Gail Dines: How “Pornland” destroys intimacy and hijacks sexuality
June 29th, 2010 § 108 Comments
This is an interview that you may not be accustomed to viewing at PULSE, but pornography is an issue I don’t take lightly. As a father of two boys, I am concerned with how pornography conveys sex to today’s youth; how it exploits both women and men; and the fact that pornography is getting more and more graphic (and violent) than ever. Dr Gail Dines, of Wheelock College, puts pornography in some much-needed perspective and I hope this engages a lively, yet respectful, discussion. – Christian Avard
In today’s world, sex has become commodified and industrialized. We see it all the time in print publications, television commercials, cable television shows, major motion pictures, and adult entertainment. Pornography is a multi-billion dollar industry that misuses and abuses sex and represents it in disturbing ways. Pornographers sell and produce films based on teen sex, torture porn, humiliation, and/or racist caricatures. What’s more disturbing is that hard-core porn is becoming more mainstream in society.
Dr. Gail Dines is a professor of sociology and women’s studies at Wheelock College and an expert on pornography. Her new book, Pornland: How Porn Has Hijacked Our Sexuality, has just been released by Beacon Press and is considered a groundbreaking study of how today’s pornography shapes men and women’s ideas, attitudes, and perceptions of sex. Here is what Dines has to say about her new book and the effects of pornography.
In the preface of your book, you share a personal story about a conversation you had with your son over pornography. You write, “I said [to him] that should he decide to use porn, that he was going to hand over his sexuality—a sexuality that he had yet to grow into, that made sense for who he was and who he was going to be—to someone else.” How and why do boys and young men give their power away to pornography? What kind of power does pornography have in shaping boys’ and men’s perceptions, attitudes, and beliefs toward sex?
Dr. Gail Dines
Boys and men don’t realize the power they’re giving away to pornography. They don’t understand the power it has to shape who they are, their sexuality, and their sexual identity. In this culture, we think of pornography as a joke or something to laugh about. We don’t take it seriously as a source of information that has the ability and power to impact on the way we think about the world. Most boys and men go to pornography for an ejaculation; they come away with a lot more. I don’t think they’re quite aware of it.
Pornography, like all images, tells stories about the world. It tells stories about women, men, sexuality, and intimacy. In pornography, intimacy is something to be avoided, and—as I say in the book—“In pornography nobody makes love. They all make hate.” The man makes hate to the woman’s body. It’s about the destruction of intimacy.
Is it true that what most boys and men see in current trends of pornography are things that they expect in sex? How did that happen, and how is it impacting on boys’ and men’s perceptions, attitudes, and beliefs toward sex?
Well, a lot of people don’t know what pornography is. The first thing I do in the book is very purposefully describe it in detail. I know that for many people it’s going to be hard to read. I understand that. But if you’re really going to understand what I’m saying and why I’m saying it, then you have to understand the material I’m talking about. A lot of older men and women think I’m talking about Playboy from 15 years ago: a centerfold or a woman with no clothes on smiling in a cornfield. They think, “What’s wrong with that?” Well, that was bad enough in the way it objectified women, but we’re on a whole new level now with this kind of imagery.
How it got to this point is the Internet. It made it more accessible, affordable, and anonymous. You’re seeing a massive rise in use, and the users are getting younger and younger. Children who are 11½ years old are now looking at pornography because it comes straight into the home. There’s no limit on how much you can access. It used to be you had to steal father’s Playboy or Penthouse. Use was limited to how much you could actually pilfer. Today it is unlimited.
So what happens is that desensitization sets in that much quicker and that much earlier. In order to keep the consumer base going, the pornographers have to keep upping the ante. They make it more violent, body-punishing, or abusive as a way to keep men interested. When you think about it, if you’re exposed to it at age 11 or 12, you’re jaded by 20. You’re certainly jaded by 30. Pornography bleeds sex dry of intimacy, emotions, and connection. Once you do that, then there’s not much left. It becomes boring and mechanical. So you have to keep feeding newer and newer ideas just to keep [the audience] interested.
You describe Gonzo porn as “body-punishing sex.” Why is it body-punishing, why is it prevalent today, and what do people need to know about it?
It’s body-punishing because the male performers pound away at a woman’s body. You often see three men orally, vaginally, and anally penetrate her over and over again for 20 minutes or more, and these are often Viagra-fortified penises, so they stay hard much longer. A woman’s body has limits. All of ours do. What you see in Gonzo porn is a woman’s anus that is red and sore and a swollen vagina. All of these things happen because of the way a woman’s body is treated. Even the pornography industry says that Gonzo is very demanding and potentially dangerous for women. If the industry is saying it, then there’s certainly a problem.
What I’ve found with my interviews with men is the more they watch, the more they want porn sex, because they become habituated to that kind of industrial-strength sex. Once you become habituated to that, anything else looks boring or uninteresting. What I find is that some men lose interest in their partners altogether and use more pornography. Other men nag and cajole their girlfriends to perform porn sex, or they use prostitutes because that’s who they think they can play this porn sex out on.
Remember that you are not just reading or looking at porn. You’re actively masturbating and having an orgasm to it. It has a very visceral response in the body. This is one of the reasons it is so powerful.
How/why does pornography misuse and abuse the concepts of sex and how/why does pornography normalize the idea that pain is pleasure?
Well, it’s because of the way the woman’s body is treated. In pornography, no matter what you do to her, no matter how much you physically or verbally abuse this woman, she loves it. She can’t get enough. What I find fascinating and upsetting at the same time is…
Men believe that!
… That’s right. They believe it. I’ve had men argue with me that they believe women like it. So when I say to them, “What’s your evidence? Have you seen any empirical studies? Have you interviewed these women?” No, of course they haven’t. They’re using the text as their evidence because she’s saying “I love it! Give it to me harder!,” when of course she has no choice. First of all, she wants to get paid. She has to say that, and if she wants to continue working in pornography, she has no choice.
I often hear that women actively seek “body-punishing sex,” talk about liking it and desiring it, and write about it in non-pornographic, sex-related blogs, periodicals, and other forms of media. Sometimes I hear people say that degrading acts of sex can be intimate. Why is this perception wrong, and how has pornography made people think this way? Why is this an unhealthy perception of sex?
Because it distorts what women want, who they are, and the kind of sex they want to have. I don’t want to say there’s nobody who wants that kind of sex. In any society, you’re going to have variations on what people want.
The problem with pornography is that it normalizes that which is a minority preference for many women. That’s all you see in pornography. You never see anybody say, “Let’s hold, let’s kiss, let’s do all of these things.” Everyone in pornography wants it as hard and fast as possible.
So what they do is they normalize something very unusual in the culture. The more men look at pornography, the more they actually think that this is what women want, especially because they have no counterbalance to it. There is very little sex education today in this country outside of pornography that really speaks to boys and young men.
I’m sure you’ve heard the common response that “no one is forcing a gun on women to perform these acts, and they are doing it by choice.” Why is that a common justification for porn, and what is wrong with that argument?
I think that’s a very apolitical and de-contextualized understanding of choice. The majority of women in pornography—and it’s true in prostitution as well—are not women who have medical and law degrees, and they’re not choosing between practicing medicine or going into pornography. The women are usually working class women who are looking at minimum-wage jobs and who have been sold an image of pornography, that it’s glamorous. They see people like Jenna Jameson or Sasha Grey with all of their pop culture celebrity status.
Recently, Jameson was on Oprah Winfrey, and there was no real analysis of what happens to women in pornography. What they did is glamorize it by showing the wealth Jameson accumulated. What they don’t show is that for every Jameson there are tens of thousands of women who end up poor, drug-addicted, incur bodily problems and diseases. And often a lot of the women are there for only a short time. They have a very short shelf life, and many of them end up in brothels of Nevada. They don’t end up in a huge mansion with lots of fancy cars and beautiful clothes.
Another common attitude or belief boys and men have toward pornography is “Well, that’s just a fantasy and I wouldn’t act that out in real life.” Do you see that as an excuse to legitimize pornography? Why is that problematic?
I address this in my book. As progressive people, we cannot bear that the right-wing media has the power to construct ideology in this country. None of us who are progressive will look at Fox News and say, “It’s just imagery; it’s just a fantasy; and it has no effect.” People can tell the difference between media and reality. We know media has the power to shift views and consolidate right-wing ideology.
Pornography is also a form of media representation. So why is it that Fox News and Rush Limbaugh have the power to change and shape society, and suddenly pornography is the only media form that has no effect? This whole fantasy issue is totally ludicrous. It takes no account of how images construct reality.
While pornography is pushing the boundaries of sex, it’s also making its way into more and more mainstream media. What are the most prevalent examples of porn being accepted or seen as “normal,” and how is it being legitimized?
