The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The digital age becomes a dark age for women > Comments

The digital age becomes a dark age for women : Comments

By Caroline Spencer, published 25/2/2008

An uninhabitable world for women: the new era of mass pornography consumption.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 13
  7. 14
  8. 15
  9. All
it all sounds a little naive. a reference to the "medical journal" in question would have helped: without it, the author simply has no evidence for her claims, much less her speculations. it would also be of interest to have considered the issue of whether some women also enjoy pornography and violent fantasies, and what this might imply for her concerns.
Posted by bushbasher, Monday, 25 February 2008 9:44:50 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It does sound somewhat hysterical.

I don't doubt there's an array of nasty pornography on the web, though I doubt most horny teenagers would choose the brutal pornography over standard fare.

Because the worst exists, there's no reason to assume large numbers of people will opt for those kinds.

As for the idea that men won't be able to believe women are people too, with feelings and so on... on that, I'm extremely sceptical. Most men have mothers, sisters, wives.
They're not some ignorant porn-addicted wretch, unable to differentiate between what is on screen and what is reality.
This assumption is rather insulting, actually. Of course the vast majority can tell women are people with feelings too.

This piece reads as if all men are ignorant sociopaths, unable to appreciate other people's feelings.
Posted by TurnRightThenLeft, Monday, 25 February 2008 10:14:04 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The 2007 medical journal finding that “high pornography consumption added significantly to the prediction of sexual aggression” means that if you observe that someone has a high (relative to the average) pornography consumption, then you may predict, with a better than random chance of being right, that the person will be involved in sexual aggression.

But that's all it means. It doesn't tell you that pornography consumption causes sexual aggression, and certainly doesn't tell you that more sexual aggression will result from the increased availability of pornography.

I sometimes think that medical articles on such things (and many others) should come with a warning:

"WARNING - This article contains data of a highly statistical nature, and should only be quoted by qualified professionals. Its use by untrained people can seriously damage their credibility."
Posted by Sylvia Else, Monday, 25 February 2008 10:39:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So, according to this article, parents don't teach their son(s) on how to treat people from an early age, rather they learn it when they're 16-17 and see women involved in pornography online.

I note that no statistics are mentioned on the pornography found on the net that are specifically degrading to women; rather, the article just says "lots".

Perhaps readers might take this seriously if the author had done some research - or, if they had, included it in the article instead of unsupported statements...
Posted by Chade, Monday, 25 February 2008 10:56:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
“A survey taken in the US in 2005 found that 38 per cent of 16 to 17-year-old boys had sought out pornography on the Internet.”

Note “a survey”. This is an old trick used by people without evidence expecting you to believe them. There might or might not be a survey.

What about the girls, Caroline? They are, after all, half the performers in straight pornography.

So far, this contribution seems to be the usual attack on those ‘dirty’ little boys and men, rather than any attempt to protect women. Let’s read on.

Third paragraph, and it’s still males abusing a poor, innocent females.

Four paragraph, more “women hatred”. The women are just “pretending” to enjoy the experience. How does our contributor know that, one wonders? We can be fairly sure that a PhD study at the Asia Institute has nothing to do with the subject. What are her qualifications for knowing how males enjoy themselves: key hole peeping, perhaps?

Paragraph five doesn’t tell us how the medical journal made its ‘findings’. Not very good for someone doing a PhD. If she thinks that pornography contributes to what she claims it does, she should be able to prove it, not just name an arcane journal most people have never seen.

Chapter six continues on, assuming that the unproven “… 2007 study’s finding linking pornography to male sexual aggression…” is universally accepted. The “estimated 1,000 cases of drink spiking” here are also dubious. We can just as easily “estimate” that x number of not so sugary and spicy girls have hit the sauce and done the old come on, only to be met with the guilt and fear in the morning, and cry drink spiking to hide their behaviour from mummy and daddy.

Continued....
Posted by Leigh, Monday, 25 February 2008 10:56:36 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Continued...

Single sentence ‘paragraphs’ seven to nine’ wonder where women fit
into a world where “large numbers” (who says?) of evil men are “looking at pictures”; when “our male leaders” might have had their brains affected by pornography so that the maybe unable to see women as human beings. This is sheer hysteria.

What about the increasing number of females involved in porn? What about the fact that women don’t wear stays, hoops and bustles anymore, and like sex wherever they can get it – often rough stuff- just as same as males? Is Caroline Norma really that naïve?

Does she think that females are still delicate flowers for whom the “coming decades” (Para. 10) will be “uncharted territory for women”?

The rest of this tiresome tirade against males continues to be just that to the end. Caroline Norma has asked and listened to women! Which women? How many women? She doesn’t say; she has no evidence, again.

I am past the stage where I am interested in women, sex or pornography. But, I still recognise an attack on my gender when I see it. This is a beauty!
Posted by Leigh, Monday, 25 February 2008 10:59:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A pretty unimpressive article from a PhD candidate - it reads more like a religious high school essay. No evidence, much supposition and indignation.

While there's undoubtedly all sorts of tasteless and unpleasant porn out there, so long as the actors, producers and consumers are consenting adults I can see no reason to restrict its availability - particularly on the basis of poorly constructed arguments like this one. If you don't like it, don't watch it or participate in it. If you want to restrict kids' access install a filter - or better still, talk to them about it.

Coincidentally, there was an unusually intelligent article about pornography in last Saturday's 'Weekend Australian' magazine (unfortunately unavailable online), based on ARC-funded research conducted Alan McKee, Katherine Albury and Catharine Lumby. I'd suggest the author of this pap has a read of it.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Monday, 25 February 2008 11:08:17 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Weekend Australian and Catharine Lumby (advisor to the Bulldogs team!!) are hardly much better sources than our PhD author.

I don't see this as an attack on males, any more than I see it as an attack on censorship or free choice to be a prostitute or porn star, or Wollongong Council Town Planner!

However, the free availability of this stuff can and does undermine 'normal' relationships and creates exploitation of, in the main, women, but also men.

I suppose, is there any merit in restricting this material? The argument that people have wives, mothers and sisters and should have been trained better doesn't overcome the addictive nature of pornography or gambling, drinking etc.

We are dealing with a weakness that can and does have catastrophic outcomes for a percentage of society. So do we just sit back?
Posted by Reality Check, Monday, 25 February 2008 11:58:36 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I'm in agreement with most of what has been posted so far. To an extent even with Reality Check, there is a darkside, some do not handle this stuff well and we need to think about how to deal with that.

Leigh it is an attack on men but perhaps the bigger attack is on women. The women of the authors world appear to be helpless victims unable to enjoy the dirty sweaty stuff for it's own sake. They are women who pretend to like what they don't like to keep men giving them whatever it is that they rely on men for (presumably not sex). They are not grown ups charting their own course through life but dependants.

Those kind of women exist and perhaps they attract and are attracted to the kind of men who'd like the type of porn the author describes.

I've no interest in either that type of porn or in the type of women who pretend to like things so that they can get something else from me. I hope that I'm in the majority on that.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Monday, 25 February 2008 12:40:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The internet, without the usual legal restraints, has become a carte-blanche invitation to men to give vent to all their proclivities. Before most of your responsdents, male, die from apolexy at such affrontery, it is not being suggested that all male desires are perverted.The heat in their answers leads to this conclusion so they can be included in this group.
The level of violence towards women is increasing: female children are being raped at a level hitherto unprecedented, as are older women. So are women in between. One in five murdered women are killed as a result of domestic violence. The statistics are simply too numerous to mention, which may explain the author's lack in doing so. Never mind, I knew where to look them up. They are there for all to see. I can only say to those that demand you waste space by reproducing them here to get off their bottoms and look. The legal system so far seems reluctant to find a solution to internet sexual violence. Why? Is it because the legal system is dominated by men? Is it because the internet is dominated by men? I'm sure there are a myriad of reasons. But they mostly will be found to have vested interests in not stopping it. To the person who stated his gender is once again being maligned, may I remind him that far and away the greatest bulk of sexual violence is perpetrated by men? So he will have to live with his gender being maligned - untill it stops perpetrating violence on women. If women think that men are the biggest problem, I think they can be forgiven for coming to this conclusion. To the Author: Go for it: raise the consciousness of the public in that the internet is now the largest purveyor of sexual violence at a level previously unknown. And of course such sexual violence is having ramifications at large. How could it not? Only the very foolish -or those with a vested interest in it staying that way - will say it is not.
Posted by arcticdog, Monday, 25 February 2008 12:59:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The usual defendants of the perverted industry while more and more kids are sexually abused as a result. The Aboriginal communities have kids under 10 carrying out acts that they watch on porn. Providing facts and figures to those who are so blind to the obvious is a useless exercise. Pornography is rife through the mining industry and very few guys treat women with any respect at all. Go on enjoying your perversion guys but don't complain when some deviant interferes with your children because that is the fruit of allowing this crap to be so widespread.

Amazing how so many intelligent people can defend the indefensible.
Posted by runner, Monday, 25 February 2008 1:39:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I have no trouble with this essay as it seems like an accurate, even under-stated, assessment of the way things are in the never ending world-wide war against women.

