Women Okay with Porn?
by
Steve Watters
on Dec 13, 2007 at 3:55 PM
A new study by BYU has found that today's college women are growing more permissive about pornography -- with 49 percent of the female college students surveyed finding pornography acceptable.
The key question asked of students and their parents was if they agreed or disagreed that viewing pornography is an acceptable way to express one's sexuality. Lead author Jason Carroll, a BYU family life professor, offered two explanations for high acceptance among college women and men, 67 percent of whom agreed.
"One is that this is a life-course finding," Carroll said, "that we captured them at a high point in time and their acceptance will decrease and they'll be like their parents. The other argument is that because of the proliferation of pornography, this generation has a unique acceptance of pornography different from their parents, and that it will last. I think there is a compelling argument that is the case."
...
"This is a hugely important issue," he [Jeffrey Arnett, editor of the Journal of Adolescent Research, which published the study] said, "given that pornography is so massively popular on the Internet. There are questions about how will it affect people's sexuality and their views of gender roles, and how is that going to affect relationships between men and women. Maybe it will just be a form of entertainment. We just don't know yet."
My hunch is that the mainstreaming of pornography is making it easier for both men and women to cover over their hunch that something's inherently wrong with porn with the fig leaf that it's just entertainment. For every problem we'll come across in life, there will be two camps -- one camp that says we just don't know how bad the problem really is and another camp that says the problem is really not a big deal and in fact the real problem is those prudish people who think it's a problem.
It's my perspective that the "porn is not a big deal camp" is clearly beginning to win the day -- and we just don't know how bad that problem really is. No woman is going to experience meaningful sexual intimacy by expanding her tolerance of material that "educates" men to treat her like an object of their self-centered fantasies. It might seem sophisticated for some to tolerate porn as mere entertainment, but it's a lot like saying, "oh, it's just a cute little kitty" while letting a fox into your house.
1. Jethro had the following to say on Dec 13 at 5:11 PM:
Seriously, what does 'the mainstreaming of pornography' mean? Does this mean swimsuits in Sports Illustrated? Does it mean Victoria's Secret catalogues? Does it mean XXX porn on cable?
2. Sara had the following to say on Dec 13 at 5:24 PM:
Just so people know, there are strong, well-known (in academia) non-Christian arguments against pornography. Catherine MacKinnon is a prominant feminist scholar who's published about this and other issues since the '80s.
She argues that it isn't a first amendment issue--we shouldn't be looking to censor or ban pornograpy--but that porn should be made illegal because it goes beyond speech or expression: porn constitutes actual action, harmful action, that violates 14th amendment equality rights. It's an interesting argument; there's a good summary of it in Michael Albert's article, "Catherine MacKinnon and Pornography":
http://www.zmag.org/ZMag/articles/oldalbert2.htm
The writer doesn't agree with her on everything, but he sums up her points very well. MacKinnon's writing itself can be really hard to read.
(All this isn't to encourage intellectual shortcuts or axe-grinding no matter how noble the cause--there are lots of pro-porn arguments that are, if nothing else, coherent--but if Christians want a plausible non-Christian anti-porn argument in their 'arsenal', there it is, and it's a good one.)
3. whs had the following to say on Dec 13 at 6:15 PM:
To be pedantic:
Foxes are members of the family Canidae along with wolves and domestic dogs.
4. Justin G had the following to say on Dec 13 at 8:04 PM:
It really matters very little what family a fox falls into, if anything it might better solidify Mr. Watter's point, the difference between a kitty and a fox is huge.
As far as "mainstreaming pornography" it is definitely a combination, you see in popular movies explicit sex scenes are becoming more common, even garnering some lower ratings. Modesty is being removed in favor of "self-expression" and "beauty." Just as the cited survey says, more people, especially in lower age groups, are accepting pornography, throwing it out of the shadows and into a mainstream way of life. Outside of a moral, Christian atmosphere there is no longer a taboo against open discussion of pornography viewing, it is discussed just like many would discuss their favorite movies or books.
On to the real issue, this "mainstreaming" is occurring and Mr. Watters is very astute do analyze this research and bring it to light. Pornography presents several dangers both from a secular and Christian perspective. From a Christian perspective it encourages lust, glorifies sexual sin, destroys Christian relationships (both of sexual/marriage and simple friendship), and many times create addictive behavior becoming an idol in its own right. Secularly the addiction still stands, leading many to shirk their responsibilities. The psychological effects of constant pornography viewing are well documented, but too lengthy to list here. The material is usually extremely sexist as the writer and Sara pointed out. The existence of the industry encourages a "pushing of the limits" that includes use of minors and use of international pornography that lacks the few limits imposed in America. Finally, much of this material depicts sexual violence and coercion as enjoyable, both the the violator and even the victim, dramatically encouraging sexual crime. (this has been asserted by many secular psychologists and criminologists)
5. Phil Hutto had the following to say on Dec 13 at 8:38 PM:
I think there is a difference between nude photography done in private and respectively, because God has made our bodies beautifully, and flat out pornography.
Pornography in my view is degrading. Woman are constantly complaining that violence towards them needs to stop, the violence towards them is just a symptom. As men engage in visual lust after females who willingly pose nude or participate in intercourse in front of a camera...that is stimulation that drives us. From a small desire to see some breasts to a deadly addiction to see a scene of an orgy; this is a major problem.
We must look at the roots of the problem, not at the problem itself.
I tried to be as mannered as I could about this issue I feel strongly about. I don't expect this to be posted or published, I only wanted to share my thoughts. Let's pray for this country and the sin that plagues us at our core.
6. k. had the following to say on Dec 13 at 9:35 PM:
I don't want foxes or cats in my house: one is wild, and the other makes me sneeze.
I think that there might be a third camp...one that says, "It depends." I am totally against explicit porn that is demeaning to women. However, I don't get too worked up over some college guy with a poster of a Sports Illustrated, bikini-clad woman in his room (which could arguably be considered porn, in the strict sense of the word).
7. JB had the following to say on Dec 13 at 10:25 PM:
I would think that what counts as pornography is culturally defined and would shift over time. The same image that had a dramatic effect on viewers 100 years ago might not turn a head now. So if pornography is becoming more prevalent and accepted, it might also be the case that pornography is becoming less striking and less harmful to viewers. What is damaging for one person might really just be mild entertainment for another.
Sara,
I've always thought MacKinnon's argument was pretty interesting, but my understanding was that it is premised on evidence of a link between pornography and sexual violence that just hasn't panned out. And, in any case, she distinguishes between "pornography" and "erotica" in a way that most people who oppose porn probably don't.
8. Joy had the following to say on Dec 13 at 11:11 PM:
Porn hurts people; I wish people knew how seriously it does.
For my college English paper, I am arguing that Colorado’s public libraries should be required by an addition to the law to allow access to the police database information regarding patron’s use of the libraries’ computers when the police have a search warrant. This is because the police have found evidence from investigating online that library patrons in Colorado are using public libraries’ computers to actually post child pornography. This is a huge problem.
I found some facts in my research on porn showing how serious it is:
The First Amendment does not cover child pornography.
Child porn is used to influence children to engage in explicit acts.
It has been shown to increase the sexual abuse of children by its viewers.
A pornography addiction can be a more difficult to break than a cocaine addiction.
It is one of the reasons of broken families today.
A discussion in my college class made me want to see what Bible verses support the idea that porn is immoral (which I know it is). Christians need to take a stand against porn.
9. cm had the following to say on Dec 14 at 12:48 AM:
This semester, I took my first college art class, Photography I. During class critiques, I always struggled to think of ways to comment on one girl's work, which usually featured people in their underwear, because the content distracted me from evaluating other aspects of the photos. No, it isn't porn, but seeing images of partially or fully naked people in art classes and on the walls of my favorite coffee shops is commonplace, "no big deal." After all, it's just art, right?
My campus minister has apologized to me for the presence of such art in a local coffee shop. It seems mildly awkward to talk to a man while surrounded by images of naked women. Maybe it should offend me, but it doesn't, because I've learned to ignore it. Yes, many of us are desensitized to this sort of thing.
As for actual porn, I'm surprised that anyone (not just women) would "be okay with" their lovers / spouses watching porn-- don't they begin to feel that they aren't "sexy" enough to compare with the porn stars? Do they believe the idea that "porn is harmless" so fervently that they can't see how it affects their own relationships?
10. Loris had the following to say on Dec 14 at 7:46 AM:
I'm going to make the case that those women may have said that they were okay with it, but many more of them are actually quite hurt by their men's porn use. However, if they asked their guy to stop and he refused, they either had to convince themselves it was fine or risk losing him.
11. Carrie Lea had the following to say on Dec 14 at 8:10 AM:
I've always had this intuitive feeling that the women who accept pornography use by men, sometimes even encouraging it, are doing so to appear more desirable to men. Sadly, this is one link in a downward spiral of how men and women in our culture relate to each other. Many men demand premarital sexual gratification from their girlfriends, and will not even consider a woman who has "hang-ups" about their pornography use. When I was single, I got the distinct impression that I was ignored by single young men many times either because of my non-acceptance of pornography, or my unwillingness to have premarital sex. When women get lonely enough, the temptation to lower their standards becomes strong.
To all you men out there who oppose pornography use -- I have great respect for you, as do many other women! As my husband will attest, a man who builds up his wife's confidence and trust, rather than tearing it down through pornography use, reaps great rewards for it (both sexual and non-sexual).
12. a sassy sister had the following to say on Dec 14 at 8:15 AM:
Okay, in regards to mainstreaming pornography.....
I agree that it is being treated like it is something that most twentysomething men our age deal with. But to me, there is something deeper than just mainstreaming pornography. I haven't seen a single post actually talking about WHAT IS PORN and what is NOT PORN. I think the reason why is that "mainstream television in many cultures has lowered the defining threshhold for what qualifies as pornography. I see it as a perversion of sexuality.
I still do not believe that there is a FRANK and honest discussion about pornography---what it is, and what can be done in our OWN HEARTS FIRST to guard against it.
13. kman had the following to say on Dec 14 at 8:19 AM:
-it might also be the case that -pornography is becoming less striking -and less harmful to viewers.
So sin is less harmful now because we've been exposed to it more often?
How would you understand Matt 5:7 when it comes to porn?
No Lord, you got it wrong. We've been exposed to it so often it's not harmful to us anymore. We don't struggle with lust like they did back when You were on earth.
Pfft. Please. Let's not make excuses for sin but call it what it is.
14. Adam D had the following to say on Dec 14 at 8:36 AM:
Too many women are passing off pornographic use as just "boys will be boys" and feel helpless to do anything about it. And honestly, I don't think they can do anything about it, at least in the secular society where it is considered normal to have a sexual relationship with your boyfriend or girlfriend. According to this study, it seems that many of them are figuring out that they have no choice but to accept it because there are probably very few men who don't view porn.
15. Jacob M. had the following to say on Dec 14 at 9:22 AM:
Ah, the view of women as innately good rears its ugly head again. Unlike Loris, I'm going to make the case that those women really were okay with it.
Steve Watters wrote the following:
"No woman is going to experience meaningful sexual intimacy by expanding her tolerance of material that 'educates' men to treat her like an object of their self-centered fantasies. It might seem sophisticated for some to tolerate porn as mere entertainment, but it's a lot like saying, 'oh, it's just a cute little kitty' while letting a fox into your house."
What makes Mr. Watters think that these women's primary goal is to experience meaningful sexual intimacy, as opposed to physical pleasure? What makes him think that they are merely trying to seem sophisticated, instead of genuinely seeing pornography as benign or even empowering to women? The fact is that women's sexual attractiveness to men gives them enormous bargaining power with us. The sexual revolution didn't just "liberate" men, it also unleashed this power of women in a radically new way. When men are slaves to their lust for women--and relations between men and women are not tempered by pre-sexual revolution traditional morality, in which sex was considered inextricably linked to marriage and childbearing--men will go to great lengths go obtain women's sexual favor. Thus, modern feminists are right to view pornography as empowering to women. Women are out becoming doctors, lawyers, corporate executives, and elected office-holders, while men are sitting at home in front of their computers masturbating. Those same men are willing to go to any lengths, including disavowal of traditional morality and manhood, to get modern liberal women to allow them access to sex. How is that not "empowering" to women?
16. Dan had the following to say on Dec 14 at 9:51 AM:
Porn is destructive. I don't doubt that every man commenting on this wall hasn't battled with it including myself. Fifty, sixty years ago you had to go to a special store to buy porn. Now it's everywhere, even in our own homes. With a simple click of a button anyone can access porn within the confines of their own home. It's too easy. The world around us calls it rights, they call expression, they call it beautiful. However, as Christians we know that sex is sacred, to be shared between one man and one woman in the context of marriage. We know that God created sex and that sex is a good thing. We're seeing a world devoid of godliness and holiness and this is what we get! The average teenager is bombarded with 44,000 (and rising) sexual references a year!! The context of marriage is being redefined! It's becoming hard not to go anywhere with seeing some sort of inference to sex. The question is what do we do? How do we combat such ungodliness and sin? We wear a hole in the floor praying for strength in God, and for a world that is spinning out of control. We maintain purity. We continue to trust God and that he has everything in control.
17. Christina had the following to say on Dec 14 at 10:26 AM:
Kinda what Loris said -
Exceptance because of the feeling that do we have a choice?
18. Loris had the following to say on Dec 14 at 11:14 AM:
Porn actually decreases a woman's sexual bargaining power because she is not always available for sex and most likely does not look like those models and stars photographed. Even porn stars don't look the way they are portrayed, since the photos are retouched to provide the highest level of unreality. Has anyone seen the CSI Miami in which a college boy murders a porn actress because his addiction to her movies made him unable to be attracted to real women? I believe I've also seen a news article somewhere on that subject, but can't remember where.
I can't imagine that any woman, religious or not, would want her boyfriend/husband turning to images of other women instead of to her for gratification. After all, if she can't measure up to the images he's looking at, what would make him want her anymore?
I believe many women who say they're okay with porn use are resigned to tolerating it because it's so widespread. Tolerating something is a far cry from really accepting it.
19. Christy had the following to say on Dec 14 at 11:26 AM:
I would think that what counts as pornography is culturally defined and would shift over time. The same image that had a dramatic effect on viewers 100 years ago might not turn a head now.
The same image can impact different people differently -- whether they live in different centuries or simply have different upbringings today.
There are also culturally-influenced ideas of what is fine or indecent to reveal. I've heard that at one point in UK history, polite society did not use the word "leg," and had to keep table legs covered with a cloth! Now a knee length skirt is generally considered modest.
Yet these things don't detract from the fact that a single man's body is fundamentally off limits for every woman, in her thoughts and actions. That is true whether or not women find him physically tempting. We could switch the gender roles and keep the principle.
Images with much skin do hold potential temptation, even if some people are not excited by them, or if the exact length of a hem could be legitimately debated. Even in our society, I have been amazed by the number of young women who wish men would keep their shirts on in the heat, because the ladies struggle with their thoughts otherwise. If that is an issue, then by the time we get to mostly undressed people, there must be bigger temptations.
Proverbs 5 talks about this . . .
Should your springs overflow in the streets,
your streams of water in the public squares?
Let them be yours alone,
never to be shared with strangers.
May your fountain be blessed,
and may you rejoice in the wife of your youth.
I agree that cultural/time issues play a role in what images we view as acceptable. It would be unfortunate, though, if culture leads us to forget the holiness and splendor of Christ. Does our comfort with an image mean that it is okay -- that it honors God's image in the person pictured -- or that we are desensitized?
Just my lengthy two cents. :)
20. Olivia had the following to say on Dec 14 at 11:31 AM:
As a high school senior who spends a great deal of time on a college campus, this doesn't surprise me one iota. It's hard for me to differentiate between what is unique to my experience, and what the world is like in a general sense, but my surroundings are highly sexualized. I mean, if you just look at Facebook, people are forever doing sexually explicit things to each other on Superpoke. The people I habitually spend time with (not of my own free will) use the F-word about twice per sentence, not counting random exclamations. And this isn't even getting into people's actual /behavior/. So I think our culture has warmed up to pornography. We're so used to girls walking around in practically nothing, that looking at pictures of said girls doesn't seem much worse. I see lots of college girls walking around falling out of their tops, and showing several inches of their stomachs, and the shortest miniskirts imaginable, and I don't imagine /them/ to be too anti-porn, do you?
This is what happens when we base our standards on the culture surrounding us rather than God's Word, IMHO.
21. Carrie Lea had the following to say on Dec 14 at 1:49 PM:
Jacob M.,
"Ah, the view of women as innately good rears its ugly head again."
On the contrary, Jacob. I wish that my opposition to porn were motivated purely by the fact that it is wrong and harmful. However, I realize that my strong reaction against it occurs largely because of my very human need to feel secure in my desirability as a woman (to my husband, in particular).
"What makes Mr. Watters think that these women's primary goal is to experience meaningful sexual intimacy, as opposed to physical pleasure?"
Obviously, Mr. Watters understands the female psyche better than you do. Here's a hint: Don't assume that women are driven by the same things that drive men.
"Women are out becoming doctors, lawyers, corporate executives, and elected office-holders, while men are sitting at home in front of their computers masturbating."
I'm sure that you love the idea of porn being "liberating" to women, since that seems to justify your own acceptance of porn (and, I would venture to guess, your own use of porn). Nevertheless, your above statement is ridiculous. You imply that the widespread acceptance of porn has led to women's ability to obtain certain careers, but this is nonsense. In fact, it is insulting. I did not obtain two degrees and a career in engineering because my male counterparts were too busy watching porn.
Also, you further betray your misunderstanding of the female psyche. Different women feel differently about their careers, but from my perspective as a woman (even in a male-dominated career field), your above statement is like saying, "Women are out being overworked, overstressed, and struggling to keep their families intact, while their husbands are sitting at home having affairs with the next-door neighbor."
"Those same men are willing to go to any lengths ... to get modern liberal women to allow them access to sex."
To what lengths did my husband go to get access to sex with his beloved? He married me and continues to reject pornography. Your argument in the above statement is incoherent at best.
For your sake, I hope that you will one day look past the phony justifications that you give yourself for using porn, and start spending your time focusing on what makes a woman truly happy. You wouldn't believe what you're missing out on.
22. xeres had the following to say on Dec 14 at 2:41 PM:
Carrie Lea,
While you have made good points, it's very presumptous of you to say Jacob M. is saying all those things because he is using porn. Though I disagree with 70 % of what he said, he did point out the stupidity in the idea that women are more capable of being moral than men. It is just as stupid as believing men are better human beings than women.
23. Darin had the following to say on Dec 14 at 3:25 PM:
Impossible! Everyone knows that only men can be corrupted by a morally corrupt society...right???
Seriously, it should be no surprise to any of us that women are becoming more tolerant to pornography. After all, just take a look at the women's magazines on the grocery store newsstand sometime. These magazines are literally filled with sexually oriented articles. And what about the sexually suggestive (and sometimes explicit) romance novels that so women read? And how about the daytime soap operas that cater to a mostly female audience?
It's just a simple fact that men and women are wired differently and thus they entertain their sexual lusts (i.e. fantasies) differently. (Now, let's not digress to arguing over whose sin is worse here because that's not the point.)
The real issue here is not pornography, sexually suggestive magazine articles, romance novels, television programs, etc. The real issue is a sexually obsessed society in which women and men are both equally affected.
Pornography is simply a SYMPTOM of sexual obsession...and likewise are the above mentioned romance novels, soap operas, etc. (An obsession is a form of idolatry.)
Scripture instructs us not to fantasize about how to satisfy the desires of the flesh, but rather to put our thoughts on eternal things. We are taught to take every thought captive.
24. Darin had the following to say on Dec 14 at 4:08 PM:
One more comment to you guys who make a distinction between "artistic" nude photography and pornography: I weigh 600lbs and my ONLY fascination with jelly doughnuts is the interesting mixture of colors and texture.
