How can this study be true?

[_Fiannan]

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=ca ... J0o07pwvEg

I mean, isn't this a problem only with men?

Although some variation in the reported prevalence rates of pornography consumption is evident across studies, comparable international studies have, with few exceptions (e.g., Pan, 1993), reported consumption rates in the range of 86–98% amongst men and 54–85% amongst women (Demar´ , Lips, & Briere, 1993; Gunther, 1995; Hammar´& Johansson, 2001; Janghorbani et al., 2003; Li & Michael, 1996; Perse, 1994; Rogala & Tyd´ n, 2003; Tyden, Olsson, & Haggstrom-Nordin, 2001).

When comparing prevalence rates it is however important to bear in mind that important factors such as the definition of sexual media/pornography, subject sample, and methodology often differ from study to study. Evidently, these differing factors have an effect on both the overall prevalence rates and how well these reflect the general population.

In the current study, for example, a rather “strict” definition of pornography was employed. Sexual materials containing only nudity, such as those seen in Playboy or Penthouse, were not considered pornography. Applying this definition would most likely reduce gender differences because it eliminates an important form of sexual material to
which men expose themselves more than women.

[_DrW]

First thing that strikes me is your use of the word 'problem'. Drinking coffee is a problem to faithful Mormons, for example. Science has shown that their problem with coffee drinking is, well, their problem.

Same goes for images of consenting adult humans without clothing covering their breasts and / or genitalia. The problem, if there is one, is in the eye of the beholder.

Where I live right now, a picture of a female without her hair completely covered is considered pornographic by many. Just one small example of "eye of the beholder" effect.

As to the prevalence of nude image viewing among men as compared to women, why would you think that women should be fundamentally less interested than men in images of individuals of the opposite sex (or even the same sex if that is what floats your boat) in little or no clothing?

[_Drifting]

Pornography is a social construct.

For example, God and Christ knew good from evil etc when they looked upon Adam and Eve in their naked state. Was that pornography?

A women turning up for Sacrament Meeting in just her bra and pants would be considered inappropriate. Yet were that same women, with the same audience be on a beach and the bra and pants be a bikini it would be considered socially acceptable.

Watching two elephants 'at it' is considered Wildlife observation, yet were that two homo sapiens then it would be pornographic. Unless it was used in teaching homo sapiens about the birds and the bee's. Then it is considered educational.