Buy the Book
Feminism, Pornography, and Choice
You may think you know what porn is. But there is a good chance you don’t.
Pornland: How Porn Has Hijacked Our
Sexuality
by Gail Dines
(Beacon Press, 256 pages, $26.95)
You may think you know what porn is. But there is a good chance you don’t. In particular, if you are a woman, or if you grew up in the age prior to the Internet, the word “pornography” might evoke images of a blushing Playboy centerfold, or perhaps some flimsy-plotted film with a delivery man, a desperate housewife, and just a bit more sex and nudity than an R-rating would allow. In reality, mainstream pornography today is far more brutal, more graphic, and more violent than most could imagine if they hadn’t seen it for themselves.
In her new book, Pornland: How Porn Has Hijacked Our Sexuality, Gail Dines draws on years of research to reveal just how extreme the porn industry has become. She takes readers deep into the world of hardcore porn, describing one nightmarish scene after another, full of men punishing and humiliating women sexually on camera.
The material she covers is truly shocking, and, often, difficult to read. I physically gagged more than once while reading her descriptions. Every sort of bodily waste and fluid, and every conceivable method by which a woman’s body can be pushed to the limit, often at the hands of two or three men at a time, is commonplace in today’s porn.
Forget about Hugh Hefner and his silk pajamas. These days porn is dominated by Gonzo filmmakers. In the Gonzo genre, the emphasis is on “real” rather than scripted scenes. Such films are cheap to produce. In the Internet age anyone with a camera and a computer can sell porn to the world. In order to stand out, porn producers are coming up with ever more extreme material. If the girl is crying, vomiting, or even bleeding, that’s Gonzo gold. According to Dines, it is not uncommon for pornographers to film close-ups of the injuries that have occurred to the girl’s body, once a scene is over.
Dines argues persuasively that porn today is not simply about men looking at naked women, or watching sex acts. Rather, the goal of much of it seems to be to depict the maximum amount of humiliation for the girl on screen. One website proudly offers its customers the opportunity to “access total degradation.”
Almost as disturbing as the abusive material itself is the fact that so many men view it as a turn-on. Like drug users always looking for a more powerful fix, porn addicts are often shocked by how quickly they became desensitized to porn, seeking out increasingly bizarre material that they once found distasteful.
The average age of first exposure to porn for American males is eleven. Internet porn now serves as a de facto sex education for America’s youth. To suppose that porn is mere fantasy, with no effect on the real world, is simply not credible. Dines reports that many young women come to her, complaining that their boyfriends expect them to act out the humiliating scenes they see in hardcore porn.
Dines is a feminist. She makes no effort to hide the fact. Her fierce opposition to porn is motivated chiefly by her objection to the sexual inequality it depicts. However, as a self-described “progressive,” she finds herself uncomfortably aligned with social conservatives on the issue of pornography. Consequently, she has the tiresome habit of gratuitously singling out conservatives for attack, as though she were anxious to reassert her liberal bona fides. (Gee whiz, did you know Mitt Romney sits on the board of Marriot Hotels; and Marriot sells porn on pay-per-view?)
Dines also seems to have a problem with capitalism. Pornography is “first and foremost a business,” she writes in one weighty passage, as though that fact alone were enough to damn the enterprise. Admittedly, smut peddlers are a greedy lot. But Dines never says exactly how Karl Marx might save our sexual culture. Once again, her main point seems to be that she is not a conservative.
It is easy to see why Dines and other anti-porn feminists have a hard time reconciling their “conservative” views on porn with their liberal views on personal choice. Feminists, after all, have been saying for a long time that a woman should be able to do whatever she wants with her own body. The question is: if a girl allows a man to urinate on her on camera in exchange for a thousand bucks, can a feminist really approve the transaction merely on the basis of the girl’s consent?
Porn pits the principles of choice and equality against one another. As a liberal, Dines believes the basis of morality is the unrestrained freedom to choose any sort of lifestyle one desires. As a feminist, she also believes that gender equality is an inviolable moral standard.
In her epilogue entitled, “Fighting Back,” Dines articulates feminism’s moral confusion thusly: “We need to offer an alternative way of being, a way to envisage a sexuality that is based on equality, dignity, and respect.” (This is her expression of equality-based morality.) She goes on to say, “Such a sexuality cannot be scripted by a movement because it belongs to individuals and reflects who they are and what they want sexually.” (This is her expression of personal choice-based morality.)
Choice is the holiest word in feminism. To comprehend a moral order that originates outside the domain of personal choice, one must acknowledge a higher law — one above human will. As a liberal, the very idea of a revealed moral standard conflicts with Dines’s commitment to personal choice. Dines understands that porn is wrong; but I don’t think she really understands why.
What is wrong with porn is that it debases the modesty and dignity of the human beings who make it, as well as those who consume it. In the sixties, feminists spent so much energy throwing off the strictures of religion and tradition. They never realized that chastity itself was a form of power. They never realized that the moral restraints they discarded were vital to the equality they so desperately wanted.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (100) | Leave a comment
More Articles From Buy the Book
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/08/24/feminism-pornography-and-choic
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Consternated Conferences
- The Demise of Money and Credit
- The (Real) Great Divide
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Purple Lips| 8.24.10 @ 7:26AM
The Anglican Lambreth Conference of 1930 declared that use of ABC (Artificial Birth Control) was longer sinful. By 1960 almost all of the Protestant Churches dispensed with aligning sin with birth control. By 1980 most Catholic couples ignored Vatican teachings concerning birth control.
But as far as porn goes, modesty was the first to go. Women's Lib coupled with Sexual Liberationists teams together to remove this social "barrier". Couple this trend with the "pill" and later cheap abortions, and it is no wonder porn and sexual immorality exploded. Yet, Woman's Lib was really never about "freedom"; it was and remains a dull, soul killing project of conscious raising. It is about as erotic as rotten cabage. The sexual libertines and feminists parted ways in the 1970s. The only real issue the feminists get excited about is abortion. Thier surrender to that well educated hillbilly from Hope Arkansas sealed thier fate. Here was a man who treated his women like concubines, and they loved it. Until Obama he was the most pro-abort President in history. Our feminists are also silent about the growing sexual and social oppression of Muslims. Whether it be honor killings or genital mutilations, the feminists give thier silent endorsement.
And now Dines writes a book that is "shocking". What the hell does she expect. One only need to go back to the decades and centuries that followed the Fall of Rome to see what happens when social restraints are removed. The Vandals, Huns, Goths, and Lombards had a grand old time (that is, the men did). Kidnappings, rapes were just the beginning of the horror. And it took almost 1000 years of constant Church teaching, preaching, and threats of eternal damnation to finally correct things. But what took the Church and Western society 1500 years to create was undone in 5 decades thanks in part to feminists.
Stephanie| 8.24.10 @ 7:32AM
Wonderful, wonderful post Lips. Thank you.
Miss Alabama| 8.24.10 @ 9:45AM
Pornography is not really about sex; it's about depravity. The more depraved the sex, the more a turn-on it is to men.
I have surfed the porno sites, and what I saw was unimaginable moral perversion and degeneracy and unspeakable, brutal misogyny. It is truly horrifying!
Mr. Harden, why did you not mention that the red states--the political and religious conservative states-- are the largest consumers of pornography?
Three studies have shown that the Bible Belt subscribes to more porn sites than any other area of the country.