There was an article in the Age recently which quoted the research of a USA professor who pointed out that pornography, just in the USA, is a $10 billion industry, and that there are 7000 porn films made every year, and that what it (pornography) does, is to reduce women to three holes and two hands for the gratification and abuse of/by men.

Meanwhile in the USA there is also an epidemic of violence against, and sexual abuse women of all ages. The two phenomenon are very much related.

The same scenario is also occurring world-wide.

There is a related essay titled The Never Ending War Against Women by Ann Jones at Tom Dispatch.
Posted by Ho Hum, Monday, 25 February 2008 1:43:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I am a little saddened by a tirade from the correction experts in this forum giving the appearance of support to the porno industry. By deflecting attention from the spirit of Caroline Newman’s article you appear to acquiesce with the sordid sex industry.
It is a timely reminder to parents and family of the vulnerability of children with access to porno sites on the internet. It also gives a warning to be watchful over their long term interests, and the need for vigilance on the whole question of the greater sex industry. You never know, it may consume one of your children in the process of its existence. Then how would you be feeling about grammar and proof by the absolute.
Posted by diver dan, Monday, 25 February 2008 2:01:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What follows are some words from Michelle. A victim of the child sex industry.

BEFORE I DIE (again)

Before I die, (again), may desire at last rise as the tide to vanquish childhood memory that scream from the inner void , clenched in the fists of guilt and anguish so tightly, fearing exposure. Where, in that void they cling so defiantly and selfishly, harbouring atrocious secrets, that whip and stab at will. Pain transformed from afflictions past, embossed to the fabric of emotion, bearing the face of child so small. A child so trapped so stifled.

A void where conscious and unconscious permeate to confuse outcomes. Fooling each other with identity crisis, memories, acting as sounding boards, dwell like demons in the cavernous and dark corners of the mind; as if minding the mind. There dwelling, in defiance of pharmacology, to silence or release them. The scream that begs to spill those memories, along the winding road of life, vacuum sealed. Safe.

Memories, hiding and defiant , cocooned in the empty shell called my heart. A place devoid of garden and flowers, too bleak to sprout new season buds. Poisoned ground, on which falls the salted water of tears from grey clouds of despond, dispatched by the Gods of doom with sick humour. Fictitiously, nourishing agents, reviled by new life.

In a land where perpetual winter of sorrow and pain, strip away all vestiges of love and comfort. There, no hope dwells, and I, like a twisted and gnarled branch, grown inwards, have fallen defenceless, entranced; turned as Lot to a pillar of salt, ever to gaze into a beating and beaten childhood heart. Abandoned by deaths reaper; enveloped in blackness, strolling eternally through a museum of horrors, a fallen victim of child abuse. And lost, the child within.

Michelle
Posted by diver dan, Monday, 25 February 2008 2:01:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I agree with CJMorgan in that the article sounded more like a fire and brimestone lecture from the pulpit.

One In Three Boys Heavy Porn Users, Study Shows
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/02/070223142813.htm

"We don't know how we are changing sexual behaviours, attitudes, values and beliefs by enabling this kind of exposure and not talking with kids about it in any meaningful way," Thompson said.

I suppose it is one the great and cruelist ironic differences in gender in that it is extremely difficult for teenage boys to meet their sexual and emotional needs. Basically no matter what they do, it will never be the right thing.

Some people try to link pornography with abuse or an increase in abuse.

Child Pornography Link To Abuse Of Children Unclear, Forensic Psychiatrist Says
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/10/061027153001.htm

Another arguement that is often used, is that early sexual behaviour causes deliquency. In this it appears that teenagers who are more likely to engage in risky behaviour will engage in early sexual behaviour rather than early sexual behaviour causing deliquency.
Posted by JamesH, Monday, 25 February 2008 2:09:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This argument has being going on for years but there is still no definitive result.

"Rape statistics have never been higher, here’s the numbers; and rapists who have been surveyed all say they enjoy pornography, here’s the stats. Ergo pornography causes rape, there’s heaps of porn around, our society has become more dangerous so it’s all because of the pornography -- obviously.
Quite the neat little package really, or is it?
The truth is rape statistics have gradually increased over the last 30 years, according to the Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC), but that’s not true of everywhere. Surprisingly, in the US, where pornography is not as obsessively controlled as it is here, the rates of sexual assaults have actually decreased, from 2.5 per 1000 population (aged over 12) in 1973 to 0.7 in 2002 (US Department of Justice statistics).
However, regardless of the statistical trends in sexual assault rates, what we do know for sure is that the number of people willing to report rapes to the authorities has increased dramatically in the last 20 years."

While personally not trying to excuse any of these factors, there is actually a stronger correlation (50% of reported cases) between alcohol and rape than there is between pornography and rape.

I suppose if I were the one defending a charge of sexual assault, I'd be blaming everyone else but me too.
Posted by wobbles, Monday, 25 February 2008 2:11:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The wide availability of porn is a factor in the way that males treat females, and the way females see themselves. Females are depicted as totally subservient in much of this pornography. As a result many males think that this is how females should be treated, and females start to think that they should put up with it. The womens lib movement must stand up to this. Women must be liberated from these depictions.

Males need to raise themselves up to the womens level and not bring the women down to their level.

We can all be in the gutter and say, pornography it isn't the statistical cause of rape, or we can rise above it. Lets just hope the nations children aren't addicted to pornography before they understand what is going on.
Posted by Sweetcorn, Monday, 25 February 2008 2:43:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Leigh and others

Ms Norma's article rightly condemns portrayals of women as sub-human and base. To dismiss it as a 'tiresome tirade' is suggest that the explosion of violent porn on the net will have no effect of men's treatment of women. At the very least violent porn desensitises us to other's suffering. I imagine that for white people to have routinely seen blacks as slaves made them think that black people were somehow inferior, and deserved what they were getting, back in the days of slavery in the West. Likewise, just to routinely see women being treated as sub-human tends to create the impression that they somehow deserve to be treated like that. It hardly makes for respect and trust between the sexes.
Posted by Tomess, Monday, 25 February 2008 3:00:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ho-Hum.
'the never ending world-wide war against women.'
Thanks for the laughs.

Sweetcorn.
'Males need to raise themselves up to the womens level and not bring the women down to their level.'
So men are at a lower level than women huh? Maybe the wide availability of feminist soap boxes like this one is a factor in the way females treat males, and the way males see themselves.

Jokes aside, I think I aggree with R0bert the most.

The topic has merit in that porn can become addictive and can exploit men and women. The emphasis on 'can'. But the article I fear is pretty much your standard man hating tripe. There is so much more complexity than the authors depiction of men as brainless emotionless monkeys copying and acting out what they see on the internet.
Posted by Whitty, Monday, 25 February 2008 3:19:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There are plenty of pornographic sites that show women sexually abusing men. Where is the protest against those? Or are we in the familiar territory of double standards, where images of men abusing women must be 'real', while images of women abusing men are classed as 'fantasy'? The truth is that for most of the participants in pictorial pornography of any kind it is a dull casual job, with as much excitement as flipping hamburgers but a somewhat better pay rate.

Or perhaps Caroline Norma could turn her attention to the never-ending flood of 'female pornography' in the shape of romance books, shows and films. This is just as far from reality as male pornography, and just as dismissive of the opposite sex, in the way that it implies sexual activity should be reserved for god-like paragons of the manly virtues. Outrage alert! Let's get this appalling and dangerous nonsense locked away at once!
Posted by Jon J, Monday, 25 February 2008 4:23:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So its another dark age looming, but only for women of course. What does the author actually want?

A ban on pornography?
A ban on men?
A ban ob boys?

Not clear.

But “men” or “boys” are only portrayed negatively in the article.

No wonder the author is doing a Phd in an Australian University. Negative portrayal of men must be the only thing they currently teach.
Posted by HRS, Monday, 25 February 2008 4:56:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There are several things that I could take to task in this article but the thing that really sticks in my craw is that it is appallingly badly-written. Is the author really supposed to be a PhD candidate?

Her first paragraph is a shocker: "We might estimate that more than half of the Australian population now has access to the Internet. Internet usage rates boomed from the year 2000". Who exactly is the "we"?

It may have been better if this 'clever' author had consulted ABS figures which for 2006 show that 63% of dwellings had access to the Internet at the time of the Census (see http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/8146.0.55.001/). Given that the respective figure for 2001 was only 35% of Australian dwellings with access to the Internet, then we might estimate that the internet access figure for early 2008 is closer to 70-80%. Or perhaps even higher.

I also wonder why the year 1995 was plucked out of the air as being a birth year of note. I can assure the author that my two boys - born in 1987 and 1992 respectively - have had the Internet play a significant role in their school, home and social lives, and yet - amazingly - are not "drooling at the mouth" downloaders of porn. Far from it.

Additionally what is meant by “pornography”? Does Caroline Norma include the soft-core erotica which no doubt constitutes the bulk of what these teenage boys and men are looking at? And some teenage girls and women as well? These images may involve naked bodies and even naked bodies coupling but leave the humiliation and degradation of women out of the equation.

And as for the notion that “the coming decades are unchartered territory for women” with the shock-horror scenario of mass porn-consuming countries like Australia becoming “uninhabitable for women and girls”, how is this supposed to happen with increasing number of women being elected to Parliament and being involved in making laws and the majority of men still not even consuming any Internet pornography according to her own figures?

