Who Here Supports and Defends Pornography as Legitimate?

[_Cardinal Biggles]

I recall another thread, on this very board If I recall correctly. In that thread, a poster recalled how he had observed a discussion of LDS women on another board (might have been babycenter or something). The LDS women were discussing whether they would rather marry a man who had been a serial fornicator, or a man who was a virgin who had viewed a large quantity of pornography. The overwhelming preference was for the serial fornicator.

I can't vouch for the truthfulness of this account, but, based on my experiences, the story rings true. And it is rather unfortunate. From whence does such a bizarre viewpoint emerge? Was it always this way?

[_Droopy]

I have a laissez-faire position. I support your right to watch as much dude on dude action as you like. I'm neutral on the morality of it, so long as no minors are involved or the rights of adults are not abused.

I have no knowledge of "dude on dude" pornography other than a few brief takes while channel surfing of some of the fouler scenes from Queer as Folk. My main concern was the mainstream heterosexual variety, in both "hardcore" and "softcore" form.

I take a similar position on drugs and alcohol and guns and karaoke, even though personally I'm not interested in those things (or porno, for that matter).

The question is not your interest, but your philosophical orientation.

[_Droopy]

Why don't you do a poll Droopy? Or do you want to know the specific people?

Both, but that' a good idea, as that would give a larger percentage spread of the entire board, including, hopefully, a number of lurkers here who don't often post.

[_Rambo]

I recall another thread, on this very board If I recall correctly. In that thread, a poster recalled how he had observed a discussion of LDS women on another board (might have been babycenter or something). The LDS women were discussing whether they would rather marry a man who had been a serial fornicator, or a man who was a virgin who had viewed a large quantity of pornography. The overwhelming preference was for the serial fornicator.

I can't vouch for the truthfulness of this account, but, based on my experiences, the story rings true. And it is rather unfortunate. From whence does such a bizarre viewpoint emerge? Was it always this way?

Yeah this is probably true. They probably look at the guy that can't get any as kind of a loser.

I'm sure if he is a serial fornicator he probably looks at porn as well. It's usually not one or the other. Just like masturbating and porn they go hand in hand :)

[_Cardinal Biggles]

That said, I don't think that porn viewing is even remotely the same as the commission of adultery in its seriousness.

Nor do I nor does the Church. Subjective fantasy and ideation is not the same as action.

Yet, I've met many LDS women who (for whatever reason) DO see them as being EXACTLY the same. I've seen marriages break up over it. I have one female LDS friend who decided to have an affair on her husband in order to "get even" with him over his porn viewing. And yes, to her, there was no difference between her infidelity and his porn viewing.

You should not minimize the deep sense of betrayal and unfaithfulness felt by woman married to a man who indulges in pornography. Their sense is that of an adultery of the heart and mind; of having any number of fantasy "lovers" other than her. It can be a deeply felt wound, and one of pornography's most painful lesions.

I'm sure that women do feel hurt (my friend certainly claimed to be, and I don't doubt her sincerity), and I don't think that I "minimized" that at all in anything that I said. I think that we agree that porn usage and adultery are not at the same level of seriousness, and that we can agree on that point without necessarily minimizing women's hurt feelings. Even if we don't agree as to the reason why some women might see the two vices as being equal, I hope we can agree that women who view them as being at the same level of seriousness probably would do well to adjust their viewpoints.

[_Cardinal Biggles]

I recall another thread, on this very board If I recall correctly. In that thread, a poster recalled how he had observed a discussion of LDS women on another board (might have been babycenter or something). The LDS women were discussing whether they would rather marry a man who had been a serial fornicator, or a man who was a virgin who had viewed a large quantity of pornography. The overwhelming preference was for the serial fornicator.

I can't vouch for the truthfulness of this account, but, based on my experiences, the story rings true. And it is rather unfortunate. From whence does such a bizarre viewpoint emerge? Was it always this way?

Yeah this is probably true. They probably look at the guy that can't get any as kind of a loser.

I'm sure if he is a serial fornicator he probably looks at porn as well. It's usually not one or the other. Just like masturbating and porn they go hand in hand :)

Indeed, they probably do view the porn user as a loser who can't "score" with real-life women due to some deficiency.

But, if it's true that some men turn to porn because they can't "get any" in real life, then this might weigh against the assumption that a serial fornicator is probably also a porn user. I see what you did there with the hand-in-hand, though :D

It would be an interesting study to perform: To determine whether men who have lots of sex tend not to look at as much pornography as men who have little or no sex. Does anyone know whether such a study has ever been conducted?

[_Droopy]

I recall another thread, on this very board If I recall correctly. In that thread, a poster recalled how he had observed a discussionof LDS women on another board (might have been babycenter or something). The LDS women were discussing whether they would rather marry a man who had been a serial fornicator, or a man who was a virgin who had viewed a large quantity of pornography. The overwhelming preference was for the serial fornicator.

I can't vouch for the truthfulness of this account...

And a very, very wise move at that not to make the attempt. This gives the concept "urban legend" a new depth of meaning beyond even that which it has aquired during its time in normative usage (not to mention the assumptions it makes about the average unmarried LDS woman).

[_Scottie]

I would also like to ask the women about romance novels.

I firmly believe that these are every bit the equivalent to male "visual" porn.

Whenever I hear about women that feel "cheated on" because a guy watched porn, I can't help but think of Twilight. Chances are they all got an emotional high from Edward and Bella. Why isn't this considered cheating on their husband?

Isn't it interesting that when a woman is aroused by a book, a guy thinks, "WOO HOO!! Score!" But if a guy is aroused by porn, the wife feels degraded? Why can't the woman just watch it with her man and think, "WOO HOO! This is going to arouse him and I'll score!"

[_Cardinal Biggles]

I would also like to ask the women about romance novels.

I firmly believe that these are every bit the equivalent to male "visual" porn.

It would also be interesting to hear the viewpoint of men (LDS and non-LDS) whose wives view actual visual pornography. Granted, this may be relatively rare among women, and especially women who are married to LDS men, but it might not be completely unheard of.

Do the husbands of such women view their wives' visual porn usage in as negative a light as many LDS women seem to view the porn usage of their husbands?

[_Jonah]

My problem is that my gal buys porn and brings it home for us to watch together. A few years ago, as a X-mas present for ourselves, she even bought tickets for us to the Porn Convention in Las Vegas. I made sure to stop by the "Jesus Loves Porn Stars" booth and picked up a copy of the New Testament though.

Oh wait a minute...this really isn't a problem at all. What a great gal. Never mind.