This does not surprise me at all. The Bible is full of misogyny, and its misogyny has affected society for centuries. Fundamentalist Christianity and filthy sex seem to go hand in hand. "Woman must serve man," and in the world of porno the woman services the man in all three orifices and sometimes by two or three men simultaneously. And often the men urinate on her after "shooting their loads" (in the ugly parlance of men) into her mouth and face.
Conservative Christians have done little to counter the ugly misogyny of the Bible, and I doubt they ever will, unless we women demand it.
I fear that my teenage grandsons will see the repulsive, violent pornographic images that are only a mouse click away.
Conservatives could take a stand about the pornographic violence inflicted on women, but since conservative men are the largest consumers of this filth, I don't think anything will be done anytime soon.
If anything is to be done about the damage hardcore porno is doing to our society, I can assure you that the initiative will be taken not by conservative men or women, but by liberal feminists.
Angel | 8.24.10 @ 10:23AM
Projecting the problems Progressives have caused onto conservatives is a common malady of the left. Since more murders are committed by Democrats, murder must be a liberal problem. Why haven't they owned up to their depravity and violent natures? Liberals donate less to charity than conservatives. Why don't they admit they hate the poor? Miss Ala, your argument is ridiculous and pure liberal illogic. Hypocrisy, thy name is Progresive.
Margie| 8.24.10 @ 1:30PM
Bravo, Angel! Bravo!
T. Goldenberg| 8.24.10 @ 10:31AM
Miss Alabama, as usual, you have something insightful to say. And, in my opinion, your interpretation of what feeds the porno industry is correct.
As for religion and porno, Pakistan--one of the most fundamentalist Muslim countries in the world--is the largest consumer of pornography in the world!
And we know the extent hateful misogyny is a part of fundamentalist Islam. Indeed, I think there is a connection between religious misogyny and hard-core pornography.
Of course, we will be attacked by the fundies for saying this.
L. Ross| 8.24.10 @ 1:07PM
T. Goldenberg:
I am fascinated by your comment regarding Pakistan. I haven't been there for about 12 years, but last time I was there, they didn't have money for clean water, much less a computer and internet connection. Regarding what is for sale in the street, trust me, there is no pornography.
sdb90| 8.24.10 @ 1:46PM
L. Ross,
Fox News reported that Pakistan is largest consumer of internet porn.
Below is from the Examiner:
Someone over at Fox News has been spending their time fooling around with their Google search engine instead of doing actual work. Recently they shook the headlines by publishing a report that Pakistan ranked number one in the world for weird pornographic searches on Google Trends. Almost immediately Google issued a statement saying that the data was not a large enough sampling to be statistically sound.
“Camel sex” and “child sex” were among the featured topics where Pakistan leads in searches per-person according to the article. You don’t have to trust Fox News. You can check for yourself. Don’t worry. No pictures.
Do a Google search, and you will see many sites saying Pakistan is a huge consumer of porn.
Steve A| 8.24.10 @ 10:32AM
Yes Miss A, Those liberal feminists have just brought so much to the table as of late. I was especially proud of them when they stood up & voiced their outrage when your man Bill from Little Rock was nailing his intern in the oval office. This was certainly not a case of abuse of authirity over an impressionable female.
Larry Full of Lust| 8.24.10 @ 12:41PM
I've learned a lot from porno. First of all, I learned about sex before I had my first experience. So I knew what to do.
And I like sex dirty. Let's face it, when sex is dirty, it's fun. Also, men like to see lesbians going at it. I know I do.
And as for lesbian sex and male and male sex and male and woman sex, it all looks the same after you've seen it all. And they are all doing about the same thing.
Sodomy? Oral sex is sodomy. I don't hear conservative men (and count me as one) complaining that oral sex being sodomy. Why? We love it. Hilarious.
The hyporcrisy about sex stinks to high heaven. And porno is here to stay like it or not. The internet is saturated with it and showing everything imaginable (and unimaginable). Get over it.
Bozoxfg67| 8.24.10 @ 12:45PM
Re. Larry's remarks:
Man, you told the truth about what men like. And what you said about sodomy is funny.
Straight conservative men love to watch lesbian action, and conservative men like oral sex. But will they call it sodomy. God Almighty, No!
I'm still laughing at your post. Tell it brutha.
Eric Cartman| 8.24.10 @ 10:44AM
Miss Alabam, you're a bitch in need of a good screwing.
Rebecca Y.| 8.24.10 @ 11:13AM
Is this the level of commentary on this blog? Pathetic.
Eric, evidently you are a man of arrested development (junior high mentality). But I'm wasting my breath saying anything about . . . forget it . . .
Anna K. from Emory U.| 8.24.10 @ 11:18AM
Rebecca,
You'll find more of the same coarse, brutish voices when you scroll through these shallow posts.
You're wise not to conclude your comment. You'd be wasting your breath to say anything intelligent.
Grzmlyk| 8.24.10 @ 12:51PM
Yeah, Anna K from Emory U; so far the command of the subject, breadth of knowledge and general erudition emanating from you and Rebecca of Donnybrook Farm are blinding.
Why, your combined contribution to this site has raised it to a new intellectual level. Oh wait - neither of you actually made a point, did you?
Then again in Liberal Land, whining is the first step toward grievance, which is the first step toward a trumped-up civil right, which is the first step toward being a professional victim, which is the first step toward sucking off the government teat to redress the wrongs that have been done to you.
Shouldn't you be in your Women's Studies class right about how? I hear today's lecture is on how testicles are the source of all evil on the planet (I would say "conservative" testicles, but aren't all liberal men geldings to begin with?).
I jest, of course. I know that EVERY lecture is on how testicles are the source of evil on the planet.
See you at the Title IX rally tonight. I hear that somewhere there is a male athlete who's happy. So there's work to be done.
Please, by all means, leave - and take your vapidity with you.
Steve A| 8.24.10 @ 1:17PM
Dearest Anna & Becky, Maybe we should just get in line with the Imam over at ground zero & slap a bit of Sharia Law on you & your lib sisterhood. It would nip this porno problem right in the bud. Best of luck with your Das Kapital term paper.
Grzmlyk| 8.24.10 @ 1:27PM
I'm sure our dear Anna from Emory U (Go00000 Lesbians-Until-Graduation!) will receive an "A" on her paper.
First of all, it's about Das Kapital - helloooo! Clearly she's already got her mind right. No need for the TA to even read it.
Second, all good universities - and I'm sure the second rate ones like Emory - socialize grades these days. As long as you show up and profess your dedication to saving our fragile, fragile, oh-so-delicate environment - you know, the ones that male capitalists are destroying - you're a shoo-in for an "A." That's Educational Justice, my friend.
By the way, have you been to Becky's Web site? I don't mean the free side; I mean the subscription side. For $39.99 a month, you can get all the degradation your little heart desires. And the good news is, she's donating all of the proceeds to her favorite charity: Herself.
Ed Frank| 8.24.10 @ 4:51PM
Whoa, whoa. All these women objected to was the incredibly crude way the previous poster attacked Miss A. Did you not read what he said? Are you not reading the same article about how porn is degrading and we need to return to a more civilized way of interaction between the sexes?
Porn is porn and will always be with us. What we NEED to be careful about is how we as individuals treat each other. The three of you are the real problem. Grow up.
Grzmlyk| 8.24.10 @ 6:46PM
No, the culture that gave birth to porn is the real problem. People who can't recognize the real problem are the real problem.