Is this wishful dark-thinking on her part?
Posted by Snappy Tom, Monday, 25 February 2008 6:46:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I have to agree with other posters, who say this article is nothing more than a feminists rant against.

She completly does not mention the fact that there apparently are plenty of websites showing women in sexual acts with women, and using male animals to penetrate every orifice. And yet she states " it is difficult to see it as nothing more than woman hatred"

I suppose she claims that men made women carry out the above mentioned acts.

I would like to see much less porn available but this article is rubbish.
Posted by Banjo, Monday, 25 February 2008 7:04:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The study finding that “high pornography consumption added significantly to the prediction of sexual aggression” is here http://lib.bioinfo.pl/pmid:17441011 Unfortunately this is only the abstract, but I suspect Caroline Norma may not have read the full article either. I haven't been able to find the full text, but a similar article is available here http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/comm/malamuth/pdf/00arsr11.pdf

According to that article, high porn use does correlate with high levels of sexual aggression in a tiny minority (approx %1) of the sample. High porn use is a risk factor in certain high-risk groups. Caroline asks "Will mass porn consuming countries like Australia become uninhabitable for women and girls?" On the basis of the research, probably not.
Posted by Johnj, Monday, 25 February 2008 7:20:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The author's apprehension is justified.One need not have evidence in the form of emprical studies. The problem can be easily assumed by applying common sense. After all pornography is the work of deranged minds. Normal people will observe public decency. Media is in the hands of money minded people whose hoizon does not extend beyond money and self.Upbringing of children in a right social environment is very vital. The errretic behaviour of children is definitly due to the influence of media,it cannot be denied.An immoral society which includes men and women, cannot understand the repurcussions of the antisocial activities.Media has to be controlled by a panel of psycholgists,doctors,public figures and social activists. The primary cause for the mistakes in the media world is the greed for money. Socities should function with values as the pivot and not money.
Posted by Ezhil, Monday, 25 February 2008 9:15:13 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Johnj

“ ... high porn use does correlate with high levels of sexual aggression in a tiny minority (approx %1) of the sample. High porn use is a risk factor in certain high-risk groups ..."

Your information supports a study done in France some years ago. Research found that only those with a tendency, already, to certain activities would actually perform them from looking at porn. Porn in portraying such activities, situated them as OK, however, with contuining portrayal of these, situated these as the "norm". This then become the problem - when those with proclavities towards an action, began to see it as normal - (but perhaps not generally acceptable in the wider society)

Studies have shown that rapist-killers have collections of "slash" material. However, it does not follow that men, who indulge in this type of material, will actually go out and perform it. Rapist-killers can not be "created" from porn, unless they already have a prediliction to do so. (Although, from a completely non-academic point of view, it would suggest that men who indulge in this material have a problem).

It is also a fact that some males (possibly females ) will be "turned on" by completely innocent objects. I recall a very abstract sculpture of a nude woman (no curves), commissioned by, and placed outside a mental health centre. Passing it quite some time later, I noticed it completely taken over with dense foliage - the head only evident. Knowing one of the psychologists, I asked why they had let this beautiful piece of art be disfigured this way. The answer - some of the patients they were trying to help, weren't being helped by the presence of the sculpture ... in fact, made their problems worse.
Posted by Danielle, Monday, 25 February 2008 9:18:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
*Males need to raise themselves up to the womens level and not bring the women down to their level.*

Err Sweetcorn, what level? Should men become more like women and
rip females off for every dollar, like Paul McCarthy's ex and others?

Should they marry some rich female for the money?

Or perhaps they could just become town planners and sleep with
rich female property developers?

Get real Sweetcorn.
Posted by Yabby, Monday, 25 February 2008 9:18:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"What if" writes the author if the word rape slips from common usage?

I believe that there is a much chance of this happening as there is that the will sun stop shinning.

It would appear that the author is following the trend set by the rad feminists in the 60's and 70's.

Spiked magazine has an article on this.
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/printable/300/

The author also asks if the male leaders in the future will be able to perceive women as human beings with feelings. It is a rather strange twist in that Psychologist Toby Green reported that it is women who have difficulty in acknowledging that men are human being who have feelings.
Posted by JamesH, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 8:31:01 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The many criticisms here of the author’s writing style – albeit partly justified – tend to miss the point of what she is saying. To me, her most sobering argument is this one:

‘The coming decades are unchartered territory for women. We don’t know what the “social experiment” of mass pornography consumption by males will mean for us.’

What history has shown is that when patriarchal societies come under stress, rich powerful men treat poor, powerless men as expendable, and they in turn take out their pain and unhappiness on women.

In fact, the coming decades are unchartered territory on many issues – environmental devastation, climate change, the end of oil, the ‘endless’ war on terror, even more nuclear arms escalation and missile defence, the decline of the West and the rise of China and India, to name a few.

The Internet has brought some major positives – particularly in breaking the political and media stranglehold on public debate, and returning it to the people. However, it has also created a mass hyper-masculine outlet for disaffected men, whose numbers are set to increase substantially if the world is unable to successfully navigate the coming decades of change.

This is not scaremongering – it’s common sense. Women have to chart a course through what increasingly looks to be a time of great instability. The escalation in pornography is only one of the many ‘unchartered’ issues we will have to face. Whether it’s through feminism or other social channels, women need a political voice now more than ever.
Posted by SJF, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 10:08:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
common sense should be backed by evidence, of which the author and her supportive posters have produced none.
Posted by bushbasher, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 10:16:56 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
James - excellent article. Glad you're coming round to Germaine Greer!

I agree the author's ideas are simplistic and insulting to blokes. Ideas like: "He has learnt from pornography what women are, and what rights he has in relation to them. It doesn’t matter whether or not a woman is keen, he will go ahead and exercise his “rights” regardless." Are men the puppets of pornography, unable to formulate the most basic morals of their own? They don't have families? Mothers? Fathers? Girlfriends?

And surely in the *vast* majority of porn women aren't "openly crying", they're (pretending to) enjoy it. To find it "difficult to describe [internet porn] as anything but pure woman hatred" is rubbish. I would find it difficult to describe it as anything other naked people in sexual poses designed to turn others on. Isn't it? Did I miss something?

Then again, all those who say "women in porn freely choose to be there" aren't allowing for the complexity of the sex industry. Many women are there freely, others have been steered through a dark course of abuse and manipulation.

I agree with SJF (and the author) that we're yet to discover how widespread access to porn will affect culture. It's pretty self-evident to say that most 13-year-old boys are having a pretty studious gander these days. Praps we will find it's overkill. As I'm sure I've said before on these pages, my husband looks back on his first forays into the pornographic world with affection. It was difficult to aquire, so treasured and hidden. There was an erotic romance to its preciousness that boys these days don't experience.

It's rare to find wise writing on pornography. We don't need sweeping, simplistic pronouncements from either camp. Porn is neither entirely evil nor entirely unproblematic. For every girl who paid their way through law school, there's another who discovered heroin dulled the pain. But it is here to stay. So we need to decide, as a community, how to deal with it.

And the religious nutters also need a voice. So we can all, you know, ignore it.
Posted by Vanilla, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 11:02:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Despite the author's opinion to the contrary, the latest empirical evidence I have seen shows that the increase in the availability of porn - and in particular it's cost to the "consumer" - has created a significant reduction in the incidence of sexual violence.

Also, the percentage of women who regularly access such internet sites has increased significantly, so it's not a one-sided debate.

The purchase of "appliances and accessories" via the internet by women is also booming, now that the face-to-face aspect has been eliminated and the world-wide economics of the industry are staggering.

Any moral aspects are an entirely different matter but I think they are more a symptom than the cause of a possible decline in social morality.

The value of human life has never been cheaper and everything is becoming more and more disposable, including relationships.
Posted by rache, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 2:56:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"James - excellent article. Glad you're coming round to Germaine Greer!"

The Germ did not write that article and besides she's into boys where I am not.

I have been to art exhibitions where people will rave how wonder the art is and I think it is crap. So what in one persons view is fantastic, is in the view of another a load of crap.

What people seem to forget is that porn is exploiting what is natural male desire. It seems that the moment the first camera was invented, what is classified as porn became a business. For many years it was a black market activity.

Vanilla no you are not missing something when you wrote that porn is about poses designed to turn someone on.

A few years ago some feminists came out and claimed that Cassanova hated women. The great seducer who put the womans pleasure above his own and spent large sums of money in order to seduce a woman, was in fact a woman hater.

A few thoughts come to mind in that these women who make these claims are either uncomfortable with heterosexuality in general or perhaps more accurately, uncomfortable male heterosexuality, just maybe they are uncomfortable with their own sexual desires and project this onto men?

Who Knows?
Posted by JamesH, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 3:03:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I resent the implication that my teenage daughter will be so ignorant of the world around her that she'll be vulnerable to a marauding pack of brainless p*rn beasts, one of whom will be her brother. It's one thing to consider the impact of the internet on future gender relations, it's another to speculate that women of the future will all have to move to some non-existent, porn-free island to avoid being ravished by addled males.

Both the article and most of the comments fail to understand the new ways young people are negotiating everything about their relationships in the digital world. I don't claim to understand them either, but I do know that technology is used to facilitate your old fashion teen romance and that a well placed knee is as effective as ever.
Posted by chainsmoker, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 3:23:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
chainsmoker

'your old fashion teen romance and that a well placed knee is as effective as ever.'

Are you saying that we introduce martial arts to the multitudes of kids with sexually transmitted diseases throughout indigenous communities.
Posted by runner, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 3:35:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Some of the posts are overly reactive and emotional by arguing that an attack on violent porn is an attack on all men.

There is no doubt that violent porn, whether it depicts men or women perpetrating violence, is not what would be considered a healthy activity. Increasing reports linking hardcore porn to violent sex crimes cannot be simply ignored. The porn referred to by the author is more than just a quick purchase of a nudie magazine from a news agent, it is full on violence, degradation and exploitation.

It is all very well to talk about freedom of the individual, but what if one of these free individuals obsessed by the image of porn acted out these fantasies in real life. It happens and the prevalence of violent porn correlates with increases in rape and abuse of children and women. Like in all 'free' societies there is often a compromise between the rights of the individual and the rights of the group.

In the Little Children are Sacred Report, porn and exposure to sexually explicit material to children from a young age has contributed to abuse in many Aboriginal communities.

Link to report is here:
http://www.nt.gov.au/dcm/inquirysaac/

Violence in the media (porn or non-porn related) has been proven to be de-sensitising particularly to the young who are still developing biologically and emotionally to find their moral compass and establish a sense of empathy etc. The killing of the young Bulger boy in England was perpetrated by children who had just viewed a very violent film called “Child’s Play”. Reports at the time highlighted the behaviours that were acted out from the movie.

The parents have to take responsibility too but in a society with children more and more at home alone and greater access to information via the Net, it is also society’s problem and it is another serious issue that is ignored because of business interests.

Detractors of violent porn are not anti-men but anti-violence and you have to ask yourself is our society better off with it or without it.
Posted by pelican, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 3:56:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I am with those who read what is a naive and mildly hysterical article full of hyperbole.

I would make these points

1 what people do in private is up to them.

2 everyone can choose to view or avoid viewing pornography.

We have the technology to lock out porn from our computers if we are fearful of it or concerned what our children might watch without over-the-shoulder supervision.

What you see on the internet is no different to what one might see in private, unless the ladies of the internet have been anatomically modified to be different to the ones we meet everyday.

The claim “The estimated 1,000 cases of drink spiking involving sexual assault in Australia in 2003 is a symptom of this training men are currently receiving through pornography.”

I find dubious.

The availability of drugs to overpower women is far more significant and serious than the availability of pornography.

If anything, viewing pornography is more likely to satiate any dark desire or fantasies and thus, reduce the incidence of actual assaults.

“Where do women fit in a society where large numbers of men are looking at pictures of women being brutalised and sexually humiliated”

Women are entitled to choose whether someone who watches “porn” (soft, harder or “getting firmer”) qualifies as acceptable to them.

“Women” fit into that society the same as they have always “fitted” into society since the dawn of time.

Today more than ever before, women have the independence to choose their partner. Those women need only to find the man who suits them. Maybe his proclivity for porn produces some benefits, especially if one prefers things beyond plain vanilla.

As with most posts, I concur with Leighs take on things.

As for derogatory depictions of women, the feminist industry is one which relies almost exclusively on “derogatory depictions of men”, their values and attitudes.

Leave peoples private choices as private choices and if you don’t like it, switch on net-nanny to keep your PC pure.
Posted by Col Rouge, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 4:22:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I'm disturbed by the (apparently) deliberate misreading of this article by those who claim it's an attack on men or wowserish.
Surely the point is that more & more of the porn available on-line IS about woman hatred. It is NOT erotica, it's not about consenting adults getting hot & sweaty. Even if it is acting, the script is the worry, like any bang-bang shoot-em-up.
When the erotica ceases and the abuse begins is not a particularly fine line - even the verbalisations are violent and/or demeaning.
This is NOT an argument for banning - et's all be aware of what's available the better to debate and defend against the baleful effects. Driving anything underground, drugs, alcohol, sex work, abortion only increases the dangers, enriches the criminal element and corrupts our (supposedly) guardian institutions like police, courts and legislature.
Posted by amphibious, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 4:56:23 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pelican

'arguing that an attack on violent porn is an attack on all men.'

Absolute rubbish. I don't see anyone arguing this. The gist of most responses was that the AUTHOR is depicting men as brainless emotionless monkeys copying and acting out what they see on the internet.

'There is no doubt that violent porn, whether it depicts men or women perpetrating violence, is not what would be considered a healthy activity.'

I don't think I can agree with that. Who decides what is a healthy Fantasy? I don't see anyone having a problem with depictions of women dominating men and there is a lot of that fantsay depicted on the internet. I actually think SOAP's on tv depict men as being able to be stolen from one girl by another, or as bad boys who just need the love of a good woman to save them. Both terrible attitudes to men, but they are just fantasy. Women's porn.

Most men can distinguish between fantasy and reality.

I think some women's objection to porn is a deep fear they are being made redundant, and losing their traditional female power over men. They lose sex as a bargaining chip, as their partner can see other women naked and enjoy his own fantasy that doesn't involve her.

Men see porn as a sex aid, just like women see their sex toys. You don't see men wanting to ban women's sex toys.
Posted by Whitty, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 5:19:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I'm with the majority of posters in agreeing that the article is rather poorly written and somewhat hysterical.

Has she actually every done a search herself? If she had she would have found that not only is there stuff available that would appeal to men, but also to women of all proclivities. And just between you and me, if I was a male and took this stuff seriously I’d be deeply worried about the mediocre size of my penis. Not only the women look and behave unrealistically. Or have I missed out on something over the years?

I'm disturbed by the notion that men, or boys, can be depicted as unthinking, uncontrollable beings easily influenced and naturally drawn to evil. As a feminist I find that kind of thinking suggesting there is an excuse for a man behaving violently. Do men need protecting from themselves? A reverse of the ‘she can't help it she's just a hysterical little woman' of days gone by.

The world is not more violent now towards women than in the past. That’s a silly romantic notion. The world has become smaller, we are now confronted with all news from every part of the world, and more aware of what used to happen behind closed doors.

There is tons of forgettable and often deeply offensive material on the internet. Porn is not the only subject. Parents should see this as an opportunity to communicate with their children. Your children get to know you and your values, you get to know your children.
Posted by yvonne, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 5:50:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I knew I would cop flak over that one but so be it.

Read back through the posts Whitty you will see some that do argue that this is an attack on men.

Whitty your comment, to quote: "I think some women's objection to porn is a deep fear they are being made redundant, and losing their traditional female power over men. They lose sex as a bargaining chip, as their partner can see other women naked and enjoy his own fantasy that doesn't involve her."

All I can say about this is whatever has happened in your life to make you believe this you have only my sympathy and I mean that sincerely.

The article is talking about violent porn and I stand by my earlier comments.
Posted by pelican, Tuesday, 26 February 2008 6:51:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yvonne,

You speak much sense.

Pelican,

The distinction is that you are saying that to believe the Author is attacking men equates to believing an attack on violent porn is an attack on men. I don't agree. You can attack violent porn without attempting to portray men, as Yvonne puts it, as 'unthinking, uncontrollable beings easily influenced and naturally drawn to evil.'

amphibious,

'more & more of the porn available on-line IS about woman hatred.'
Where is the evidence for this? The author's opinion? Leaving aside the simplistic assumption that certain fantasies boil down to women hatred, I read an article recently that said statistically the booming area of porn is Amatuer porn. I can understand this. I think it's because it's more fun to see the women really enjoying themselves (and having real boobs and not looking so orange) than the fake american-accented oooh, ooooh. The bad acting is a turn off.

I think the author is somewhat hysterical, and attempting to portray a fringe activity as a mainstream one. You can say that we are '(apparently) deliberate misreading this article ', but I think it's pretty clear the author has tried to portray most porn as violent or 'pure woman hatred'.
Posted by Whitty, Wednesday, 27 February 2008 9:10:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The author uses 'suppositions'
are likely to have,
they might have been,
they could have seen,
What if?

How does the author know that boys/young men who access internet porn have looked at what she portrays as violent porn? The answer is she doesn't.

Does she know what their responses were to exposure of violent porn? I would suspect that perhaps the vast of young men who view internet porn would be revolted by graphic portrayals of violence and would turn away from those images.

then she switches to "this is what men will do to women." Sexual Behaviours that are classified as perverse have been around perhaps since the day of Adam and Eve. Psychiatry has volumes of books on this very subject.
Posted by JamesH, Wednesday, 27 February 2008 10:38:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
All those still interested in this topic should take a listen to what was an extremely timely and very relevant interview from last night's Hack program on Triple J with Professor Alan McKee about Australia's porn habits... and the correlation between porn and certain other activities:
http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/hack/notes/s2173707.htm

5 million Australians watch porn, eh?
Posted by Chade, Wednesday, 27 February 2008 11:12:01 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Chade, unfortunately the link to the interview is broken.
The link you provided did give enough info to find other material though.

Some provisional findings from the study are at http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/perspective/stories/s858008.htm

An extract from that "There's no sexual violence against women in mainstream Australian porn videos - which is unsurprising because that's a legal requirement. What's more surprising is the women in these videos aren't objects in any sense we can pick up. We've measured how much the different genders talk, how often they're in control of situations, and how much attention is paid to their pleasure. On every count it seems that porn videos place women in the driving seat. "

Some library info on the report http://nla.gov.au/anbd.bib-an42395490

A Daily Telegraph write up on the book with some quotes http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23278782-5001021,00.html

"Curiously, the new female porn consumer is more likely than her male counterpart to want to see idealised body types featured in pornography.

There's strong evidence that for a lot of male consumers it's looking at 'real' looking women that turns them on," Lumby says.

Interestingly, more women preferred 'fantasy porn', which is the glossy, Penthouse style porn, in which women are more likely to have fake breasts and toned bodies and the men are more likely to be the handsome hunk.

However, women who consume pornography share a strong aversion to pornography showing violence, abuse or rape.

It's definitely fair to say from our survey and when we looked at all the other literature that there's a strong movement against violence or sexual violence, Lumby says. "

Some mention of the opposing point of view at http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2004/s1178524.htm
from Clive Hamilton from the Australia Institute

Some general discussion on research at http://libertus.net/censor/studies2.html - the site appears to be an advocacy site for reduction is censorship but the material looks worthy of consideration.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Wednesday, 27 February 2008 6:16:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Rambo is due for another installment of gratuitous appreciation for human life.

Horrible to think that lm gonna have to walk the streets contemplating everyone elses cheap view of my life.

Oh, the horror of possibile perception.

Quick, ban the internet, ban media and put everyone on lie detector machines, just in case the sky is falling.

Chicken wittle wost its head.
Posted by trade215, Wednesday, 27 February 2008 6:19:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Whitty

I re-read the article again to make sure I had not missed anything. The studies quoted at the beginning of the article refer to young men and boys. I don’t get the impression tht the author is arguing that all grown men and all young boys are weak uncontrolled beings and I am certainly not arguing that.

But we cannot deny that our experiences shape the people we become and there are many factors at play eg. the values taught by family, positive and negative experiences with the opposite sex, teachers and peers. Violent porn would not seem to be a positive experience to add to this mix and it adds to the desensitising argument in my last post in relation to the development of young people. The fact is violent crime (sexual and non-sexual) has increased as studies have shown.

In the bigger picture what does it say about a society that approves of this depiction of (mainly) women? Some men are able to compartmentalize women such as described in Anne Summer’s book “Damned Whores and God’s Police". Prostitutes are targetted by some men because of this compartmentalising phenomenon ie. good women vs bad women (in their mind).

Over the last few years we have seen in the media – TV, advertising, music videos etc – an increase in the sexualisation of children. There was a great show presenting all sides of this argument on ABCs ‘Difference of Opinion’ in 2007. The reason I raise this issue is that society is failing its children for the sake of the dollar and increased access to violent porn is another aspect of this failure
Posted by pelican, Wednesday, 27 February 2008 9:57:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
JamesH

‘A few years ago some feminists came out and claimed that Cassanova hated women. The great seducer who put the womans pleasure above his own and spent large sums of money in order to seduce a woman, was in fact a woman hater.’

This kind of seduction is an act of power, not pleasure - and certainly not love. Cassanova was an infantile narcissist, who used women in much the same way that George Bush invades countries. In the eighteenth century, the worst thing that could befall a woman was disgrace – so he would also have ruined many lives.

Because patriarchal societies place a high value on polygyny, its underlying pathology has been actively ignored until recent times. If Cassanova lived today, he’d be seen for what he was – a sad sex addict. But I doubt if he’d have the sense to get treatment.

Whitty

“I think some women's objection to porn is a deep fear they are being made redundant, and losing their traditional female power over men. They lose sex as a bargaining chip, as their partner can see other women naked and enjoy his own fantasy that doesn't involve her.’

Try flipping your comment around thusly:

“I think some men's defence of porn is a deep fear they are being made redundant, and losing their traditional male power over women. They lose infidelity as a bargaining chip, as their partner can see other opportunities in life and enjoy a sense of self worth that doesn’t depend on his approval.’

pelican

I admire your attempts to bring attention to what porn says about us as a society. To me, it’s not only about how porn affects society, but how society affects porn.

Another issue that most porn discussions overlook is why so many people don’t use it or need it. They can’t all be prudes.
Posted by SJF, Thursday, 28 February 2008 8:30:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
SJF,

'I think some men's defence of porn is a deep fear they are being made redundant, and losing their traditional male power over women...’

I like your style, but I don't think it really matches. Or make sense now that I read it again. How would an absense of porn make men feel redundant? Highlighting a male power in the pre-feminist era (nowdays women more often than men instigate divorce as they have less to lose) doesn't lessen the still existing female power. Women still get last say whether sex takes place. Men ask for, and women give or withhold sex. It's ridiculous to think of men in the position of power. That's why rape is so abhorent. It's an abuse of male physical power and an attack on women's sexual power. An abuse of female power is more acceptable. In fact increasingly in society traditionally female traits are more acceptable than male ones.

Anyway I still think if men are adult enough to deal with women using sex toys, women should be adult enough to deal with men viewing porn. A lot of women enjoy massive phalluses and super fast vibrating objects, and then moan about their feelings of inadequacy caused by the images men use to get off. I find this pretty hypocritical.

'Another issue that most porn discussions overlook is why so many people don’t use it or need it. They can’t all be prudes.'
That's a very interesting point.

' patriarchal societies place a high value on polygyny'
I think patriachal societies would place a high value on monogamy. That way the alpha males don't all have 10 wives, leaving the majority of the males with no partner.

pelican,

' there are many factors at play eg. the values taught by family, positive and negative experiences with the opposite sex, teachers and peers'
That's the point. The author feels violent porn is the most influential factor. So much so that the world becomes 'uninhabitable for women and girls' and men wont be able to percieve women as human beings with feelings.
Posted by Whitty, Thursday, 28 February 2008 10:06:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What a disgustingly biased article. Only yesterday I read in the Sydney morning herald that more and more women are onto the internet.

This is the kind of feminism that absolutely sickens me to the core. Every pornographic image you see has a willing woman participant who, gasp IS ENJOYING THEIR JOB.

Author is a misandrist. I would love to do a parody article, but it's probably a waste of time.
Posted by Steel, Thursday, 28 February 2008 4:03:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
if anyone at all wrote in support of this article, you seriously need your head checked. this is a disgrace
Posted by Steel, Thursday, 28 February 2008 4:04:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Steel: "Every pornographic image you see has a willing woman participant who, gasp IS ENJOYING THEIR JOB."

Actually Steel, while I agree with you that this is a poor article, and while I know a lot of women in porn enjoy their jobs, not all do. Some of them hate their jobs, and some are indifferent. Kind of like every other type of job. Except often with more drugs.

While we're on the topic, a lot of people seem to think that porn actors (as in people in porn who aren't porn "stars") earn heaps of money too. Actually not. Like anything else, if you're popular, if you really are a porn star, then sure, but there's a lot of women and men earning an average-ish wage. And if you've got a drug habit to support, it may not go far.

I am pro-porn and not a fan of this article (see my post above), but cliched rhetoric about how everyone in porn is "empowered" and "doing *exactly* what they want to be doing" just isn't true, and, in failing to allow for the complexity of the industry, doesn't help pro-porn cause.
Posted by Vanilla, Thursday, 28 February 2008 7:13:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Whitty

‘”patriarchal societies place a high value on polygyny”
I think patriachal societies would place a high value on monogamy. That way the alpha males don't all have 10 wives, leaving the majority of the males with no partner.’

I said ‘polygyny’ not ‘polygamy’. ‘Polygyny’ is the pseudo-biological hokus pokus that men are wired to be more sexually active than women. This is despite the fact that, heterosexually speaking, mathematics alone renders this impossible. After all, it’s women that men have to have sex WITH.

‘How would an absense of porn make men feel redundant?’

I didn’t say that. I said ‘some men's defence of porn is [due to] a deep fear they are being made redundant’. Polygyny assumes that it’s in men’s biological nature to ‘stray’ – a social construct that keeps women in a state of permanent insecurity lest they lose their desirability. This is what I meant by men’s ‘infidelity’ being used as a bargaining chip in maintaining power over women. As women become less dependent on male financial support, pornography offers men a way of maintaining their sense of polygynous entitlement. (Of course I’m speaking in broad generalisations here.)

‘Women still get last say whether sex takes place. Men ask for, and women give or withhold sex.’

The ability to give or refuse sex is a right, not a power. Don't confuse the two.
Posted by SJF, Thursday, 28 February 2008 11:13:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sorry to be pedantic, but strictly speaking 'polygyny' in humans is a variant of 'polygamy', whereby men have several wives. It's quite common throughout the tribal world, and in a couple of the United States of America. It does not refer to masculine tendencies to promiscuity, except perhaps in ethology.

Interestingly, there are (or were) cultures in which polyandry exists, whereby several men (typically brothers) might share a wife. Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that in those cultures women had a higher status - as I understand it, it was more about retaining patrilineal title to land.

No, I don't think the "digital age" is inherently a "dark" one for women.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Thursday, 28 February 2008 11:41:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ms Norma doesn't seem to realise it, but the evidence she quotes undermines the point she is trying to make.

Yes, the internet has seen a huge increase in the availability of porn. And its done an end run around our censorship laws so lesbians, bestiality, violence, scat - its all there. The age controls have disappeared too. Whereas before young Johny had to reply on sneaking a peek at dad's stash, now he could tell dad a thing or two about where to find the best porn.

So, now males of all ages looking at far more porn. And they have been doing so for at least 5 years now. If porn had the effect Ms Norma is worried about, we should of seen a corresponding sharp jump in violence against women. It didn't happen. In fact others here quote figures showing the reverse has happened in the US.

I am sure Ms Norma finds the idea of men looking at and enjoying porn unpleasant. But if it has no concrete effects, what Ms Norma wants amounts to policing mens thoughts because she doesn't like them.

Well I don't particularly like these thoughts of yours Ms Norma. Does that means I can get them policed as well?
Posted by rstuart, Friday, 29 February 2008 9:26:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Interesting article in The Age today:

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2008/02/28/1203788544143.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap2

An excerpt:

Many of the mainstream porn films watched here are made in America. The US porn industry is worth $12 billion. In California, it employs 12,000 people. Incredibly, most heterosexual porn performers there do not wear condoms. Maguire quotes Luke Ford, a journalist and former porn actor who told US Sixty Minutes: "Most girls who enter this industry do one video and quit. The experience is so painful, horrifying, embarrassing, humiliating for them that they never do it again."

The Porn Report authors deplore extreme "Fear Factor"-style porn films and criticise harmful work practices. But in general their tone is a little too accepting, with a tendency to over-emphasise positive developments. After studying 50 of Australia's top-selling porn films for 2003 (which included such classics as Paul Norman's Nastiest Multiples), the authors conclude "pornography pays more attention to women's pleasure than some people think".

In terms of the power balance in films, they say, "overall, it's about half and half". Women got more time talking to camera, for example, and initiated more sex. But men had orgasms in 80% of sex scenes; women in just 16%. And while women performed oral sex on men for more than 15 hours of screen time, they received it for less than five hours.
Posted by Vanilla, Sunday, 2 March 2008 12:27:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
People qualified to state whether pornography has led to greater violence or hatred of, or different attitudes towards women, are those in the sex industry. Perhaps research with sex workers should be undertaken to determine whether their clientele is changing its expections. This would be a more telling barometer of the influence of violent porn.

I don't believe that people can be taught from pornography the desire, or need, to inflict pain and humiliation on others. Such people must have a prediliction for this already.
Pictures of attrocities don't inspire others to commit them ... unless ...

Some adults and youngsters enjoy playing extremely violent and inter-active video games. Does this make them homocidal?

Pornography does not necessarily apply to male/females relations - homosexuals also have their own pornography. I have no doubt that the examples provided by Caroline Norma also occur male-on-male in the prison system; and the perpetrators would be
heterosexual. Such examples are appalling in any situation.

A teenage girl told me that her boyfriend smothers his penis with icecream and gets his dog to lick it off. Is this pornography? A criminal-case in Q'land cited a man, whilst wearing waders and standing on a milking stool, for knowing his cow (in the biblical sense). Was there a stampede of men off to buy waders and milking stools?

Personally, I have no interest in porn. The human sex act must be the most ludicrous of all human actions to observe. Obviously some people enjoy porn, or use it to spice up their relationship with their partner. Some are so lonely that they will kiss a face on their TV screen, or use blow-up dolls. I know a woman whose favourite fantasy was being pack-raped; until she was actually raped - thirty years later she still talks with horror about it.

cont ...
Posted by Danielle, Sunday, 2 March 2008 7:14:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Teenage boys are naturally curious about the opposite sex. Many would not like to ask their parents about "erogenous zones, stimulation, etc"- and, if they did, would they get a proper answer - other than being told "the standard": ‘things happen naturally - and sex between two people who love each other, is very beautiful.’ The only information I gave to one of my sons, who was "pedal-to-the-metal", that if he made love that way, he wouldn't keep a lover long.

School-yard information is/was notoriously wrong. Many adults don't even like to contemplate their parents having sex ... How many here would be comfortable talking personally about "orgasms" with their parents; or their adult children. Nowdays boys go to porn sites to find out. Many sites are obviously vile, but I doubt the average boy would take this on board - unless he is already predisposed to it. My sons, now adult, tell me that after a while porn became boring, or it was "off", and they wouldn't revisit this site. I don't know if they look at porn now - it is not my business; importantly, their partners are happy.

I have heard people state that sex-manuals written by sex-therapists were pornography.

I am not advocating porn, nor do I condemn it. I am not knowledgeable about this area, but surely it is an individual matter.

... I must admit, however, that the vision of the man and his cow ... but, only if she was a consenting partner ...

[For those who would immediately condemn me, this does not "turn me on" ...!]

Incidentally, my husband and I both do life-drawing; some people equate this with pornography. It is not.
Posted by Danielle, Sunday, 2 March 2008 7:18:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
You may not think yourself knowledgeable, Danielle, but you are certainly wise.

It's the zealous advocates - either for or against - that I find unhelpful to the debate. Those who think porn is entirely damaging to males and exploitative of females, and those who think women's participation in and men's consumption of porn is completely issue-free - both sides have it wrong. It needs a supple, subtle mind to unpack such complex issues.

I like porn while I'm watching it but then often feel yucky when it's over. Apparently that's common. I'm much happier now I've discovered "amateur" stuff - watching (sexy) people in real relationships. The stuff I've seen is clearly not exploitative of the female. Having said that, I rarely go trawling. My husband's interest is more enthusiastic!
Posted by Vanilla, Sunday, 2 March 2008 8:02:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Good sense from Danielle and Vanilla. However...

Danielle: "A teenage girl told me that her boyfriend smothers his penis with icecream and gets his dog to lick it off."

I'm sorry, but I find that about the funniest thing I've read in ages :D Surely it's not true? If so...

ICE CREAM MUST BE BANNED!

And we won't even think about what flavour the ice cream is - eh, Vanilla ;)
Posted by CJ Morgan, Sunday, 2 March 2008 9:44:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Vanilla wrote:I like porn while I'm watching it but then often feel yucky when it's over.

Ever wonder why that is so? Or is your enquiring mind completely satisfied by the answer: "Apparently that's common" ?
Posted by apis, Sunday, 2 March 2008 11:37:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Vanilla nothing is issue free. People who work in the industry CHOOSE to. NO ONE IS PUTTING A GUN TO THEIR HEAD. PERIOD.
Posted by Steel, Monday, 3 March 2008 2:31:19 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
CJ

‘Sorry to be pedantic, but strictly speaking 'polygyny' in humans is a variant of 'polygamy', whereby men have several wives.’

Sorry to be even more pedantic, but the variant is important. ‘Polygyny’ comes from two Greek roots: poly = many; and gynos = woman. ‘Polygamy’ comes from: poly = many; and gamos = marriage.

Most patriarchal societies are both monogamous and polygynous – that is, men are expected to marry one woman, but overall social mores maintain that men will want sex from many women both before and during marriage. This belief is upheld via various cultural, social, scientific and political means - particularly in the ongoing masculine domination of the worldwide pornography market. Even though mathematically the premise is completely unsound, the myth of polygyny allows men more choice, more mobility and consequently more power.

Conversely, patriarchal societies maintain the belief that women – whether married or not – are happier to practise one devotion to one man, sexual and otherwise. Although this double standard is changing in most Western societies, it stays alive in the culture through various morality fables like the 40-something woman who is successful and independent but full of regrets about her marriageless/childless existence, and ‘Sex and the City’ scenarios about lonely female sophisticates who can get all the sex they want but can’t get a man to commit.
Posted by SJF, Monday, 3 March 2008 9:34:31 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
While SJF's etymology is impeccable, I think that s/he is redefining the anthropological term 'polygyny' from its conventional sense to a broader term that conforms with the feminist agenda s/he is pushing in their analysis of pornography. While this may be convenient for their argument, it is misleading to equate polygyny with generalised male tendencies to promiscuity.

My references for insisting on the stricter definition of 'polygyny' include C. Levi-Strauss (1969) 'The Elementary Structures of Kinship' and R. Keesing and A. Strathern (1998) 'Cultural Anthropology: a Contemporary Perspective', among many others is my library. I would be interested to know from what authority SJF's redefinition of this orthodox anthropological term is derived.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Monday, 3 March 2008 10:01:58 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Steel. Never suggested they had a gun to the head. I simply disagree that all women who work in porn enjoy their jobs, as you claimed. Many do, not all. And while I agree that nothing is issue free, I think it's in teasing out those issues that we turn up the interesting stuff.

Apis. Yep. I've thought about it a lot. I never intended my last post to serve as my definitive conclusion on the subject. However I get the feeling that you're not that convinced by my "inquiring mind", so I won't bore you with further thoughts.

CJ and SJF, to quote the most definitive source of all, Led Zeppelin, "you know sometimes words have two meanings." Either way, I entirely agree with your analysis SJF, and the original point you made to Whitty. Really made me think.
Posted by Vanilla, Monday, 3 March 2008 12:52:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
it is not mathematically unsound to claim that men will want more sex than women, only that men will have more (heterosexual) sex than women. i don't believe men have a greater desire for sex, but it's not a question of the mathematics.

not quite sure what any of this has to do with the original silly article.
Posted by bushbasher, Monday, 3 March 2008 1:08:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Vanilla "I simply disagree that all women who work in porn enjoy their jobs, as you claimed."

And I never claimed they all enjoyed it. there are exceptions to every job. Your comment that some don't enjoy it, is simply superfluous and mundane. People don't enjoy there jobs in any profession, but they *always have a choice to leave if they don't like it*
Posted by Steel, Monday, 3 March 2008 4:32:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ah. I see. When you said "Every pornographic image you see has a willing woman participant who, gasp IS ENJOYING THEIR JOB," I thought you meant that every pornographic image you see has a willing woman participant who is enjoying their job. My bad.
Posted by Vanilla, Monday, 3 March 2008 8:13:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Vanilla,

Thank you for your comment.

CJ,

Regarding the "icecream, a penis, and a dog" I trust I haven't inadvertently contributed to a new trend ... - the girl asked for my opinion. I completely "opted out" with: "discuss this with your boyfriend" - obviously the dog also had a stake in the situation. Managing a ménage à trois can be so difficult :-{ Wouldn't icecream cause shrinkage, but then doggy ... Perhaps a curtain needs to be drawn discreetly over this ... I still don't know if this would be classified as pornographic.

Steel,

You have made some sound comments. However, many young women in the sex industry have been sexually abused at home. Because they are so damaged, so young, and without an education, they fall into this type of situation; and without help they cannot climb out. I’m sure many would prefer some other “profession”. The risks are great. I agree, some women willingly enter prostitution. I recall a man, consoling himself about his daughter's school fees, observed: "at least a private education produces 'high class hookers.’”

As to Caroline Norma’s examples: how many women would consent to this? I suggest that a male who tried it, wouldn’t have any partners - it would get around the grape-vine very quickly. If a woman did enjoy it, this then is, sadly, a pathology between both of them; and a private issue between consenting adults. Nothing more needs to be said.

Some of the writers here makes sex sound so grim. Admittedly, sexual activity comes with responsibilities. However, what happened to the joy and fun of sex - lust is great, especially if spontaneous, indulged in appropriate places - not in a lift between floors, nor in the front seat of a car (a man’s foot can get stuck in a glove-box).

I am in my seventh decade, and if I could rouse some slight blood presssure in the opposite sex, I would consider it a plus.
Posted by Danielle, Monday, 3 March 2008 11:39:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Posted by Vanilla, Sunday, 2 March 2008 8:02:37 PM

I agree with all of that. And it is ridiculous as you say to think that ALL of any occupation enjoy their job.

I am a big fan of Amatuer too. It's much more erotic to see people really enjoying themselves, rather than trying out every hole and position one after the other and fakely going oooh oooh. That's why Amatuer porn is the fastest growing genre. Kinda puts a hole in the author's assertion that the web is full of violent porn and that most men are naturally being drawn to and corrupted by it.

Also, Abby Winters rules man!

'women performed oral sex on men for more than 15 hours of screen time, they received it for less than five hours.'

I think this also has a little to do with the more graphic nature of men's climax and greater ease of graphically showing fellatio. Except for those talented photographers and filmographers at AW of course.

SJF,

'pornography offers men a way of maintaining their sense of polygynous entitlement.' What rot! :-) You seem to me to be strengthening my point about women fearing being made redundant if you can equate watching porn to infidelity. I'm sure you wouldn't equate using a vibe to infidelity. Actually I'm sure if men could satisfactorily replicate female genetalia we would be accused of reducing women to a just a vagina.

'The ability to give or refuse sex is a right, not a power. Don't confuse the two.'

A man gets ready for a night on the town. He wonders to himself if he may get lucky.

A woman gets ready for a night on the town......

She knows.

I think we can all take something from that.
Posted by Whitty, Tuesday, 4 March 2008 10:58:55 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Vanilla, it should be obvious that it was a general statement. Do you know what conversation would be like if you had to qualify every statement by saying "but there are these exceptions...." . It would be stupid and that's why no one does it unless it's relevant.

Now, the reason why I made such an absolute statement is that it's statistically insignificant. Employees are not slaves in any profession. They are free to do what they want. So if they have a problem, it's their own fault for their choices and decisions. So such discussion in the context of the article is absurd.

> 'women performed oral sex on men for more than 15 hours of screen time, they received it for less than five hours.'

> I think this also has a little to do with the more graphic nature of men's climax and greater ease of graphically showing fellatio. Except for those talented photographers and filmographers at AW of course.

No, it's simply because WOMEN DO NOT PAY OR CREATE A DEMAND for pornography.

They blame men for wanting a product that they like, when they should know full well with a little applied intelligence that women do not support the industry nor put their money where their mouths are.
Posted by Steel, Tuesday, 4 March 2008 4:59:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Apart from the digital-age and resulting increase of porn, do any think that the market itself for porn is increasing because of the risks sex brings, such as AIDs, Heps., etc.

The rise in porn, apart from the obvious pleasure it brings to many - as I have stated before, I don't see how - possibly has many factors.

Those (either male or female), who would not, otherwise, have access to a willing partner in some proclivity, now have their own fantasies to access.

I have never met a woman-hating man, but I have known men who have come out of very
bad relationships, who either by inclination or financial reasons, or both, are not willing to
risk another.

Perhaps some men see porn as more acceptable, even more personal, than visiting brothels.

Whilst women also have scars from bad relationships, many more seem either willing or "needy" enough to risk another. Perhaps some believe that their "knight" will be out there. Also, there is the biological clock. I hope this doesn't result in a deluge of comments about women being "needy" - but some are; and even with the more modern attitudes of women approaching men, some women find this daunting.

A reading of the "wanted adds" would "indicate" that often more women, particularly of a "certain" age, than men, are looking for partners. Interestingly, there appears more women of 50+ plus are seeking men. This would seem to suggest that women raised in this generation regard a man in their life as a needs to completion. This "neediness" is not
a reflection upon women in general, but reflects the mores in which they were raised.

I think there are a lot of lonely people - often caused by relationship breakdowns, and the
obvious scars that come with them - some very deep - to whom porn provides an outlet.

Rather than the digital age becoming a dark age for women, perhaps it is meeting certain needs created by the changing society in which we live.
Posted by Danielle, Tuesday, 4 March 2008 5:29:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
CJ

‘I would be interested to know from what authority SJF's redefinition of this orthodox anthropological term [polygyny] is derived.’

I don’t know if you’d call it an ‘authority’, but one book I’d highly recommend – that uses the term ‘polygyny’ in the same sense that I do – is ‘The Cassanova Complex’ by Peter Trachtenberg.

Trachtenberg writes, not as a cultural anthropologist, but as a recovering sex addict. He believes that male sex addiction is a widespread social problem that goes largely unacknowledged because of the misplaced glamour that surrounds it. He argues that traditional polygynous practices – such as having more than one wife, having one wife plus several mistresses (virtually mandatory among successful, powerful men), expectations for boys to sow their wild oats, the glamorising of the serial seducer (Cassanova, James Bond etc), businessmen going to brothels and strip clubs, the male dominance of the porn market, girlie posters strewn around male workplaces etc – make it difficult for men to develop mature relationships with women, particularly if they have had difficult childhoods. This in turn creates the psychological climate for many men to develop an addiction to sex to fill the emotional void this leaves.

In talking of his own recovery from sex addiction, Trachtenberg writes:

‘It is hard to convey the wonder of such a discovery, as though after spending years in a dark warehouse filled with mannequins one were finally to walk onto a sunlit street populated with real human beings.’

Vanilla,

Thanks for the encouraging words. The feeling is mutual.

Danielle,

‘Rather than the digital age becoming a dark age for women, perhaps it is meeting certain needs created by the changing society in which we live.’

Sobering but true.

Whitty,

I think you badly need to read ‘The Cassanova Complex’!
Posted by SJF, Wednesday, 5 March 2008 8:32:58 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
SJF - thanks for that clarification. It sounds like an interesting book, but without having read it I don't think that conflating the technical anthropological term 'polygyny' with more generalised male promiscuity is very useful. Societies where men achieve higher status through formally marrying more than one wife are, as you suggest, closely correlated with patriarchal structures.

However, to confuse this with the widespread tendency of men to have multiple sexual partners illegitimately, tends in my view to confuse the analysis of power relations between men and women. It is not a trivial distinction between polygynous societies, where it is both legitimate and desirable for men to acquire several wives simultaneously, and formally monogamous societies such as ours where there are legal sanctions against people being married to more than one person at a time, regardless of illicit sexual relations that may be more or less tolerated under various cultural and historical circumstances.

Also, I've always been suspicious of the recent invention of the 'sex addict', whereby people's responsibility for their own sexual behaviour is pathologised, thus rendering them apparently less culpable for the consequences of their acts.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Wednesday, 5 March 2008 9:29:07 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
SJF,

'I think you badly need to read ‘The Cassanova Complex’!'
How so? Have you decided I am a sex addict? Or just patronising me?

'... make it difficult for men to develop mature relationships with women'

Oh yes. I'm sure this book would be right up your alley. Anything that reinforces the myth of women's emotional and social superiority over men. The REAL problem is that all these types of books are framed by the currently prevailing female-oriented view of emotional maturity and relationships. i.e. Those nasty men just not behaving how little princess wants them too. Women naturally demand (and usually command) the emotional centre-stage. They are trained from birth by their female role models and by the complicity of the male role models to feel free in expressing their emotions at any time. They then learn to expect that their emotions should be responded to.Over time this can translate to an inability on the part of women to recognise that men have emotional needs of any validity at all.

The feminine discourse is usually ignorant of basic male realities, the males are seen as wrong and perverse to brush aside the advice of women to be more like them. Every man just needs a good woman to 'soften' him or 'mould' him into being a 'responsible' person. Basically I think any trait more predominant in men has been demonised as being a social problem. Any trait more predominate in women is considered the ideal.

If women were the major viewers of porn there would be no problem. It would be 'liberating'. And men would be advised to get some counselling to deal with women's needs and rights to view porn.

Sex addiction was created as an excuse for guys who choose not to be manogamous.
Posted by Whitty, Wednesday, 5 March 2008 1:14:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Whitty

'The feminine discourse is usually ignorant of basic male realities, the males are seen as wrong and perverse to brush aside the advice of women to be more like them. Every man just needs a good woman to 'soften' him or 'mould' him into being a 'responsible' person.'

That sounds like something straight out of Anne Summers' 'Damned Whores and God's Police'. You old latent feminist, you!

CJ

Fair enough. Let's agree to disagree. My ironing's starting to pile up. I'm outa here.
Posted by SJF, Wednesday, 5 March 2008 4:27:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The writer Caroline should be congratulated. She is absolutely correct.

A parallel problem also arises with the internet, especially via these public forums - as good as they may otherwise be.

This debating medium is a stridently male domain. Although many of the posts use anonymous names like bushwacker and gecko it's not hard to tell the gender of the writer. Amongst those who do use real names, the vast majority of writers are male.

If this sort of iternet medium is, in part, deriving and developing the shared values of society, then there is something missing.

A high proportion of debates on the internet are imbued with intolerance, aggression and simple lack of maturity and respect for democratic values. This may be a learning experience for young disempowered computer nerds, so maybe it will help develop a better sense of democracy in the long run, who knows?

But I wonder if the Internet is imbedding and deepening a disenfranchisement of women from the body politic.

(Gecko is a bloke, by the way.)
Posted by gecko, Thursday, 6 March 2008 6:40:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
gecko,

One could agree with what you say. I use my own name, and one particular OLO male writer, who always sounds moderate and reasonable to others, goes into an hysterical lather when he responds to something I have written.

However, for the most part I find writers of both sexes responsible. Some become heated, sure. But this is the nature of debate. Also the adversarial system, however much we dislike it, is imbedded in the law courts and parliament.

You state:

“But I wonder if the Internet is imbedding and deepening a disenfranchisement of women from the body politic.”

I believe contrary - that the Internet, especialy public forums, is providing women with the means to have a say when they, otherwise, would not be able to open their mouths, before some male spoke “over them”. Posts indicate that women are articulate with as much, sometimes more, to contribute than men.

However, I think that the tenre of Caroline Norma’s article was bound to produce the reactions it did.

Norma presents a very compelling argument about the digital age and porn; but, a close reading of the article poses many questions ... and she didn’t cite sources correctly to be verified, also to look at the surveys submitted.

“The 2007 medical journal finding that “high pornography consumption added significantly to the prediction of sexual aggression” makes sense when you see the pornography of the Internet.”

I would suggest that this would occur only in those in those already with a predisposition towards sexual violence.

“The Australian Institute in 2003 reported that two in five boys in Australia had sought out pornography on the Internet. Just under three quarters had seen an x-rated video. A survey taken in the US in 2005 found that 38 per cent of 16 to 17-year-old boys had sought out pornography on the Internet.”

cont ...
Posted by Danielle, Thursday, 6 March 2008 5:28:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Knowing the natural curiousity of healthy young men, it surprises me that the % isn’t higher.

Unless you see the questions of the survey, statistics do not prove anything. How many returned again to the porn site? Did these youths become addicted to the porn sites? What sort of porn were they seeking? Did this survey base its findings on the numbers of times porn sites were accessed, or the numbers of males accessing them? Also, did a single group of 3 or 4 lads, as a lark, access one porn site. There are so many variables in any survey taken. How large was the survey; how many actually responded, how many responded frankly, did it use a system of cohorts?

The “correct” questions on a survey could provide evidence that 90% of elderly men in aged care, and indeed not computer literate, were indulging in internet porn.

I have never sought a porn site. However, an ordinary site, for example on embroidery, has thrown up a porn site ... I presume a title “Hot Hooters” does not refer to car horns. I have certainly never gone into such sites. But undoubtedly, a history of sites that I have “accessed” would indicate that I am a “porn-a-holic”

“The estimated 1,000 cases of drink spiking involving sexual assault in Australia in 2003 is a symptom of this training men are currently receiving through pornography.”

Does this mean that there are 1,000 men spiking women’s drinks, or 20 pathetic creatures seeking to “get lucky”.

Spanish Fly (cantharides) since time immemorial has been used as a means of seduction; also as an abortificient. It can also be fatal. Its use is well-known in animal husbandry. My great-grandmother’s generation were warned against accepting drinks from men in case Spanish Fly had been added ... apparently, Madeira also had sexual connotations, but I suspect this was more in the intentions of the male, than in the drink itself.

Wikipedia could provide a potted history of Spanish Fly, a notorious aphrodisiac
Posted by Danielle, Thursday, 6 March 2008 5:32:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Danielle. What wisdom. What perspective. I think I love you.
Posted by Vanilla, Thursday, 6 March 2008 5:45:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
gecko, it's the anonymous bushbasher (not bushwacker) here.

i agree that the anonymity on fora such as OLO has an interesting effect. i also agree that much of such debate is reduced to shouting. i ponder my own behavior and my use of the anonymity.

what i don't agree with is that caroline should be congratulated, or that there was something out of line with the majority of criticism of her article.

i haven't followed this thread closely, but what was clear was that many of the posters, even those very critical of the article, are uncomfortable or at least wary about the social effects of pornography. i found many of the posts, both pro- and anti-pornography informative and enlightening.

BUT, caroline's article was strident and thoroughly devoid of evidence. in this regard, the reference to anonymity and a perhaps less than well-mannered debate are simply red herring.
Posted by bushbasher, Thursday, 6 March 2008 5:47:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Vanilla, thank you for those lovely comments - they truly made my day.

Perhaps a survey should be done on women. Women talk among themselves freely ... admittedly, often with “too much information” ... however, many believe that their husbands are not inventive enough.

One woman’s description of her love life, sounded like she was directing traffic - another’ s husband would be in traction if she had her “evil” way - another mentally makes out her shopping list (women multi-task very well). Women regard sex as natural and normal ... they don’t regard a nudge in the ribs and “Ow about it, luv?”, as adequate foreplay. My own mother, the most proper of people, always maintained that there was no such thing as a frigid woman - only incompetent males.

As the article situated the consequences of the penis and porn together, I recalled where this doesn’t occur - and quote verbatim from a series of papers directly from google:

“Frogs don't have penises ... are not particularly bright when it comes to sex ... will attempt to mate with anything that moves, including other males and floating leaves ... have specially adapted thumbs so that they can hang on to the female's back even if she gets bored and tries to hop away... also needs to hang on tightly because sometimes more males try to join in the fun in a kind of frog orgy ... Male frogs exposed to estrogen-like pollutants morph from male to female ...exposed to very low doses of a common weed killer can develop multiple sex organs, sometimes both male and female.”
Posted by Danielle, Friday, 7 March 2008 8:12:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
'however, many believe that their husbands are not inventive enough. '

Is it the responsibility of their husbands alone to be inventive?

' no such thing as a frigid woman - only incompetent males. ' That's pretty sexist. Imagine an impotent man blaming incompetent women...
Posted by Whitty, Saturday, 8 March 2008 11:45:38 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
it's not sexist. it's a joke with truth behind it. it's very feisty and very funny.
Posted by bushbasher, Saturday, 8 March 2008 11:56:02 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Whitty,

I apologise if I didn't make myself clear. The writer of the article suggested that women were passive victims. I endeavoured to make a point that some women can be quite
aggressive in bed - indeed, not sensitive to their husband's needs at all.

"One woman’s description of her love life, sounded like she was directing traffic - another’ s husband would be in traction if she had her “evil” way" ...

My mother was born in 1914 and her comments related to some women's accounts of their husband's foreplay: “Ow about it, luv?”. Men in general are better informed now. I recall a very old lady telling me that her husband believed that if a woman enjoyed sex, she was no better than a whore.

No woman should, or would disparage a man for impotency. Hopefully, any woman would be very sensitive to this situation.
Posted by Danielle, Saturday, 8 March 2008 12:23:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 13
  7. 14
  8. 15
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy