Jezebel 
Enter your username and password.
New York, 6:15 AM
Thu Dec 3
63 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
Editor-in-Chief:
Anna Holmes
| Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Dodai Stewart
| Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor:
Tracie Egan
| Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Anna North
| Twitter
Sadie Stein
| Twitter
Reporter:
Irin Carmon
| Twitter
Editorial Assistant:
Margaret Hartmann
| Twitter
Contributors:
Rich Juzwiak
Email | Twitter
Latoya Peterson
Email
Jenna Sauers
Lizzie Skurnick
Interns:
Katy Kelleher
Twitter
Weekends/Commenter Moderator:
Hortense
| Twitter
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
12/02/09
Also he's trying to study how porn shapes men's views of women, but he's using only men who already watch porn. Perhaps the perception of women hasn't changed for these men, because the construct of "woman" had already been shaped by years and years of pornography use?
Sloppy, sloppy, sloppy research. Sounds like this dude really, really likes to watch creepy porn and wanted to justify it with a "study" about how it's, like, totally cool that he likes watching women get degraded so much that he masturbates to it.
Barf. When academia has something real and new to add to the conversation about pornography, then I'll listen. But this? Isn't worth it.
12/02/09
12/02/09
They also looked for men who didn’t watch porn, they couldn’t find any.
12/02/09
12/02/09
12/02/09
12/02/09
I couldn't find the actual paper, but I think this is actually prelim research for his dissertation, so I would guess there will be a bigger study.
I don't think this is supposed to be the study that explains porn, its just another piece in the literature to build off of.
12/02/09
12/02/09
(Because the people who know the most about it are frequently not people you'd take advice from on any other subject. E.g.: Young men taking advice from other young men on what women allegedly like in bed. As if they would have any idea.)
12/02/09
Logic fail on so many levels I can't even respond.
12/02/09
Since it doesn't, there's obviously a problem with the original thesis.
12/02/09
12/02/09
Why can't you fly?! Why can't you flip over 27 times and then smash my head? Why don't you pause mid-fight and shoot me a one liner about how you are about to finish me?
12/02/09
12/02/09
12/02/09
12/02/09
12/02/09
12/02/09
12/02/09
12/02/09
Not sure who would want to do that research, though.
12/02/09
/Debbie Downer moment.
12/02/09
The thing is - I don't dislike porn. I disliked the secrets and constant hiding. Eventually I began questioning my own worth and I had to bust on out of that relationship. It was the reason we broke up. And thank god.
Now I just feel sorry for him. I know it's not my place to feel sorry for anyone but he just got into an new relationship (three years later) and I really do hope he's dealt with those demons.
Oh! But! I think I saw my first porn around 10. Current boyfriend was about 12. I think there's more to it than age though; I think escape is a bigger issue. In my experience anyway. My ex was, for all intensive purposes, a misogynist who had an intense fear of his mother. I think he just found his escape early on.
12/02/09
Erotica isn't a bad thing, necessarily. It, like anything, however can take up forms that are sort of destructive and alienating.
12/02/09
12/02/09
[www.erikalust.com]
12/02/09
Agree. It seems the trend now is abusive sexual performance equates to female pleasure.
And men are always ready at the end to "feed" the woman, as if that's what she has been waiting for the whole time and sex was merely there to get him ready to feed her (not for her or his pleasure, of course, that's silly.)
12/02/09
I've never seen any negative effects of porn between us in bed. Granted this could be due to my vaginismus and our inability to have actual penetrating sex for oh... let's say going on almost 2 years. So his patience is appreciated all the more.
12/02/09
12/02/09
I just fainted from shock.
12/02/09
So as a result...oh wait, you just fainted again.
12/02/09
I'll take you victimized by rhetoric and raise you a "victimized by rape/murder/objectification."
12/02/09
Are you suggesting that pornography is composed of "rape/murder/objectification"?
