The effect of porn on teenage boys and young men

[DeviTheGaelet]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

"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.

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

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.

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.

You do know absolutely if chaturbate video footage appears on a porn hub that it is illegal and without the participant's consent.

It is possible to know in that situation.

And just because someone is a known porn performer it doesn't mean clips of them are there with their consent - if from chaturbate they definitely are not and if from snapchat probably not.

If someone wants to view snapchat or chaturbate they should do so on the actual platform so the person participating has the opportunity to block them and they should not record the footage, even for private use.

And just because someone is a known porn performer it doesn't mean clips of them are there with their consent - if from chaturbate they definitely are not and if from snapchat probably not.

Of course,. Exactly. My point is that there is no proven consent on these platforms. They're out of control. I wish Laura Bates et al would have more to say about this.

It's also difficult to make a distinction between amateur and professional work. Professional work is usually a form of marketing and the person makes most of their income from amateur work talking to fans.

No, that is not what I am saying.

It is illegal to record someone's chaturbate, and it says all over the site that the participant does not consent to you doing so.

There is proof that they have said no to that recording existing.

You never did enlighten us as to how your preferred state of "all pervasive surveillance" is going to work, Meph.

It is illegal to record someone's chaturbate, and it says all over the site that the participant does not consent to you doing so.

It is. But could someone claim they did get the participant's consent, however implausible that is? Perhaps you're right. And if you're right, how come the porn hubs are getting away with this? Aren't these clips removed?

But the problem remains that no one knows whether consent has been obtained regarding anything else. The whole lot should be banned. That's the only way to do it. You can't just focus on the stuff that clearly is illegal - all the stuff that isn't proven beyond doubt to be legal has to be addressed too.

The clips aren't removed because there is a massive problem of illegal recording of material, whether pornographic or not. You could just as easily ask why 123movies or Putlocker still exists.

It's completely implausible to claim to have a participant's consent when they have a huge sign on their channel stating they do not consent and anyone who films them is breaking the law.

Yes, hubs should be banned under the law, but there are two separate issues - changing the legal framework and chasing social and ethical attitudes. I would say that recording someone's chaturbate is very similar to revenge pornography, and that requires people to take a strong moral stance. You can get people to agree they would not view revenge pornography without requiring them to take a wider anti adult material stance.

Someone being a participant in nudity or sexual behaviour via social media does not mean they are consenting to creation or distribution of a recording. The fact that someone is also a porn performer does not mean social and ethical standards about secretly recording someone or distributing that should not apply.

I fully agree that recording and publishing online private intimate chats is the same crime as revenge porn, and I also find the term "revenge porn" problematic as it implies the victim is to blame for upsetting the perpetrator.

I do agree with you tartansnowman. It’s just that couldn’t someone claim that the Chaturbate clip was published with consent? That they asked whoever they were communicating with ‘Oh, by the way do you mind if I record this and put it on Pornhub?’. Now you and I know that’s fucking ludicrous. That that 99.99999% did not happen. But whatever clever, cynical lawyers these people have the money and power to hire will argue otherwise. And here’s another theoretically possible albeit highly unlikely scenario. Suppose the Chaturbate thing was recorded (which is illegal) and then forwarded to the participant who then uploaded the clip of her/himself? 2.0 platforms warp all the conventional legal concepts of ownership.

Plus, even if clips are almost certainly non-consensual the authorities clearly do not have the time and resources to be going through all the millions of clips being uploaded (and being immediately downloaded, reduplicated and re-uploaded to other sites) and verifying the consent or otherwise of the participants. Plus, hardly any of the mainstream porn is uploaded consensually is it? No one gets Jenna Jameson’s consent. That form of regulation would just consume huge amount of time and resources and would for subject to all manner of legal quandaries and disputes.

No, the only way to address this is to hit the hubs at the point of access and to make them 100% legally accountable for anything that appears on their site. And it is also to make the consumer 100% accountable by demanding their credit card details.

This has to be about accountability and access. The porn empire is just too big to regulate internally on a video by video basis. We need blocks and deterrents so people don’t even get so far as uploading something dodgy in the first place. I’d have it so that anything on a site without cast iron documentary evidence of the age and consent of the participants in any image or video is illegal in and of itself, and the site is accountable for any such material.

I was wondering on the way home whether Maria Miller and the women and equalities commission is the home for this. I feel like it needs some kind of campaign. I might write to her, or maybe we can start something up.
I think unfortunately the views meph has expressed is why this doesn't gain traction. Like so many women's rights issues, I find it strange that people can overlook the harm to society in their desire to justify the status quo.

WIll it make men stop bothering all together? If there is no need to impress a female, or be stronger than another man who might get her if doesn't, will men begin to lose their energy?