One example I talk about in Pornland is Brazilian waxes. They come straight down from the pornography industry. Most of the female students I meet across the country have no pubic hair whatsoever. Their boyfriends don’t like it, and I’ve even heard of cases where boys won’t have any sex with women if they have any hair. Where did this come from? When I was growing up, if somebody did that, you would think something was wrong with them. Suddenly girls are increasingly taking all of their pubic hair off and getting bikini waxes.
Another example is the way in which the pornographic and prostitution culture is being glamorized. Women can now take pole-dancing lessons. They wear clothing that looks like they just stepped out of pornography. You see it everywhere, and women are capitulating to men’s sexual demands because there are very few alternative ways of being female in this culture.
Another example of pornography having power is in the hook-up culture that’s taking place on college campuses. What is hook-up sex? It’s porn sex. It’s the same thing. It’s anonymous, non-intimate, and disconnected sex, and everyone is having hook-up sex in pornography. Increasingly, what’s interesting is that women and girls are consenting to hook-ups even though studies show that they experience less sexual pleasure than men and are more likely to be raped in such situations.
Pornography today is being mainstreamed by the likes of Howard Stern, “Maxim” magazine, or the “Girls Gone Wild” series. You also mention the series “Sex and the City” in your book. How does the show shape perceptions of pornography, especially for women?
In “Sex and the City,” pornography is kind of a minor character on the show. It pops up a few times with men masturbating to porn and wanting to bring it into the bedroom. These women on “Sex and the City” were not outraged. Some of them didn’t like it but rarely complained. A lot of men in “Sex and the City” wanted porn sex, hook-up sex, urination sex, and other things that come from pornography. What you saw in “Sex and the City” was women hooking up and then feeling empowered by it, when in reality what they really wanted—and what made “Sex and the City” such a conservative show—was to settle down with a guy. The series was all about finding Mr. Right.
In Pornland you discuss racism in pornography. Oftentimes I hear, “They’re not racist, they’re just funny titles.” How prevalent is racism in pornography, and is it being diminished or trivialized by consumers and producers alike? Why hasn’t most of society picked up on this element?
One in four new videos to hit the market is interracial, which is sex between a black man and a white woman. Today’s interracial videos depict body-punishing sex. A black man’s penis is referred to as “gigantic,” “huge,” and “monstrous,” and the images reduce black men to their penises, which has historical resonance in this culture. Black women are portrayed as extremely animalistic, uncontrollable, and deviant in their sexuality. Now what happens is when you show these images over and over, it reinforces the way white people think about people of color, because in this country one of the ways in which they have rendered invisible racist ideology is by sexualizing it.
Why haven’t many people picked up on this racist element in pornography?
I think most of them don’t know. When I tell people, they’re shocked. If you ask the men who use pornography, they’re not. But these men, once aroused and eager to find an image to masturbate to, are not in any mood to start doing a critical deconstruction of the text.
One of the main reasons why interracial porn is so popular with white men, which is the main consumer base, is if pornography is about the dehumanization of women, what better way to dehumanize a white woman in the eyes of white men than to see her being penetrated over and over by something they view as depraved, the black male body?
People or individuals who try to explain that sex is about intimacy, caring, sharing, and trust in a relationship are often cast off as “prudish,” “a tight-ass,” “a religious nut,” or “someone who isn’t getting any.” How difficult has it been to explain this aspect of sex and how pornography strips it of any human connection? Why is there such aversion to sex based on equality and respect?
I think there is a real fear of being labeled anti-sex. The way pornographers and their allies have sold this is that you’re either pro-pornography or you’re anti-sex. Which of course is ludicrous because pornography is not the same as sex. Pornography is an industrial product. It commodifies human needs and sells it back to people, often in an unrecognizable form. It is not simply a reflection of reality. It is a specific representation of it and it is a specific way of representing sex.
Now to assume that if you are against pornography you’re against sex, is to assume that anyone who criticizes McDonald’s is anti-eating. People who criticize McDonald’s are against the destruction of the environment, against the assault on healthy foods, and against child obesity. They are against an industrial product. They are not against eating. So why can’t they see that it is the same thing when it comes to pornography and sex?
Given the prevalence of pornography today, that demand for pornography is going up, not down, and that sex acts are getting more and more violent, degrading, and humiliating for men and women, are you hopeful that things can be turned around?
To turn this around there needs to be a massive public health awareness campaign. Unless people begin to understand the role pornography is playing in our culture, I can’t see any reason that this won’t get worse, because all of these men who started watching pornography young are going to want more and more. Pornographers themselves say they’re having trouble keeping up with what fans want because they want it so hardcore.
Where is this going to end? I don’t know. What will an 11-year-old boy want 10, 20, or 30 years from now? Nobody knows. The truth is we’ve never brought up a generation of males with hardcore pornography. No one can really say what’s going to happen. What we do know, from how images and media affect people, is that it’s going to increasingly shape the way men think about sex, sexuality, and relationships.
Thanks for this interview, a very thoughtful and thought-provoking discussion on an important topic.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1232485/My-generation-created-sexual-revolution–wrecking-lives-women-since.html
http://daily.swarthmore.edu/2010/4/26/two-girls-one-laptop/
@l.s.t. To each their own, but I don’t think their view is at all representative among women. How convenient for you to marshall this minority view in an apparent attempt to absolve you of examining the deeper issues. This link says: “It’s OK, folks, they like it. You can carry on with the porn and not feel bad about it.” Bullshit.
Christian this was a really good interview. One of the best I’ve read in a while mainly because it was so informative.
Kudos to Gail Dines. I’ll be picking up her book soon and passing the information to my teenage sons.
Great post and very informative but as a young man who lives with a conservative family, any kind of pre-marital sex is unacceptable. Despite the extremely negative effects of porn, I choose to indulge myself using it as a short fix deliberately and consciously ignoring the long term effects that it might have.
For those interested check out a philosophical treatise on the subject called Sexual Solipsism by Rae Langdon.
Ed: I have inserted two links to the work you mention.
Important, thoughtful work that needs broad discussion, not just when private contactors/military/pro athletes/actors/musicans “behave badly.”
Really insightful questions here, and I look foward to reading the book. Thank you!
Cheers! This was a very interesting look at the ways porn shapes our culture and attitudes toward sexuality. And I agree that its consumption does indeed shape, and even warp, young men’s image of sex and sexual roles/identity.
However, the central-most issue here goes largely unaddressed: WHY? Why do boys/young men so easily buy into this perception of violent sexuality and intimacy (or lack of such)? Dr. Dines references Fox News apropos to shaping our cultural image through media. Yet this is perhaps confusing correlation and causation. Media certainly help shape our worldview, but they are not solitary or even primary operators. They are part of a mélange of cultural influences. Media’s most prominent role is that of cementing, defining and even narrowing the views we already have.
So continuing with the Fox metaphor, WHY are men/boys so easily influenced by this particular form of media? As a journalist, I monitor right-wing media all the time. Yet it doesn’t influence my politics. Or if it does, the reaction is actually an inverse one. But porn doesn’t seem to affect people that way. So, Dr. Dines, what do you make of the seeming ease with which we as a society can be sucked into the violent sex depicted in these films, or the violent fantasy they promote? Surely there is something deeper than media normalization going on here. Sure, we’re jaded. But what brought us to this point in the first place? How is it that people who are in every other regard nonviolent and non-misogynistic not instantly revolted by the violent images depicted in these films? When an actor like Sasha Grey is starring in a film by Steven Soderberg, obviously the formerly-fringe genres of porn are reaching an audience made up, at least in part, of very liberal (in the classical, not political, sense) people. So why do you think this is happening?
PS: there are some pretty honest, practical, and non-fetishistic reasons for preferring a hairless vaginal/anal region. Let’s not take this point too far, but uncontrollable coughing/choking doesn’t exactly breed intimacy…
“there are some pretty honest, practical, and non-fetishistic reasons for preferring a hairless vaginal/anal region. Let’s not take this point too far, but uncontrollable coughing/choking doesn’t exactly breed intimacy”
Really? So what did men who were incompetent at cunnilingus do before women shaved their pubes en masse?
And what about women who are equally incompetent at fellatio? Should their boyfriends ensure that their testicles and the pubic area are all waxed or shaved?
I agree that it may misinform those who have not had sex or have sex rarely of the popularity of certain fetishes.
But part of this is rectified by having actual sex, and if you like someone enough to have sex with them, you’re more likely to want to know what your partner actually wants.
Communication is even more important in the porn age. We can no longer afford to be prudes about sex or we risk wildly inappropriate responses.
“women are capitulating to men’s sexual demands because there are very few alternative ways of being female in this culture.”
Certain types of porn are definitely a problem. But I think women have a particular issue with it because it threatens their control of men through sex. Some men abandon real sex for pornography to release them from the control of their partner.
Some pornography is a problem. But women share responsibility too.
Can you cite some specific examples where women share some resonsibility, Bobby?
