💾 Archived View for gmi.noulin.net › mobileNews › 229.gmi captured on 2023-09-08 at 19:08:15. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

⬅️ Previous capture (2023-01-29)

➡️ Next capture (2024-05-10)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

The Porn Myth

2007-08-01 16:48:46

In the end, porn doesn t whet men s appetites it turns them off the real thing.

At a benefit the other night, I saw Andrea Dworkin, the anti-porn activist most

famous in the eighties for her conviction that opening the floodgates of

pornography would lead men to see real women in sexually debased ways. If we

did not limit pornography, she argued before Internet technology made that

prospect a technical impossibility most men would come to objectify women as

they objectified porn stars, and treat them accordingly. In a kind of domino

theory, she predicted, rape and other kinds of sexual mayhem would surely

follow.

The feminist warrior looked gentle and almost frail. The world she had,

Cassandra-like, warned us about so passionately was truly here: Porn is, as

David Amsden says, the wallpaper of our lives now. So was she right or wrong?

She was right about the warning, wrong about the outcome. As she foretold,

pornography did breach the dike that separated a marginal, adult, private

pursuit from the mainstream public arena. The whole world, post-Internet, did

become pornographized. Young men and women are indeed being taught what sex is,

how it looks, what its etiquette and expectations are, by pornographic training

and this is having a huge effect on how they interact.

But the effect is not making men into raving beasts. On the contrary: The

onslaught of porn is responsible for deadening male libido in relation to real

women, and leading men to see fewer and fewer women as porn-worthy. Far from

having to fend off porn-crazed young men, young women are worrying that as mere

flesh and blood, they can scarcely get, let alone hold, their attention.

Here is what young women tell me on college campuses when the subject comes up:

They can t compete, and they know it. For how can a real woman with pores and

her own breasts and even sexual needs of her own (let alone with speech that

goes beyond More, more, you big stud! ) possibly compete with a cybervision of

perfection, downloadable and extinguishable at will, who comes, so to speak,

utterly submissive and tailored to the consumer s least specification?

For most of human history, erotic images have been reflections of, or

celebrations of, or substitutes for, real naked women. For the first time in

human history, the images power and allure have supplanted that of real naked

women. Today, real naked women are just bad porn.

For two decades, I have watched young women experience the continual mission

creep of how pornography and now Internet pornography has lowered their sense

of their own sexual value and their actual sexual value. When I came of age in

the seventies, it was still pretty cool to be able to offer a young man the

actual presence of a naked, willing young woman. There were more young men who

wanted to be with naked women than there were naked women on the market. If

there was nothing actively alarming about you, you could get a pretty

enthusiastic response by just showing up. Your boyfriend may have seen Playboy,

but hey, you could move, you were warm, you were real. Thirty years ago, simple

lovemaking was considered erotic in the pornography that entered mainstream

consciousness: When Behind the Green Door first opened, clumsy, earnest,

missionary-position intercourse was still considered to be a huge turn-on.

Well, I am 40, and mine is the last female generation to experience that sense

of sexual confidence and security in what we had to offer. Our younger sisters

had to compete with video porn in the eighties and nineties, when intercourse

was not hot enough. Now you have to offer or flirtatiously suggest the lesbian

scene, the ejaculate-in-the-face scene. Being naked is not enough; you have to

be buff, be tan with no tan lines, have the surgically hoisted breasts and the

Brazilian bikini wax just like porn stars. (In my gym, the 40-year-old women

have adult pubic hair; the twentysomethings have all been trimmed and styled.)

Pornography is addictive; the baseline gets ratcheted up. By the new

millennium, a vagina which, by the way, used to have a pretty high exchange

value, as Marxist economists would say wasn t enough; it barely registered on

the thrill scale. All mainstream porn and certainly the Internet made routine

use of all available female orifices.

The porn loop is de rigueur, no longer outside the pale; starlets in tabloids

boast of learning to strip from professionals; the cool girls go with guys to

the strip clubs, and even ask for lap dances; college girls are expected to

tease guys at keg parties with lesbian kisses la Britney and Madonna.