Or haven't you read the main article?
Yes, some of the posts here are crude and unfortunate; the vast majority, however, are serious. Or haven't you read them?
Drive-by comments do nothing to add to the conversation; they're simply moral preening. Which, come to think of it, probably suits you just fine.
Eric Cartman| 8.24.10 @ 7:51PM
Rebecca, you are obviously severely handicapped by Liberal thought if you think the above pathetic attempt to diss Miss Assholebama came from me - see post below.
But what is more it is obviously an attempt to try to make me look ham handed, being without my usual panache'! perhaps it is you or Anna of Emory using my nom de plume. Which can only mean one thing: I live inside your head rent free! Hee hee hee!
Eric Cartman| 8.24.10 @ 7:44PM
Um, dude. If you're going to steal my name, do it some justice. I'm much more creative than this. And not so demented that I would put that disgusting picture of Miss Assholebama having sex in my brain nor subject others to that awful, awful image. EEEESH! However, between you and me, you're probably correct.
TZRUZ| 8.24.10 @ 9:10PM
Eric Cartman, (are you the REAL Eric Cartman?) you sound like white trash to me.
Eric Cartman| 8.25.10 @ 12:35AM
Hmmm, that'sfunny, because you sound like Ghetto Trash to me. I mean, a name like TZRUZ, you gotta be down wit da homies.
Purple Lips| 8.24.10 @ 10:59AM
Ah yes, it is all the Red State's fault! Ignore San Fran where perversion is the norm, or the San Fernando Valley which put porn on the map (California is a blue state the last time I checked). And Liberal Feminists? They had thier chance and put thier full support behind thier Man from Hope. Misogyny is Clinton's middle name. Good grief, he had the Arkansas State Police pimping coeds for him. Of course he wasn't addicted to porn, because he starred in his own constantly running porno on a daily basis. And the feminists just loved him!. He was thier man! And why? Well, abortion of course. And the feminists were silent concerning that sophisticated, nuanced European artiste named Roman Polanski. Heck, the man sodomized a 14 year old and those moralists from NOW applaud him. The hags also adore ALGORE. And the last time I checked, ALGORE has quite a taste for middle aged women and S&M. I loves to give them the smack down if they don't comply.
So please, go back to your double wide and make your old man some grits Eggos.
Hug a Bear| 8.24.10 @ 6:33PM
Gail Dines has addressed an important subject, and I concur with her about the dangers to society of ugly, violent porn.
I know many of you will not want to hear this, but there is a movement among older gays (50 and upward) away from sex and into the more intimate communication of cuddling.
I am in a relationship now with a very good-looking man, and our love is romantic, not sexual. At home we hold hands, snuggle, hug each other and intwine our arms and legs when we stretch out on couch and bed.
I know you will find this strange, but many gay men are into warm intimacy, and we think that sex often distracts. Sex, by the way, is not the most intimate way to communicate. Gentle caressing and kissing and hugging are best for many of us. We call ourselves teddy bears.
And now that I have expressed my two-cents, you may respond with your acid derision. I know it's coming.
monty.crisco| 8.24.10 @ 9:34PM
Well, I for one, as a regular commenter here, will not respond with derision. As a libertarian I don't think it is anybody's concern or business what you do with another consenting adult. And the same is true for porn. Yes, there may be moral laws and such, but if a consenting adult along with another consenting adult chooses to violate them and make filthy porn, that is not the state's duty to make their choices for them and it is not violating any CIVIL law. If you don't like it, don't watch it, and get the fuck out of my business if I do watch it. And if you feel like it destroys the souls of those who use it, then maybe you should tell their parents and try to convince them to do a better job. But BIG GOVERNMENT is not my parent and it isn't yours, either, and I find this a tricky issue - as evidenced by the posts here - that puts statist progressive in bed (you'll pardon the expression) with evangelical conservatives. It is thorny for me as a conservative because all I hear is condemnation and rabble-rousing about "there oughta be a law against it"! Well, let me tell you, we do not need more laws. Because it won't stop at porn.....
monty.crisco| 8.24.10 @ 9:38PM
And don't ge me started on the laughably absurd arguments of the intellectual "giants" who posit that after achieving their liberal goals of complete sexual freedom and "the right of women to their own bodies" (and I see nothing wrong with either of these principles, but that is hardly the true goal of the American political left) now BLAME CONSERVATIVES for allowing the porn industry to flourish and grow. This argument is so VAPID, so hypocritical - so MONUMENTALLY CHILDISH - that is does not even rise to the level of sophistry.
Grzmlyk| 8.24.10 @ 11:04AM
Of course in Liberal Land, destruction wrought by liberals is blamed on conservatives. Par for the course. Same goes for the failure of the Great Society, Viet Nam, cities like Detroit and New Orleans, our failed schools (despite billions of dollars being thrown at them) and, of course, the pornification of what used to be a civil society.
Hey, Miss Alabama: What's the demographic for MTV, which is a gateway drug for porn? I'm guessing it's not your evil bible-toting southerners; it's liberal urban teens. And who acts in these movies, for which there seems to be a never-ending supply of young (and not so young) women happy to be degraded on camera? I'm guessing you'd be hard-pressed to find a conservative Christian willing to wallow in filth as I'm sure you've done in your time (and yes, I know you're a gay male, not a woman).
And can you show me the studies that prove porn consumption occurs primarily among religious Christians? I'm sure the wink-wink-nod-nod research is as irreproachable as the phony data plugged into global warming models to prop up that scam.
I must admire liberals' utter disregard for facts.
Porn today has reached its logical conclusion; just as cocaine addicts require more and more to feel the buzz, so porn must become more and more decadent to raise, uh, interest.
Hedonism always ends this way - in destruction, degradation, nihilism, the abandonment of civility for the singular attention to one's own appetites at all costs.
Hedonism is perhaps liberalism's primary tool for corroding the social contracts that make society work. And that's just what liberals want: The end game of all liberalsim - be it feminism, environmentalism, communism, gender issues - is abject chaos, the masses lying prostrate before the ruling class which hides its own sybaritic avarice, self-indulgence and immorality behind the phony mask of compassion.
What was Colin Powell's "Pottery Barn" rule for Iraq? Well, it applies to American society: Liberals broke it - now you're damned well going to pay for it.
Grzmlyk| 8.24.10 @ 11:50AM
Oh, by the way: Where do you think this never-ending conveyor belt of women willing to perform in these movies comes from? Liberal social policy.
First of all, the advent of the pill and the sexual "revolution" fueled our obsessive drive to make female sexuality indistinguishable from male sexuality (never mind the different biologies). So as a culture, we engaged in a headlong race to make women as randy and promiscuous as men were traditionally (look at the rise of STDs among both sexes if you don't believe me). The inevitable result: We have devalued women. How's that workin' out for you feminists? How's it feel to be a recepticle?
And since - once again, thanks to liberal social policy - we no longer believe in the nuclear family and men have become superfluous after the sex act itself, most of these women come from broken homes whose failure they had no control over.
The result was so many young girls felt powerless and, as they entered puberty, they felt their only shot at validation was by having and exercising their newly-developed sexual power over men.
During childhood, they were too often burdens to be discarded. And thanks to the liberal takeover of schools that took no part in teaching them to respect their brains or to embrace values, all they have to fall back on was the desire for power - economic power to become profligate consumers, and sexual power to become desired and validated by men for whom they have - again, thanks to liberal social values - extremely unhealthy and unresolved emotions.
So in order to claim both short-term economic power that fuels their shallow materialism and to slake the thirst they have for validation, they become the sexual objects I thought feminism was supposed to discourage.
Voila: An endless supply of women with no sense of shame, no respect for their bodies, no useful skills, no respect for this country or its institutions, no education, no sense of responsibility. Pefect Democrat voters.
Now you have a society where porn stars are crossing over to mainstream pop culture; it was a red-letter day for liberalism when Jenna Jameson did a sneaker commerical, I'm sure. Because we all know that liberalism empowers women to be in charge of their sexuality and have as much fun as they want, right? Why, spreading your legs in front of a camera (or far wors) is liberation, isn't it?
Never mind the post-porn career instances of empty lives, drug and alcohol addiction, failed marriages, estranged children, ongoing STDs and the vestiges of stigma that still attach to a past as a porn star, and you've essentially got the results of a whole slew of liberal policies right there in the broken, hollow and unproductive lives of myriad women who might have been something in their lives.
Instead they turn out to be disposable tissues. Another victory for liberalism, which views all people as disposable.
monty.crisco| 8.24.10 @ 10:39PM
Grzmlyk-
Absolutely exactly what I wanted to say - glad you said it more eloquently (and forcefully) than I ever could have. Love this post. Sure they won't respond to it though - what could they say?
Brenda Long| 8.24.10 @ 11:25AM
I don't usually agree with you, Miss Alabama, but what you say about pornography rings true to me. Something must be done now, or porno will have terrible effects on male/female relations.
I think all porno should be separate from other internet sites so children cannot access it. I, too, have grandsons and granddaughters and I hate to think of them accessing this violent filth. Filth beyond belief!
And I never hear men getting alarmed about it. And I think we all know why.
John II| 8.24.10 @ 11:45AM
"And I never hear men getting alarmed about it."
Last time I checked, "Nathan" is a male name, from a minor prophet in the Old Testament who took King David to task. But perhaps the author of the piece is a woman using a nom de plum.
For my part, I never hear feminists getting alarmed about "it," or about quite a number of other degradations, such as abortion and the behavior of the likes of Associate Professor Clinton.
Anthony| 8.24.10 @ 11:25AM
Is there a liberal feminist who is not a supporter of the murder of pre-born children? How can any group that starts with the premise that child sacrifice is a right ever lead a moral movement?Unfortunately for Miss Alabama and her ilk , because they are blind to reality, they will never see that conservative values such as family, chastity and church , and the religous teachings of Christianity are the only things that can give dignity to women.
D. H.| 8.24.10 @ 12:33PM
The misogyny embedded in Christianity gives "dignity to women"? Come on, Anthony, use your brain.
JKS| 8.24.10 @ 1:52PM
"The misogyny embedded in Christianity gives "dignity to women"?" Examples please. Ad hominem is not a valid argument.
Paul and Saul and Maul| 8.24.10 @ 2:23PM
Here's your reply, Mr. right-wing fundamentalist:
In Matthew 25:1 Jesus says: "At that time the kingdom of heaven will be like ten virgins who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom."
In John 20:17 Jesus says to Mary: "Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father," as though the touch of a woman is somehow improper, but a few verses later, is happy to have Thomas touch him.
In Genesis chapter 3, God punishes Eve, and all women for thousands of years, with greatly increased pain during childbirth. No such pain is inflicted on Adam.
In Ephesians 5:22-24 we find this: "Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything."
In 1 Peter 3:7 we find: "Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers."
In 1 John 2:13, John says, "I write to you, fathers, because you have known him who is from the beginning. I write to you, young men, because you have overcome the evil one. I write to you, dear children, because you have known the Father." No mention is made of women.
And so on. There are many, many examples like these throughout the old and new testaments.
There are other, broader examples of misogyny that are readily apparent in the Bible as well:
Are any of Jesus' disciples women? No.
Are any of the elders in the book of Revelation women? No.
Are any of the books of the Bible written by women? No.
Etc...
God, it would seem, wants nothing to do with women.
Kenneth E. MacAlister Jr.| 8.24.10 @ 3:01PM
Sorry friend, but you know nothing of GOD. Have you ever asked GOD Himself for the true meaning of His Word? Instead of taking a handful of verses out of context please read the entire book, but before you read ask for the enlightenment & understanding only He can give you. If GOD wanted nothing to do with women they would not have been created. How can you judge The GOD you don't know? Stop rejecting GOD & get to know Him. You don't know what you're missing.
FakeEagle| 8.24.10 @ 3:34PM
Right, and "all men are created equal," which clearly shows that the founding fathers were hopeful that all American women would someday be the recipients of degradation and abuse by men hooked on porn. I'm glad you read the Bible. Now try studying it. Context is your friend.
John II| 8.24.10 @ 3:52PM
"God, it would seem, wants nothing to do with women."
Except for Ruth and Judith and Ester and Anna and Martha.
Oh, and except for the New Eve--Mary the Mother of God, whom He chose to be His Mediatrix and to be the Exemplar for a humanity that itself chose the cosmic degradation of the Fall.
Then there are all those pesky female saints and martyrs, century after century after century bearing witness to the love of a God who wants nothing to do with them.
Tell the story straight, Maulie. No fair picking and choosing just to suit your little optic.
Margie| 8.24.10 @ 6:11PM
Sorry John II, but Mary was and is not any kind of mediator between man and God.
"For there is one God, and there is one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony to which was borne at the proper time." 1 Tim. 2:5 & 6.
John II| 8.24.10 @ 7:06PM
Hi Marge. "The Bible hath not all the wisdom but only a huge chunk of it. There be-ith as well Tradition and the Magisterium. Which saith that Mary, Queen of Heaven, is Mediatrix, though there be only one Mediator" (John II: 1)
How do you like my new Scripture quote? I just made it up. . . . Well, I got the teaching from the Catholic Church, but I made up the Scripture quote to fit. Besides, I love quoting myself. I got a million of 'em--quotes all over the place.
For example, here's the beginning of Paul's admonition to Timothy: "First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectable in every way. This is good, and it is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." (1 Tim. 2: 1-4)
That's the part you left out, Marge, but us wafer-chomping Catholics aren't allowed to leave anything out, know-what-I-mean?
I mean, Christ's role as Mediator between God and man is indeed unique--for God-Himself -become-Man can have no rival in that department. Yet union with Christ allows the rest of us to participate in the mediation--as for example whenever you raise hell with me for what you take to be the sola Scriptura wham-wham. Your own deep faith in Christ moves you to admonish me, so that you yourself are participating in Christ's mediation (albeit somewhat mistakenly with respect to some techie details, but hey: that's why we have a Church).
Now, just as my pal Margie participates in Christ's mediation by dint of her deep faith and her communication of that faith, so the Virgin, among all those who participate in the mediation, is the Supreme Participator, there being no possibility of a relation closer than that of Mother to Child. In other words, God takes His own creation seriously and delegates all over the place--he's not aloof, like the Muslim god. He's designed things so that there's a lot of participatory mediation going around.
But I like the word Mediatrix, partly because I'm into Latin roots, that being the manner in which I make my living.
For a fuller discussion of this issue of human participation in Christ's unique mediation, see my hero Tommy Aquinas in the Summa Theologiae III. 26. 1.
