HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Gender & Orientation » Men's Group (Group) » Why Porn Can Be Good For ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sat Jun 30, 2012, 09:10 PM

Why Porn Can Be Good For You (And Society)..,.

Last edited Sat Jun 30, 2012, 10:52 PM - Edit history (1)

Porn has always had plenty of detractors, but since the web has brought it into our homes on demand, a multitude of 21st-century criticisms have been leveled at it. The breakup of relationships, violence, sexual pressure, body image problems for women and sexual addiction and dysfunction in men have all been blamed on the avid use of porn. One could argue that all these things existed before search engines did; Henry VIII handily exemplified two or three. And is there no upside to having a world of human sexual wonders at your grown-up fingertips? Is the world in no way better for having a film called Bitanic? Let’s take a look past the implants and see if -- and when -- a little voyeurism is a good thing.

In The Sunny Side of Smut, Scientific American’s Melinda Wenner Mover says the research in several studies suggests that “moderate pornography consumption does not make users more aggressive, promote sexism or harm relationships. If anything, some researchers suggest, exposure to pornography might make some people less likely to commit sexual crimes.” Mover does not see this as proof that porn decreases sex crime, but Christopher J. Ferguson, a professor of psychology and criminal justice at Texas A&M told Mover that the trends “just don’t fit with the theory that rape and sexual assault are in part influenced by pornography.”

Participants of both sexes in a 2007 study of more than 600 Danish men and women aged 18-30 found that self-reporting adults said that “hardcore” pornography had a positive effect on their lives. Researchers Martin Hald and Neil M. Malamuth asked the subjects to report the effects of hardcore porn consumption on “sexual knowledge, attitudes toward sex, attitudes toward and perception of the opposite sex, sex life and general quality of life.”

Along the quality-of-life lines, Dr. Donald Ardell, who was credited with helping found the wellness movement in the 1970s, writes in A Wellness Perspective on Pornography, that wellness is about quality of life, and that pornography, with its ancient lineage (he mentions the Kama Sutra, circa 300 AD) and huge number of users “seems to enhance life quality, unless of course they get caught looking at it.” He sites humor and stress release as two possibly life-enhancing qualities of porn.

http://www.alternet.org/sex/154266/why_porn_can_be_good_for_you_%28and_society%29

First off, this alternet article is originally from Feb., so I apologize if it's already been posted. I also figured I'd start a new thread since Warren seems to have resorted to kicking old ones.

I just thought it was interesting the way these studies directly contradict the arguments put out there over and over again by the anti-porn crusaders....

30 replies, 11571 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 30 replies Author Time Post
Reply Why Porn Can Be Good For You (And Society)..,. (Original post)
Upton Jun 2012 OP
Warren DeMontague Jun 2012 #1
Major Nikon Jul 2012 #2
Warren DeMontague Jul 2012 #3
Major Nikon Jul 2012 #4
4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #5
Behind the Aegis Jul 2012 #6
4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #7
Warren DeMontague Jul 2012 #8
Upton Jul 2012 #9
4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #11
eek MD Jul 2012 #12
Upton Jul 2012 #13
eek MD Jul 2012 #14
Warren DeMontague Jul 2012 #15
eek MD Jul 2012 #19
Warren DeMontague Jul 2012 #25
eek MD Jul 2012 #26
Warren DeMontague Jul 2012 #27
4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #22
4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #10
Warren DeMontague Jul 2012 #16
4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #17
Warren DeMontague Jul 2012 #18
4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #20
ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jul 2012 #21
4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #23
opiate69 Jul 2012 #24
Warren DeMontague Jul 2012 #28
opiate69 Jul 2012 #29
Monaque22 Jul 2012 #30

Response to Upton (Original post)

Sat Jun 30, 2012, 11:34 PM

1. Its also interesting that the anti porn "science" comes from the religious right

But the fact that it is thoroughly discredited and carries a heavily jesus-laden agenda doesn't matter, because AT LEAST SOMEONE IS TAKING THE HEROIN-LIKE PROPERTIES OF PICTURES OF NEKKID WOMEN SERIESLY!!!!!!

Which makes me wonder why the anti porn crusaders aren't all CRUSHED that Rick Santorum dropped out of the race.

Hell, maybe they are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #1)

Sun Jul 1, 2012, 02:41 AM

2. It also comes from the women's studies dept at a few universities

I seriously doubt if either group contains anyone with a background in psychology, criminal justice, or any actual behavioral science fields of study.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #2)

Sun Jul 1, 2012, 04:16 AM

3. And they love nothing more than to tout "hard science" from folks like Reisman

She, of the "erotoxin" fame and the spooky headlines bout how looking at a sexy boob pic is equivalent to mainlining black tar heroin... Funded by the AFA and shilling for "anti porn" groups who are peddling a clear fundy jesus agenda.

Whereas the gobbledygook laden shit from "scientific" fields like sociology, the $45 a pop papers full of authoritative sounding nonsense regarding the male gaze's ability to disrupt the flow of consciousness... Those generally come from your ivory tower womens studies dept type source.

