Is Porn Bad for You?

[compared2what?]

Cultures that have a generally benign social attitude toward sex and sexuality have fewer problems than cultures that have a specific and doctrinaire social attitude toward sex and sexuality. Irrespective of whether the doctrine is proscriptive or prescriptive.

Bonobos

I didn't know they had a culture. Is there a movie or book or something that's really key to the Bonobo canon? Because if there is, I'd be incredibly interested in checking it out.

[jfshade]

Cultures that have a generally benign social attitude toward sex and sexuality have fewer problems than cultures that have a specific and doctrinaire social attitude toward sex and sexuality. Irrespective of whether the doctrine is proscriptive or prescriptive.

Bonobos

I didn't know they had a culture. Is there a movie or book or something that's really key to the Bonobo canon? Because if there is, I'd be incredibly interested in checking it out.

Maybe I'm misappropriating the term culture for my primate kin, but I feel more comfortable with a less anthropocentric definition of it. Of course, other primates can't boast of artifacts like American Idol or Foucault's Pendulum, so maybe I'm more precisely referring to social customs and mores. But I think bonobos have a generally more benign social attitude toward sex and sexuality than, say, chimpanzees or homo sapiens. And less attendant sexually related violence. That is to say, I was offering what I thought was an example to underscore your point.

[brekin]

Simulist wrote:

brekin wrote:


Simulist wrote:


brekin wrote:
And since some argue that the logical conclusion of aggressive pornography is murder (because that is the ultimate dehumanization)...



Can there be a "logical conclusion" from an illogical premise?




I don't know. You should take that up with the Marquis De Sade. He knew a little bit about violent porn.


Brekin, you seem somewhat fixated on this subject.

One does not have to seek out the Marquis de Sade for torture porn when Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ is so readily available. The obvious parallels are extremely disturbing, but also thought-provoking.

I would say from the heated replies when this subject is brought up I'm not the only one fixated on this here. I'm actually a little surprised at peoples reactions to be honest.
Not in content, but mostly in style.

I whole heartedly agree with the Passion of the Christ being torture porn. But not to examine the opposing secular faith in sexual liberation is a little myopic.

Got to run to church now.

(Just kidding!)

[Simulist]

I whole heartedly agree with the Passion of the Christ being torture porn. But not to examine the opposing secular faith in sexual liberation is a little myopic.

I think that's true. And yet, really "examining" a subject requires an open mind, and that implies a willingness to see at least two sides of a question.

[brekin]

Simulist wrote:

brekin wrote:
I whole heartedly agree with the Passion of the Christ being torture porn. But not to examine the opposing secular faith in sexual liberation is a little myopic.



I think that's true. And yet, really "examining" a subject requires an open mind, and that implies a willingness to see at least two sides of a question.

Agree again. I think I've done a fair job of seeing how some porn can be positive in society (maybe even necessary) in the way of instruction and illustration. However to even
state that it can start to become the proverbial "golden handcuffs" when it is tied to new forms of technology, commercialism, distribution and violent subject matter seems to
instantly cause some people to bristle. Why do you think that is?

[barracuda]

The answer to that is pretty straightforward, brekin. Throughout history, the notion that "sex is bad" has been used as a control far more widely and dangerously than the notion that "sex is healthy". Just generally speaking. Thus, the bristling.

[brekin]

barracuda wrote:

The answer to that is pretty straightforward, brekin. Throughout history, the notion that "sex is bad" has been used as a control far more widely and dangerously than the notion that "sex is healthy". Just generally speaking. Thus, the bristling.

I agree. That is why I think it warrants attention. Porn (specifically modern online porn) is advertising with the slogan "sex is healthy" and selling something completely different. I personally don't think "sex is bad", in fact much of what I'm saying (and trying to figure out) is why porn today seems to be competing with healthy sex and frustrating it. I'm not asking people to choose between either the Pope and the Pimp. If anything I'm just saying there are similarities.

[Nordic]

porn today seems to be competing with healthy sex and frustrating it

Again, you're generalizing. I think you're a little too concerned about "nasty" porn and not paying attention to the huge world of it that's out there. There's a lot of stuff out there that's actually very tasteful, beautiful, well lit and photographed and all of that. Not everybody likes the nasty crap.

[brekin]

Nordic wrote:

Again, you're generalizing. I think you're a little too concerned about "nasty" porn and not paying attention to the huge world of it that's out there. There's a lot of stuff out there that's actually very tasteful, beautiful, well lit and photographed and all of that. Not everybody likes the nasty crap.

See for me its not just the quality aspect. (Although that is key) Because as you say there is such a "huge world of it that's out there" even of the tasteful stuff that changes a lot of things I think.
Growing up how many boring ass movies did you have to sit through to see some skin? Now you can get down to business right away and I think that can skew people's take on what it takes for the average sex act to take place. Online porn (even the arty stuff) separates sex out from human relations and commodifies it. This wouldn't be such an issue it seems if the amount of porn produced now seems to rival bollywood. This volume is mostly viewed by men and since most women I know (another generalization) seem to need a two hour long Jane Austen film to legitimize a relationship before the people can fuck I can see this causing problems down the road for gender relations.

[Simulist]

Online porn (even the arty stuff) separates sex out from human relations and commodifies it.

Which can also be said for cereal commercials: some guy, sitting alone, eating a bowl of cornflakes.

I actually knew a priest once who joked that since he wasn't supposed to have sex, he was thinking about installing a mirror on the ceiling above his kitchen table.

Of course, he was just kidding. (Well, I think he was. )

[Penguin]

Lets do it like mammals do it.

(I got nothing of value whatsoever to add, except that Ive seen very few truly arousing porn flicks. The ones I liked were invariably films where the actors / actresses - in any possible combinations - were clearly doing the film willingly and not for the monetary reward solely, and enjoying themselves) - so I guess I agree with Nordic.

Which rules out probably at least 95% or more of what is out there.
Nothing beats the real thing, though.

One of the better ones was a british flick I think, which had pretty much regular looking women and men - and women and women etc - all amateurs and volunteers. You could see it was genuine thrill and satisfaction, all around.

[Nordic]

most women I know (another generalization) seem to need a two hour long Jane Austen film to legitimize a relationship before the people can fuck

You don't know the same women I've known.

The women I've known enjoy porn as much as men do. Sometimes more. And I'm not talking about stuff that takes forever to get off the ground and involves candlit dinners or anything, I'm talking about good porn with attractive people in nice settings and decent production values, where they actually seem to be enjoying it and ESPECIALLY the "lesbian" stuff.

Just sayin'. I don't know where people come up with this "women don't like porn" idea. That flies in the face of all of my experience. Women don't like porn when they men in their life are enjoying it WITHOUT THEM.

[Penguin]

Again, I agree with Nordic.

And lesbians and gays especially seem to be better catered for, in the genuine and voluntary enjoyment category.

[beeline]

.

Without porn, I'd never get laid.

.

[brekin]

Nordic wrote:

brekin wrote:
Quote:
most women I know (another generalization) seem to need a two hour long Jane Austen film to legitimize a relationship before the people can fuck


You don't know the same women I've known.

The women I've known enjoy porn as much as men do. Sometimes more. And I'm not talking about stuff that takes forever to get off the ground and involves candlit dinners or anything, I'm talking about good porn with attractive people in nice settings and decent production values, where they actually seem to be enjoying it and ESPECIALLY the "lesbian" stuff.

Just sayin'. I don't know where people come up with this "women don't like porn" idea. That flies in the face of all of my experience. Women don't like porn when they men in their life are enjoying it WITHOUT THEM.

I'm going to need names, number and pics to verify all of the above.