Pornography -- interesting points in a Ted video.

[Brickjectivity]

Why I stopped watching porn | Ran Gavrieli | TEDxJaffa - YouTube

 

[Brickjectivity]

What he said that I found most interesting is that from the perspective of porn the definition of 'Sexual' is "Anything that arouses men," so he said that in porn, violence, humiliation, crying and subjection were sexual. Then he went on to say that porn disabled the ability to imagine regular sexual encounters, made men imagine their self worth by penis size and their ability to maintain erections for extended periods. So he said that porn by its nature emphasized violence and penetration while skipping normal touching, sensitivity, cooperation etc. Good points I thought.

I makes me wonder if the current legal limbo of porn might be due to a misunderstanding of it. It seems like popular support to reign in porn has generally emphasized nudity rather than violence. Perhaps that is something worth thinking about. There is a need to prevent 'Mental police' and to preserve artistic expression, but opposing the depiction of sexual violence in porn is perhaps a necessity. It might make porn boring, but it might be for the best. Would it undermine artistic expression? I'm not sure, since sexual violence in erotica seems like a definable exception.

 

[Revoltingest]

I think his 'research' was skewed in the direction of some really aberrant porn. Perhaps I'm isolated in my little provincial bubble, but I've never even seen the stuff which piqued his interest.

 

[dawny0826]

Emotionally safe sex without gender hierarchy. I really appreciated what he had to say and agree with him on many points. Thanks for sharing.

 

[Sunstone]

I think porn that reduces men and women to sex objects is highly problematic. I'm fairly sure, though, that our politicians have neither the brains nor the wisdom to pass benign laws against porn that do not adversely effect some necessary freedoms.

 

[Thruve]

I think porn that reduces men and women to sex objects is highly problematic. I'm fairly sure, though, that our politicians have neither the brains nor the wisdom to pass benign laws against porn that do not adversely effect some necessary freedoms.

England's politicians apparently thought their laws did the job. Atleast for the white man, muahahahahha

 

[Nietzsche]

What he said that I found most interesting is that from the perspective of porn the definition of 'Sexual' is "Anything that arouses men," so he said that in porn, violence, humiliation, crying and subjection were sexual. Then he went on to say that porn disabled the ability to imagine regular sexual encounters, made men imagine their self worth by penis size and their ability to maintain erections for extended periods. So he said that porn by its nature emphasized violence and penetration while skipping normal touching, sensitivity, cooperation etc. Good points I thought.

I makes me wonder if the current legal limbo of porn might be due to a misunderstanding of it. It seems like popular support to reign in porn has generally emphasized nudity rather than violence. Perhaps that is something worth thinking about. There is a need to prevent 'Mental police' and to preserve artistic expression, but opposing the depiction of sexual violence in porn is perhaps a necessity. It might make porn boring, but it might be for the best. Would it undermine artistic expression? I'm not sure, since sexual violence in erotica seems like a definable exception.

Why is it a bad thing, and why does it matter to you or anyone at all what turns me on?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Porn is so varied and diverse that anyone who lumps it all together into one giant category should be shamed. Violent porn may increase violent tendencies towards women, but there are porn companies that are run by women who make porn for women. As a whole, porn tends to serve some very specific and very picky markets.

so he said that in porn, violence, humiliation, crying and subjection were sexual.

To some, these things are sexual. Some people enjoy being hurt during sex, some enjoy being humiliated, and some like being totally subjected and dominated. This is just how some people are, and some people are not aroused by any such things.

Then he went on to say that porn disabled the ability to imagine regular sexual encounters

This claim is doubtful. It may be hard to imagine it if you have only watched porn and have never had sex before, but distinguishing the difference between sexual reality and fantasy is a failure on culture to not educate young people about sex.

made men imagine their self worth by penis size

I can assure you, guys do not need porn to feel their penis size is everything. This isn't a problem from porn, but a total failure of our culture as a whole to properly educate young people about sex.

their ability to maintain erections for extended periods

I have never heard this before.

So he said that porn by its nature emphasized violence and penetration while skipping normal touching, sensitivity, cooperation etc. Good points I thought.

He couldn't be more wrong. Porn typically involves penetration, but not always. And as for violent pornography, unless you intentionally seek it out your probably aren't going to be seeing any of it.

 

[Sunstone]

Why is it a bad thing, and why does it matter to you or anyone at all what turns me on?

I think it would conceivably matter quite a bit if porn could be reasonably well demonstrated to increase violence against people.

 

[Nietzsche]

I think it would conceivably matter quite a bit if porn could be reasonably well demonstrated to increase violence against people.

Correlation =/= Causation.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I think it would conceivably matter quite a bit if porn could be reasonably well demonstrated to increase violence against people.

It would. But the most we have is that violent pornography may (may is in it might, as in there is a correlation albeit not a very strong one) increase sexual violence. But shouldn't it be that people with these inclinations will be drawn to violent pornography, thus having these impulses before hand?

 

[Sunstone]

Correlation =/= Causation.

Tell me something I neither know nor implied.

 

[Sunstone]

It would. But the most we have is that violent pornography may (may is in it might, as in there is a correlation albeit not a very strong one) increase sexual violence. But shouldn't it be that people with these inclinations will be drawn to violent pornography, thus having these impulses before hand?

Perhaps, but how can we know that with any more certainty than we know the alternative. It would be intellectually sloppy of us to jump to conclusions.

 

[Koldo]

I am always bothered by this idea that sex must be done in a particular way with a particular mindset. No matter on what form this reasoning is presented. Surely I am against violence as much as the next guy, but when it goes way beyond this the argument begins to lose its appeal to me.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Why is it a bad thing, and why does it matter to you or anyone at all what turns me on?

Bad thing? We are discussing whether porn is harmful. If you consider that bad then that is what we are discussing. Anyway I agree with one thing the video said, which is that people are capable of being sexually aroused by violence, humiliation, subjection, treachery and other kinds of victimization, and I think its fairly natural. Porn companies are producing more of that, because people pay for it, which means people want it, which means its human nature. Just because its natural doesn't mean it isn't harmful. I think putting 'Good and bad' into the discussion just waters it down.

My primary concern is me, then comes family, friends, etc. Strangers are about maybe 4th or 5th level; so I have a passing interest your wishes but nothing really strong. I suppose you feel the same way, or maybe you are unusually empathic which I can respect.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Perhaps, but how can we know that with any more certainty than we know the alternative. It would be intellectually sloppy of us to jump to conclusions.

It is, and I very often see the anti-porn crowd doing it. I've even noticed the debates tend to be chauvinist, revolve around around female purity, focus on men as sexual beings and women as not having sexual interests, and the debate always revolves around men. Really the porn debates need to be included with media at large, as it fits with the general themes of being dominated by a male point of view (even the anti-porn debates tend to revolve around a male perspective), and that the question of violent media does not have a clear answer. As for porn, these debates exclude couples watching porn for the interests of both partners at what seems to be the same rate bisexuals are excluded from discussions and debates on sexuality.
However, we do know for certain that sexuality is a highly complicated subject, and because pornography tends to cater to various sexualities and fetishes, it can't be adequately discussed by lumping it all into one big category. IMO, a thorough sex education would do far more good than any attempts to restrict pornography as it would give people the needed knowledge to lay to rest many myths (such the importance of penis size) and to view porn for what it is, a fantasy.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I think his 'research' was skewed in the direction of some really aberrant porn. Perhaps I'm isolated in my little provincial bubble, but I've never even seen the stuff which piqued his interest.

By your own admission you are from two or three generations ago. It stands to reason that you wouldn't be up to speed on what people are interested in!

 

[Brickjectivity]

Emotionally safe sex without gender hierarchy. I really appreciated what he had to say and agree with him on many points. Thanks for sharing.

Sure. He was very believable.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I think porn that reduces men and women to sex objects is highly problematic. I'm fairly sure, though, that our politicians have neither the brains nor the wisdom to pass benign laws against porn that do not adversely effect some necessary freedoms.

Yeah, I tend to think that our country has yet to come to an understanding of its self and awaken to reality.

 

[Sunstone]

It is, and I very often see the anti-porn crowd doing it. I've even noticed the debates tend to be chauvinist, revolve around around female purity, focus on men as sexual beings and women as not having sexual interests, and the debate always revolves around men. Really the porn debates need to be included with media at large, as it fits with the general themes of being dominated by a male point of view (even the anti-porn debates tend to revolve around a male perspective), and that the question of violent media does not have a clear answer. As for porn, these debates exclude couples watching porn for the interests of both partners at what seems to be the same rate bisexuals are excluded from discussions and debates on sexuality.
However, we do know for certain that sexuality is a highly complicated subject, and because pornography tends to cater to various sexualities and fetishes, it can't be adequately discussed by lumping it all into one big category. IMO, a thorough sex education would do far more good than any attempts to restrict pornography as it would give people the needed knowledge to lay to rest many myths (such the importance of penis size) and to view porn for what it is, a fantasy.

I'm in substantial agreement with you, especially your point that human sexuality is vast and varied. Perhaps the only point on which we disagree is that I think both sides too often engage in sloppy thinking on the subject.