Seriously, God really did make women beautiful (for the benefit of their husband). He also made sex beautiful (for the benefit of their husband). You say that because God made a woman beautiful that enjoying her nude body visually is simply art. But then the hardcore porn addict could use the same arguement (and they do) that because sex is beautiful that it should be put on display for all to see. The arguement is wrong on both counts.
Just because God made something beautiful doesn't mean that he made it for common use by anyone and everyone. Nor should a human being be reduced to an object. If you aren't fully committed to a woman - body, mind and spirit - until death do you part (i.e. marriage) then you have no rights to her body.
25. Carrie Lea had the following to say on Dec 14 at 4:27 PM:
xeres,
I assume you mean that I was being judgmental by making the educated guess that Jacob M. uses porn. Perhaps my guess is right; perhaps not. From Jacob M.'s viewpoint, for a man to use porn is progressive and liberating to women. How is it a negative judgment to guess that he partakes in what he sees as a pro-woman activity?
I find it hard to believe that anyone would swallow such flimsy arguments without an ulterior motive for doing so. My hope is that Jacob M. will start to think about this issue more clearly, and will ultimately reap the rewards of a pornography-free life.
Also, I do not fully understand what women's acceptance or non-acceptance of porn has to do with women being "innately good." It is a fact that men struggle more with porn use than women do, just as women have their own moral weaknesses. Perhaps you and Jacob M. could clarify what you mean.
26. Elizabeth H. had the following to say on Dec 14 at 4:41 PM:
Regarding nudity, I remember the first drawing session with a naked model in college art class. I was quite nervous beforehand, but then I found that even being a Christian, it did not bother me. I did not know the guy and I was not attracted to him. Art was art. It was harder once when I knew the model and he gave me a ride home afterwards. I felt that I had sinned. But it would seem that in general men are more wired to react to visual stimulation. Strangers’ naked bodies are not very interesting to women; there is no romance in it.
Why are women becoming more tolerant of pornography? I think that as others have said, it has to do with a basic lowering of standards. Sexual sin has always existed and this is the way it’s manifesting itself in the current generation. It’s really nothing surprising.
I do think that Christians need to take a stand against the way porn can be accessed on the Internet: use filters; be accountable to each other, etc.
As far as avoiding temptation, I think we have a responsibility to know what can be a stumbling block for ourselves, and also to look out for our brothers and sisters. Honestly, I think publications like women’s magazines with their sex advice advertised on the cover can be likened to porn. Isn’t it all about hedonism?
27. Adam T. had the following to say on Dec 14 at 6:14 PM:
Jacob, you're spot on in most of what you say:
The fact is that women's sexual attractiveness to men gives them enormous bargaining power with us. The sexual revolution... unleashed this power of women in a radically new way. When men are slaves to their lust for women... men will go to great lengths to obtain women's sexual favor...
You're absolutely correct here: Women have enormous power because they control access to what men want: sex.
On the other hand, Carrie Lea, I think you've misunderstood a great deal of what has been said:
Don't assume that women are driven by the same things that drive men.
Surely you're not suggesting that women never want sex purely for the physical pleasure of it? I know many women who would disagree with that. Perhaps you're projecting your own feelings onto all women?
I'm sure that you love the idea of porn being "liberating" to women, since that seems to justify your own acceptance of porn (and, I would venture to guess, your own use of porn).
A close examination of Jacob's post reveals that nowhere did he suggest that he uses or approves of porn.
You imply that the widespread acceptance of porn has led to women's ability to obtain certain careers, but this is nonsense. In fact, it is insulting.
The idea is that fewer men are succeeding because many of those who could do well academically are instead spending an hour or so each day looking at porn, which detracts significantly from study time. In turn, women are filling the places that these men are vacating.
For example, in a demanding program like a pre-med degree, if men are viewing porn daily, and women aren't, who is going to emerge with higher grades? Consequently, who is going to be accepted to medical school?
Jacob may have (inadvertently) exaggerated and implied that the ONLY reason women are succeeding is because men are wasting time looking at porn, but I'm sure he didn't mean that. I don't think anyone would suggest that women are incapable of competing on a level playing field, but when we see, for example, that women are outnumbering men in various professions, we have to wonder why.
I'm not convinced that overuse of porn is one of the main reasons, but to dismiss it as 'nonsense' is to seriously underestimate the magnitude of men's porn consumption in our society, I think. At any rate, it's a theory I've heard before from educated church leaders.
your above statement is like saying, "Women are out being overworked, overstressed, and struggling to keep their families intact, while their husbands are sitting at home having affairs with the next-door neighbor."
I don't even know what you mean by this. I'm not sure how you arrived at this from what Jacob said.
Those same men are willing to go to any lengths ... to get modern liberal women to allow them access to sex.
Your argument in the above statement is incoherent at best.
On the contrary, his argument was very coherent: 'Women control access to sex. Hence, many men today will do anything to try and please a woman in the hopes that she'll give him some sex. This gives women power.'
Next time you fail to understand something you should ask for clarification before you call someone's writings 'incoherent'.
I hope that you will one day look past the phony justifications that you give yourself for using porn
I hope that you will stop reading things into people's posts that aren't there.
28. Adam T. had the following to say on Dec 14 at 6:23 PM:
Tsk, tsk, Carrie.
From Jacob M.'s viewpoint, for a man to use porn is progressive and liberating to women. How is it a negative judgment to guess that he partakes in what he sees as a pro-woman activity?
He does not say that porn is 'progressive', 'liberating' or 'pro-woman'. He merely says that it gives women power of a certain kind. It's a great leap to go from there to suggesting that he uses and condones pornography. You've misunderstood what he means. Again.
I find it hard to believe that anyone would swallow such flimsy arguments without an ulterior motive for doing so. My hope is that Jacob M. will start to think about this issue more clearly, and will ultimately reap the rewards of a pornography-free life.
I find it hard to believe you would leap to such grotesque conclusions about somebody instead of asking for clarification. My hope is that you'll apologize to Jacob for smearing him. But, I'm not holding my breath.
29. Liz W had the following to say on Dec 15 at 1:35 AM:
One thing that has pretty much been ignored in these comments is the increasing number of women with addictions to pornography. The internet has allowed women (like men) 24-hour, anonymous access to pornography. When access is just a click away, a curious impulse can be easily followed.
Consider also that while as a rule men may be more visual than women, the current generation has been raised in culture that relies increasingly on the visual image for entertainment and information. This, combined with the accessibility and pervasiveness of pornography, means more young women are going to be exposed to and end up struggling with pornography. And as a woman, she will have the added shame that her sin is a "man's problem" and no "normal" woman would struggle with this. This makes it much harder for her to ask for or get help.