And now back to my summer review of Laurel and Hardy movies.
Margie| 8.24.10 @ 6:27PM
John II,
I should have said instead,
I love you lots John II, but... and then said what I said. Because then I would have been kinder. And other than that, and the fact that Mary also isn't the Mother of God, as God has no Mother, I like what you said. :^)
John II| 8.24.10 @ 7:14PM
Er--hi again, Marge. I sent you a long-winded reply before I saw your follow-up. No need to soften your reply. We're pals. And pals don't mince words.
Can't think of anybody in the whole world (except my wife and kids and grandkids) whom I'd rather have next to me in the trenches in our Holy War against the Obamanation!
Margie| 8.24.10 @ 9:42PM
John II,
Thank you for saying that! It means a lot to me.
As to 1 Timothy. The intercessions are made through Him. He is the intercessor. Not man, nor woman. Because no other man or woman died for the sins of the whole world, nor were they risen by God from the dead. It goes on:
"..who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony to which was borne at the proper time." 1 tim. 2:6.
Only Jesus died on the cross and was raised from the dead, thus overcoming Sin and Death.
"..having canceled the bond which stood against us with its legal demands; this He set aside, nailing it to the cross. He disarmed the principalities and powers and made a public example of them, triumphing over them in Him." Col. 2: 14 & 15.
Only He did that. No one else.
"Consequently He is able for all time to save those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them." Heb. 7:25.
The one and only Great Intercessor!
And now, on to that Holy War!
Excelsior!
Margie| 8.24.10 @ 6:15PM
To Paul & Saul & co:
"..with the pure Thou dost show Thyself pure; and with the crooked Thou dost show Thyself perverse." Ps. 18:26.
Florence, the Night Nurse| 8.24.10 @ 7:03PM
Marge, dear,
Just curious: Are you the wife of Old Texican?
And another thing, sometimes you seem to be off your medications? Am I correct in this assumption?
Margie| 8.24.10 @ 8:42PM
Flo baby:
"For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." 1 Cor. 1:18.
Ed Frank| 8.24.10 @ 5:31PM
Yes, actually, there are pro-life feminists. Women get their dignity from themselves, and then bring them to those institutions you speak about.
Flit Andersen| 8.24.10 @ 11:22PM
Ms.A, I don't know how you've arrived at the conclusion that that "red states--the political and religious conservative states-- are the largest consumers of pornography", perhaps you read this on the Daily Kos? Or the HuffPo? I like to see facts backed up with orig. sites.
As for the bible being misogynistic, I'm not a bible expert, but I was raised Christian and I was always taught to repsect womenfolk.
Personally, I don't believe whatever "misogyny" you've found scouring the pages of the bible can touch the damage done by the secular humistic communist pals you no doubt chum around with.
Good day, ma'am.
Believer| 8.25.10 @ 2:17AM
Miss Alabama- If anything is to be done it will be done by feminists? I think you have done quite enough thank you, your kind have done more to encourage free sex, abortion, and the total distruction of the family unit, not to mention teaching young girls that family values were for stupid religious men. Im quite sure your anti religious and think we are morons but you and your kids are witnessing the fall of western civilization, then Men will go back to their primitive ways with your granddaughters. and you sacrificed civillization for the ability to do what you wanted with no sence of guilt.
Alan Brooks| 8.24.10 @ 3:24PM
But porn SHOULD be disgusting, otherwise too many young people would literally fall in love with porn--it is too tempting.
Can you imagine if someone with taste, talent, imagination, and funding, could do with say, an erotic TV film-- it could be so exciting that susceptible viewers would have coronaries; if porn was based on taste rather than revenge it would be irresistible to young people, and healthy older viewers as well. Keep porn dirty, disgusting, and in a plain brown wrapper.
All things tasteless and empty.
Tomas| 8.24.10 @ 3:45PM
Sounds good, but you miss two important points:
1. Many people in the porn industry are there against their will. Human trafficking plays a huge part in supplying victims. Don't get caught up in the mistaken notion that these women are doing this because they want to. Listen to the people who have been rescued from the porn industry.
2. Porn is VERY addicting. It's not just a matter of porn being so disgusting people will be turned off by it. Like all addictions, it starts slowly. It grows. Before one realizes it, he (and she) is past the point of no return. They're hooked. And from now on everything they see is filtered through the lens of porn. Women are sluts. Men are threats. Even words take on meanings they aren't intended to have.
Ask an alcoholic. Ask me, a recovered drug addict.
Porn is not a victimless element in society.
Get involved, Alan. You have friends who are addicted. I know you do. Help them. Get involved in organizations that help people get out of porn, that help them kick the drug addictions that porn makers use to keep them subservient.
Come on, Alan. I know you visit this forum to bait people, but this issue is beyond political chess. There are lives at stake.
-
Alan Brooks| 8.24.10 @ 3:52PM
Baiting is part of what AS is-- you are not pacifists.
If what you write above is correct, then it is much worse than I thought. If porn is so addictive, how can you do anything without larger government embarking on a war against porn similar to the war on drugs? private initiatives wont work in this case-- in fact, young people will rebel all the more.
Yours is not only a losing cause, but a totally hopeless one.
Grzmlyk| 8.24.10 @ 4:04PM
Once again, you never miss and opportunity to miss an opportunity to prove you have a clue about any aspect of life.
Which means you're a perfect liberal. Congratulations.
I must say, it's amusing to watch your attempts to prove your intelligence, but you remind me of a fish that's flopped out of the pond and flounders helplessly on the shore.
John II| 8.24.10 @ 7:23PM
Nice reply, Grzzy--but "flounder" can stand on its own; "helplessly" is redundant. One cannot attend too closely to style when one is responding to liberal morons.
John II| 8.24.10 @ 7:25PM
And note my own redundancy in the last two words. It's been a long day.
Grzmlyk| 8.24.10 @ 8:14PM
Not to nitpick, but it's not strictly redundant. According to thefreedictionary.com, it's defined as follows:
flounder1
vb (intr)
1. to struggle; to move with difficulty, as in mud
2. to behave awkwardly; make mistakes.
On Dictionary.com, it is defined as:
floun·der1 /ˈflaʊndər/ Show Spelled[floun-der] Show IPA
–verb (used without object)
1. to struggle with stumbling or plunging movements (usually fol. by about, along, on, through, etc.): He saw the child floundering about in the water.
2. to struggle clumsily or helplessly: He floundered helplessly on the first day of his new job.
Now, while "helplessly" does appear in the second definition on dictionary.com, it does not appear in the first definition at all.
However, the more important point is that, to my eye, there's a nice stylistic underscoring, an added heft, if you will, when the sentence is structured as follows: "Alan Brooks floundered about helplessly."
Far better than "Alan Brooks floundered" - because, keep in mind that if you maintain that "helplessly" is redundant, then surely "about" is also redundant. But "Alan Brooks floundered" is far less satisfying - far less complete, if you will - an image than, "Alan Brooks floundered about helplessly."
It's like the verb "mill." You could say, "People were milling at the mall," because "mill" means to move about aimlessly; but the rhythm, emphasis and imagery of most sentences cry out for a bit more oomph: "People were milling about aimlessly at the mall."
Much more evocative, don't you think?
Margie| 8.24.10 @ 9:13PM
Alan Brooks flounders about quite swimmingly on other occasions. Rare though they may be.
How's that? The question is though, is there such a thing as floundering swimmingly? Perhaps not.
Oh well. :^)
John II| 8.24.10 @ 11:32PM
Well, Grzzy, I dunno. Adverbs are notoriously intrusive and insistent, as attested in this very sentence. It appears that your taste in rhetoric is more Mediterranean than English or Teutonic. What I would call redundant you would call pleonastic. And, as the Romans were fond of saying, De gustibus non disputandum est.
On the other hand, neither the Brits nor the Krauts nor the Romans nor the Greeks would like "milling at the mall" because of the indeliberate bilabial alliterative clash, so to speak.
How about this? "Floundering, Alan Brooks wandered aimlessly in the mall of ideas."
Ed Frank| 8.24.10 @ 5:39PM
"silent endorsement"? You must not be listening. They are very, very vocal about both, and many other issues with the oppression of women in the name of Islam.
Your concept of the Church and Rome's roles in history are also oddly fitted neatly to a totally false narrative. It's true that delicately woven social fabric holds society together and keeps people treating their neighbors neighborly, but the Church (and the damnation part) was coincidental, and Rome was also pretty rape-y stabby murder-y.
Sam Vaughn| 8.24.10 @ 8:59AM
Well said. It's been fashionable for a long time to deride old fashioned values as "un-hip" so Leave it to Beaverish. When in fact those old fashioned values are nothing more than the foundation of a civilized society.
Tomas| 8.24.10 @ 3:34PM
So much to say on this. But before I start I want to applaud Dines for writing this book. Just a few ancillary things to consider:
First off, part of Dines opposition to porn is based on sexual inequality. Speaking as a feminist, one can understand her argument. But it easily overlooks the concurrent degradation of men.
As women are treated as the recipients of this humiliation, men are likewise downgraded to the level of a perpetrator (and in gay sex, the victim AND the perp). This model is shown to be the only true model a man must represent to a woman in order to be a real man.
Therein lies the conundrum for the feminist. Their continued stereotype of the conservative male as the brutal misogynist, the force in our society that wants women in a subservient role.
Yet, men who use porn do not see women as they should: people to be loved, to be served, to be cherished exalted for all the glorious things they are. Rather, men are told that women are only objects of degrading sex, and that - Hey! - they like it!
Which leads to the fundamental political dilemma: While the liberal wants to cling to the first amendment, doing so in the case of porn will only helps to promote it. Yet, they see its damage and want that damaged stopped.
This mean s they must side with the conservative on the political issue of speech vs. the outcome of speech.
Now, "choice". In the case of porn, yhis is an issue that feminists can do an end-run around, yet they don't see it. They buy the false notion that the women in porn are doing it because they want to.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Most women in porn are there against their will. They are held through addiction to drugs, through their status as property, through their treatment as a kidnapped individual: no contact with the world outside of porn.
Porn is full of human trafficking. Girls are snatched off the streets, primarily in third-world countries, and forced into porn. Troubled girls - and men - are told porn is they way out; it is glamorous; they will be a star. Visit http://www.thepinkcross.org/ for the truth on this.
Feminists can easily side with conservatives on the issue of the treatment of both women and men in and through porn. it's a no-brainer.
Everyone needs to get involved. Stop pointing fingers. if you use, find help. Help the organizations that work to release those in porn and who use porn.
FTA: "What is wrong with porn is that it debases the modesty and dignity of the human beings who make it, as well as those who consume it. In the sixties, feminists spent so much energy throwing off the strictures of religion and tradition. They never realized that chastity itself was a form of power. They never realized that the moral restraints they discarded were vital to the equality they so desperately wanted."
Bingo. Sounds like a good read. But, only if you have the stomach for it. Thank you, Dines.
-
Anastasia Mather| 8.24.10 @ 9:29AM
Yes, the "feminists" have derided marriage so long, and then insist on all the things marriage provided women - respect, dignity, worthy work towards common goals, companionship. Maybe they SHOULD consider taking a few steps back.
Paul Kotik| 8.24.10 @ 9:38AM
This is so perplexing. Why, I don't know what I'm to think. Other feminists proclaim that Woman Is Queen and overlord of the contemporary porn industry, and that its product is a triumphal monument to women exercising, in extremis, their hard-won freedom of choice. They say that female porn performers earn much, much more money than do their male co-workers who, we are told, are viewed as nothing more than animated props.
I suppose getting to the truth of the matter will require personally investigating the industry and its product, but I'm not going to do it because it just isn't interesting enough. There's nothing new under the sun, and so there's no reason to suppose there's any historical novelty in the contemporary porn industry.
Derek Leaberry| 8.24.10 @ 9:50AM
There is no denying that pornography is vile and the female performers are degraded. Yet such a small amount of women work in the field(and at double the pay for the men) that it is more a problem for the men who watch it and in many cases become addicted to it. More a problem is the high sexuality rates of teenagers. Losing one's virginity before graduating high school seems to be some perverse rite of passage for tens of millions of American children.
Ed Frank| 8.24.10 @ 5:26PM
Thank you! Someone who actually read the article.
Louis Jenkins| 8.24.10 @ 9:52AM
So why has porn caught on? It's available in almost every venue, from light porn to hard core. It's a personal choice of morality, and we know that morality has many facets. The women involved in the industry allow these things to be done to themselves, therefore it is based upon them alone. Wonder what would happen if they all left the business at one time?
Anthony| 8.24.10 @ 9:59AM
Poor Ms. Dines, what a delima, a "progressive" finding herself in the uncomfortable position of being aligned with social conservatives. Oh the horror!!
Let's see what impact Ms. Dines has on her more nuianced and erudite fellow "progressives", say for example Larry Flint, as opposed to us Neandtherthal conservatives.
Ed Frank| 8.24.10 @ 5:24PM
The "horror" was something the author of this post said, not Ms. Dines.
There's a lot of misreading going on here - like, just because she says women should be ABLE to make decisiouns with their bodies does NOT mean that all of those choices are good for them or that they should. Her bigger point, about how bad porn is, is all about individual choices. Come on, this is a conservative argument - that you yourself make choices and are responsible for yourself, government out. Don't be such a hater that you have to lump them all together - then you don't HEAR them or anything they've said.
Petronius| 8.24.10 @ 10:59AM
Decency or depravity. The left believes they can be turned on and off: that it's fine when they want to fornicate, and a felony when they don't. And it's all the fault of today's Conservatives that the the primitive polity of the ancient world being documented in the Old Testament legitimizes their views. Bravo Sierra. That's why we call it B.C. pre Christian; Before Christ. The Mosaic Law descending from the Ten Commandments is the first real attempt to make men realize that it was time to consider themselves as something other than beasts. What galls Liberals the most is that self control defines whether or not a person is civilized. And committing adultery reduces one to
a rutting animal. They can reject this concept all they want; sleep with anybody, abort a child, simply to put up and maintain a front. They believe we are slaves to antiquated morality. So what. They are slaves to their self image and the opinions their friends have of them. So why all the angst? 1 We are still here. And 2 We still dare to disapprove of wanton behavior. They have the power to flout the Commandments, but they demand the Right. And Rights are grounded in and by the making and keeping of agreements.
vtwin| 8.24.10 @ 12:28PM
Come on you reactionnary teabaggers! Try to relax, this is just great:
http://www.pornhub.com/view_vi.....2013468552
Grzmlyk| 8.24.10 @ 2:18PM
Gee, think how much porn you could watch if you had opposable thumbs.
monty.crisco| 8.24.10 @ 9:09PM
What a tard... teaparty guys are probably the least disposed of the conservatives to make porn an issue... what an ignorant douche you are... If you're gonna be a troll at least do it right, tard...
Steve A| 8.24.10 @ 12:39PM
vtwin, Lame effort pal. Come on man. Is that the best you have to offer? Weak. Expect a bit more from you.
Jeremiah| 8.24.10 @ 12:45PM
vtwin, you're a disgusting libturd and you should be ashamed of yourself. Liberals invented pornography, they rely on it to corrupt America.
Joe D. | 8.24.10 @ 12:53PM
It proves once again when man steps in, in this case woman, to act as God they always mess it up. God had it right in the first place. Read the Bible to see how a husband, boy friend should treat a woman.
The Emperor| 8.24.10 @ 1:27PM
Gee...Typical of Feminists, spouting out this and that over a subject while not knowing the reasons why. It is really simple why men consume large amounts of porn.
It is because after a while, women are get tired of being intimate with their man and thus withhold sex. When it does come time to sex, it is more like necrophilia because the woman will just lie down, close her eyes, and hurry the guy up to finish. As a result, women treat sex like a chore, something not seen in porn.
If feminists are serious about getting rid of porn, do something radical like treat men nice and indulge some of fantasies...as long as they are within reason and not something that will put you in danger.
And you know...the same logic and solutions can also be applied in getting rid of prostitution but again, feminists will never do this because some moron like Amanda Marcotte will just turn the discussion from a talk about cooperation and compromise into a tirade about women being oppressed by men, convincing many men that feminists are man-hating lesbians with no logic.
Ed Frank| 8.24.10 @ 5:16PM
What are you doing wrong to have such bad sex with people who hate having it with you? I assure you, that's not what it's supposed to be like. I'm sorry for your personal problems - counseling?
Lynne | 8.24.10 @ 2:22PM
My 81 year old mom, was a lady, a "kick down the door"feminist, she was also a US Marine! Her advise to me when I was young was this simple, she said: " In this culture a woman creates her own dignity, If you give up your dignity, prepare to be trod upon by the guys". A lady is a lady and not all women are ladies and any man worth his salt will know the difference and act accordingly. My Dad ( also a US Marine Ret.) Said: "Honey ,some girls are for fun and some girls are for marriage. No man wants a fun girl to be the mother of his children. He wants a girl he can be seen with". These are the things I tell my teenage sons. and I have added the question, how many guys will you have wanted to share your wife with? remember that girl you are seeing will be some guys wife one day. All I have to say is " Girls if you want to be respected and you want to grow old with a decent man...be a lady a model for your daughters and avoid guys who like perverted stuff". As for feminism...in this country, we are all in charge of our own dignity.
Margie| 8.24.10 @ 8:30PM
Beautiful.
"Charm is deceitful, and beauty is vain, but a woman who fears the LORD is to be praised." Prov. 31:30.
WAKE UP| 8.25.10 @ 12:45AM
As Margaret Thatcher pointed out, "If you have to say you're a lady, you aren't."
JP| 8.24.10 @ 2:33PM
If one were refer to history and Nature, it is easy to conclude that Men's nature points towards freedom. Men, by thier nature, are not predisposed towards what in the West is known as Matrimony. Both Kant and Rousseau recognized this problem; both Plato and Aristotle saw it as well. Men like sex, but naturally do not gravitate towards taking care of thier off-spring or mates. This dichotomy betwen Nature and Necessity is an ancient one. Women, by thier Nature must suffer the effects of sex. And in ancient societies, it was most often rape. The churches of the middle ages also served as orphanages and safe havens for women and children. The problem was the male's sex drive. How could this be tamed without changing the nature of males? The great problem with the early Middle Ages was a social one. And the West found the solution in sublimating men's sex drive. The family wasn't a perfect institution; but it was far preferable to the rape, plundering, and pillaging of the 6th and 7th centuries. In the long run, it lead to the emacipation of women (which to some degree was forced on other cultures, with the exception of Islam). Only in the West did women enjoy an elevated state.
But in the last century a war was declared on not only men, but Matrimony, convention, morality,and the family. And the effects are to again unlesh to sex drive. Of course, porn has become more and more perverse. The original definition of perverse dealt with any sex act that didn't lead to procreation. We are well beyond that. Young men now can enjoy a variety of perverse pleasures without fear of shot-gun marriages and jail. Birth control and abortions usually take care of that problem. And no amount of conscious raising, and feminzing can change the nature of men. Young males know when they are being preached at. But today they are free of the social, religious, and civil constraints that kept thier grandfathers in line. Hooking up has become mainstream. Sex is everywhere. And why shouldn't it be? It is the strongest instinct left in Man. Not even King David could resist the temptations of the flesh (as it was once called). Unleashed, sex is like Pandora.
tattooed poochie| 8.24.10 @ 2:45PM
well, uh, why, i mean, uh, why did god give,uh, men such a, uh, str . . . strong sex drive? wuz god creating mischief? mischief for the feemales?
kin yuh answer this, mr. j.p. whizz?
JS| 8.28.10 @ 9:46PM
I must respectfully disagree, as I suggest almost every father would.
The change that came over me at the birth of my first child was expected, but even so the strength and depth of that change still managed to surprise me.
Men are STRONGLY disposed towards taking care of both mate and children.
Once I became a father, threats not just to my child, but any child made me much angrier, and much more careful of their safety and well being. When a teenager, I could watch movies that had scenes of dead or dying children in them. The first think I check now, in a movie review, is whether or not such scenes exist. If so, I can't go to that movie . . . homicidally angry is not an emotion I want to have to pay good money to experience.
Theories about how men are by their very nature misogynist, uncaring, violent and selfish brutes are a symptom of the damage done to the world by sixty years of Feminist hate speech . . . they aren't reality.
Felix| 8.24.10 @ 6:23PM
All of the despicable acts alluded to in this article, pale in comparison to the unimaginable horror of abortion. With 43,000,000 murders around the world every year, it is the culture of death that has created the environment in which this exploitative pornography thrives. Nathan nailed it when he wrote, "In the sixties, feminists spent so much energy throwing off the strictures of religion and tradition. They never realized that chastity itself was a form of power. They never realized that the moral restraints they discarded were vital to the equality they so desperately wanted."
Alan Brooks| 8.24.10 @ 6:24PM
"Grzmlyk| 8.24.10 @ 4:04PM
[Snip]
Which means you're a perfect liberal. Congratulations. I must say, it's amusing to watch your attempts to prove your intelligence, but you remind me of a fish that's flopped out of the pond and flounders helplessly on the shore."
You write 'perfect', but a perfect liberal would be a Ted Kennedy-- who was not clueless. As Bush and Nixon, Ted was a Perfect opportunist.
You may have meant to write 'conflicted'. You are conflicted yourself, Grzmlyk, sometimes you have the self-control of a sage, other times you are like an enraged version of Old Texican.
So we both need anger management.
Grzmlyk| 8.24.10 @ 8:35PM
Perhaps in some instances you are correct, but it wasn't anger that drove me to write that - it was honest bemusment at how you seemed to miss the point entirely.