Well, if you are a man and your moody wife doesn’t put out more than twice a month, and you’re civilized enough not to force the issue, or to have an affair, I could very easily imagine that someone would go to porn for that outlet. If wives did their duty, porn probably would decrease. That’s where they share some responsibility.
Thank you, Jack, you just proved Gail’s point about the avoidance of intimacy. Sex is not a “duty” and if women, who enjoy sex as much as men do, don’t happen to be responsive to their partner’s overtures, partners need to communicate about this. Its the communication and intimacy that porn does away with. But the real corker in your comment was that porn “threatens their [women's] control of men through sex”. So women control men through sex, now? What a fascinating worldview that inverts all evidence of patriarchy.
Your condescension is misplaced, Finebeer; you should not talk down to people until you understand the point. Sex is indeed a duty, and while there are always exceptions, women do not generally enjoy sex as *often* as men to. Part of sexual fidelity is not only for the partner who want more sex to restrain themselves from seeking other partners, but for the one who wants less to exert themselves to meet their partner’s sexual needs.
Because sex takes effort, and people (especially with children) are busy and tired, it often works on the schedule of whoever wants less. The person who wants more is left find some other outlet.
And of COURSE women have long controlled men through sex…that’s how women have thrived in patriarchal culture. Women in general are more in control of their sexual impulses, and whoever has more control of something so powerful and basic will have more power.
I’m sorry, I don’t think sex is a duty. Pity the couple that views it as such. Non-consensual sex is just that whether its within marriage or not. Its called rape. And rape is not about sex, its about power. The ones exercising that violence are almost exclusively male. So much for women’s “control”.
As for women’s generally greater control of their own sexualities, I can concede that, but not so their “control” of men. Influence, maybe, but to make a blanket statement that women control men through sex is a bit much. It is men that control men. Why are you abdicating your responsibility of yourselves? Withholding sex works both ways, there are plenty of women who have stronger sexual appetites than some men.
On to the busy schedules bit. Funny that most studies see women, even and especially working women, bear a disproportionate burden of household work. Maybe they’d be more interested in sex with their partners if their partners pulled their weight around the home a bit more.
As for women “thriving” in patriarchal culture — through sexual control — this is too simplistic an assertion to address here. Suffice to say, it implies that women only have recourse to their sexuality. Now, if men valued the intelligence of women more, stopped the systematic discrimination and devaluation of women and seeing them as mainly sex objects ….
Jack, do a bit more housework and treat hyour wife with love and respect. Then she’ll put out more often.
If wives “did their duty”? Ugh. You sound exactly like the type of man that would inspire a wife to be completely turned off.
@Jenny/Alison. You both raise a great point here, and I think I might be able to tie a few ideas on to the “why” of porn.
As someone who has grown up on internet porn since puberty, I am fully aware of issues raised in the above interview. I am here to learn more about why sex with a real woman scares me and why I’d rather be watching porn! Terrifying!
Men on the whole have no idea about women. Don’t understand the way they think/feel/act or how to relate to them. The natural processes that taught us these things in nature have vanished in modern society.
I never realised I had issues with my sexuality because I didn’t have the social/personal/emtional skill set required to interact with girls. It wasn’t until studying the works of David Deangelo that I was able to go out, interact with and understand women, enjoy the complexity of the interactions, and ultimately realise: I’ve got massive sexual anxieties and I have no idea why.
Porn didn’t even blip on the radar when I went looking for the problem, not a first. It was as normal a part of life as TV (something I’m now also quite skeptical about). The fast food analogy is my favourite, and I’ve been binging my whole life (I’m 24)
For anyone interested in learning more about what’s going on inside the minds of men today and what could possibly drive us into such an unhealthy addiction, read/watch some of the inner game material from David Deangelo. We’re so messed up on the inside you wouldn’t believe.
Actually I would…. which is why I’m single…
I’ll try to, Christian. We live in a very sexualised culture. Many (not all) women enjoy the power that sex confers on them – control over boyfriends, husbands, bosses, co-workers, etc. Pornography threatens that control by providing men with an alternative sexual outlet.
So, womens’ culpability comes from them willingly contributing to the sexualisation of society – and then complain about one manifestation of it (porn).
Bobby,
I’m not sure I understand, how exactly do women contribute to the sexualization of our public culture? The ownership of media and advertising is mostly male, and women’s images targeted for the male gaze. Men, more than women, are sexualizing our culture.
And I’m not sure I understand you with this “control” thing. Perhaps sex does confer some power, but you are conflating this with control. What about women who have strong sexual drives and whose male partners have weaker libidos? I don’t buy your theory that porn threatens what you see as women’s sexual control.
I’ll concede that women are more adept, generally, in the emotional sphere, but you make them sound like sexually manipulative control-freaks. I’m not saying you said it, it’s implied only. It makes you seem like a misogynist. You even include co-workers and bosses that women “control”. Have you had bad experiences with women? Your claim that women are culpable from “willingly contributing to the sexualisation of society” just doesn’t add up.
OK, well we agree that women contribute to the sexualisation of society. You also accept that sex gives women some power. You then do not see the connection between power and control. Most people do.
Of course I do not think women are “sexually manipulate control freaks”. I simply pointed out that sex confers (some) power and (some) control to many women.
Spare me the name calling and amateur psychology. It’s the sort of thing men used to do to women.
Your assertion that sex gives women power, rests on the disgusting perception of women as gatekeepers of sex, who don’t really enjoy it, but use it as a negoiation tool with men.
Newsflash: lots of women enjoy sex for its own sake and don’t use it for a negotiation tool and those who do, do so in a society which tells them that if they don’t gatekeep it, they are sluts. Put a stop to that double standard and you put a stop to gatekeeper behaviour.
Men have far more sexual power than women do: the power to sexually assault and rape for example, whcih they use on a fairly widespread basis: 1 in 4 women in our society is raped or sexually assaulted and although we know sex offenders are repeat offenders, all that sexual assault and rape isn’t being perpetrated by the same bloke. That’s a lot of rapists out there, between 60 and 90% of rape isn’t even reported and when it is, there’s only a 6% conviction rate. That’s real sexual power – gatekeeping doesn’t even come close.
While a woman can certainly talk to and about their view of porn without argument, and certainly no-one should argue about the negative factors surrounding abusive. The problem with this article is likened to straight men trying to play the part of gay men in movies and TV sitcoms. It just isn’t realistic. The false-truth is masquerading behind a woman’s view of what men should like and not like. We are two totally different creatures. Likewise Mrs Dines is attempting to bend a fragile object around a mandrel. It becomes misshapen by the effort. Religion has hijacked morality, and her efforts are proof of that effort. Non-abusive porn is nothing more than voyeurism. Abusive porn is something else again.
Dines makes some valid points about the porn industry’s normalization of specific ways of being female, but let’s not forget that viewing porn also affects men’s perceptions about what their bodies should be like and how they should perform in sex…
That the porn industry has become an enormous institution that’s easily available to anyone who wants it is undeniable. However, I think Dines is assuming that pornography is exclusively for straight male consumption. What about women who view porn? What about non-heterosexual porn? Dines is suggesting that porn is about [white] heterosexual men reinforcing their position of power, but they are not the only target audience.
I think it’s safe to assume Emily that the majority of consumers of mainstream porn are men. I don’t think you’ll find many women who enjoy seeing women being anally, orally, and vaginally penetrated by men or watching them be passive participants in acts such as “Ass-to-mouth” or ATM or bukkake. That’s where porn is going these days.
“Thats where porn is going these days”?
This kind of oversimplification is maddening. The proliferation of porn means porn is going in EVERY direction these days. But there is no effort to distinguish between them, because that would be in danger of showing that, say, romantic fantasy porn geared toward couples is not so bad after all.
It’s as bad as Dines statement: ““In pornography nobody makes love. They all make hate.” This a genuinely stupid statement that is not only wrong, it contradicts her own view of pornography. The danger of pornography is that it rips the physical away from the emotional/spiritual aspects of sexuality, reducing it to, as Dines says elsewhere, the mechanical. But the “make hate” foolishness implies (ALL!) pornography is charged with emotion, and that emotion is hate.
You are assuming that “hate” is an emotion, whereas some might define it as an absence of, a revulsion toward, or a negating of emotion.
This is an informative summary of what’s wrong with porn wrapped in some chicken little alarmism. Calm down. Popular culture, and porn for that matter, is not monolithic, and while porn is an awfully misleading place to get sexual information, it’s not exactly the only thing that influences people’s attitudes about sex.
I worry that the serious stuff that this person has to say is being obscured by some family values parania that I’m rather suspicious of.
Um, no “JamieMc.” You’d be surprised by the amount of evidence today that men think that what women do in today’s porn really reflects who they are when it comes to the bedroom. As I said above, no woman enjoys being triple-penetrated, forced to perform ATM, bukkake, or other humiliating sex acts, which are becoming the norm, rather than the exception in porn production. It’s scary.
