A coworker of mine said today that pornography is not a problem that causes
men to treat women as objects.  The problem, he said, is that there are some
really *stupid* men who, after going to a topless bar, conclude that all
women want to be treated like the women in the bar.  And does it make sense
to, say, ban or condemn pornography because there are a few stupid people
in the world?
   I don't know how much of that I agree with, but I wasn't quick to dismiss
it.  The fact is that most men *can* tell the difference between a picture
in a magazine and a real person.
   What do the rest of you think?

159 responses total.

Pornography is a problem only inasmuch as it is a symptom of general
social maliase about sex.

I stopped playing Doom because I became hostile after playing it.  It
struck a chord in me.  I have seen it affect others quite the opposite.
I am not going down to yon Softward Dealers Associates because my 
personality is incompatible with Doom.  I simply don't play.

My problem with pornograhpy comes about when the models are being
forced into it.  There is nothing wrong with a woman (or a man) 
creating sexual explicit fantasies for money or pleasure.  The
issue of objectification leading to rape (especially date rape)
is one of people not being able to separate fantasy from reality.
If we ban pornography *for that reason*, we nned to ban Bugs Bunny
so that people won't go around dropping anvils on each others' heads.

There... was that suitably incoherent.
  ?

I consider pornography a slightly different form of masturbation. Instead
of simply imagining a body for sexual gratification there is a picture or
photograph or story to help the fantasy along. And as long as the author
or models weren't coerced into producing the material there is no victim. 

This response has been erased.

valerie, there are men who like real women better than magazine
glossies who make you uncomfortable...they don't read 
porno magazines but can undress you with their eyes.  I know
pronography when I see it and I know a gentleman when I meet one.

Just can't defne either perfectly tho'!

To me, anything etween truly consenting adults is okay.  Children 
arent' ok when it comes to sex.  But anthing else, I don't care what
a person looks at.  And I don't think porno makes someone behave badly...
we're responsible for our actions, thus we can choose our behaviors
(tho it can affect attitudes).

 I've always thought of Valerie as a person, and not a sex symbol. Which
is typical of my thinking when it comes to women. I think mags such as
Playboy and Penthouse degrade women from what they should be: People first

View hidden response.

Pornography is sexual junk food.  Most guys with whom I have gone out
have a copy of Playboy or something like that lying around (I am told
that they buy it for the articles), but I don't think that I have bee
objectified as a result.  Canada is, unfortunately, more paternalistic
with regards to pornography because of arguments that pictures of 
consenting adults participating in sexual activity are somehow demeaning
to men and women.  I could never understand why.  If a man sees me only
as a body, I don't want to know him but I don't think that it is 
pornography that makes him a jerk.

Yes!  That's exactly the point my coworker was making in #0.

Pornography is called considered vile and low when people call it
as such. It all comes down to values and standards. But I agree
that pornography is pornography when the human body is
exploited for money. Money never is and will be a good motive
to start actions from.
That less developed people can change their attitudeas a rsult of such,
is in my point of view a rather sad case.
Personally I couldn't care less for pictures/movies/videos containing
explicit sexual acts. Doesn't turn me on a bit. A person, on the other
hand, might.

Do you ever go to work in the morning and stay all day simply
because you need the money?  Isn't that vile, doing something 
simply for the cash-ola?  Heck,  I bet there are wives out there
fucking their husbands just to keep the home scene from blowing
up.  Is the wife exploiting her body?  And who are "less developed
people"?

I dunno. I just don't think that anything positive cAn come from pornography.

re: #11 - agree - but a lot bad can come from it.  It is dehumanizing.

I think so too mcpoz. What I really woner about is the women (and men) who
decied to be part of it, by being dancers, in magazines, in movies. From what
I have heard, dancers can make good money. But why do women have to resort
to flashing their boobs  in order to do well financially? I don't know about
it making it influence someone's behavior exactly... but how can it  build
up a person? How would it make you a better person? It won't. And I learned
a long time ago that there is a concept of GIGO... Garbage In, Garbage OUt.

I watched Beavis and Buthead for awhile and realized I was screaming
"fartknocker" and "buttmunch" when I encountered bad drivers on the highway.
Not intelligent, I admit. But just 30 minutes a day impacted me that much.

