad parameters. And even then illegal material is not immediately taken down.

Action must be taken, but the question is what? The platform economy is designed to resist any form of regulatory intervention. Furthermore these sites transcend national jurisdictions so there is the question of what body of law should be brought to bear on them.

A feminists analysis is obviously warranted here, because pornography does for the most part deal in misogynist tropes of female abuse and submission as well as other deviant themes such as incest. Pseudo-paaedophiliac imagery of women made out to look much younger than they are is becoming a frightening norm too.

However, male oppression is only one dimension to the porn problem.

As Beach says:

"As Dines and Jensen say, the porn industry has hijacked our children's (and many adults') sexuality. The porn industry is a parasite. They want young boys exposed to pornography because it has an addictive element (the orgasm is an extremely powerful social conditioning tool) and they want their sexuality to be fucked up to the point that porn is the thing that gets them off. It works just like cigarettes, the younger the exposure the better."

Porn is addictive, and while many men who consume it are overtly contemptuous of women, some will be poorly socialised and become reliant on it in the absence of the capacity to form a relationship. In short it will attract sexist men, but also very vulnerable men and children. Though as Beach also says, it will condition males into accepting a misogynist narrative of sexual relations, so the net result is the perpetuation of sexism in our society.

Furthermore, women can be consumers of pornography and porn, and they are increasingly representative of porn addicts. More research is needed on this.

This woman's experience is interesting:

www.lindaikejisblog.com/2015/03/meet-nigerian-woman-who-was-addicted-to.html

Pornography is a massive public health problem - one that is for the most part ignored by government. Why, I am not sure. Possibly because porn probably accounts for a sizeable slither of GDP. Every once in a while a politician will suggest some modest regulation, it gets shouted down and then nothing comes of it.

Qwerty beachcomber and pax I couldn't agree more you have written beautifully exactly what I feel and think.

I have chosen a girls school for my daughters largely because of this issue. It is tragic for our young people that this industry has turned what should be a loving fun act into one of pain and death. I would support any campaign to change things. Saying it can't be done is not good enough. Men created this monster they need now to fix it.

Well said querty!

I agree with the call for a new morality. It is immoral to watch women being exploited and abused and jerk off to that. It should be much more embarrassing to be caught doing that than to be caught wanking over animal sex or necrophilia.

I will accept porn actresses are free to pick this job or another just as soon as sex trafficking disappears. As far as I am aware, there are no international crime rings illegally trafficking nurses or teachers, even though they are in short supply.

It might help get rid of that boner if men were thinking about how many girls and women are trafficked as slaves for the sex industry. Leaving this unchallenged is dangerous. Maybe telling teenage boys that porn means creating a generation of men who's sexual relationships were with their hand and a screen is just the thing to do.

qwerty I find your call for a new morality interesting. I agree.

One of our concepts of rights today is the "swinging arm" theory. You can stand and swing your arms around all you like.....but when you start hitting others....accidentally or not....then you have to adjust yourself (I wish my neighbours understood this in regards to their music).

It would be very hard to make the point that pornography is not harming some.

In the same way violent video games are allowed to exist...

Yes I do mean that we need the government involved. I think DeviTheGaelet is absolutely right that the public health angle is our only hope. There are people who are ready to lead a big campaign - they just need us to get behind them. Gail Dines and Robert Jensen are IMO the ones who could do it. They have both done masses of research on the subject, both have books published and they have already worked together. Gail Dines is already leading a one woman campaign.

We need the search engines on board and it needs to be something that makes them look good and let's face it the rad fem women's rights angle that I have posted here is not going to be it. A campaign about child protection and health is.

So concerned parents need to organize and campaign. I think the first problem is a lack of awareness. I remember seeing a documentary once about parents and pornography (it might have been Dines' work, can't remember but she often starts her talk with this point) and the parents didn't think their children were accessing hard-core internet pornography and they also didn't really know what that pornography consists off (perhaps some of the dads did but the late 30s early 40s and older mothers certainly didn't). The parents agreed to watch some mainstream porn and they were APPALLED by it. Not in a prudish pearl clutching way but in a humane way of people who recognize contempt, abuse, violence, body punishing hard-core acts and profound sexism when they see it. The general reaction was "that's not sex it's sexualized violence" they were also shocked by the titles of videos and the deeply sexist and racist language plus the evident predatory element and rapey element (teens, "simulated" rape, incest themes, rapey "group" sex, choking, double penetration, etc).

We need an awareness campaign that lets parents know what their kids are being exposed to and how it is impacting on them. No decent parent wants their son to have been socially conditioned to growing up with messed up ideas about relationships with girls and none want their son acting like a sex pest in school. Same goes for girls - we don't want them being pressured into porn sex rather than the sex they want and we don't want them being sexually harassed by their male peers in school and in life in general.

As Dines and Jensen say, the porn industry has hijacked our children's (and many adults') sexuality. The porn industry is a parasite. They want young boys exposed to pornography because it has an addictive element (the orgasm is an extremely powerful social conditioning tool) and they want their sexuality to be fucked up to the point that porn is the thing that gets them off. It works just like cigarettes, the younger the exposure the better. Porn has got more and more hard-core in order to feed the addiction of adult men - that's what young boys are being exposed to. To continue the (bad) cigarette analogy, when my generation were young our first act of rebellion was a puff of a fag, for today's kids it's smoking crack. (The analogy is bad because drugs are things and the women in porn are people but I hope you get the point about how the ante has been upped).

Coming back to what PinkisRad said here:

Young boys need to be taught that what they see in porn, is not how they can treat women

So why is it ok for women to be treated like that in porn? They are women, real women. There aren't 2 kinds of women; ones you can treat badly and ones you can't. That's a terrible message to give boys and it is an endorsement to treat some girls and women badly. How the boys are expected to treat girls and women right if they are being taught that it's sometimes ok to treat us like meat, like sex objects, like fuck holes who are there to be treated with contempt and sexualized violence I don't know. And they don't - we can see that from what Spartacus said here about what is happening in her DD's school.

So, yes, I do think the way forward is the public health angle. But that angle isn't and cannot be only about boys and their erectile function. It is also about girls and women and our right to be treated like humans, not body parts and holes to be penetrated. The dots need to be joined up. Why is porn bad for boys - because it is sending a powerful message to them about the worth of girls and women and about what we are for (consumption amongst other things). It's bad for boys because it tells them that abuse is sexy, that girls like sexualized violence, that brutal female body punishing (dangerous) sex acts are what sexual relationships are about.

Pornography is bad for boys because it is profoundly misogynistic but it is being promoted as fun, as entertainment, as sexy. And it is being promoted as normal due to its proliferation and messages like "all men watch porn" "boys will be boys" etc plus the porny element that has entered popular culture. Much of popular culture nowadays is "soft" porn. Practicality naked women simulating sex and men singing about rape is what our kids see in music videos. The next step is redtube and as qwerty says, before they know it they're masturbating to all manner of sick shit.

The porn industry has been harming women for decades with its message about women. That harm is the same as it's ever been. The situation now is that due to the internet and the power of the moving image to influence human thoughts and behaviour, things have got so bad that we are clearly in the realms of child abuse. The porn industry is grooming and abusing children by exposing them to explicit hard-core material that if it were portraying the abuse of any minority group other than women would have seen the industry shut down a long time ago.

Apologies for length of post. I have strong feelings on the subject

Child abuse images are illegal pretty much everywhere. The Internet Watch Foundation reviews over 1000 pages a week and when they find sex abuse images they can get them actually removed from the internet, wherever they are hosted. It's a crime not only to produce or disseminate these images but to possess them.

However, for extreme adult content and non-photographic child abuse images, IWF can only get those pages hosted in the UK removed.

There are two problems with expanding this approach to mainstream porn -

1. getting an international consensus and changes in the law - unless you make mainstream porn illegal and most other countries do the same, orgs like IWF don't have the authority to get it removed.

2. scale - IWF don't rely just on technology to assess images, a lot of the work is done by actual human beings who have to look at the material. Because child abuse images are illegal even to possess, there's not that much, compared with mainstream porn (there's still more of it out there than IWF have the resources to deal with).

So we're not yet in a position where it's realistic to take a similar approach to mainstream porn. Filtering works to an extent. I use adblock, noscript and a tracker blocker and I very rarely see porn. Google images seems pretty good at filtering stuff out (but I don't know how many innocuous images it also stops me seeing). There is software you can install on devices to stop the worst of the tide and ISP's now offer filtering at their end.

The problem is, filtering only works if people want to use it. If you want to circumvent it it's very easy. As long as this stuff is online and not illegal, it will be accessed and shared.

So yes, we do need to get 'the people' on side. What some of us on the other thread are saying is that, while we would like internet porn gone, the idea of just banning it is simplistic and unworkable. It's going to take a huge cultural shift, not only in the UK but worldwide, before we're in a position to properly tackle the problem. We can get there - child sex abuse was not even talked about seriously until at least the 80's and we have seen a huge shift in attitudes and laws since then, without which the work of IWF would not be possible.

What you can do is change the culture of pornography by going after the hubs, as they are providing pirated and often illegal material which is there without the participant's consent.

This would be a good place to start though.

You will have to get 'the people' on side first just looking at the other thread shows how large a task that would be and that's on a board where the majority are women.

Beachcomber I don't want to put up with this infiltration and pollution of the porn industry, so what do I do now? (Have parental controls and educate the kids already.)
Or do you mean we actually have to get the government/big companies on side first?

Qwerty I agree with much of your above post. Well said. Also glad we agree on Dines.

I agree with you HerOtherHalf that of course we can do something about internet porn. I used to work for a well known search engine and (although you wouldn't think it) there are quite a lot of controls in place regarding pornographic material and illegal material. There are already definitions of what can be in the public domain and what cannot. We don't have to put up with this infiltration and pollution of the porn industry if we choose not to.

If we're talking about porn in the sense that Beachcomber means, then yes, you could restrict porn to some extent. Enough people would be prepared to report images of violence and abuse against women that it could be policed on a mass scale.

But adult/sexual material online more widely cannot be policed in that sense, because sexuality is part of adult human life and social media is too intertwined with people's lives for there to be any willingness to have the public be willing to police it. So I agree with Pink that you cannot remove adult content from apps like Snapchat.

What you can do is change the culture of pornography by going after the hubs, as they are providing pirated and often illegal material which is there without the participant's consent.

Can i just add, i challenge those who say nothing can be done, that the internet can't be policed or controlled. Yes, it absolutely can. Maybe not 100% but enough to make an extreme difference to the availability of porn, if the will was there. Almost all of us will be seeing adverts or spam for porn on an almost daily basis. Yet, if my experience is normal, i dont recall ever seeing spam or a banner add for child porn. Why not? It's not because it's not out there or there's no money to be made. It's because the legal and reputational consequences for the ISPs, search engines, hosting companies and social media companies are sufficient that they apply reasonable resource to prevent their systems being used for the promotion or distribution of child porn. They could do the same for other types of porn if they were pressured to do so.