As for the “being obscured by some family values parania” comment, you obviously are shooting from the hip without knowing who Dines is and what’s she’s all about. Today’s porn exploits men and women and it’s become more degrading than ever. Producers are having a hard time coming up with more material for their movies and it’s frightening and abhorrent to see where porn is going these days.
Interesting that you “know” what all woman enjoy.
Um, I never made that claim “Benjamin.”
But please tell me how many women out there enjoy performing today’s sex acts that are portayed in mainstream porn. Who in their right-minds would find fulfilment and satisfaction from humilation? Porn makes you think that women enjoy being treated like that, but I sincerely doubt that they do. What evidence would you like to see to convince you? Let me know.
Uh, you did make that claim when you said “no woman enjoys”. I agree for the most part, but you did make it.
“no woman enjoys being triple-penetrated, forced to perform ATM, bukkake, or other humiliating sex acts, which are becoming the norm, rather than the exception in porn production.”
Please back this statement up with either some stats, or even your method of deciding what is the “norm” in pornography. And what about what is still the vast majority of porn, which involves no humiliating sex acts?
I’m assuming you’re male. Instead of imagining that you know what a woman enjoys or not… why don’t you speak to your own experiences, tell us what you as a man enjoy, and imagine how you would feel if you were not only having sex but also simultaneously being penetrated by a dildo in the anus and in the mouth? It’s the same act, isn’t it? A little over the top, verging on painfully over-stimulating, wouldn’t you agree?
Ummm… A lot of women. Men too, actually. In the context of a consensual relationship between informed adults, humiliation can (for some) be super hot. Many people in bdsm subcultures purposefully play with humiliation and power dynamics in their sex lives all the time.
The porn ms dines is talking about has always been around. The Internet has just made that material, for better or worse, more accessible.
For me the issue is not porn, but porn out of context. Way too few people are having conversations about sexuality, fantasy, and consent. This silence or outright refusal to talk about sex fuels the feelings of wrongness and shame that give porn part of its power and erotic charge.
The more you demonize porn and shame people for watching it, the more attractive porn becomes. Like it or not, thats the nature of the beast.
Sorry if this comment is rambly and disjointed. My thoughts on this topic are all over the place.
Wow… lot’s of generalizing in this interview. Porn this. Porn that.
The researcher should study some gay porn. I lot of her assertions just wouldn’t stand up. ooops. I mean they’d be blown out of the water. ooops You know what I mean.
So if Dines just understood connectionless sex a little bit more, then everything would be fine? No. Regardless of sexual preference, porn commodifies sex into unhealthy means for relating or connecting to other people. I’ve always thought that sex should be a means for connection and a way of expressing trust, respect, caring, and cooperation in a partnership. Porn takes all of these things away.
I can’t imagine how empty it must feel to have connectionless sex where two consenting adults use each other for their own pleasure. Yet this is what porn is conveying and people think this is where fulfillment in sex comes from. Let’s not deny that that’s not happening.
This is manifestly NOT the point that Dines was making. Seriously, square this with the “make hate” statement.
Most of the complaints here are that this whole article is very messy thinking. Even those of us who agree that almost all porn has a negative impact are put off by the fact that different kinds of porn had different kinds of impact, but you and Dines either won’t or can’t distinguish between them.
“So if Dines just understood connectionless sex a little bit more, then everything would be fine?”
Uh, thanks for assuming that all gay sex is connectionless sex.
My point was that the author’s assertions of porn showing no intimacy, no connection, no love is not true of gay porn, at least some gay porn. There’s even kissing, something I gather straight men don’t do in porn for some reason.
She might also look into gay couples and their attitudes about porn. She might find some significant differences between how hetero couples and gay couples deal with porn-related issues.
[...] conservative blogger Rod Dreher points me to this interview of a Left-wing sociologist on the malevolent influence of pornography on modern relationships. She [...]
Kara’s comment on male body image made me smile. I have no hard evidence to support this, but for a long time I’ve attributed certain strong prejudices to porn. For example, many women are horrified or confused by uncircumcised penises–some by the mere idea of a penis that hasn’t been partially chopped off. There’s also a strong reaction I’ve noticed towards body hair; this gets reinforced everywhere in Hollywood, not just porn, but it’s an interesting change. I’m in great shape and take a lot of pride in my body, but I get some very strong reactions to my chest and shoulder hair.
I think Dines makes some interesting points about pornography. Like many things (vices, in particular), surely it should be “used” (consumed?) in moderation, and there is a small subset of people (men) out there who ignore that.
But I have to admit, I think her attitude towards porn, not to mention sex in general, strikes me as a little prudish. She doesn’t like the fact “girls these days” shave some of their pubic hair, or that the imaginary phenomenon of “hookup culture” is a fact of life. I can almost imagine Dines sitting in a rocking chair – “Why, back in my day… !”
None of these things is an affront to women, destructive to women, or, indeed, indicative that men have somehow been programmed into misogyny by the evil of easily accessible porn. Dr. Dines, please give us men a little more credit. Geez.
well, i’m in my mid-20s and i don’t understand the shaving or hook-up sex and think it’s just a product of living in a culture that has an increasingly deteriorating morality/spirituality. saying that it’s a “fact of life” is just the most pointless statement. i mean, in africa people starving to death is a fact of life. what point are you even trying to make?
I’ll second BobSF – this interview is totally heterosexist. For gays, porn has brought the community together, legitimized their identity, and brought release to many men who are trapped in the closet. The author seems to be a sex phobe who mistakes what is depicted in some straight porn as the norm. We are really talking about diversity here. Women don’t accept a lot of things about their mates and they sure aren’t going to be forced into a four on the floor gang bang while being shaved bald etc etc. Talk to regular people for Chrissakes.
I agree it’s very hetero-focused. Within that, though, I don’t see why you would assume the author is mistaking trends in pornography for trends in sexual behavior among young people. I haven’t done any surveys myself, but I’ll note she’s not the only person to remark on this issue:
Thanks for posting this clip. I completely agree with her throughout, but especially at 2:15. Thank God someone said it: most women do NOT like it on their faces. And this is from a woman who (in the clip) says she watches porn. The porn trade is still dominated by men for men, and doesn’t have much clue about women’s desires. Even men’s desires it doesn’t necessarily reflect but leads, mainstreaming sometimes abusive and minority fetishistic acts. Of course, its all so titillating that violence gets a pass. And thta’s dangerous.
Well said, Finebeer. Having lived thru the age of “Free Love” and joyously partaking in it, something twisted along the way. And has stayed twisted, only encouraging & leaving the lowest common denominators of all that Free Love philosophy birthed.
it is heterosexist. she’s talking about straight porn that is made for straight men.
She makes good points, but I feel she goes too far and denies that…..how do I put this…..
Some people *really* get turned on by getting pissed on.
Some of these people will eventually think “Why not get paid to get pissed on”.
She seems to take the position that all wild fetishes have been artificially created by porn. I think we could agree that’s the case with say, bukkake, but many times porn just seeks to exploit fantasies that have been quietly hiding in the bedroom for generations. The Interracial craze is a perfect example….
*** they sure aren’t going to be forced into a four on the floor gang bang while being shaved bald etc etc. Talk to regular people for Chrissakes. ***
That’s becoming the norm in pornography, not the exception. What will happen when pornographers have nothing left to cover? What boundaries will the push next? I don’t want to know and I hope it doesn’t go any further than it already has.
You can keep asserting this without evidence, but that doesn’t make it true.
Thank you for an interesting debate. I am a woman, in my mid-30s, who used to watch porn with my then lover. I am not a prude, sex is beautiful and the human form is hardly repugnant to me, but I have to agree with most, if not all, of Gail Dine’s observations. Erotic depictions are fine, but hardcore industrial porn does indeed rob men and women of their power and sexuality, its an addiction like drugs. Each time you need a higher and harder dose to get off.
And that’s the direction hard-porn is heading. There will always be a minority of women and men who have fetishes and I am not presuming to define what is normal, but what some commenters above seem to miss is the larger picture of what porn culture is doing to us all, not just some “harmless” soft porn to get off on. Its destructive and corrosive effects are becoming more apparent.
We want to define their own sexualities rather than have it defined for us by porn purveyors who don’t have a clue and have no respect for women — or men for that matter. So this is an issue of power, not just sexuality: and why should we give our power away to these purveyors of porn?
This is not just about family values — I don’t have any children and I’m still clearly worried about the things Gail Dine talks about (for the record, not so much things like being hairless, that’s also a health issue) but about dignity.
Porn-free for 3 years and happier for it.
I’m interested to know what it was about watching porn with your former partner that you found corrosive/distasteful. From your post, it sounds like that was a disempowering experience for you. How did that experience negatively affect you/your relationship?
