Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

The effect of porn on teenage boys and young men

414 replies

DeviTheGaelet · 15/01/2017 18:12

Did anyone else hear the section on R5 about porn addiction the other day? They spoke to a doctor who is looking into the defects of porn on men. A study in Italy found 40% of young men were having erectile issued, of those 60% were psychologically caused ( I think those were the stats).
The doctor suggested that watching porn during adolescence is training men to be aroused by purely visual stimuli and the visual stimuli are not realistic. As a result they are not being wired to find the smells and touch of actual sex arousing. As a result they are having election issues.
He described porn as "stunt sex" and said it was creating a generation of men who's sexual relationships were with their hand and a screen rather than another person.
I found it really interesting. We talk a lot on here about the harm porn causes women and girls but I've not heard so much about the impact on boys.
I think this should be discussed in PSHE in schools. Maybe this will be the personal impact many men need to see how harmful porn can be.

OP posts:
CaptainBrickbeard · 17/01/2017 17:10

MephistophelesApprentice wrt your assertion that 'the last thing on the mind of anti-porn folk is the wellbeing of men and boys' - I am reading this thread precisely because of my fears for the influences which my sons will be exposed to. I am extremely worried about the consequences of widespread extreme pornography for boys right now. So is my husband, who shares my concerns that pornography is misogynistic and degrading to women. My boys are very young so I go on and read threads like this exactly to gather ideas about how to protect and prepare them for a world in which kids see brutal abuse of women filmed as entertainment on their way to school on someone's phone. Why would you think no one who is opposed to porn cares about men and boys? Some opponents of porn are men themselves.

MephistophelesApprentice · 17/01/2017 17:27

I have a great mistrust for anyone who tries to assert moral control over the other gender for the pure benefit of their own, whether they are a priest, imam or feminist, and I have heard too many sexist men say "I'm only doing this to protect the women I love" as they lock them away, suppress their sexuality or economic freedom.

venusinscorpio · 17/01/2017 17:33

No one is advocating locking men up, are they?

tartansnowman · 17/01/2017 17:41

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make on this thread, MA.

This is presumably a thread where people are exploring the changing nature of pornography, the ethics of that, and how to discuss it with others.

If your opinion is that pornography is fine as it is, and there is no discussion to be had, what more is there for you to say?

RufusTheSpartacusReindeer · 17/01/2017 17:51

Same here captain

CaptainBrickbeard · 17/01/2017 18:07

I don't want to assert moral control over men for the 'pure benefit' of women. I think the free availability of pornography, which is easily accessible to children, is harmful for everyone. I think if as a society we condemned abuse presented for gratification, everyone would benefit- men as well as women.

PinkIsRad · 17/01/2017 18:52

Why is that PinkIsRad?

Because that's not how women in general want to be treated.

I would much prefer we didn't give up on the idea of preventing young boys being exposed not just to adult material, but often extreme adult material in the first place.

Yes, would be better, but how do you want to achieve that with stuff like whatsapp snapchat, etc.?

PinkIsRad · 17/01/2017 18:55

I don't want to assert moral control over men for the 'pure benefit' of women. I think the free availability of pornography, which is easily accessible to children, is harmful for everyone. I think if as a society we condemned abuse presented for gratification, everyone would benefit- men as well as women.

How so? It's apparently what men want to see.

A lot of people here are implicitly assuming porn makes men like that, whereas in reality it's much more that porn represents what men like to see.

qwerty232 · 17/01/2017 19:07

Meph please don't insult us all by suggesting your primary concern is women's sexual and economic freedom. It is more about your and other men's (and a minority of women's) supposed sovereign right to jack off to whatever you like completely irregardless of who gets harmed. Your convoluted argument can be stripped down to 'Don't take mah phonz!!!!'

Really funny how so many liberals will decry sweatshops and Sports Direct warehouses and then spring to the defence of the most predatory capitalist industry there is. And porn is a hugely damaging industry. It is damaging to the young girls who come off the trailer parks, fooled into thinking a glamorous career awaits them only to find themselves on their first shoot surrounded by men with one camera shoved up their vagina and another up their anus and then hear the director say 'wreck the bitch' (yes, this happened). It is damaging to the young girls who are made to gag on men's penises until they vomit. It is damaging to the girls who suffer prolapses and get faecal throat infections and STD's. All for the entertainment of men.