I'll let the "Old Texican" argument pass because I'm not insane, nor am I a habitual liar.
As for Ted Kennedy, IMHO, he was a perfect limousine liberal. I don't know how much of his hogwash he actually believed - but then again I'm always stunned when liberals actually believe any liberal hogwash, seeing as how it doesn't work and is intellectually, morally and practically untenable.
Let's not forget that Ted lived like a king off of money he didn't make (that would be the money his father made off of bootlegging), and among other sacrileges to true liberal asceticism, he used women like tissue paper, killed one (but what's one forgotten campaign worker, more or less?) and of course wouldn't allow a wind farm to be erected anywhere near Hyannis Port. And, like all good liberals, he hired a guy to take a Spanish test for him at Harvard while he was out carousing.
I do know he was an inveterate liar, crafty and cagey, and that pulled the wool over Bush and Nixon's eyes, perhaps - maybe even Reagan with the bait and switch he pulled on the '86 immigration reform.
So yeah, I can see how you'd seem his as a perfect liberal - full of mendacity and sybaritic self indulgence, pretending to care about the little guy when what mattered was power first, power last, and power always.
That's liberalism with the mask off.
guesswho| 8.24.10 @ 7:48PM
The Wages of Sin is DEATH
Gail| 8.24.10 @ 11:32PM
http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/trends/n_9437/
Porn hurts everyone. These women are someone's daughter, sister, mother. All of society is hurt by this degrading treatment of women. Even 'soft' porn hurts because it is the pathway to 'hard' porn. Women are more than bodies. It's really not that mysterious.
WAKE UP| 8.25.10 @ 12:42AM
Al Bundy, believe it or not, skewered the whole of this in one line years ago (paraphrased);
Marcy: wanna know what my women's lib group were doing this afternoon?
Al: having "this side up" mown into the hair on their chests?
Never have the extremes of the dilemma been put more succinctly.
Paul| 8.25.10 @ 9:18AM
Lots of sad commentary here.... Evil inches its way into society and into the minds of people. Starting with the playboy acceptance, now we are saturated with foul filth. You can use this analogy for anything and all things gone wrong with America, whether it's pornography, homosexuality, the dollar/federal reserve, the education system, and so on... just a gradual infiltration of evil disguised as "helpful" or "good" or "something to consider" or "let's have a dialog." For instance, the mosque near the 911 site... just a "bait and switch" routine where the promoters know that there will be a huge outcry and those who will say "build it elsewhere" ... which is exactly what they want to spread their agenda. This type of thing goes on daily ... a slow, steady progression of destroying our country in every way possible.
One of the posters here was ranting about the bible and how "women should serve men" and so on. What she does not understand is that the bible was written by truly good men who had the living word (energy) of God in them, not by the fakers, liars, mealy mouthed nothings you see in all religions today. So when they are speaking of a woman "serving" a man, they refer to a woman helping/assisting a good man, or in other words, helping only the good in a man, not the weak or bad part of a man; in fact, a man who has a good intent welcomes correction from his wife. Moses walked the people around the desert for 40 years... why? ... to allow one or two generations of egyptian-corrupted people to die off so that younger folks could learn the real ways of God, not the hypocritical ways.
I have thought for many years now that the "end of the world" will not come from wars, economic collapses, etc., but by the smallest, almost unseen thing around, such as a virulent bug or germ. We are beginning to see this now with various bugs. All I can say is, it will be the survival of the most moral. suggested web site is www.fhu.com
Margie| 8.25.10 @ 12:02PM
Re your second paragraph~ you are so right! Those writings in the Bible are meant for Christian men & women. But not until you are "regenerated from above", as in Jn. 3:3, you simply cannot possibly understand or "see" the way God sees, and actually intended for us to be toward one another. Till then, He says that there's a veil over our eyes. So the person posting cannot understand what they are saying, nor do they seem like they want to.
"..but when a man turns to the Lord the veil is removed." 2 Cor. 3:16.
Chas| 8.25.10 @ 3:08PM
If Christianity hadn't constrained male sexual behavior, western culture wouldn't have achieved any gender equality at all (look at Chinese, Japanese, Muslim culture). The wonder isn't that the treatment of women in western culture is less than perfect, it's that there's any constraint at all on the lust for domination.
When the focus of culture is so exclusively that "free is good" (and the need for constraint is forgotten), there's a big problem, because "free" releases all, including evil.
"Liberation" means freedom from constraint. Freedom from constraint is dangerous as hell.
Feminists usually despise conservatives. But they shouldn't; if they understood, wouldn't.
pornsporn| 8.26.10 @ 6:54PM
Lot of "hell la boo" here on porn and it detriments. Sadly some would say anything past procreation and missionary position is porn. My point being humans are way to complicated for such stereotyping. Perhaps porn is a matter of taste, tastelessness and/or personal preferences. Those preferences would seem to be as unique as personality. Where is the line of what “is” and “is not” to be drawn? The discussion above does not take into account females who have pornographic interests of all differentiations inclusive of emasculating and abusive, as well as abusive of their own sex. Since time of man began there has been pornographic materials. Every generation uses its technology to produce such fanciful material. From clay “venuses”, cave art, the printing press, and now the Internet, it all has been done before. Please if you do not prefer such, do not. Leave the rest of your fellow humans in peace to enjoy life and each other in whatever way they mutually feel appropriate. Why do we not focus on honor killings? There is a topic detrimental to women and worthy of feminist ire, as well as the harsh judgment of us all.
wayne| 8.27.10 @ 2:07AM
Here's a real-life story. Joe was a serious piece of work. First day I worked with him, he farted, picked his nose and ate it, scratched, belched and flipped me off. Real winner. Later, his supervisors noticed that he was spending a lot of time on some porn site, they later told me. Then he was spending most of his time on it. He was an otherwise talented, if revolting, young fat boy, college grad. Well, the bosses gave him 1 warning to stay off the site while at work. Joe could not resist. Fired.
So, I am conservative, non-religious, not a prude, was talked into watching a live sex show in Amsterdam once, which was hilarious, absurd, and pitiful. Otherwise, I have never possessed pornography, and it would never occur to me to do so, though I have seen it, of course. As Joe found, it is very addictive, in his case destructive, and to me, dangerous. I had sisters, so I grew up knowing girls are human, and now I have 2 teenage daughters. That some little perv would fantasize or scheme to reenact some porn with my kids is unacceptable.
So, I guess I just want to assure maybe some of you that at least among the people I work with, in engineering, college grads, tax-payers, mostly married or intending to get married, no one has anything to with pornography. Like alcohol and drug abuse, a relatively small number of people account for most of it.
Remember back when the "American Intellectual" had articles on the harmlessness of pornography? How things have changed. I will also say that since most pornography victimizes women (gay porn is even sadder), it does threaten the equality of women (i.e., my wife, daughters, sisters, etc.), and I can't help but see it, like polygamy, as in some way detrimental to democracy. Which if it's true that the islamist countries are the heaviest consumers makes total sense.
PornxTv | 5.7.11 @ 3:20AM
Nice Articles
Thanks for sharing
http://pornxtv.us
Anna | 6.20.11 @ 10:12PM
Yeah ,, Hahaha , you are right . welcome to visit www.sexdollusa.com .cheapest price and best serviser will be your best choise.our Adult toys
NYC Wine Bars | 8.5.11 @ 6:45PM
Very interesting article. I'll have to look out for that book.