They happily work together, those groups, because they share a common anti-sex, puritannical goal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #3)

Sun Jul 1, 2012, 05:43 AM

4. Which demonstrates that there's no really difference between them and the book burners

Reisman's degrees are in Communication, which is typical for the 'experts' touted by such people. Among her other brilliant 'theories', she thinks Nazism was caused by homosexuality. The so-called 'male gaze' brilliant idea came from Laura Mulvey who has a degree in cinematography. Dworkin was a college dropout. MacKinnon has a law degree. Steinem studied political science. Brownmiller was a college dropout.

As near as I can tell, not one of them has any sort of background in human behavior, yet there are those who seek to reorder society (by force if necessary), based on the writings of these hacks, none of which who enjoy any sort of credibility from people who actually do have backgrounds in human behavior.

I actually have more respect for the book burners. At least they are basing their fringe nut ideas on scripture rather than duplicitous pseudo-science.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #1)

Sun Jul 1, 2012, 11:24 AM

5. It's always fun when the far left and the far right loop around and overlap

 

you get normally gay-hating anti-women evangelicals marching hand in hand with radical feminists and atheists.

On most issues they absolutely despise each other but because they have the same opinion on this one scourge that will bring down humanity they are united and sing each others praises (during the porn wars a couple weeks back it was hilarious how many DUers cited evangelical christians for the "objective" research in to the horrors of porn).

I guess there are some people (left, right, apolitical) who just cannot be happy knowing that someone else is finding happiness in a way they would not enjoy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4th law of robotics (Reply #5)

Sun Jul 1, 2012, 01:49 PM

6. It happens in other areas too.

It always amazes me when the far elements of the spectrum overlap and how, self-professed liberals/progressives, accept racist or other bigoted forms of arguments or "experts." It really is frustrating.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Behind the Aegis (Reply #6)

Sun Jul 1, 2012, 02:46 PM

7. It frustrated me too at one point

 

now I just enjoy a good laugh.

Life's too short and all that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Upton (Original post)

Mon Jul 2, 2012, 03:45 PM

8. Meet your anti porn "science" team!

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Reisman


Reisman has said that she believes that a homosexual movement in Germany gave rise to the Nazi Party and the Holocaust, she endorses The Pink Swastika, which elaborates on this view and has compared modern youth groups for gays to the Hitler Youth.


You've heard that scary assertion about how a picture like this:



Is 100 TIMES MORE ADDICTIVE THAN HEROIN ZOMG O NOES ZOMG

Well, that "scientific" assertion came from anti-gay, religious right shill, Reisman.

(remember, if you find yourself unable to close this thread or do anything except look at that nasty! Horrible, relationship-ruining, abuse-enabling, brain-melting picture, HELP IS AVAILABLE!!! And remember, pray!)

Reisman is also affiliated with the:

http://www.lightedcandlesociety.org/

(trustee: the honorable Edwin Meese III )



From whom you may have heard about this guy:

http://byutv.org/watch/63dbb63b-8218-4e8a-b457-65d0d30a2e06

Impressive sounding "dr." donald hilton, whose great anti-smut manifesto is entitled "he restoreth my soul".


More proof that the elements of so-called "2nd wave" that are engaged in the (holy?) war against porn are really shilling for the religious right, either unknowingly or, quite possibly, deliberately.















Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #8)

Mon Jul 2, 2012, 05:03 PM

9. Oh, it's deliberate..

as anti-porn radical feminists have been giving a nod to the RW's own efforts at circumventing the 1st Amendment since at least the Dworkin/MacKinnon days. And as you've pointed out, we've seen it right here at DU..

I really don't know quite what to make of it. I guess it's like the circle or horseshoe theory. On this topic, the two left and right extremes have come full circle and now sit side by side sharing authoritarian goals and solutions to an imaginary problem..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Upton (Reply #9)

Mon Jul 2, 2012, 06:47 PM

11. Ultimately the extreme right and the extreme left have a lot in common

 

neither cares about freedom or the general welfare of the people. Both would see us in shackles rather than come face to face with the reality that some people choose to live differently than the way they advocate. Just look at the visceral reaction they get to the notion that some people are achieving orgasms in ways their holy prophets (Jesus/Dworkin) would not approve of.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4th law of robotics (Reply #11)


Response to eek MD (Reply #12)

Mon Jul 2, 2012, 08:11 PM

13. Horseshoe..



I'm not sure what you're getting at. I mean, just what is "the "left" or "progressive" side" of the porn issue? How about just letting consenting adults do whatever they wish, without having to put up with some self appointed moral crusaders?

The anti-porn extremists of both the left and the right sit at the bottom right next to each other, sharing mutual ideas and goals..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Upton (Reply #13)


Response to eek MD (Reply #14)

Mon Jul 2, 2012, 10:06 PM

15. Theres nothing nutty about thinking pot, or porn, should be legal for consenting adults.

Last edited Tue Jul 3, 2012, 02:19 AM - Edit history (1)

The fact that some people like to wave the "libertarian" word around like it is dog doo on a stick, or some sort of argument-winning trump card, proves zilch. The fact is, many (if not most) progressives are also social or left small l libertarians. Equal rights for LGBT citizens- that is another socially libertarian position.

The fact that the anti sex puritan zealots THINK they have a good reason for telling consenting Adults what choices they can make-in porn, be they the particpants OR the audience- well, isnt that always the case? "WE KNOW BETTER THAN YOUUUU (SO STOP YER SINNIN!!!)"

We hear a lot of noise about how women in porn "must not really be consentng" or they're not capable of consenting... Same sort of shit anti choicers use to make women "victims" of the so called "abortion industry".

The fact is, if there was evidence of widespread non consent in porn, there would be widespread prosecutions and lawsuits. After all, Unlike with many other crimes, the evidence is right there on film.

But there aren't, because the participants have not only consented but signed papers to that effect. So its yet another bullshit ruse to cover up the real, fundy agenda, which is to do away with any sexual pleasure that might piss off Jesus.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #15)


Response to eek MD (Reply #19)

Tue Jul 3, 2012, 01:37 PM

25. My point is, they ally themselves with fundies, they quote rw religious sources and "science", and

They use identical arguments and logic as to what fundies use in the effort to infantalize women, deny adult women choice, sexual agency and control of their own bodies, etc.

I'm sure, again, many think they "mean well" but again,the implication that anyone on THIS side of the "debate" supports non-consent, or anything like that.. Its offensive. There is NO evidence of widespread non consent in porn, beyond the yowling from the usual uspects that "it MUST be so"

Yes, we are coming into an election. I would think that the way to avoid "division" would be for certain people to stop continually trying to antgonize the vast majority of the rest of us here over an issue that has been hashed and rehashed repeatedly. Porn pisses off a few people, most dont have a problem with it, and it isn't going away.

Matter settled.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #25)


Response to eek MD (Reply #26)

Tue Jul 3, 2012, 11:27 PM

27. Let me just say, im not a "vociferous advocate" for anything except free speech and the right of

Last edited Wed Jul 4, 2012, 02:34 AM - Edit history (3)

Consenting adults to make their own damn decisions and control their own damn bodies.

I feel just as strongly- if not more- about reproductive freedom, ending the drug war, legalizing pot, making sure terminally ill people have access to palliative care and a pain free exit on their own terms if they so choose. It is only this area where we have a small but vocal cadre of "progressives" so dedicated to an anti freedom, anti choice position.

The real issue is that there are (some) women on this board who don't like men looking at women's bodies in a sexual way. Period. Whether in porn, at a bar, on television, in movies, in magazines, on the street, heck..even in a committed relationship


See, i think you've nailed it, there. This is how you get people making comparisons between a film of two people fucking, and a film of a lynching, for instance. Because some people have been programmed to believe that heterosexual sex IN AND OF ITSELF is abuse to women- so of course films of it are "hate speech". The very act itself is imagined to be somehow harmful and anti-feminist.

Its a whacked out view, and it drives the gibberish we see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #8)

Mon Jul 2, 2012, 06:44 PM

10. Maybe they're right about porn being more addictive than heroin

 

I've never had any interest in heroin but I would gladly take another hit of "Misha".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4th law of robotics (Reply #10)

Mon Jul 2, 2012, 10:06 PM

16. Google "veronika zemanova"

Turn safe search off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #16)

Mon Jul 2, 2012, 10:29 PM

17. Ah so you're a pusher

 

first taste is free.

But the second . . is also free. And the third and the fourth and the 100,000th I suppose, this is the internet after all.

What's your game drug-dealer?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4th law of robotics (Reply #17)

Mon Jul 2, 2012, 10:31 PM

18. I just appreciate good smack.

what can I say?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #18)

Tue Jul 3, 2012, 09:14 AM

20. Careful with your word choice

 

our resident porn-crusaders will cite that quote as proof the violence porn encourages.

Heh.

/only half joking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #16)

Tue Jul 3, 2012, 10:18 AM

21. You a bad man

A very, very bad man.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudToBeBlueInRhody (Reply #21)

Tue Jul 3, 2012, 11:24 AM

23. Must. Not. Fap!

 

Mustn't give in the to patriarchy's conditioning.

No real man could be sexually interested in such a woman. She's just an outlet for our need to oppress and subjugate women . . . .by masturbating alone in the dark.

Hehe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #16)

Tue Jul 3, 2012, 12:35 PM

24. This thread needs more Stoya....

well actually, with all the Meta drama, I think saying I need more Stoya is more accurate...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to opiate69 (Reply #24)

Wed Jul 4, 2012, 01:54 AM

28. Aria Giovanni



Another highly addictive source of nefarious erotoxins from the space patriarchy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #28)

Wed Jul 4, 2012, 02:08 AM

29. "I said god damn... The pusher man"

I'll be in my bunk

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Upton (Original post)

Reply to this thread