Lots of the pro-porners here who have been inveighing against 'anachronistic taboos' haven't stopped to ask themselves if we need taboos. Human communities in which taboos break down and anything goes are barbaric. Civilized culture means people not being given licence to do you as they please.

Doing what you please is what self-centred infants do. Though ironically what is more disgusting than anything else about pro-porners is their complete disregard for the welfare of children. We now have a world in which almost any child from the age of ten can access the darkest porn imaginable with a smartphone. That is CRAZY! As soon as anyone suggests restrictions on access however, there are ludicrous howls of 'fascist' and 'prude' from all the libertarians with their imbecilic incapacity to tell the difference between 'sex' and 'the sex industry'. And as much as the MRA types claim to care about boys, there is scant evidence of that when they get on their high horses about porn. For make no mistake, porn damages boys. Good boys. One minute they're out in the sun playing football, forming healthy relationships with girls - and then they stumble into Wanktube and are having their heads messed up with God knows what nastiness. They're on the cusp of adolescence so they're naturally aroused, but they also feel fear and shame and confusion. All that innocence they felt is gone. And then they come back and feel more shame and fear, and the cycle continues until they're hooked. Because this is whatever rapacious, cynical fuck in his LA mansion who owns the site intends: make it all free, get the kids sucked in early and get them hooked. Ker-ching!

I am totally in favour of some restrictions on this shit, and taboos on sexual behaviour in general. If you want a totally sexually uninhibited society in which people can wank in the street and shag members of their own family go off and form your own crazy cult somewhere.

Would restrictions mean the feminazis and the big bad state stopping you from jacking off to 'barely legal teen gets abused by ten cocks'? Yep, and that's just too bad.

It's like we have such an infantilised culture that immediate gratification is held up as a human right. Men are becoming totally infantilised. It's utterly pathetic, and I am on this completely in agreement with the radical feminists and even the moral conservatives. Porn is vile and something needs doing about it.

qwerty232 · 17/01/2017 19:11

And if there are any women who privilege expressing their own sexuality through porn over the children whose heads are going to be filled with it (selfish arseholes like Pandora Blake spring to mind) then they can off off too.

Beachcomber · 17/01/2017 19:16

Gail Dines is very good on the issue of how the modern proliferation of pornography is harming youngsters.

I haven't read her book "Pornland - How Porn Has Hijacked Our Sexuality" yet but I have watched videos of her speak and she explains how this mess has come about. I don't think she particularly gives out practical advice to parents but she let's us know what we're up against. Her analysis is brilliant, clear and easy to follow. Plus she fits in the odd rad fem joke to boost morale. She's ace.

I'll have a look on YouTube and post some links later.

qwerty232 · 17/01/2017 19:18

Gail Dines is indeed ace Beach. We agree. :)

DeviTheGaelet · 17/01/2017 19:21

While respecting the differing perspectives of the people on this thread, the one thing I am certain of is that the last thing the anti-porn folk have on their minds is the well-being of men and boys.
Nice. I am anti-porn, not anti erotica (thanks for that distinction beach). I am concerned about a porn culture where girl children's sexual development includes the belief that sex that's painful or unpleasant for her is to be expected (see changing attitudes to anal in youth). I'm concerned about the boys who can't enjoy sex with a human. I'm concerned about both equally.
I don't think the theoretical exhibitionist posting consensual sex online is relevant to the debate about how we stop porn harming young people.
I think some posters have a vested interest in moving the debate onto "slut shaming" and female sexuality to avoid facing up to the fact their love of porn causes harm. Even if that porn is produced as ethically and consensually as possible.

OP posts:
DeviTheGaelet · 17/01/2017 19:23

qwerty amazing post! Amazing!
Star Star
Thank you

OP posts:
HerOtherHalf · 17/01/2017 19:52

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.

tartansnowman · 17/01/2017 20:15

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.

Beachcomber · 17/01/2017 20:24

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.

namechange102 · 17/01/2017 23:14

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.)Grin
Or do you mean we actually have to get the government/big companies on side first?

Holowiwi · 17/01/2017 23:43

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.

PencilsInSpace · 18/01/2017 08:00

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.

Beachcomber · 18/01/2017 08:25

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

PinkIsRad · 18/01/2017 08:54

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

makeourfuture · 18/01/2017 08:57

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.

paxillin · 18/01/2017 09:20

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.

EmpressoftheMundane · 18/01/2017 09:30

Well said querty!