What is your take on women like Tristan Taormino, Annie Sprinkle, and Madison Young, who are addressing this issue by creating the kind of porn that they would like to see?
I think it’s more apt to compare porn to alcohol. There are some who can watch it within a healthy context, but there are others who let it completely hijack their erotic imagination. I’m not going to go into all the possible contributing psychosocial factors for why this is the case, but I’m willing to bet money that the more stigma and shame you create around porn, the more likely people are to develop an unhealthy relationship with it.
I’m not saying that our hypersexualized media is a good thing, but I think that porn culture does not happen in a vacuum.
And where is the line between erotica and hard core porn? At what point does it cross the line from acceptable to harmful? And how do you distinguish between unhealthy hard core porn and fetish porn?
I could disprove many of the generalizations of this interview with about 30 minutes and a web browser. Some porno is distasteful, some is tender, some is invigorating, and the best of it creates a little window into a human mind. George Carlin pointed out that a car radio (back in the day) had two knobs; you need to learn how to work them.
The fact that some people are influenced by their environment and the imagery they encounter is hardly news. Dines critique of those people seems judgmental, but her message that we need to think about what we consume and live consciously is welcome.
Less shame about desire is probably a good thing. One of the miracles of the internet is the discovery that there are other people out there doing, saying, touching in ways that resonate with me.
*** I could disprove many of the generalizations of this interview with about 30 minutes and a web browser***
Unless there’s porn that shows mutual respect for the other person and a genuine sense of connection, I don’t think you’ll find much that’s meaningful per se and if you’re saying that men (and I say men because the majority of porn consumers are men) aren’t looking for connections then I think it’s only leading them to feelings of emptiness, which is really what most porn conveys. That and the degredation of women and men.
That was an interesting read from Ms. Dines. I think one important point this article misses is the paradox of the porn industry’s relationship with the internet. On the one hand it’s a larger audience to market to, on the other hand like the music industry when there is so much “free porn” out there the audience is unwilling to pay for dvds.
The porn industry went through a similar experience when the introduction of the vcr killed the porn theater business. But the difference in this pron internet evolution is that the most popular type of current porn or trend is “reality” or “homemade” porn. This is not the gonzo porn highlighted by Dines, where indeed the industry feels the need to go to more and more fetishes.
In reality/homemade porn the focus is not extremes, or air brushed unrealistic models, doing acrobatic acts but real people having sex.
In an age of phone cameras, flip cameras, and webcams where everyone is a voyeur it is indeed possible to see intimacy btw consenting partners and spouses. Take 30 minutes with a web browser…
Like I said, there’s plenty of porn that is full of mutual respect, humor, passion. This isn’t the place for links, though.
You have to look for it, just as you have to look for theology, history, and fiction that respects it’s audience. Most of the output of our culture conveys emptiness.
The shame of it is that we let our pornographers get away with this dreck, maybe because we’re afraid to admit that we want compelling visions of sexuality.
I think pornography is more of a mirror than guidebook. We find what we deserve.
Something that annoys me about porn is that people who like doggy-style sex are lumped in with people who like anal sex. These are two distinct sets of people. Also porn producers need to learn that not everyone likes the extreme close up sex. I like to see faces and not just faces covered in cum.
I disagree that you need “a harder and harder dose to get off” as a straight male I always am sifting through the harder stuff to get to what I want. Watching porn is not making me want harder stuff, it has not increased my interest in anal sex or gagging. HOWEVER, this is because I have actual sex on a regular basis. If I was more sexually naive I could see how porn could be extremely confusing.
All of universal behavior is commodified. Not just sex, but recreation, eating, aesthetics…they are all turbo-charged by multi-billion dollar industries compelling its participants to consume more. And all of these facets of life lead many people to extreme behavior built on the mediated experiences all around them (ever see enraged soccer parents light into a ref at their kid’s match?). The point, while valid, is academic. Unless the professor is stating we’re near an “end of history” with respect to pornography. I doubt that she is, or she would be in great company with those who declared Elvis Presley the end days or painting the visage of Christ a sign or Armageddon.
What makes it impossible to me to align with “progressives” like Dines is the fundamental belief from these folks that to disagree is to simply not know oneself. Are you a women who enjoys pornography or loves her S-Factor class? Oh poor thing, you’ve unfortunately been brainwashed by a vocal minority. Like “pornographic” sex, young man? It simply does not matter if you believe you can separate the two because I assure you that you cannot…and even if you could the strains you are putting on the societal fabric are simply too much to bear.
To baldly state as fact that non-intimate sex lacks any utility or that pornographic performers “hate” with their performance is not only a heaving bit of histrionics but requires that the person saying it disallow any other viewpoint, even from their perpetual victims whom the profess to speak for.
Unfortunately, it is the basis of the human condition that we rely on our free will. We will either move forward or go away. We certainly don’t need saviors who reside on THIS planet…
What gibberish. Dines assumes, without any serious empirical evidence or theoretical structure to back it up, that the illusory insinuation of porn videos can shape a phenomena as genetically embedded in humans, as sexuality. Her opinions are of no relevance to any scientist, policy maker, or for that matter, part time intellectual, and should be appropriately ignored.
Does that mean you read the book and you’re telling us she collected no data at all? No interviews, surveys, that sort of thing? That seems bizarre for a sociologist.
I’ve heard the same issue (of pornography as sex ed) brought up by others anecdotally — the TED talk I linked to above is one of the sources — but I haven’t seen wider data collection. And I’m pretty taken aback at the thought that Dines makes no reference to data in her book.
Am I misunderstanding you?
Sudeep, so you’ve read her book and looked at the footnotes, right? How about her other published works? Ever been to her lectures? If so, then you might have some grounds to back up these weak generalizations of yours.
After reading the interview and comments I want to respond to the poster Christian Avard.
Porn as a site of commodification of sexuality (among many others, it should be noted) is an important topic. However, it needs to be said that people have many different forms of sexuality and there is nothing necessarily wrong with it. If you predicated the discussion on that understanding, you could have a more useful exchange on the problem of commodification and associated violence which seems to motivate your concern.
For instance, you stated:
“I’ve always thought that sex should be a means for connection and a way of expressing trust, respect, caring, and cooperation in a partnership.
“I can’t imagine how empty it must feel to have connectionless sex where two consenting adults use each other for their own pleasure. Yet this is what porn is conveying and people think this is where fulfillment in sex comes from.”
This is your ideal of sex. Many people have recreational sex and have been doing so for at least thousands of years. It is nothing new. Recreational sex can be fun, safe, and healthy.
There was a time when leftists and feminists even advocated people engage in such behavior as sexual liberation, and even protected pronography as free speech.
Sex has also been “commodified” since forever. It’s called prostitution and here to stay.
As with prostitution, porn is nothing simple and its practice usually refects wider power dynamics and struggle in the society as a whole. So what are the contemporary power dynamics in contemporary pornography? Who shapes and wields power in the industry? What are their ends? So far the article and discussion tells me little.
Duder says **** This is your ideal of sex. Many people have recreational sex and have been doing so for at least thousands of years. It is nothing new. Recreational sex can be fun, safe, and healthy. ****
Really? And what did you base this opinion on? Can you give empirical data to back that claim up? Especially the part when you mention that recreational sex is “healthy.”
“Empirical data” Are you serious? Please do grow up. It is a big and wonderful world out there beyond your cultural taboos. And read some Foucault.
It’s worth pointing out that neither you nor Dines provide any empirical data yourselves.
“In pornography, intimacy is something to be avoided, and—as I say in the book—“In pornography nobody makes love. They all make hate.” The man makes hate to the woman’s body. It’s about the destruction of intimacy.”
Sorry, Gail Dines, I’ve watched way more porn than you and I can assure you that you are wrong.
All, an interesting discussion. Let’s keep it respectful and civil please. We all have different perspectives here. We don’t have to agree and let’s avoid dismissing others opinions out of hand.
Personally I don’t agree with everything Dines says, but her argument merits attention and consideration and it certainly has touched a nerve going by some of the responses.
Aside from defensive responses from those males who view porn, it would be interesting to hear from more self-identified (if it isn’t obvious from your name or handle) females here, too.
Thank you SO MUCH for this interview. I tend to be pretty Libertarian in thinking that what people do in the privacy of their homes is their own damn business, provided those things don’t hurt other people — but I’m coming to agree with the author that the pervasive reach and acceptance of pornography in our culture is, in fact, causing harm.
In our own home, pornography has had a negative impact on my husband’s sexuality, crippling his ability to shape a sexuality for himself that is not dictated by the images he’s viewed online from way too young an age. My teenage stepdaughter is horrified by the sexual ideas and expectations of the young men around her, and worries whether she will ever find a partner whose sexuality has not been shaped by porn, which has become so normalized in her age group and social circle.