Because while you could at least make an argument as to the latter-most, it is absurd to suggest that contemporary pornography is about rape and/or murder.
12/02/09
At any rate what I was saying is that "victimization" was an absurd word to use there.
12/02/09
12/02/09
I make that distinction - that I'm only talking about US, legal, porn - because obviously once we dip into the realm of something like child pornography (which is intrinsically child abuse and rape, obviously) it completely changes the discussion.
12/02/09
12/02/09
As I understand rape, it's a sexual encounter where one party hasn't fully consented to the encounter (either by refusing or abstaining from giving consent initially, or revoking consent in the middle of it).
So, in order for any of the sexual acts in pornography to be rape, we'd have to show that at least some (i.e. more than one) woman in porn actually aren't giving consent to the acts they're participating in.
This would be staggeringly difficult to be true, at least in pornography produced according to US law, since actors are almost universally required to sign contracts, etc. which make the consent quite clear.
12/02/09
There's a difference between saying "prosecute people who act in rape-themed porn for rape" and saying "rape-themed porn eroticizes rape, which is a problem". The first is a strawman that no one is advocating, the second is a legitimate concern.
12/02/09
You're incorrect in your assessment of what I think. I think that men enjoying fictive rape - while rather gross and unimaginable in my mind - is completely distinct from those men actually engaging in rape, the same way that men enjoying porn with three-ways is distinct from those men actually having three-ways.
It is a reality that almost everyone has fantasies that exceed their real life (in sex or otherwise). Indulging those fantasies vicariously (e.g. violent video games, violent porn, sci-fi, historical fantasy, etc.) can satisfy enough of those urges to allow people to be actually content with their real life.
As for rape-porn eroticizing rape, I simply don't think it's actually true. I think it certainly allowed some rapists to magnify their urges by getting themselves comfortable with the resistance offered by their victim. However, that doesn't mean it eroticized the rape: the rapist was already a rapist in his mind. In other words, the porn didn't make the rapist believe rape was okay (or, worse, pleasurable for the victim).
12/02/09
Your comment about how the only men who ever rape were already rapists to begin with, who know rape is wrong and don't care or think the victim finds it enjoyable completely ignores:
1. The studies who show that men will admit to rape if it's not called rape: [www.washingtoncitypaper.com]
2. Any notion that desires are influenced by culture at all, which is either willful blindness or true ignorance.
3. The fact that many rapists do say they "thought she wanted it", that "she enjoyed it", "she said no but not "really" no", etc. You seem to think that the only rapists are sadistic strangers jumping out of bushes to attack women, which ignores most acquaintance rape, which is most rape. And where do men get these ideas? Or at the very least, where are these ideas validated and repeated ad nauseum? You guessed it, rape-themed porn!
12/02/09
I provided what -I- define as rape. To the point, I think my definition is broader than the legal definition of rape, i.e. includes acts that wouldn't be legally termed rape.
Your study on people admiting to rape when not called rape is greviously flawed; among other things it doesn't include then asking them if they would call it rape. It just asks them to admit to behaviors. While this indicates a level of rape actually occurring, it doesn't actually indicate anything about how these men label rape.
I'm not clear what you're suggesting with point 2.
As for point 3, again you're being glib and misrepresenting what I'm saying. The men you're talking about - all of them - are men who are rapists by virtue of how they understand the way a woman consents (at best). They are rapists regardless of porn because they think a woman doesn't need to consent, can't revoke consent, or otherwise aren't actually free to say no.
You have this bizarre assertion, that men get the idea to commit rape from porn. This is baffling, given the presence (quite wide-spread) of rape in every sense of the word long before porn was widely available. Hell, many have argued that rape was almost a default during the era before Women's Liberation, given that women would feel unwilling or unable to say 'no' (much less complain about it afterward) in those days.
12/02/09
12/02/09
You keep trying to frame porn in a way that takes it outside of culture, when it both informs and is informed by culture.
