<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Wednesday, December 02, 2009

Annals of social science: proving the obvious 


A professor tries to compare the attitudes of men who have seen pornography to those who have not. He encounters a little problem...


10 Comments:

By Blogger Georgfelis, at Wed Dec 02, 05:50:00 PM:

I have this mental picture of a caveman, painting dirty pictures on the wall of his cave....  

By Blogger Cassandra, at Wed Dec 02, 08:22:00 PM:

Sounds like a really dumb measure to me.

I have zero interest in porn. In fact, it's one of the few things that has a near 100% effectiveness rating at turning off any desire to have sex. With anyone.

Yet I have "seen" porn several times. Usually inadvertently but once or twice b/c I clicked on a link knowing what was there because I was curious. What conclusion can we draw from that, other than the fact that it has become well nigh impossible to avoid porn even if you actively don't want to see it?

Now there's a study I'd be interested in. When did we get to the point where we can't avoid it even if we find it off putting?  

By Blogger JPMcT, at Wed Dec 02, 10:03:00 PM:

Men with no interest whatwoever in porn or good liquor are not to be trusted.  

By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thu Dec 03, 05:43:00 AM:

I don't mind porn. I object to cut-rate porn.  

By Blogger Cassandra, at Thu Dec 03, 06:20:00 AM:

Men with no interest whatwoever in porn or good liquor are not to be trusted.

You know, I have thought that to myself many I time. In fact, when the word "integrity" is mentioned, the first thing that comes to mind is, "But does he like porn?". It's the acid test :p  

By Blogger Dawnfire82, at Thu Dec 03, 08:44:00 PM:

I concur with JPMcT. While there are relatively sophisticated sociological and psychological arguments to be made in support of such a finding I'll settle with a sacrifice to Godwin's Law.

Adolf Hitler vehemently opposed pornography.

Abraham Lincoln collected it.

Who would you trust?  

By Blogger Cassandra, at Thu Dec 03, 08:58:00 PM:

A sample size of two isn't what I'd call convincing.

Nor, since apparently all men use porn, does it seem likely that porn use is strongly correlated with either character or personal integrity.

In either direction. But then I don't have a dog in this fight.  

By Anonymous feeblemind, at Thu Dec 03, 09:55:00 PM:

Re Cassandra: If I may be so bold as to ask, (and I ask out of curiosity, not to be snarky, or to bait you in any way)just what exactly is it about porn that is a sexual turnoff? I thought porn appealed to everyone on a primal level. Some may avoid porn for moral or other reasons, and I can understand that a person's interest in porn may diminish with a healthy sex life, but saying it is a sexual turnoff is above and beyond all that. There must be a reason why it does not appeal to you when it appeals to so many others.  

By Blogger TigerHawk, at Thu Dec 03, 11:20:00 PM:

Nor, since apparently all men use porn, does it seem likely that porn use is strongly correlated with either character or personal integrity.

Why must we say "use" porn? It seems to unnecessarily accurate. Why not "watch" or "read"? Do we "use" other kinds of movies or photography? I think not.  

By Blogger Cassandra, at Fri Dec 04, 03:50:00 AM:

Do we "use" other kinds of movies or photography? I think not.

Without being "unnecessarily accurate", I think the answer to that question is pretty obvious.

Other kinds of movies or non-pornographic photos don't accompany the activity that (and here - because I don't have any firsthand knowledge of same - I'm relying on what I've heard men openly admit, though I've never been sure why anyone felt the need to talk about this in public) traditionally occurs alongside the viewing of porn.

And that's about as direct as I plan to get on that subject :p

I thought porn appealed to everyone on a primal level.

No, I don't think that's true at all. It may be true for men. And it seems to be true for some women, but nearly all women with whom I've discussed the subject had the same reaction I do. Of course that probably reflects the fact that the people I associate with are not unlike me.

How can I explain the fact that it repulses me? Sex doesn't repulse me at all. It's something I've been interested in as long as I can remember. But porn leaves me cold.

I understand the allure of looking at photos of beautiful women or handsome men (what I'd call erotica rather than porn). The only word I can think of that describes the impression I get from porn, though, is "dehumanizing". I hesitate to use that word b/c I'm fully aware how strong a word it is, and because for some weird reason guys go into attack mode when a woman has the nerve to say she doesn't care for porn. It's about the most politically incorrect thing one can say on the right. But if porn is no big deal, why is it not OK for me not to like it? I don't like lots of things. TV is another thing I don't care for and for many of the same reasons I don't care for porn.

Maybe I could get the idea across by describing a movie that "appeal to me" on that level, though I'm not sure "primal" is the right word there either. The remake of The Thomas Crown Affair.

That's the kind of movie that would put me in the mood. Except I can't remember ever needing a movie to put me in the mood. And if I'm in the mood I'd rather just have sex.

For many (though not all) women, sex is far more enjoyable in the context of a relationship. I understand that men don't feel that way at all. It seems odd to me that men can't understand why severing sex from the tiresome necessity of a relationship might not appeal to a woman, though.  

Post a Comment


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?