30. Carrie Lea had the following to say on Dec 15 at 10:10 AM:
Adam T.,
Text on a screen, as many would point out, hardly communicates as fully as a face-to-face conversation. I can't help but smile at the way you have reacted to my posts. Did you notice how you took on a deriding tone toward me (Tsk, tsk, Carrie.), while giving Jacob the benefit of the doubt (Jacob may have (inadvertently) exaggerated ... but I'm sure he didn't mean that.)? Clearly, I have "hit a nerve" and put you on the defensive.
Relax. We can have a conversation without being defensive. There are plenty of men who struggle with porn, and false justifications only make their struggle more difficult to overcome. Since Jacob clearly believes that porn "empowers" women, I do not think it terribly far-fetched to guess that he partakes in the activity, assuaging his guilt by believing that he is doing his sisters a favor. If my guess about Jacob is inaccurate, he is free to ignore it and/or protest. If it was accurate, then perhaps it caught his attention enough for him to hear what I have to say. That is all I was trying to do -- not trying to "smear" him. There is no shame in struggling against sin, only in becoming complacent with it.
You say that I project my feelings onto all women. Ironically, you and Jacob project your feelings onto all women. Since I am a woman and you are not (just going by your masculine names here), I would consider myself a better reference point. I find it tedious to point out the difference between "statistically significant differences" and saying "this is true for every single man-woman pair you could think of" every single time I wish to make a general statement. (Would you like me to describe Gaussian probability density distributions and how there can be overlap while having different means?) Of course there are women who want physical pleasure (myself included, though the thought of being with anyone other than my husband disgusts me). Of course there are men who want meaningful sexual intimacy (my husband included). But in general, while many men are satisfied with purely physical pleasure, most women tend to want something "more" or different from the experience. This can be illustrated by the fact that a great deal of married women do not regularly experience orgasms during intercourse, but are still satisfied by the experience. Their husbands, on the other hand, experience orgasms with overwhelming regularity, and will often feel "anxious" if this is not achieved. (Wow, I hope this gets by the censors.) Do you see what I'm getting at?
Finally, I pointed out that Jacob's argument about pornography empowering women is incoherent. It is incoherent because porn does not even have to enter the picture for men to go to great lengths for sex. In fact, I would argue just the opposite. A man who is accustomed to the air-brushed, always-willing beauties in porn may not be as satisfied with a mere "mortal" woman. If a woman turns him down for sex, he has the option to give up on her completely and return to his porn habit for sexual gratification (rather than pursuing a deeper relationship that could lead to marriage). Again, do you see what I'm getting at? Porn actually takes away from women's "power."
I stated that I believe many women have started accepting porn use by men because they feel they must do so to be desirable. If you will read back on the posts written by women, you will see that most of them agree with me.
I have a question for you. While I am getting bombarded by people telling me that Jacob is right about there being a connection between women's acceptance of porn use and implying that women are "innately good," no one has yet clarified to me what this connection is (since, by all accounts, I misinterpreted the statement). Would you clarify what you all mean by this?
31. xeres had the following to say on Dec 15 at 11:25 AM:
I think Jacob is saying is that the idea of women being more capable of being moral gives a different perspective on why women do things. For example, in a heat of an argument, when a woman slaps someone out of anger, it is often assumed that either the person deserved it or she just couldn't help it. However, if a guy did the slapping in the mist of an argument, it is almost automatic to think he must be a jerk.
In the case of porn, I think he meant women are given more permission to be manipulative and controlling, using sex as weapon. This whole thing is correlated with the rising narcissism and entitlement many Americans are have. When the media portray what makes a strong woman, it is often the ones who are manipulative, controlling, and condescending who can be considered strong. If the media has a good girl in a plot, it is often a negative stereotype; too prissy, dull, unfashionable, total doormats, has no taste.
32. k. had the following to say on Dec 15 at 11:56 AM:
Carrie -- You need to attack Jacob's arguments, NOT HIM (and goodness knows his arguments leave you plenty of openings). Leave the so-called "educated guesses" alone. It's not your business to speculate on his personal life, thoughts, or habits.
33. Darin had the following to say on Dec 15 at 1:05 PM:
Liz W, you made a great point! I believe that society has a double standard in which the highest level of purity is expected of women, yet men who struggle with sexual sin are simply considered normal. This does a great disservice to women because, like you pointed out, they are less likely to admit their weakness for fear of condemnation and rejection. (It makes one wonder how extensive the problem of women and porn addiction really is.)
Carrie Lea, sometimes when we have a chip on our shoulder we hear what we are expecting to hear rather than what is actually being said. It also causes people to take things personally that weren't intended that way and then we are tempted to strike back in a personal manner. Just some food for thought.
In regards to pornography empowering women, I have to clarify something. Sin does not empower. It is never as satisfying as we expect it to be and it's benefits are always short lived. Sure, there are some women who use sex to control men...and there are some men who trade their power and money for sex. And in the end it's just men using women and women using men...each being controlled by their own lusts. (Doesn't sound very empowering to me.)
As Christians, we are called to live outside of that realm. We are given a different value system where godly character and self-control are more important than sex, power, money and all of that temporary stuff that the world defines "success" by.
True empowerment comes through Jesus Christ who restores our character and gives us self-control. This is also where true equality between the sexes can be realized.
The feminist movement puts men and women on opposite sides of the scale and defines success in terms of power, money and position. In Christ, men and women are united into one body where success is defined in terms of character and service to one another. The feminist movement says, "Lift yourself up!"...but Christ says, "Lift each other up." (I could go on, but that's not really what this post was intended for.)
PS:Since the subject of power and equality between the sexes was brought up and (in my opinion) there was more smoke than light I felt compelled to comment. --- Perhaps we need a separate post on the subject.
34. Robert J Espe had the following to say on Dec 15 at 1:15 PM:
I think Jacob made a fair devil's advocate argument. Basically all he said is that you can't assume that all women hate pornography. Of course he isn't right about 100% of women, but that doesn't mean there aren't a lot of them he's right about (even 1% of the 150 mil women in this coutry is 1500 people), I know lots of them that are just like that (you just have to know people from the crowd that goes to Mardis Gras for the sex and alcohol). A girl in college who found out I live a couple miles from a strip club said she'd be there daily. Spend any time talking to a bi-sexual girl, you'll probably find that they while they emotionally like women, they still really like men's bodies.
So as a health teacher who spends time reading up on this, I'm going to add some relevant thoughts.