12/02/09
She didn't say porn invented rape, and yes, I'd guess some men will rape no matter what cultural influences they are exposed to (or not exposed to). But you can't argue that watching hours of men and women acting out rape scenarios won't effect your feelings about, and level of acceptance of, those scenarios. Especially, as yvanehtnioj pointed out below, these acts are labeled as "sex", not "rape fantasies".
Also, you argue that people can satisfy their violent urges through video games, violent porn, etc. and that those games/porn/etc. don't actually affect how people act in real life. Do you have any evidence to back that up?
12/02/09
12/02/09
Sure do.
"After an average playtime of 56 hours over the course of a month with "Asheron’s Call 2," a popular MMRPG, or "massively multi-layer online role-playing game," researchers found "no strong effects associated with aggression caused by this violent game," said Dmitri Williams, the lead author of the study."
[news.illinois.edu]
""We don't know whether playing to get anger out is a good thing or a bad thing for any individual child, but we suspect that it might be healthy for a lot of kids," said Olson."
[www.firstcoastnews.com]
Basically, it's always difficult to distinguish correlation/causation on these topics (e.g. are kids who are already violent playing video games as a result of their existing tendencies, or vice-versa), but it appears that at least for many people, it's actually positive (or at least neutral).
12/02/09
The first study you sent was based on one month of participants playing a fantasy-based game with fantasy-based violence. The article even admits these results may not apply to:
-long-term playing (once month of play is hardly indicative of the kind of exposure gamers get)
-younger children or teens (participants were mostly adults, all over 14)
-people playing games with more realistic violence (urban games like GTA, etc.).
The quote you sent was just someone's opinion.
Again, it's ok to cite these things as a part of your argument, but they aren't facts and you shouldn't pretend they are.
12/02/09
Also, hello Madonna/whore dichotomy! Your boyfriend is calling.
12/02/09
12/02/09
12/02/09
12/02/09
12/02/09
As much as men want that madonna/whore split, women want their men to simultaneously be strong, protective and providing while also being sensitive, caring and gentle. This isn't about sexism or anything; it's about the simple fact that human beings aren't supposed to be defined by a single facet.
If you're a woman, you shouldn't be defined as "whore" or "madonna" alone, anymore than a man should be defined as "guardian" or "manslave". You should be a complex melange of characteristics.
12/02/09
You make an excellent point, is what I am saying :-)
12/02/09
12/02/09
A woman's status as a human being isn't threatened by how promiscuous she is or isn't; you're confusing people judging this hypothetical woman for her decisions with thinking it makes her some how less than human.
The reality is that women don't want men who sleep around any more than men want women who sleep around. They might like sleeping with the other person occasionally - e.g. on a hookup - but people of both sexes aren't looking for a promiscuous person as a -partner-.
My point is that the desire of our partners to have a variety of characteristics is healthy, as opposed to your claim that it's somehow toxic. It's reasonable for a man to want his wife to appear one way in public while acting differently in private, the same way it's reasonable for a woman to want the same of her husband.
I don't see why it's so hard to understand that idea.
12/02/09
12/02/09
But thanks for mansplaining about my hyperbole.
12/02/09
Women -can- be a "whore" and a "virgin" in the sense of fantasy. It's not like the man actually expects them to literally be a whore or a virgin; it's just that they want the woman to embody elements of those fantasies. E.g. to be sexually powerful and talented (the "whore") while appearing to be more refined and chaste in public or with the kids.
12/02/09
Maybe you ought to re-assess yourself before jumping to conclusions about other people.
12/02/09
"Problems are external to you." What does this mean, for example?
12/02/09
12/02/09
(On a separate note, everyone in this thread please refrain from personal attacks. Thanks.)
12/02/09
In other words, it's the exact opposite of wanting someone with a variety of characteristics.
12/02/09
12/02/09
12/02/09
But it's nice of you to clarify for other people what their experiences were. Surely, they wouldn't have known themselves. Thank heaven, a man came along to tell them.
12/02/09
I'm glad I now understand all the things I want and feel so much better than I did before this thread came along! How enlightening.
12/02/09
If we assume your reasoning is correct, then you (as a woman) must be at least as ignorant of the male perspective as you're alleging I'm ignorant of the female perspective.
12/02/09
Again, I don't think this is about female sexuality. It's easy to make it about the "female", but it just doesn't appear to actually be about anything uniquely female vs. male. Among other things, the problem is the label of "whore" instead of something more accurate, i.e. "sexually powerful".
12/02/09
12/02/09
12/02/09
12/02/09
The issue there isn't some nonsensical "whore/virgin" dichotomy, but rather the fact that the man has converted sex into something he does -alone- while using a woman, instead of something he does -with- a partner.
This isn't actually found in most men. It's found in some, sure, the same way any particular fetish is. It's found the same way some men are rapists. etc.
The problem is that you think there is some culture-wide acceptance of this, that all men feel this way, etc. It's simply illogical, and not tied to any actual study of psychology.
12/02/09
She's not here to actually think about the topic, but rather to complain about men, judging them while saying it's unacceptable for men to judge her and other women.
The idea of actually treating everyone fairly is alien to someone who thinks everything comes down to a battle between men and women over this or that.
12/02/09
[en.wikipedia.org]
12/02/09
It never happens that someone names a "phenomenon" without realizing that they're naming an illusion, right?
You know what else never happens? People never, ever ascribe themselves to be the victim of a conspiracy of literally half the population only to later find out that many if not virtually all of the alleged conspirators don't agree at all?
The -idea- obviously wasn't coined here on Jezebel. It's just endorsed. The idea is nonetheless based purely on conjecture. There is no actual indication that it exists in how actual men treat actual women.
It's amazing that the site can be simultaneously complaining about mythical social structures - like the "Cheetah" article on the front page - while simultaneously complaining about other social structures with precisely as much evidence and study.
If you want to complain about others' ignorance, perhaps your link should include any actual research or study instead of just confirming that there are people who believe in it.
If I link you to the page on young-Earth creationism, does that mean it's true? Or does it just mean that some people believe it, regardless of evidence?
12/02/09
12/02/09
I'm not a big fan of psychoanalysis either, but there's a substantial amount of social science-based research supporting the idea that certain cultural factors can create Madonna/whore-esque attitudes in a society. For example, the combination of veneration of mothers + Catholicism + acceptance of male infidelity, as seen in many Latin & Mediterranean cultures. Not that we need to go far to find it - "Girls you marry"/"Girls you fuck" seems like a pretty common trope in American culture, just with more variation in what kind of sexual behavior is permissible in a woman before she falls into the "girls you fuck" abyss.
12/02/09
12/02/09
Ugh yes. This is the absolute worst.
12/02/09
12/02/09
12/02/09
12/02/09
12/02/09
It seems that a child who witnesses domestic violence would be more inclined to seek-out violent pornography than a child who is not surrounded by violence in his day-to-day life. If a child finds violent pornography on the internet, I don't think he acts on it in the absence of a preexisting pathology.
12/02/09
12/02/09
12/02/09
12/02/09
12/02/09
12/02/09
Yeah, have you talked to my husband? He wants to enact a porn movie every time.
12/02/09
And do these re-enactments include you as well?
12/02/09
12/02/09
The question "Why should you care" could be used to criticize any effort to understand something on the internet that doesn't directly involve one's own self.
I find that the most effective answer is that people often have interesting things to say on all kinds of subjects, and many don't mind saying them if someone expresses interest.
I'm someone who expresses interest frequently. I take it you're the opposite?
12/01/09
I'm glaring at you, Smeyer.
12/01/09
12/01/09
Suddenly, "He spilled his seed into her womanhood." actually sounds kind of nice.
12/01/09
that fleshbot description almost made me gag.
12/01/09
12/01/09