I really appreciate Dines smart comments on the subject.
Very interesting interview, and topic. I have a few thoughts.
First of all, I feel that Mr. Avard is conflating two separate ideas in the interview and his responses to commenters, namely that:
1). Hard-core pornography is abjectly bad, social acceptance nonwithstanding; and
2). Certain sexual practices and those practitioners are bad.
In the article and his responses, Mr. Avard address both of those threads as one. It is clear from the interview that Mr. Avard sympathizes with Prof. Dines’ view that pornography is bad for society, but his questions regarding sex in general (not sex in porn) swerve pretty far to the normative (e.g. the statement that those who think that “sex is about intimacy, caring, sharing, and trust in a relationship are often cast off as ‘prudish,; ‘a tight-ass,’ ‘a religious nut,’ or ‘someone who isn’t getting any.’ “; more explicitly: “I’ve always thought that sex should be a means for connection and a way of expressing trust, respect, caring, and cooperation in a **partnership**,” my emphasis).
I suppose this is his imperative as the interviewer, and I don’t agree with him here, but in his replies to the commenters he strongly implies that Professor Dines agrees that certain types of sex (outside of porn) are bad (specifically in responses to “BobSF” and “Sundeep”), which seems to be a misrepresentation of Prof. Dines’ position. I’ll be the first to admit that I have not read Prof. Dines’ book (this is the first I’ve heard of it), but from the interview it does not seem that Prof. Dines shares the idea that there can be little interpretation of what proper sexual practices consist of. Prof. Dines explicitly states that “The way pornographers and their allies have sold this is that you’re either pro-pornography or you’re anti-sex. Which of course is ludicrous because pornography is not the same as sex…. to assume that if you are against pornography you’re against sex, is to assume that anyone who criticizes McDonald’s is anti-eating.” This logical argument resonates, and its corollary — if you are pro-sex then you must be pro-porn — is similarly ridiculous.
Many of the commenters on this article have grasped this idea, and tried to explain that some people like sex without intimate emotional connections, or enjoy certain types of fetishized sex. It’s fine if Mr. Avard personally does not like those things, but the assumption that embracing types of non-conservative sexual activity (and I use non-conservative instead of non-traditional on purpose; it would be very hard to argue that there is not a very longstanding tradition within human existence regarding recreational/non-intimate/fetishized sex) logically demands embracing hard-core, violent and sexist pornography is as incorrect as the pornographer’s claim that Dines mocks.
Demystifying and de-sacramentalizing sex has been a powerful tool for the feminist movement; it is important to remember that in many parts of the world female genital mutilation is a way of life, and women are expected to have sex for procreation (not pleasure) whenever the man in the relationship demands it. Being open about the pleasure of sex, in many different forms (the violent, multiple penetrative forms likely excluded; I don’t really know anyone who actually does that), is progressive and as Duder said, healthy. Being normative about what is and what is not the correct type of sex and generalizing that notion to the population at large is not helpful or healthy.
Secondly, with regard to Dines herself, I largely agree with her thesis that hard-core pornography is a social negative, but I’m not sure that I agree with her claim that this porn is ruining our sexuality. I don’t like most porn because most porn is pretty horrifying in its gross sexism (faux-rape and psychological, if not physical violence prevails) and racism (the interracial themes mentioned in the interview).
But the conclusion that porn will unleash a new generation of sexists seems like a great leap, and I think that it’s probably more likely that the sexism/sexual abuse tropes so often seen in hard-core pornography are a reflection of the undercurrent of acceptance of sexism and abuse that already exists in our society. The last thing we need as a society is another mainstream outlet that implies that men can order women to do what they want, during sex or whenever, but porn didn’t invent that idea.
Certainly we have good reason to discourage proliferation of such porn in an effort to stamp out violence (sexual, physical, verbal, psychological, etc) against women or non-anglo people, but the playing out of those situations in porn are more of a consequence of those issues rather than the genesis of them. In fact Dines herself can only come up with (in the interview, at least) 2 rather innocuous examples of porn influencing actual sexuality (“brazilian” waxes and pole-dancing classes) and one rather tenuous one (the oft-debated {and oft without much data} “hookup culture;” please see http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/2010/06/sexy-teen-trend-data/ among many others).
After all, if pole-dancing fitness classes, pubic hair grooming choices (as a brief aside, I love the hard, significant dataset regarding “most of the female students I meet across the country have no pubic hair whatsoever [I'd love to see *that* experimental consent form]…. and I’ve even heard of cases where boys won’t have any sex with women if they have any hair.” If you don’t think it can get more anecdotal than that, see: “when I was growing up, if somebody did that, you would think something was wrong with them.”). If these are the the most important outcomes of the increasing availability of hard-core pornography, then maybe we shouldn’t be so worried after all.
I agree that pole dancing and pubic hair grooming seems pretty innocuous sexual preferences. If Ms Dines doesn’t want to sound prudish, she shouldn’t cite harmless examples of sexual preferences as problems, regardless of whether they were influenced by porn. Don’t get into some connections about kiddie porn and pubic hair grooming either. I know plenty of men and women who prefer shaved and none that I know of are child molesters or perverts.
For what it’s worth, I started “consuming” hardcore porn when I was something like 13 or 14. On the internet, of course. I am now 28, and have perfectly healthy relationships with women, myself, my sexuality and whatever else. Even at a very young age, I was able to clearly distinguish between fantasy and reality (I played video games too, after all).
And just to counter anecdotal evidence with some of my own, none of MY buddies (who’ve also seen their share of YouPorn) have warped views of sexuality stemming from their consumption of porn. Any of those who do, I suspect have other issues to deal with as well.
I’ll leave it here.
I may strongly disagree with some of the comments I’m reading. But I do respect you all for sharing them and for opening up with all of us some very personal stuff. I’m glad that people feel comfortable doing so.
Sorry, for my tone in some of my comments. Carry on.
Very interesting read. Makes me think of my habits and what I think/feel/expect when watching porn. Dr. Dines does have a point on the desensitation porn has on sex. I don’t necessarily expect a woman to deep throat me after anal sex but without porn, I never would have wanted it in the first place. I mean sometimes I think if a woman doesn’t gag or vomit when giving oral then she’s doing it wrong. How warped is that?
Like some here, I agree that pornography can be bad for one if it gives one unrealistic expectations about what actual sex can and should be. (Survival hint: don’t go to kung fu flicks, high-class or low-, to understand fighting or martial arts.
Thinking after this manner since childhood, I almost entirely avoided porn until I’d actually had sex, recreational sex which was good foe me in itself and even better for me in its blossoming into love. I’ve been in that steady relationship for three decades now, enjoy a little porn and loath most of it, sometmes using the former as an aid to masturbation when I feel the need for orgasm and my wife is not interested. I think this works well, perhaps because I’m not interested in much that my wife would abjure. I don’t expected her to act like a porn actress, she doesn’t xpwct me to give her an absolute monopoly on my orgasms.
I must say that one _is_ against eating if one says that McDonalds is bad and simultaneously holds that there is no other food but McDonalds’. Some food is much better for you than fast food, and even some fast food is much better thhan McDonalds’—In-and-Out, for example and I’m boy joking and serious.
I totally agree with Gail Dine’s observations about porn, but porn isn’t sui generis, there are baser, more violent needs that are met by this kind of sexual imagery, and why are those not being addressed and looked into more deeply? Erotica isn’t the problem. It is the failure of our culture to adequately address the connections between masculinity, violence, domination and dispassionate, emotionless plunder (in the bedroom AND board room) that is the real, far-reaching and truly difficult problem. Erotica? You can just ban it in a righteous fury and be done. But another hydra head produced by the above issues will just rear its ugly head, and criminality and the excitement of the forbidden will just increase and swell around an underground porn industry. It is cultural laziness to just keep banning things and not address the root issues of why that which you have banned has become a problem. The sheer scope of the problematic underpinnings, and the attendant hopelessness, cause religious myths and pious stories about the “fallen-ness” of creation itself, or how there was one a golden age, or an Eden, or what have you. Well these problems can no longer be scapegoated to righteous bans, or relegated to God or the coming of a divine reign. Turn the minds of our young men and women around with tough and embarrassing conversations from the git-go, do not flinch away, do not shirk this responsibility if you dare to have children.
[...] an interesting interview with Pornland author, Gail Dines, she says: So what happens is that desensitization sets in that much quicker and that [...]
Sex is not a spectator sport!
I don’t necessarily buy that what I want in porn is what I want in real life. Be honest with you I’d rather just make love with my significant other than do some of the kinky stuff you see in porn. In fact, I find that when my significant other tried to do some of the kinky things that I like in porn, I found that I just didn’t like them in real life and just wasn’t interested.
This is a great interview. I attended Stop Porn Culture this year and very much enjoyed Gail Dines’ presentation.