But does all this sexual imagery in the air mean that sex has been liberated or

is it the case that the relationship between the multi-billion-dollar porn

industry, compulsiveness, and sexual appetite has become like the relationship

between agribusiness, processed foods, supersize portions, and obesity? If your

appetite is stimulated and fed by poor-quality material, it takes more junk to

fill you up. People are not closer because of porn but further apart; people

are not more turned on in their daily lives but less so.

The young women who talk to me on campuses about the effect of pornography on

their intimate lives speak of feeling that they can never measure up, that they

can never ask for what they want; and that if they do not offer what porn

offers, they cannot expect to hold a guy. The young men talk about what it is

like to grow up learning about sex from porn, and how it is not helpful to them

in trying to figure out how to be with a real woman. Mostly, when I ask about

loneliness, a deep, sad silence descends on audiences of young men and young

women alike. They know they are lonely together, even when conjoined, and that

this imagery is a big part of that loneliness. What they don t know is how to

get out, how to find each other again erotically, face-to-face.

So Dworkin was right that pornography is compulsive, but she was wrong in

thinking it would make men more rapacious. A whole generation of men are less

able to connect erotically to women and ultimately less libidinous.

The reason to turn off the porn might become, to thoughtful people, not a moral

one but, in a way, a physical- and emotional-health one; you might want to

rethink your constant access to porn in the same way that, if you want to be an

athlete, you rethink your smoking. The evidence is in: Greater supply of the

stimulant equals diminished capacity.

After all, pornography works in the most basic of ways on the brain: It is

Pavlovian. An orgasm is one of the biggest reinforcers imaginable. If you

associate orgasm with your wife, a kiss, a scent, a body, that is what, over

time, will turn you on; if you open your focus to an endless stream of

ever-more-transgressive images of cybersex slaves, that is what it will take to

turn you on. The ubiquity of sexual images does not free eros but dilutes it.

Other cultures know this. I am not advocating a return to the days of hiding

female sexuality, but I am noting that the power and charge of sex are

maintained when there is some sacredness to it, when it is not on tap all the

time. In many more traditional cultures, it is not prudery that leads them to

discourage men from looking at pornography. It is, rather, because these

cultures understand male sexuality and what it takes to keep men and women

turned on to one another over time to help men, in particular, to, as the Old

Testament puts it, rejoice with the wife of thy youth; let her breasts satisfy

thee at all times. These cultures urge men not to look at porn because they

know that a powerful erotic bond between parents is a key element of a strong

family.

And feminists have misunderstood many of these prohibitions.

I will never forget a visit I made to Ilana, an old friend who had become an

Orthodox Jew in Jerusalem. When I saw her again, she had abandoned her jeans

and T-shirts for long skirts and a head scarf. I could not get over it. Ilana

has waist-length, wild and curly golden-blonde hair. Can t I even see your

hair? I asked, trying to find my old friend in there. No, she demurred

quietly. Only my husband, she said with a calm sexual confidence, ever gets

to see my hair.

When she showed me her little house in a settlement on a hill, and I saw the

bedroom, draped in Middle Eastern embroideries, that she shares only with her

husband the kids are not allowed the sexual intensity in the air was archaic,

overwhelming. It was private. It was a feeling of erotic intensity deeper than

any I have ever picked up between secular couples in the liberated West. And I

thought: Our husbands see naked women all day in Times Square if not on the

Net. Her husband never even sees another woman s hair.

She must feel, I thought, so hot.

Compare that steaminess with a conversation I had at Northwestern, after I had

talked about the effect of porn on relationships. Why have sex right away? a

boy with tousled hair and Bambi eyes was explaining. Things are always a

little tense and uncomfortable when you just start seeing someone, he said. I

prefer to have sex right away just to get it over with. You know it s going to

happen anyway, and it gets rid of the tension.

Isn t the tension kind of fun? I asked. Doesn t that also get rid of the

mystery?

Mystery? He looked at me blankly. And then, without hesitating, he replied:

I don t know what you re talking about. Sex has no mystery.