First,
let's make a distinction between cultural and biological programming. Men and Women both enjoy visual stimulation, men and women both enjoy the emotional stimulation of being with the person they love. As a Christian married man I get offended every time I hear it implied that men will jump into bed with any beautiful woman while a woman won't because she isn't "emotionally invested", as if men didn't care about emotional investment. In most cases, the only difference in degrees of the two is cultural. Until recently, most women were told it was inappropriate to be sexually aggressive. Now that it has become acceptable, there are a great many women (especially in college) that care a great deal (even most) about how a man looks. This has also led to the first occurrence of widespread male insecurity about body image, and the appearance of males implants (to enhance the appearance of muscles and genitals). After all, how can the average Joe compete with the models in Men's Health. So this impacts both genders.
Second, while the numbers of women addicted to pornography are currently few (although the rising numbers mean it could eventually balance out, again cultural norms take time to change), research says that viewing pornography over the long term may be more damaging to women than men. This is because long term viewing can actually move a woman's arousal threshold, in other words, too much pornography and a woman can find herself unable to be aroused without it.
Third,
the cited statistics about married women and orgasm have nothing to do with biology or visual/emotional dichotomies, and everything to do with psychology and education. Christians have until very recently done a poor job with marital sex education, fortunately we now have ministries stepping up to the plate, such as FOF partner ministry "passionate intimacy", and themarriagebed.org just to name a couple (pun not intended).
35. Carrie Lea had the following to say on Dec 15 at 3:05 PM:
k. et al,
Wow, you guys are so focused on my apparent offense that you don't hear what I'm saying. Jacob clearly views pornography as empowering to women. (Empowering to women is a good thing, right?) This implies that Jacob views porn as either a neutral or positive activity. Therefore, I don't see why everyone is up in arms about my "educated guess." I'm still awaiting Jacob's response. If he is really offended, I will be surprised but will gladly offer an apology, as no offense was intended.
Let me try a less hot-button example to show why I would be surprised if he is offended. Suppose we were discussing birth control, and the viewpoint was put forward that all birth control is wrong. Then, suppose I argued that birth control can actually be good for families by allowing couples to have children when they are best able to support and nurture those children. Then, someone who views birth control as wrong (let's call him "Tim") could come back with his own arguments, in which, to strengthen his point, he makes the "educated guess" that I use birth control. Whether Tim's guess is right or not, how offended do you expect me to be that he assumed that I act in accordance with my viewpoint? Do you think everyone would jump in and berate Tim for making presumptuous remarks about my private life?
It's interesting, because even those who agree with Jacob (Adam T.) apparently consider my guess to be a "smear" on Jacob. Is porn use good or bad? Jacob hasn't responded, but Adam seems to be talking out of both sides of his mouth. It seems apparent to me that, despite the "empowering to women" rhetoric, at least Adam unconsciously views porn use as shameful. That is a telling response.
36. Carrie Lea had the following to say on Dec 15 at 3:17 PM:
Robert J. Espe,
That's interesting. I never considered that men's stronger response to visual stimulation could be a result of cultural conditioning. Are there any cultures, for instance, in which women have an equal or higher rate of viewing porn than men?
(By the way, Jacob said more than "not all women hate pornography," which is a statement I agree with. I was mainly taking issue with his stance that porn is empowering to women. But I digress.)
I recently read a book that claimed that women with strong religious beliefs are more likely to be very sexually satisfied in marriage, and experience orgasms more often, than non-religious women. They claimed that a study reported in Redbook gave similar results. I found this rather surprising, and I'm still not sure whether to believe it. What do you make of it? Have you ever heard anything similar?
37. Sara had the following to say on Dec 15 at 3:23 PM:
JB, a late response
Canadian law has incorporated some MacKinnon-style reasoning in its obscenity legislation.
The test in the States for whether something is obscene asks whether a reasonable person would find the material offensive or obscene, whereas the Canadian test also asks whether it can be considered degrading and dehumanizing, that is, do actual harm.
The argument isn't directly violence but about eroticizing submission: MacKinnon is OK with porn that depicts the participants as equals. Look at billboards that show women lying on the ground encumbered by high heels and short skirts, with men standing over them, standing solidly on two feet, fully clothed. We're so used to seeing submission and weakness as sexy we don't even notice it.
38. Darin had the following to say on Dec 15 at 7:39 PM:
Robert, thanks for the informative comment! I learned a few things that I didn't know.
39. Denisha had the following to say on Dec 16 at 1:09 AM:
Why is everyone attacking Carrie?
I think she has a good point. The overall point will should be learning is that porn has harmful effects to both men and women.
I think its sad that mostly men are attacking Carrie. Just take someone else's oppinion and be quiet!
40. Crystal had the following to say on Dec 16 at 1:59 PM:
I think people have been a little unkind to Carrie Lea. I personally agree with most of what she is saying and think it is quite logical. .I also don't get the impression that she is being judgmental Anyway on to my point, I recently watched the Dateline series "To Catch A Predator". For those of you who don't watch it, the series involves members of a civilian group who pose in chat rooms as young teens (some as young as 11) curious about sex in order to lure the unsuspecting potential child molester to a decoy house. I'm not here to argue the pro and cons of the show, but I think it's curious that although the potential predators had extremely diverse backgrounds they all had 2 things in common. 1) All were male 2) All used pornography. The series was responsible for the arrest of over 200 potential predators. That leads me to draw the conclusion that more men view porn than women and that porn has a vastly different affect on men that it does women. Also interesting was that many of these men were married or had girlfriends, but that didn't stop them from driving hundreds of miles for the purpose of having sex with a child. SICK! The propensity for human perversity is limitless. Men already struggle with lust, porn just makes the battle all the more difficult. (I really don't by the argument that men and women are the same btw). When women start telling men that lust and porn are okay our relationships will end up irreparably marred. It's really depressing that it's gone this far and even more depressing is that people are okay with it.
41. Stanhope had the following to say on Dec 16 at 10:12 PM:
Joy's comments seem to be about child pornography, which I'm pretty sure is NOT the kind of pornography surveyed by the BYU study.
And therein lies the rub:
discussions like this are virtually meaningless without a clear definition of the subject ... as Jethro observed in the first post of the thread.
42. kman had the following to say on Dec 17 at 6:44 AM:
Carrie said:I recently read a book that claimed that women with strong religious beliefs are more likely to be very sexually satisfied in marriage,....I'm still not sure whether to believe it.
Why would this surprise you?
It would seem that women who lived closer to the ideal of marriage God had in mind would be more satisfied.
43. Christina had the following to say on Dec 17 at 7:00 AM:
Carrie, Jacob's response doesn't say he's ok with porn.
His argument is that some women ARE ok with porn. And then he backs up why he thinks those women would be.
None of us have any real idea what Jacob's personal views on porn are...except that he understands that there are some women who are actually "ok" with it - and not just desensitized or being tolerant like Mr. Watters seemed to be implying.
And us not accepting that as a possibility is what warrented the first sentence - women being seen as inherently "good".
Romans 2 (or 3) discusses the people that fall into depravity - they embrace sin and call it good. Women were mentioned right along side the men.
Keep in mind that Jacob wasn't addressing all women in his "blanket" statement (as some of you would call it), but that he defines who he is discussing from the get-go. The women in the article who claimed that they were "ok" with porn are the people he is discussing - not himself, not all women in general, specifically those people.
Maybe I've just spent more time in debate than you, Carrie, but he as a well constructed argument - a premise, a point, and a well defined subject. And his argument in no way implies what his personal view of porn is. As someone else already pointed out - address his argument. Not the person behind it.
44. Jacob M. had the following to say on Dec 17 at 7:50 AM:
Oh, boy. A lot has been said for me to respond to, and I really don't have time to respond to everything. I think Adam T. did a good initial job of answering Carrie's criticisms of me; I wouldn't change much of what he wrote. There are, however, a few of Carrie's misunderstandings I need to correct.
First, when I used the word "women" here, I was referring not to evangelical Christian women who believe that pornography is morally wrong, but to the women in the study who say that they find pornography acceptable. Presumably those two groups don't overlap.
Second, I want to clarify that I do not look at pornography, nor think that it is good or morally neutral, nor want it to be legal or even exist at all.
This would appear to confuse Carrie, since I said that pornography (and the sexual revolution in general) is "empowering to women." That this should cause confusion highlights the essentially liberal nature of our entire society, and the fact that even most people today who are considered "conservative" (e.g., evangelical Christians) are really liberal. Conservatives today are always trying to appeal to liberals by saying that they agree with liberals' goals, they just don't agree that the methods proposed by liberals to reach those goals are the most effective. For example, you'd be hard pressed to find a conservative or evangelical Christian today who would argue that women's "empowerment" is a good thing. The only difference between the liberal and "conservative" points of view on the subject is that liberals believe that women are best empowered by being made totally independent from men and being free from the bonds of traditional sexual morality, while "conservatives" think women are best empowered by having lasting marriages, maybe staying home with the children while they're young if their financial situation allows it, but otherwise pursuing careers and advanced degrees just as liberal feminists advocate that women should.
The problem stems from the fact that modern liberal society separates men and women into discrete groups with competing interests. I, as a traditionalist, believe that we should not view these issues in the light of "men's interests," vs. "women's interests," but rather that the family, not the individual, should be considered the basic unit of society, with men's and women's interests unified under the banner of the interests of the family. And in those families, women would occupy a generally subordinate role to men. So I do not regard the "empowerment" of women as a good thing.
I could have been more clear on the issue of women being innately good. It's not that women's acceptance of porn means that they're innately good; it's that women's acceptance of porn is explained away by the supposition that they're innately good, a supposition that often crops up on Boundless and among modern Christians in general. My point wasn't obvious perhaps because the belief is stated only explicitly in this entry, but I was referring to Mr. Watter's statements that "No woman is going to experience meaningful sexual intimacy by expanding her tolerance" of porn and that "it might seem sophisticated for some to tolerate porn as mere entertainment." I take this to mean that even among women who accept porn, their goal is still to experience meaningful sexual intimacy and they are accepting porn only because it makes them seem sophisticated to do so. Mr. Watters seems to be saying that when men say they like porn, it's because they do, because they're lustful and tainted by sin (a true statement, don't get me wrong.) But when women say they like porn, well, they don't really like it, they're just saying they like it to gain the acceptance of porn-loving men so that men will marry them, because deep down the true desire of their pure innocent hearts is to be stay-at-home-moms and enjoy the life of domestic tranquility God intended them for.
When you look at the world realistically, and you see a survey finding that 49% of college women find porn acceptable, this interpretation is laughable. Why not take women at their word? We know that all people, men and women, are stained by original sin. Why not simply assume that if women say they find porn acceptable, they are saying it because they really mean it? Then we can work to understand the reasons and implications of that, and try to deal with it realistically, instead of trying to explain it away with our premises of snips and snails and puppy-dog tails vs. sugar and spice and everything nice.
If you would like to continue this discussion at a different venue, feel free to visit my blog, which should be linked to my name in this comment's header. There you will find a link to email me, and I'll create a new blog entry for the discussion.
45. Jacob M. had the following to say on Dec 17 at 8:22 AM:
I wrote a lengthy reply, but Typepad's anti-spam filter considered it spam and wouldn't let me submit it, presumably because it contained so many instances of the word "porn." Since I have no way of knowing how much I'd have to pare it down to make it acceptable, I simply posted it at my own blog. You can read it here.
46. RF had the following to say on Dec 17 at 9:00 PM:
I may be repeating some of what was said before, but...I'll post anyway. I'm not sure how porn is in anyway empowering to men...I get the whole argument that it allows women to earn their way into places previously occupied by men...but how is the truth of that measured?
I saw a video put on by Dove recently (it might have been discussed on Boundless...I'm not sure how I found it). I don't agree with everything, but it was interesting how we are bombarded by the media to become more beautiful...look it up: http://www.campaignforrealbeauty.com/dsef07/t5.aspx?id=7373
It certainly is not empowering to me to think that the majority of men today are involved somehow in porn. As a single woman, I wonder if that will be a deterrent for some man to get to know me because I'm not "perfect." I immediately feel insecure about myself that, in the event that I get married, my husband might compare me to other "perfect" women he's seen. My next (and brief) reaction is to somehow want to compensate for my "imperfections." Those feelings are not in the least way empowering, but rather a distraction from the truth of who I am, in Christ, and a distraction from "setting my mind on things above." (Col. 3:1).
Anyway...just a thought...
47. Don had the following to say on Dec 18 at 12:20 AM:
This weekend an acquaintance of mine was sharing how her brother has gotten really frustrated at his private Christian university. Apparently his sweet mates were viewing pornography and when he tried to report it he was told they wouldn't do anything about it because "lots of people are doing it." How sad that even in a Christian environment a permissive attitude toward pornography is being taken.
48. Carrie Lea had the following to say on Dec 18 at 12:51 AM:
Jacob M.,
Thanks for your gracious reply. It definitely cleared some things up for me. I am sorry that I assumed you are a porn user. As I stated in an earlier post, I have high respect for men who reject pornography, and that would include you.
Yes, I was confused by the fact that you said that "modern feminists are right to view pornography as empowering to women." It would have been more clear to me if you had also said something like, "at the expense of men" or "at the expense of family." Since I didn't see any such qualifier, my impression from your post was that you were looking for an excuse to not feel guilty about porn use. I know that porn use is destructive for both men and women; I have experienced firsthand the emotional devastation of a woman realizing that the man she cares about uses porn; and it frustrates me to no end that some men would actually use the "empowering to women" idea to excuse this behavior. In formulating a reply to you, I should have taken into account the possibility that you did not see "women's empowerment" in this case as a good thing. You are right that the idea of women's empowerment being good is so entrenched in our culture that it is difficult for even a conservative to see it differently.
Also, in regards to the phrase "women's acceptance of porn," you may have been referring at least partly to women who use porn themselves, whereas I took it primarily to refer to women who tolerate porn use by men, which seemed to be Mr. Watters' take on it.
Regarding the idea of women being innately good, I would agree that no doubt some of these women really do accept porn, likely some of them for the very "empowerment" idea that you described. By the same token, though, there are also some women who accept porn because they feel they have no choice but to lower their standards in this permissive society. (If you will notice, this is not an indication of them being "good" either, but possibly an indication of lack of faith (for the religious ones) or even a desire to "outshine" other women in men's eyes. Mr. Watters could have had this idea in mind when he chose the phrase "seem sophisticated" in his post. I did not spell this out earlier because I have to fight the temptation to be angry at these women.)
I suppose whether porn is empowering to women depends on how you define empowering. What do women really want? To be in a high-powered career? To stay at home with their kids? Something in-between? It depends on the woman. Myself, I am a woman in a male-dominated field. One might even expect that I, of all women, would prioritize my career. Nevertheless, when I was single, the thing my heart longed for most was marriage to a good man. Once I have children, my desire is to stay home to raise them and run the household, and I feel very blessed that we are able to do so. Any setbacks in my career as a result mean nothing to me. It seems that more men are driven to pursue their careers, while more women are driven to take care of their homes, but I could be wrong. At any rate, the acceptance of porn might increase a woman's chances of getting married, but is she really getting what she longs for -- a man who loves and desires her exclusively?
What about women who want the high-powered career? Personally, I don't see much connection between men's porn use and women's rise in previously male-dominated career fields. If it's really an issue of good time management, then video games, for instance, can be potentially much more time-consuming. So I'm not convinced that porn is empowering even to women who want the career with no desire for a family.
49. Carrie Lea had the following to say on Dec 18 at 1:22 AM:
Denisha, Crystal,
Thanks for defending me. Sometimes people don't realize how hurtful their words can be... a lesson I would do well to learn myself.
kman,
It's not that I find it totally unbelievable -- I agree that a marriage close to God's ideal provides trust and intimacy that allow for the most satisfying sexual experience for both partners. As far as women's orgasm is concerned, though, I guess I expected that (1) if women had more sexual partners (more typical of non-religious women), they may have experienced a greater variety of approaches and thus determined what works best for them, and (2) in Christian circles, sex is still sometimes seen as inherently "bad," even if only subconsciously, leading to some psychological difficulty for the woman. Also, the book is not exactly a peer-reviewed journal. It is written by Christians, so naturally they will highlight the perks of being a Christian. Nevertheless, I hope they're right -- one more reason to be thankful to our kind Creator!
50. kman had the following to say on Dec 18 at 9:41 AM:
Carrie-
re: (1)- Figuring out this aspect doesn't require multiple partners. Just a willingness to discover what pleases the other. And practice makes perfect ;)
re:(2) Sure. Everything has a bias. Just like the people who would promote having multiple sexual partners have a bias.
51. Holly had the following to say on Dec 18 at 10:02 AM:
I'd like to elaborate on something Carrie Lea said: "in Christian circles, sex is still sometimes seen as inherently "bad," even if only subconsciously, leading to some psychological difficulty for the woman."
This is right on the money. In many churches, including my own, the message for unmarried people is to maintain their purity until marriage. The teens take pledges to be pure until marriage. Personally, I hold the view that there is nothing impure or dirty about married Christians having sex with each other, and I doubt that my pastor truly disagrees. Nor do the myriad of Christian ministries who use the same terminology disagree intellectually. Their subconscious biases and the subsequent language choices reveal that belief though -- virginity is the only real purity. Thus sex is dirty and/or bad. Not a belief that anyone would cop to, but it's there nonetheless.
Thanks, Carrie.
52. Jacob Douvier had the following to say on Dec 18 at 10:22 AM:
Holy, Carrie Lea,
Regarding Christian circles having an unconsciously pejorative perspective on sex, I think some of this is rooted in the rise of peitism in the late 19th century, with it's emphasis on personal holiness through abstaining from all manner of perceived vice (drinking, dancing, card playing, etc). Another place where this comes up is St. Augustine's teachings on sex. While I love Augustine and agree with much of what he wrote and taught, I think he was wrong here.
53. Robert J Espe had the following to say on Dec 19 at 7:49 AM:
Holly,
I think you misunderstand the message. Sex isn't dirty, but sex outside of marriage is so purity is a good word to us. I think you are being confused by until, and would like to point out that maintaining purity "until marriage" does not necessarily imply that purity stops at marriage, but that it was maintained up to and continues into marriage.
Carrie Lea,
regarding the multiple partners thing, it would make sense only if all people were the same, but God made us more complicated than that. Every man and woman is different, and it takes time for bodies to adjust to each other (like Kman said). It takes roughly 3 months on average for two bodies to adjust to each other so that the woman can experience 0rg@sm (trying to not be flagged by the recently more sensitive spam filters) easily. The human body is really quite remarkable in that both partners bodies adjust the length of their response cycles until their bodies complement each other perfectly. However, if a woman is changing partners (also married couples have sex more frequently which also helps) this does not occur, and invariably it is the woman who loses out in terms of satisfaction.
54. Carrie Lea had the following to say on Dec 19 at 1:38 PM:
Robert J Espe,
Regarding the adjusting of husband and wife to each other, that's interesting. I think it's safe to say, though, that it doesn't necessarily mean every married couple will reach the point (especially in a matter of 3 months) that orgm. for the woman occurs regularly. My point was that when husband and wife are both inexperienced and trying things out, there may be more effective approaches that neither of them think to consider. (That's not to say I would condone pre- or extramarital sex just for a woman to experience this -- even apart from the moral considerations, the guilt and fear of comparison that can result will detract from the experience for both husband and wife.)
I don't think Holly is misunderstanding the message. She is pointing out that often, "purity" is spoken of in connection with virginity, while in comparison it is rarely mentioned in connection with marriage. With enough repetition, this can lead to the word "purity" being connoted as "virginity" in the subconscious mind. And what Christian, especially female, doesn't want to be "pure"? Even though it's subtle, this connotation can have a psychological effect -- and we all know that women's response (and men's, for that matter) can be dampened by such an encumbrance. It really has very little to do with the actual teachings, or even with what the woman actually believes about purity on an intellectual level.
Jacob Douvier,
Yes, in fact, I would say it goes all the way back to the Gnostics. Not to pick on Catholics, but their requirement for priests to be celibate is really more rooted in Gnosticism than in the Bible, and Protestants haven't completely escaped Catholic influence.