I also wanted to say that I’m 22 years old and just getting out of the porn industry. I’m not afraid to speak out, but I am too tired. I suppose I am happy to let academia do it for me.
Just want everyone to remember that one of those “consenting” women they fap to or see in a SPC slideshow could be me.
The isses that Pornland author Gail Dines raises in that interview are of great importance, but I think she too easily confuses pornograhy qua pornography and larger social problems that manifest themselves in and around the porn industry.
I share her concern that pornography is the only sex education material available to (pre-)teens who aren’t yet able to distinguish between fantasy and reality. But isn’t the obvious answer to this problem that children deserve–are even fundamentally entitled to–sex education that clarifies the physical and emotional realities of sex? Teens are caught in the crossfire of abstinence-only “education” from adults and relentless social pressure from their peers; eliminating porn does nothing to solve this problem.
The same goes for Dines’ concerns over economic exploitation. “The majority of women in pornography…are usually working class women who are who are [otherwise] looking at minimum-wage jobs.” So Dines would like to eliminate pornography and force them back into said jobs? “Pornography is an industrial product.” Actually, the vast majority of pornography on the internet is amatuer porn that users produce and distribute for free. Sites like Cam4 are built around video chat rooms where the exhibitionists and the voyeurs talk for surpsiginly long perods of time (often more than an hour) before the sexy stuff happens. The “stars” have individual personalities that they express, loyal followers who address them respectifully, and total control of when and how they perform. Which is a way of saying that there are many more kinds of porn on the internet than gonzo.
Dines also laments the lack of intimacy and love in porno sex, which strikes me as willfully naive. The kind of utopian porn that she desires already exists: steamy romance novels. If Dines would like to see more cinematic porn along these lines, then she should really complain that romantic comedies always cut away from the sex act! Becuase outside of amatuer films–where real-life couples will often perform in ways that appear genuinely tender and loving–how can pornos convincingly convey deep emotional trust between actors?
As for the exploitation of women, this is the most complicated issue. That Dines speaks exclusively of heterosexual porn in the interview is telling. There is a lot of gay hardcore on the market that involves dominance/submisssion, extra large endowments and rough-and-tumble fantasies–so why doesn’t she identify “bottoms” as an exploited group? Juding by the volume of posts on Craigslist’s M4M sections, there are as many bottoms looking for hardcore action as there are “tops”; perhaps this is statistically specific to gay male culture and doesn’t represent the deisires of women (I wouldn’t know) but Dines doesn’t drop any statistics herself.
But here’s the more eternal problem: the sex act itself may be the one arena where total equality of the sexes can never fully prevail, for the simple fact that men can penetrate women but women cannot penetrate men. Gay hardcore seems unproblematic to the extent that both partners (unless indicated otherwise) are social equals and could easily “flip” roles, if not with eachother then with other partners. But straight actors cannot; men will always be the “tops” and women always the “bottoms” and this has nothing do with socialized values. To see hardcore exclusively as an expression of misogony is a way of avoiding the more difficult, intractable problems imposed by the sex organs themselves.
@Paul. Thanks for your thoughtful comment, and others here. Just a quick note. I’m not sure “equality” is quite the right word, it normatively privileges penetration. I’d prefer a word like reciprocity. Yes, males and females can not flip over and reciprocate in exactly the same way. Most heterosexual females — and males — are quite happy with this natural biological complementarity, of course. But I wouldn’t characterise it as “unequal”.
In this discussion, I wonder whether we can demarcate pornography per se from the issue of porn culture being mainstreamed, in the same we differentiate between military culture as something that properly belongs to the military, and not to civilian life?
Pornography will likely always exist and not all of it is violent or overtly abusive, but how many of us, including those who “consume” porn, would be unconcerned to see porn spill over in greater degrees into public culture and social relations? Pole-dancing classes are one thing, what about screening xxx videos on primetime?
In the same way I would find the creeping militarization of social life disturbing, I suspect many of us are concerned not so much at the existence of pornography in its various forms but about how its increasing accessibility may exercise an undue influence on perceptions.
If I were a parent I wouldn’t realistically expect that my teenager would not see any porn, I would expect however that there would be many other influences shaping their emerging sexuality, from friends, to family, mainstream culture, books, magazines, and most of all, personal experiences. I would hope then that porn would be but one available channel tempered by a variety of more influential channels, and not be their main source for shaping their sexuality as Gail Dines relates in the interview.
Also, on the porn-as-education question. A straw poll amongst friends doesn’t really return a positive correlation: I guess people pick up technique in other ways — above all, from practice. A web browser can not beat personal experience and interaction.
Is the author of this book saying anything new? From the interview (in which she’s got the opportunity to put forth her best insights, and evidence) it doesn’t seem so.
Is there any nuance to her conclusions? Can anyone imagine this author modifying her conclusions when faced with evidence to the contrary?
Regardless of how you feel about the subject, a professor writing a social-studies book should be able to make a more rigorous argument than this.
I’m equally disappointed with the softball questions of the interviewer. Challenging the holes in someone’s argument doesn’t mean you’re taking the other side.
monkey see monkey do,…porn creates and functions in a negative vortex and magnetic force-field which appears to be fascinating and is difficult to untangle oneself from,…
the important question for me is: what are the other aspects of life that the participant misses by becoming engaged/caught up in this fairly low common denominator (but very consuming) realm of human endeavor,…
i was struck by the one who commented something like: “three years porn free, and much HAPPIER for it,”….seems a little bit like getting rid of a smoking habit,…
good luck,…
I wish someone would do some research on how porn has shaped and is shaping women’s view of sex, rather than just taking female attitudes toward sex as given. I worry that women’s sexualities might be just as warped by overexposure to porn as men’s.
[...] reading it, but this is stupid.” I’d read it already. It was. Later, I stumbled across an interview with Gail Dines, author of Pornland: How Porn Has Hijacked Our Sexuality. I read it, too. It was [...]
First of all congratulate to professor Gail Dines for her book on Pornland with indeed very valuable guidence. I appreciate her bold and free frank views on sex and society at large hoe is effected and future youths of our world . Since she is in line of past PLAYBOY experience publishing has deep rooted ideas.All at large should think what she said in her interview also for the future healthy living life. Without satisfaction in sex the life not healthy as such miserable. The women in the world proved always above men hence satisfy 3 to 4 male at atime. I have seen a Porn a girl of 20 years satisfied 10 male of age group 40 to50 with in 90 minutes by constant sex one after another as an active partner in sex play.Any enjoyment has a limit of once’s personal choice.Only problem is for teen aged boys and girls of our society,for which unitedly solutions to be framed by GOVT and states.Ramesh nayak India Camp USA
I wonder what Dr. Gail thinks about gay porn. I personally think straight porn is terrifying, but have noticed that in gay porn there is less of an overall trend towards more hardcore stuff. Since anal seems “hardcore” already to most straight people, gay porn is almost adjusted on a different level to begin with.
I’m sure this topic goes unmentioned in her book.
I agree with a lot of what she says. A lot of porn is disgusting and could have an impact on boys and young men. But the way she talks is a little black and white. For instance, she says:
“Well, it’s because of the way the woman’s body is treated. In pornography, no matter what you do to her, no matter how much you physically or verbally abuse this woman, she loves it. She can’t get enough. What I find fascinating and upsetting at the same time is…
Men believe that!”
She doesn’t mean all men, does she? I enjoy porn but I’m not an idiot – I don’t buy that BS. I don’t watch super violent hard core stuff – but I watch what’s available. Just like I know that it’s a fantasy that every guy has a 10 inch c*** and every women screams her head off like that…
Perhaps porn have influenced me subtly, but I understand fantasy and reality. In her book, she says that men learn from playboy that women are to be used and then put away. That’s not what I learned; I learned that magazine is to be used and put away…not women…
Aren’t there other men who feel they can watch some porn and enjoy it and not be the sheep we are made out to be? And yes, I understand it affects some men, especially young men, and maybe it IS a bad thing in the aggregate.. but does she really think everyone is that blind?
wouldn’t one do better to suppose that
pornography is a manifestation of
the sexual economy rather than to suppose
a sexuality which suffers adversely from the
effects of pornography ?
pornography really derives from the theory
of so-called ‘sexuality’, one of whose principal
commands is that we must liberate ourselves
from all vestige of repression. popularizing
and tirelessly promoting this idea, getting it to become the establishment ‘scientific’ position counts as one of psychiatry’s main successes, or at least an
achievement psychiatry claims as a success.
psychiatry has convinced us that a ‘sexuality’ constitutes our deepest identity, that this
deepest identity requires a constant
patrolling, constant monitoring, lest it
fall prey to some repressive force or other,
and that the desire which accompanies our sexuality
demands both our full recognition and full liberation, insofar as we are to be
‘psychologically healthy and normal’.
now of course pornography has embraced this notion with tooth and nail. every possible, indeed
every imaginable sexual scenario has been
very precisely cataloged, identified,
named, enacted, photographed, and dramatized.
but keep in mind the veritable encyclopediatization
of pornography simply translates, simply
carries into art, fiction, drama, and film
that which has already been cataloged
and named in psychiatry. pornography merely
dramatizes, merely carries to its logical
conclusion psychiatry’s exhortation to
make sexuality ones primary identity and
field of concern, and admit to, define, and innumerate
the specifics of ones sexuality and its
accompanying desire sparing not the least detail.
now one can readily admit as to the failure
to which this line of thought has
led. the root of the problem
is that equally psychiatry
and pornography have confused the liberation
of desire with what saint michel referred to
as ‘making ourselves more susceptible
to pleasure’. the two are by no means the
same. hence teenage girls in hot pursuit of
the image of the so called slut. this is
a kind of natural end point for a desire
which has attained the full measure of liberation. and yet as so many have pointed out, its difficult
to imagine such a public display resulting in
much pleasure, in particular the kind of cultivated pleasure which really ought be our aim. for that
we need not the psychiatritization of a
fictionalized sexuality and accompanying pornographic
art, but rather a cultivated art which can
inspire us to the attainment of cultivated
pleasure of which sex is merely one component
of proper proportion and perspective.
and so to return the ‘sexual economy’ by which i mean merely the rules governing the possibilities for pleasure. in its present form this economy permits if you like, one and only one transaction. a woman can love one and only one other woman or man, can experience the pleasure of the company of one and only one woman or man. to derive pleasure from the companionship of two or more has for us, been problematized. and in this instance, this sort of proscription of pleasures is mediated not so much by government interdiction as by voluntary individual enforcement. nevertheless the result is the same great poverty of possibility of pleasure and the same formation of a black market more often associated with government interdiction as in the case of black markets spawned by the war on drugs. interdiction however never eliminates the demand for the problematized substance, it merely re-routes its supply through an underground market. this dimension of pornography cannot be overstated, nor can it be overstated in the case of the proliferation of the strip bar, the escort, the massage parlor etc etc.
Easy solution:
Let’s stop pretending that young teens aren’t having sex and, as parents, actually GUIDE them through the process (like any other activity)if they develop at an early age. By keeping sex illicit for minors, it occupies a dangerous social space that leaves way too many opportunites for destructive peer behavior and porn addiction. Odd that ‘progressives’ seem to have so much in common with the right-wing prudes regarding this issue. Is this a case of having common ground or both sides getting it wrong.
Teens need a sexual outlet. If it not actual sex, it’s going to be porn – for the boys, at least.
As a sexually active male before and since the onset of pornography I can tell you it has significantly effected the sexual power women previously had over men. 20 years ago even a very average looking naked women would have an ENORMOUS effect on a group of men. These days this is not the case because of readily availability of porn, The sight of a well above average looking naked women is common place. The feminist writer Susan Faludi has said that this generation of women is the first probably in history not to enjoy the knowledge they that have this effect.
Many women especially feminist thinkers are against porn because of the shift it has caused in this power dynamic, even if only on a subconscious level. Arguments about objectification and exploitation of women etc are largely a canard imo.
The sexual power dynamic between men and women is evolutionary and has deeply effected the structure of human societies. Porn has changed this balance and as a result will have a profound effect over time on our society, (either good or bad). Porn deserves much more than the superficial self serving discussions that dominate commentary on it today.
Although benefiting from this power shift I am not sure porn is a good or bad thing, but I am sure it is here to stay.
You were sexually active before the Victorian Era? You must be incredibly well preserved.
The discussion is clearly about the onset of Internet porn. The sexual power imbalance was there for an evolutionary reason, and probably a good reason.
I’m very pleased to see others discussing such a thing. As a young adult in todays society I have always felt that inside. Living my life staying away from it and not getting dragged into the too familiar discussions about how “I’d love to do this, I’d love to do that” was challenging. Its everywhere. In the end its worth it. 100%. I have a uncommon respect for women (as with all people) and I really appreciate the people I’m with. Though when most men hear I’m not into it think I’m gay. I hope that there is more publications on such things as I’m in the belief that…… well lets just say: music about being slutty + males obsessed with fcking + penis enlargement medication and the like. To me this equals disaster….. though I supposed now that stem cells and genetic mapping are getting closer and closer to a gattaca state then all that the cats need is for approval is sex-desensitized people with rotting genitals. Which scares me as it should. I would rather have a child whose soul was created in a moment of love then a petri dish with a sticker on it. Sorry if the last end of this was a little rough but its one of the only reasons I could see for such a things to be hitting the markets and societies of the west like this.
-Ni
The thing I like about porn is that it makes me get really turned on by pleasing a man and he likes it too. The thing I don’t like about porn is that it trains men to turn around and act like he’s f’n thinking of f’n England when he has to do anything that involves not getting pleasured by a woman. Men are too phallocentric and lazy about pleasuring their women. When I see a porn video where a man actually gets off on pleasing a woman, I think dang there’s a gem. In porn, most men don’t even touch a woman or think twice about her pleasure because it doesn’t matter at all. She’s supposed to simply be totally satisfied pleasuring him without any returns, such as being sensually touched, given selfless attention, or brought to a nice sensual orgasm by the man. Forget it. So that’s a problem in my mind because what I see are men being brainwashed into forgetting about women in bed and only thinking about themselves. When I watch porn, what it makes me wonder sometimes is whether or not men actually are turned on by women at all. A man who doesn’t touch a woman, doesn’t kiss her, doesn’t do anything to stimulate her isn’t enjoying her feminine body the way it should be enjoyed by a man. The central focus in porn is so very often the male orgasm and nothing more. In very simplistic terms, that’s the “sickness” of it.
I think this is a discussion very typical for the US, but I admit that it is an issue, if lesser, in all Western countries, as the problem of availability transcends country borders.
Anyhow I think the impact of porn is stronger in the US, as in this society sex is hardly ever seen as something “natural”, but as something dirty. Public nudity is a big taboo, every discourse about sex is extremely prude. To me this is just the flip-side of what Ms. Dines is talking about, as prudery dehumanizes sex the same way, as it takes it it out of the “natural human social sphere” and puts sex into a “semi-forbidden sphere of taboo”.
The problem is for example obvious with sexual education for example, which is mostly talking about pregnancy and STDs, but not about matureness for sex or how to stand up for what one wants and how one says no to what doesn’t want. Which would be a valuable knowledge for teenagers, as interest in sex can’t be killed, as much as parents might want that.
Food for thought
http://www.alternet.org/sex/148948/why_i%27m_happy_i_became_a_prostitute/?page=entire
[...] alle was gegen Pornografie. erstens.. ist dem so, dass alle was gegen pornografie haben??? Gail Dines: How erstens.. und zweitens die tatsache, dass dank politischen problemen, die menschen arbeitslos [...]
Thank you so much for this. Believe every word. My boyfriend of 6 years prefers to watch porn than be intimate with me. Its heart-breaking, and i definitely blame porn.
There are two very basic problems with your thesis that porn destroys intimacy, as far as I can see. First of all, you assume intimacy is a integral part of human relationships. However, even before the porn explosion, there was precious little intimacy in marriage or intimacy between men and women. Most people were dirt-poor and spent all their energy trying to make a living and not get killed. The demand for intimacy in relationship is quite a modern expectation (mid nineteenth century onwards). It’s also an elitist and privileged outlook – since only the wealthy and the well-educated have time to worry about such frivolities as “romance”.
The second problem with your thesis is you claim boys give away their sexual power when they watch porn. This posits boys as passive consumers of porn, and not as active creators and co-agents of porn. There is such amazing variety and diversity of porn out there that any blanket statement that “porn is violent” or “porn is destructive” is essentially meaningless, because there’s masses of porn (especially the amateur variety) that is neither violent nor destructive. In fact, it may not even feature penetration. It might even be a solo perfomrance.
Clearly, not all porn can be lumped in the same category. Boys (and girls) would create porn scenarios in their heads (while masturbating), even if all porn was banned and destroyed and outlawed. Porn can also be used as a tool to bring couples closer together, leading to honest communication about sex, and hence BUILDS intimacy.
i want to like this article because i hate porn, but there’s just too much generalizing going on. but i really do hate porn. it’s utter crap. worse than twisting your sexuality, it’s a waste of time and energy and it’s ugly and tasteless (i DARE you to prove me wrong and find me some good porn. seriously.). generally you’re destroying your soul when you watch porn. you’re not creating anything, not even emotion or desire. it’s not inspiring or even comforting. it’s deadening. brainless heartless garbage. it just needs to go away along with half of the people on this planet who watch youtube like it’s a religion. and if you do find some porn that defies what i’ve just said, good job. you’re awesome.