The first problem with the controversy reported here is it’s one-sidedly, taking mens’ subscription to porn for granted as purely sexual, rather than psychologically/socially complex. The other main problem is the article doesn't canvas the fundamental incompatibility between men and women. These two factors are connected. Marriage is a social contract that evolved for the sake of social cohesion and regeneration, but it seems hitherto to have been much more adapted to female sexuality, sensibility and security than male—even if it was patriarchy that projected inhibited sexuality onto women in denial of the lust that offended men's spiritual aspirations. Women tend to romanticise sex and are needy of affection, love and post-coital hugging, whereas male fantasy is more domineering and visceral, yet discontented* at the last and almost repulsed by the smothering that follows. Porn requites men uncomplicated gratification directly adapted to the rush of male fantasy. The pornographic surrogates are just as unreal in terms of male experience as they are women’s. The representation of insatiable, unsentimental, promiscuous woman directly contradicts reality. Indeed pornography offers an attractive alternative to romanticised sex and prudish, stifling monogamy.
The irony is that men wouldn’t want these sexual maenads for wives as with no escape they’d present a constant challenge to their masculinity, and because civilised, spiritual man is disgusted by primal, sexualised man*; his modest wife is both a constant reminder of his uprightness, and a foil for his emergent alter-ego.

*The expense of spirit in a waste of shame
Is lust in action: and till action, lust
Is perjur'd, murderous, bloody, full of blame,
Savage, extreme, rude, cruel, not to trust;
Enjoy'd no sooner but despised straight;
Past reason hunted; and no sooner had,
Past reason hated, as a swallow'd bait,
On purpose laid to make the taker mad:
Mad in pursuit and in possession so;
Had, having, and in quest to have, extreme;
A bliss in proof,— and prov'd, a very woe;
Before, a joy propos'd; behind a dream.
All this the world well knows; yet none knows well
To shun the heaven that leads men to this hell.

–Shakespeare

As usual with feminists they connect the dots and get an answer that suits their agenda.

Can I pose an alternate one that that considers males as people rather than as adornments to women?

How about men need sex because that is how the human race manages to reproduce itself. Women on the other hand don't need sex and in fact in many instances don't even like it. What they like is the feeling of being sexual. hence, they spend lots of money, time and effort to look and feel sexual. So men=sex, women=sexual.

Perhaps in the past when women weren't feeling sexual all the time they may have actually wanted sex more. Who knows.

I have little sympathy for women who feel threatened by porn. Our society is so sexualised now that even music videos would have been considered porn just decades ago. Surely porn is just women expressing their sexuality. Isn't that what we hear everytime someone criticises the omniscience of sex?

And apparently it causes women to worry about the look of their labia. Well stop the presses. Don't women know that all men look like John Holmes when naked?

Another article that is really about neuroticism not porn.

...When pornography is simply one integral part of the overall sex industry, why not aim the source of the problem of women’s libido on the whole industry? After-all, is it not a commonly held opinion that the modern-day sex industry is a mark of achievement of progressive politics, in which homosexuality has recently been included in “in-tandem” in the Public mind as well, and demands universal acceptance as part of the overall unit of progress for sexuality and sexual desire, for that universal desire to be acceptably satisfied?

...The removal of the “Christian morality” argument, was the key weapon for achievements in open sexuality and its many parts, including pornography!

...To divorce morality from the argument, (as this article does), and weep only for the victims, (as women are), will not solve the social dilemma of unfettered sexuality in a progressive society going backwards morally!

"Dr Bella Ellwood-Clayton, resident anthropologist come sexpert..."

And what makes her a sexpert? Read a lot of books I suppose?

Pornography has a lot in common with fast food in that what you see is never quite what comes thru the window.
It's the same with news. Repetitive gloss, with every update marketed as something new. It so seldom is.
The resulting dissatisfaction gives rise to violence, a growth phenomenon if ever there was one.
We are becoming increasingly disconnected from reality, and yet reality is just that - reality.
Scary, really. Don't know where it's going.

I do agree that women's self image is a factor. A far bigger factor in declining libido is in my view the presence of children and possibly an element of staleness (monogamy works on a lot of levels but there are some aspects that don't do well in maintaining excitement).

Also agree that in some cases men may make adverse comparisons contributing to poor self image but I strongly suspect that in most cases poor self image has a lot more to do with what's portrayed in women's magazines, TV etc than the images in porn.

I think that in relation to porn and libido the author and others got the arrow heads the wrong way round when they joined the dot's. That a significant proportion of increased porn usage is driven by the combination of a partners declining libido as a relationship settles into routine and easier access than in the past rather than increased porn usage driving declining women's libido.

Porn is in my view generally a very poor substitute for the real thing, however for a lot of men the real thing is not a regular part of life.

The sexual needs of men and women do appear to be generally different as are the hurdles to getting sex happening.

R0bert