I hear the "It's ok for adults" thing a lot too. But parents, think about
it... would you want your son/daughter watching this later on, or being a part
of it? Hell no. The last thing you'd imagine is your son, whom you raised to
be moral and appreciate the good in things, slobbering and getting excited
over a porn movie or in a theater, with women portraying the ultimate sex
object role. They're going to tolerate what we tolerate.

Re #11:  How can anything good come out of bungi jumping, or snorkeling,
or looking at a famous painting?  Do they make someone a better person?
Yet these are not things we regard with disgust.  Your last paragraph in
#13, beeswing, seems like a blatant attempt to push people's buttons
without providing any real compelling arguments.  Kind of reminds me of
Pat Buchanan. 

This response has been erased.

I think most forms of "risk-taking" are dangerous and it is hard to quantify
the good from it.  If the adrenaline rush of bungee jumping outweighs the
risks of becoming an omlette or micro-stroking, then so be it.  

Ah, perhaps. But snoerkeling is relatively safe, as is liooking at paintings.

I don't tend to think of strippers as garbage.  Or the people who
go to see them as losers.  Or acts of erotica as immoral.  Or any
sexual acts between consenting adults as wrong.  Pornography is
obviously very enjoyable material for some and if a woman is victimized
by involvement in the industry then she was a victim in waiting and
if it wasn't porn flicks it would have been something else she would
have found to abuse herself.

I didn't say strippers were garbage. Just in a very defeating occupation, for
themselves and for womankind. I don't think they are all victims in waiting.
Some may stumble into in, some may be lured by the money it pays. I admire
anyone who works to, say, feed their kids, it's just sad that this is what
some women have to do in order to earn teh money to do so. beats prostitution
I guess, but still. And it seems the porn industry is what leads to the drug
use, the prostitution, and so forth. Not for everyone... but it hapens a lot.

Re #15:  I still don't see the distinction between the activities I cited
and pornography.  All are entertainment.  There's no accounting for taste.

As for my inflammatory comparison between you and Pat Buchanan, of course
I can't read minds - I call 'em like I see 'em.  Your statement read like
an attempt at manipulation to me.  The fact that people are responsible
for their own reactions (I agree with you there) does not mean there is no
such thing as manipulation. 

I'm afraid I don't see the connection between the Agora math item and this
one.

This response has been erased.

You don't see the connection in the same way I don't see the connection
between Picasso and porno. Valerie says it the best in #21. And as for
manpulation, I can't force that either. People choose to interpret it that
way and act accordingly. 

and, on a similar subject:
why is it ok to have sex with someone, and ok for you to
just give someone money, but not ok to combine the two?
i really do not understand why prostitution is illegal.
who is it hurting?

The issue of Porno goes back to how you perceive other people, as humans or
objects.  I don't know if I can explain this clearly and to everyones
satisfaction, but consider the following:

A)  You are a bright young female professional.  You work in an office with
    both men and women.  Your supervisor is a male who is a connoisseur of
    Pornography, topless bars, etc.  

    Would you be willing to trust him in guiding your career development and
    not worry about how he perceives/treats you?  Do you think this person
    will give you the same opportunities as the males?  Is it conceivable that
    he can "turn off that interest" or keep it from clouding his judgement
    when he decides who gets the big promotion, raise, etc?  

B)  YOu find out that your children's grade school teacher is very much into
    porno.  Do you have second thoughts about keeping them there?

I guess the point I am trying to make is this dehumanizing has the net effect
of supporting the sexist activities result in things like glass ceilings.

Ok, off the soap box again.

A. Yes, as much as I'd trust anyone I knew so casually or in such
   in limited role.  As long as he keeps his sexual preferences out
   of the work place I have no problem with this.

B. Yes, as long as he or she is a good teacher what's the deal?  I 
   also wouldn't have a problem with a teacher who was a right-wing
   religious zealot as long as those beliefs were kept out of the
   curriculum and didn't become part of the classroom experience.

Both women and men enjoy pornography.  It's not bad or dirty.  Like 
a lot of things though it's very tempting to see it as wrong for
society if it's wrong for you, personally.

And I agree with igor, prostitution should be legalized.

Sex is not bad or dirty, provided it's in a loving, adult relationship. Porn,
where it's twisted into nothing but selfish gratitfication and objectivity...
and sometimes abuse... is bad. And reducing the human body down to an object
with no dignity is dirty. I can't stop a person from buying PLayboy or going
to topless bars. I can't, and wouldn't burn the porn magazines and videos.
It does have the right to be there, but it's a sad commentary on our culture
that it is there.

Whatt I think mcpoz was getting at (and I aplogize 10,000 times over if I am
wrong) is that those who frequent topless bars and such obviously like the
idea of objectifying people, and most often  women. Someone who likes to see
the woman in the "service" role of a lap-dancing, "what can I do for you" 
arena can't have all that much respect for them. I know women can objectify
men as well, but look at the ratio of men's bars as opposed to places where
women could go. ... maybe the Chippendales come by every year or so.
Coincidence? I think not.

I disagree 100% with the conclusion in that last paragraph.  It's quite
possible to be a mature enough person to separate fantasy from real life:
to enjoy pornography and not objectify people in real life.  That's the
point my co-worker was making in #0. 

I agree it is "quite possible."  Now what percent of the people achieve that
separation?

When a woman is standing over a man, her breasts in his face, 
his heart racing, his penis standing at attention, and his hands
stuffing his hard earned money into her G-string, who is it 
exactly who is "objectifying"?  Who lords the most control over
the other, the dancer or the guy sweating testosterone?

Me thinks we're doing another Woman as Victim item here.  It
comes so naturally.

This response has been erased.

This response has been erased.

I don't have the power of expression that some people have, but I have not
made my point clear.  I am not disputing this on an individual basis, or on
the basis of whether men or women are exclusively guilty of "dehumanizing."

My point was that it has a great societal effect and because of the fact that
males dominate the power structure, women may not be allowed to achieve their
potential.  If a woman objectifies a man, it does not carry over into the
education system, the workplace, the society in general as much as the reverse
case.  

This response has been erased.

Oh, but beeswing, I do consider myself a feminist.  But I'm most certainly
of a different breed of feminists than you. I'm of the sect that believes
if a behavior change is needed there is some amount of intellectual
integrity to changing your own behavior before expecting others to change
theirs.  If women feel pornography is wrong then women should cease
affiliation with the industry.  It's seems kinda silly to see the men as
the crux of the problem when women could shut down the industry by simply
not participating (changing their own behavior).  Porno films which show
only men and are only purchased by men really wouldn't pose much be much
of a feminist issue. And I really don't think women are forced like slaves
to be involved in pornography production.  They have a choice. 
Alternative employment is available.  The decision to be involved is
probably complex with money being only a part of the package, but it is,
indeed, each woman's decision.  And to deny that is to strip women of
power through lies.  With this issue especially, forget men, work on the
women. 
 
Two, be very careful that you don't project your hangups, modesty, sexual
practices (or lack of) into being normal for everyone. Erotica is not
wrong, bad, evil, or demeaning.  Lots of men like it and lots of women
like it.  Couples can partake and still respect each other in the morning. 
Reading or watching erotica does not make you blind, it won't make you
into a lustful neighbor, or a child-fondler.  If pornography (private,
among adults) bothers you then don't partake.  But don't, Paglia-like, try
to make it into another "poor women" thing or (mcpoz) suggest those who
watch a movie showing adults making love are unsuitable as teachers or
clergy or neighbors.  They tried that with homosexuality.  Didn't fly. 

Hear, hear.

Do NOT compare me to the evil Camille "If civilization were lef tin female
hands, we would still be livign in grass huts" Paglia. She is not a feminist.
I can understand you argument that the woman who are in the porn industry do
need help too. But the fact is men are overwhelmingly the ones who are getting
into this. Why is that?

And you tell me to not project my hang ups, and that people can use porn in
their opwn homes without bothering me. But when I have to drive by a topless
bar, A Hooters, or scan over the Playboys while looking for a copy of
Newsweek, then it DOES bother me and I have some say in it. You yourself seem
very adamant about porn, but you seem hesitant to admit you just might be
using it yourself. And porn is not "making love", honey. There i

You know, beeswing, just because something bothers you doesn't
mean it should be changed.  Some things, maybe, but not all
things.  That's what tolerance is all about, being bothered by
something but understanding you are not the center of the universe,
that there are other people out there, with different points of view
and rights to different values.

Aside:  Please, beeswing, don't take my comments disagreeing
with you point of view as a sign of hostility.  Truth is I 
find your posts very interesting and read every one, closely.
I seldom agree with you but that's what makes conferencing
interesting.

I also think you would have been a magnificent md pseudo.
What a pity nobody gets into pseudos like that any more.
That we know of. ;-)

This response has been erased.

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss