It's stupid when feminists say that porn is misogynistic

Post Reply New Topic

There's no proof that porn leads to rape. There never has been.

EDIT: The linked article provides no evidence of a link either, it just states that there's been an increase in porn searches. Correlation doesn't equal causation.

That's cause most sexual-predators have ASPD which makes them already more prone to be rapists with or without viewing porn.

I've heard the opposite - that porn *reduces* rape, because it provides non-personal outlets for deviant urges. Haven't seen any good evidence for it, though.

I do think it causes bad sex, based on personal experience.

It's not about emotions, but it's not about male dominance either(in most cases). It's about a business of physical sex in scenarios that are aimed at a target audience.
I might need to dig up where I read it, but it sounds like the current studies are proving that the female sex drive is not emotionally driven. The notion of women being simply turned on by emotional connection is a myth. Pornography isn't about male dominance as much as bad acting, but you can't conclude that women derive no pleasure and are complacent props for the guys because of it.

MjrMajorMajor,

I'm not going to lie to you, I'll be honest, I have seen "traditional" pornography in the past, so I do know what I'm talking about.

As for "It's about a business of physical sex in scenarios that are aimed at a target audience", that is true. However, I'd like to state that it is a very unrealistic depiction of sex, with guys who are extremely well endowed having sex with beautiful (although slu*ty) women in various positions that I don't think most "normal" couples would do. And women are moaning, and saying "Oh yeah" and sighing, and doing other things.

I'm sure female porn stars derive pleasure from having sex with male porn stars, however I don't believe it is "genuine" in the sense that while they may be enjoying the act of sex, they are also acting to make it appear more amazing and fantastic than it really is. As you said "bad acting".

As for the notion of women not being sexually stimulated by emotions, that could be a totally different topic on its own. But I will say this though- I certainly believe a woman would be more romantically inclined towards a guy who is able to emotionally stimulate her in positive and attractive ways then a guy who is just looking to have casual sex with a girl.

But I stand by my opinion, traditional pornography is about displaying male dominance in an unrealistic sexual way.

Bad actors enacting fantasy storylines. I still don't see where dominance comes into play. Because "traditional porn" tends to be geared towards a more masculine fantasy scenario? Movies aren't real, video games aren't reality, and neither is porn. People don't want reality on their screens, they want beautiful bodies endowed with fantasy features. IMO it's just a business that needs to be regulated, but it's existence isn't harmful on it's own and doesn't lead to moral depravity for viewers. Are women objectified in it? Of course, but are you saying men aren't?

Men are subjects in traditional porn; they are active, they 'do something' to the women, who are passive objects which have something done to them. That is literal objectification.

They ejaculate—’nuff said.

What about female POV porn, where the whole shot is shown through the eyes of the woman and often only the man gets seen?

How Puritanical is that? How does that apply with the woman on top, anyway? It reminds me of of the old fashioned mindsets where women should lie still and only tolerate their husbands climbing on them and "relieving their base urges". It's unseemly to do otherwise.
Do men get to ejaculate? Of course, God forbid they miss their "money shot". Men usually get to accomplish this in real life, too. Why should women bother having sex at all, because there's no guarantee for her to climax every time?
Not to get too personal, but I have no issue with something "done to me" in the bedroom. It may not involve multiple partners or orifices, but I am a very active participant in deciding the five W' s included at the time. As long as there is willing consent on every side, I don't see an issue.

That's not really true. Women do stuff to men all the time in porn. You can even see this in the cliche "she does it all". It isn't "she has it all done to her".

Haven't you been around when I've posted this:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 111326.htm

I said absolutely nothing about proof. However there's evidence supporting both positions, like the link I posted to the News story showing that the city in India with the highest levels of rape also has the most google searches for porn out of any other city in the world.



"Is there any porn & rapes link?

New Delhi, April 22: Is there any connection between increasing rape cases in Delhi and the city of Delhi being the city with the highest-worldwide percentage of searches for "porn" in 2012.

Google searches for the word "porn," as a proportion of total Google searches, have increased five times between 2004 and 2013 in India.

India ranked fourth worldwide, after Papua New Guinea, Trinidad and Tobago, and Pakistan."




The issue isn't so much with well adjusted adults that view it, but, as I stated before, its possible that it may lead to more sexual abuse among minors that are exposed to it, in that children who view it may emulate it by sexually assaulting younger siblings or peers.

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/184739.pdf

Here's a National Criminal Justice report with a segment on the influence of pornography on juvenile sex offenders.




"Pornography
Investigations into the role of pornography in juve-
nile sex offending are limited in number. Becker and
Stein (as cited in Hunter and Becker, 1994) found
that only 11 percent of the juvenile sex offenders in
their study reported that they did not use sexually
explicit material. Approximately 74 percent reported
that pornography increased their sexual arousal, 3
percent indicated it decreased their arousal, and 23
percent said it had no effect. There were no statisti-
cally significant differences between the subjects in
terms of use of pornography and number of victims
or in terms of types of pornography used and num-
ber of victims.
In a sample of 30 juveniles who had committed sex
offenses, exposure to pornographic material at a
young age was common (Wieckowski et al., 1998).
The researchers reported that 29 of the 30 juveniles
had been exposed to X-rated magazines or videos;
the average age at exposure was about 7.5 years.
Similarly, Ford and Linney (as cited in Becker and
Hunter, 1997) found that 42 percent of juvenile sex
offenders, compared with 29 percent of juvenile
violent offenders (whose offenses were nonsexual)
and status offenders, had been exposed to hardcore,
sexually explicit magazines. The juvenile sex offend-
ers also had been exposed at younger ages, ranging
from 5 to 8. High rates of exposure to pornography
also have been found for girls who have committed
sex offenses (Mathews, Hunter, and Vuz, 1997)"

Last edited by JNathanK on 07 Jun 2013, 1:22 am, edited 7 times in total.

And when I've posted this:

http://www.tamiu.edu/~cferguson/pornography.pdf



From the abstract (my emphasis added):

"Victimization rates for rape in the United States demonstrate an inverse relationship between pornography consumption and rape rates. Data from other nations have suggested similar relationships. Although these data cannot be used to determine that pornography has a cathartic effect on rape behavior, combined with the weak evidence in support of negative causal hypotheses from the scientific literature, it is concluded that it is time to discard the hypothesis that pornography contributes to increased sexual assault behavior."

Precisely my point.

I still believe that this speaks more about mindsets than the porn itself, but I'm done arguing. It reminds me of the Madonna/whore issue. Because everything is of course that black and white.