Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Does Porn Make the Man?

By Robert Jensen, South End Press. Posted November 17, 2007.


Most men have, at some point, feared not being masculine enough, especially in the bedroom. Pornography speaks to that fear.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Robert Jensen

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

The following is an excerpt from Getting Off: Pornography and the End of Masculinity, by Robert Jensen.

King of the Hill

The object of the children's game King of the Hill is to be the one who remains on top of the hill (or, if not an actual hill, a large pile of anything or the center of any designated area). To do that, one has to repel those who challenge the king's supremacy. The king has to push away all the other kids who charge the hill. That can be done in a friendly spirit with an understanding that a minimal amount of force will be used by all, or it can be violent and vicious, with both the king and the challengers allowed to use any means necessary. Games that start with such a friendly understanding can often turn violent and vicious. This scenario is also used in some video games, in which a player tries to control a specific area for a predetermined amount of time.

In my experience, both male and female children can, and did, play King of the Hill, but it was overwhelmingly a game of male children. It's one of the games that train male children to be men. No matter who is playing, it is a game of masculinity. King of the Hill reveals one essential characteristic of the dominant conception of masculinity: No one is ever safe, and everyone loses something.

Most obviously, this King-of-the-Hill masculinity is dangerous for women. It leads men to seek to control "their" women and define their own pleasure in that control, which leads to epidemic levels of rape and battery. But this view of masculinity is toxic for men as well.

One thing is immediately obvious about King-of-the-Hill masculinity: Not everyone can win. In fact, by definition in this conception of masculinity, there's only one real man at any given moment. In a system based on hierarchy, by definition there can be only one person at the top of the hierarchy. There's only one King of the Hill.

In this conception of masculinity, men are in constant struggle with each other for dominance. Every other man must in some way be subordinated to the king, but even the king can't feel too comfortable -- he has to be nervous about who is coming up that hill to get him. This isn't just a game, of course. A friend who once worked on Wall Street, one of the preeminent sites of masculine competition in the business world, described coming to work as like "walking into a knife fight when all the good spots along the wall were taken." Every day you faced the possibility of getting killed -- figuratively, in business terms -- and there was no spot you could stand where your back was covered. This is masculinity lived as endless competition and threat. Whatever the benefits of it, whatever power it gives one over others, it's also exhausting and, in the end, unfulfilling.

No one man created this system. Perhaps no man, if given a real choice, would choose it. But we live our lives in that system, and it deforms men, narrowing our emotional range and depth, and limiting our capacity to experience the rich connections with others -- not just with women and children, but with other men -- which require vulnerability but make life meaningful. The Man Who Would Be King is the Man Who Is Broken and Alone.

That toxic masculinity hurts men doesn't mean it's equally dangerous for men and women. As feminists have long pointed out, there's a big difference between women dealing with the constant threat of being raped, beaten, and killed by the men in their lives, and men not being able to cry. But we can see that the short-term material gains that men get in patriarchy -- the name for this system of male dominance -- are not adequate compensation for what we men give up in the long haul, which is to surrender part of our humanity to the project of dominance.

This doesn't mean, of course, that in this world all men have it easy. Other systems of dominance and oppression -- white supremacy, heterosexism, predatory corporate capitalism -- mean that non-white men, gay men, poor and working-class men suffer in various ways. A feminist analysis doesn't preclude us from understanding those problems but in fact helps us see them more clearly.

What feminism is and isn't to me

Each fall in my seminar class for first-year students at the University of Texas, I lead a discussion about gender politics that will sound familiar to many teachers. I ask the students about their opinions about various gender issues, such as equal pay, sexual harassment, men's violence, and gender roles. Most of the women and some of the men express views that would be called feminist. But when I ask how many identify as feminists, out of the 15 students in any semester, no more than three (always women) have ever claimed the label. When I ask why, the typical answers are not about the political positions of feminism but the perception that feminism is weird and that weird people are feminists.

This pattern is no doubt connected to the assault on feminism in the mainstream culture, captured most succinctly in the phrase "femi-nazi" made popular by right-wing radio host Rush Limbaugh. One response to this by some feminists has been to find a least-common-denominator definition of the term, to reassure both men and women that feminism doesn't really aim to undermine established gender norms and isn't threatening to men. I believe that to be the wrong strategy. If feminism is to make a meaningful difference in the sex/gender crisis we face, and contribute to a broader social change so desperately needed, I believe it must be clear in its challenge to the existing order -- and that inevitably will be threatening to many men, at least at first. Feminism, then, should get more radical than ever.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: adult entertainment, erotica, sexual fantasy, sexuality, manhood, masculinity, pornography

Robert Jensen is a journalism professor at the University of Texas at Austin, and the author of, most recently, The Heart of Whiteness: Confronting Race, Racism and White Privilege (City Lights Books).

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Another article from this book?
Posted by: matti on Nov 17, 2007 12:39 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I respond only to urge others to resist responding (Yes I am aware that opens me up to critisism for "hypocracy").

The debate about this book and the author's Ideas has gone long enough.

There are matters of more immediate import.

It has become apparent that the editors will continue to bring this book up as long as it generates a big debate. (no doubt, due to the extra "hits" they can sell to the advertisers?joke?).

So please, resist response.

-matti

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Another article from this book? Posted by: walldodger1969
» RE: Another article from this book? Posted by: VannaLaRoche
» There's more of this crap? Posted by: timemachinist
Enough with the Porn
Posted by: abbadon2007 on Nov 17, 2007 2:09 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think I speak well enough for many an alternet user:

Articles about porn and what it means about our society are interesting, and often culturally pertinent, but almost certainly not enough to warrant their continuous presence and high refresh rate on Alternet's front page.

Also, there comes a point where balanced media coverage of a topic, like porn, can be construed as a particular fascination, then an obsession. True or not, I'm not interested in seeing my favorite progressive news source smeared as porn-obsessed. It's enough that everyone is out of the woodwork blasting Fox News for showing gratuitous sexually-laden imagery. We have bigger issues. Please ask your writers to forward their best articles on the impact or meaning of pornography on culture to a different news outlet for a little while, until the readership is interested again.

Thank you very much,

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Not just "porn" in general. Posted by: abbadon2007
» Ha! "promiscuous" Posted by: matti
» RE: nough with the Porn Posted by: abbadon2007
» RE: nough with the Porn Posted by: beelzeblob
Yeah, yeah...
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Nov 17, 2007 3:14 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So the world has gone to hell because guys are competitive and like pictures of naked women?...Sounds like all those whiny, touchy feely, "diversity" courses they made us take in college. And this author will probably have a bestseller for regurgitating it for the millionth time.

Want to see a real world example of women's oppression? Check this out: Saudi gang rape sentence 'unjust'...Please let there be a special place in hell for all members of the Saudi legal system who support this sick s***.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Well written!
Posted by: kgs1947 on Nov 17, 2007 3:38 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've read the other posts about "not" reading this article or replying to it. Hog-wash! I found Jensen's writing to be superb and right to the point!

This issue of sexism is foundational to the reality of our current world, far from irrelevant in light of all of the pathological devastation that is occurring around the world by the likes of Bush and Cheney who epitomize sexist rants and behaviors. An analysis of C. Rice might make for a fascinating critique of women who have been well-trained in such belief systems.

So, keep the articles coming and maybe some day the opponents will see the visceral connection between our political situations and our sexist ideologies.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Well written! Posted by: screwjack2000
the subject isn't exhausted, maybe because many of us don't want to think badly of ourselves
Posted by: Suzon on Nov 17, 2007 3:47 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Kama Sutra states that women who've had a lot of partners are less desirable and that the same is true for men.

While the honesty of posters of both sexes is commendable, there's something personally tragic when women express hatred of men and men seem indifferent to the welfare of women.

The battle of the sexes is really internal. We want to think of ourselves as not just honest (honesty is easy if you are unfeeling), but as tolerant and compassionate.

The subject of pornography tests both our tolerance and our compassion. From previous threads, it seems that women are more likely to be intolerant and men are more likely to lack compassion.

Are there really more important things to discuss than our own emotional intelligence? We in the west are educated for careers, not life. Happy people don't want to endorse or support human suffering and degradation. Your attitude toward pornography is a life decision, like deciding you won't rob banks.

If all porn vanished and couldn't be replaced, would people be unable to have orgasms? And might the world be a slightly better place?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What a load
Posted by: Libsrule on Nov 17, 2007 4:29 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't know what else to say, but this constant crud of porn and the lame article about it are just rediculous. What the hell is this site, an anti sex site run by republicans???

Total hogwash.

Stop posting this crap.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I also am getting tired of the porn discussion
Posted by: Camilla Cracchiolo on Nov 17, 2007 4:57 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We've had several articles all about this same guy and same book. Enough already.

You want to run a good article on porn? Tell us how to politically organize or retaliate against the "pron" and "hot XXX barely legal teens" spammers. That's the only real issue that gets my goat about porn.

Look, Jensen's not saying anything new and people already pretty much have their minds made up on the porn issue.

I feel like someone at Alternet isn't happy with the response of the many posters who have a pro-porn or at least neutral position and is going to keep beating us with this until we 'get it'.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thank You, Mr. Jensen
Posted by: Markson on Nov 17, 2007 5:00 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm sure I'll be but one of very, if only, young men posting in support of your attack against violent anti-female media (AlterNet comments on this issue are rabidly bigoted; anti-female extremism is the norm). This media exploits the power of images and of sexuality itself to fuel violent anti-female extremism. Sex can sell anything--including violent hate.

The feverish defense of this media is so openly irrational it speaks only to absolute hysteria. No one is suggesting that anti-female hate media be made illegal, but apologists immediately respond with the "Censorship!" misdirection. This is about a society standing up to hate and refusing to legitimize it any longer. However, apologists insists that merely encouraging such social disapproval is paramount to brutal injustice (Mind you, this is said without irony).

Any justification of this media as benign or trivial rests on the assumption that female humanity is either a technicality or treason. There is nothing more radical than subscribing to the belief that women and girls are human beings and, thus, entitled to basic rights and civil liberties.

Again, Mr. Jensen, thank you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» So what ARE you advocating? Posted by: war_on_tara
YES, to this article
Posted by: Sheila Parks on Nov 17, 2007 6:25 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I thought the article was great and right to the point.

I hardly ever read what men have to say about feminism, but found this author's analysis of feminism and linking it with the other isms and porn good.

As for saying porn is not important, it reminds of the men (and some women, alas) who say abortion rights are not important and let's move ahead and get to important rights and go back to abortion rights later.

As I am writing, I am reminded of how the second wave of feminism came about. Not only were women disgusted with how we were being treated by the leftie men, but also, these same leftie men were saying women's rights were not important and had to take a secondary seating to ending the Vietnam War

Keep the articles against porn coming and thanks for this one. I have just forwarded it on to 4 women feminist friends involved in other political work with me

Sheila

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: YES, to twisted logic... Posted by: jimidee
» social issues Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: social issues Posted by: ladyoracle
» No to article and book Posted by: Badger1492
This is the part that I like...
Posted by: jimidee on Nov 17, 2007 7:20 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Pornography knows men's weakness. It speaks to that weakness, softly. Pornography ends up being about men's domination of women and about the ugly ways that men will take pleasure. But for most men, it starts with the soft voice that speaks to our deepest fear: That we aren't man enough."

Speak for yourself, Hoss! I know I am man enough. Plus, that doesn't make a lick (pun intended) of sense...why would any man who has such fears be comforted by watching another man with a penis 2+ times the size of his, pleasure a woman? Yeah, porn is really about as subtle as a dump truck.

My wife and I watch a good bit of porn from our collection, and I will tell you how it speaks to us. It says forget about the trials, tribulations and troubles of your day and sit back, relax, and watch these other beautiful and uninhibited folks have sex...then have great sex yourself. You too can have sex like a porn star if you could just relax a bit.

We are not into 'money shots', per se, as we both like for me to come in her, not on her. Simultaneous orgasms are hard to attain if you pull out of her at the last second...that stuff is for Hollywood. I understand that this is what gets most feminist going...the money shot. I guess if I squint my eyes and move my head back and forth really fast, I can see where that may appear to be degrading...especially to someone who their daddy "made" them have sex with him when they were little girls...or boys. But that is a whole other issue.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

More self-hating-man "feminist" drivel
Posted by: timemachinist on Nov 17, 2007 7:30 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Another white-guilt, man-guilt article? I can't do more than skim this crap. I'm sick of whiny calls for "feminism." I'm sick of being blamed for every ill in the world. I don't exploit or dominate people, I'm a fine man and sick of all this hand-wringing about who and what we are. And why does Alternet constantly need to have porn-themed articles? Doesn't exactly bother me, as I just surfed over here after looking at a few dozen naked women pics. But politics pretty much ruins sex. You should publish stuff exposing how complicit the Democrats are in everything they blame Bush for. You know, leave the sex articles to sex sites and stop wrapping Democratic Party business-as-usual politics around Bush-hating, Bush-licking, self-hating-man "feminist" drivel. Thanks.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The continuing anti-porn demagoguery
Posted by: Q30 on Nov 17, 2007 7:32 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yeah, I love how anyone who even attempts to question Jensen's nonsense are instantly labelled as misogynists. McCarthyite tactics at their best.

I think it is Jensen, not 90% of men, who's got psychological issues.

There is nothing the anti-porn crowd has to say about nude pictures that the Temperance movement hasn't already said about alcohol.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hilarious ... Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Hilarious ... Posted by: Q30
» RE: Hilarious ... Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Hilarious ... Posted by: Q30
» That's easy Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: That's easy Posted by: Q30
» RE: That's easy Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Hilarious ... Posted by: AMERICAN VETERAN
» Don't forget ... Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Don't forget ... Posted by: YogiBear
I love the debate on this subject:
Posted by: Q30 on Nov 17, 2007 7:49 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Anti-porn feminists: "Pornography causes violence!"

Me: "How does it do that?"

Anti-porn feminists: "It causes violence!"

Me: "How?"

Anti-porn feminists: "It causes violence!"

Me: "HOW?! HOW DOES IT CAUSE VIOLENCE?! You have never answered this question! Not once! Not ever! And you can't answer it because there is almost zero evidence which supports your position and plenty of evidence which prove your position to be false! How is it you keep saying that pornography causes violence? Have you got some kind of deep-seated neurosis? And why do you ignore the women who enjoy pornography? Why don't you have a problem with gay porn? What the hell is your problem?"

Anti-porn feminists: "MISOGYNIST! WHY DO YOU HATE WOMEN?!?!"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I love the debate on this subject: Posted by: Joshua Holland
» Puh-leeze Posted by: Q30
» RE: Puh-leeze Posted by: yellow
» RE: Puh-leeze Posted by: h2281n
Bad Title, Good Article.
Posted by: boysen on Nov 17, 2007 7:49 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The knee jerk response to this article as "another article about porn" is interesting to me, as the article only talks about porn briefly.

What the article is about is Masculinity and Dominance. When I look at the smug picture of Cheney right on top of this article in today's alternet - I think this is totally relevant.

The dominant majority does not have to self-examine. They do what they want and they tell us our concerns are irrelevant, misguided, unpatriotic. (OH, not that liberal wussy bullsh*t again - the world is a dangerous place, you just aren't smart enough to see it. Thinking is for pu**ies, compassion is for women.)

It's a CORE VALUE conversation. And Jensen hits at a key component.

# Given the widespread acceptance of basic notions of equality and human rights, the existence of hierarchy has to be justified in some way other than crass self-interest.
# One of the most persuasive arguments for systems of domination and subordination is that they are "natural."

So what I hear, here, is a lot of people telling me that the current system is natural and logical. Men being men. Sorry, I don't buy it.

Competition is the system we have, collaboration is the system we need. Examining our privilege is the first step to collaboration. I have to admit that I have "more" than you - AND - be willing to share. As a REAL MAN - I can do this. As a MACHO MAN - not so much.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Bad Title, Good Article. Posted by: AMERICAN VETERAN
» RE: Bad Title, Good Article. Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Bad Title, Good Article. Posted by: goldmarx
» RE: Bad Title, Good Article. Posted by: ladyoracle
» RE: Bad Title, Good Article. Posted by: phatkhat
» RE: Bad Title, Good Article. Posted by: jimidee
The War In Iraq is more of a threat to women than pornography
Posted by: James W. Harris on Nov 17, 2007 7:51 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Men go to buy pornography in the 'red-light' district, the 'combat zone.'" says the writer ominously.

Well, maybe that's because of decades of government censorship that forced adult material into these areas. This includes the recent abuse of zoning as a censorship tool to limit adult bookstores to such locations.

Our real enemy is the state, especially the Bush Cheney one, not pictures of nekkid wimmen.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If It's So Wrong, Why Does It Feel So Right?
Posted by: InsertNameHere on Nov 17, 2007 8:08 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think men like porn because it's still taboo, that's part of it's allure. It's dirty, naughty and, even if it weren't taboo, it would still sell in the millions, because you can't escape from the simple fact that men want to see women naked.

Men like visuals to get turned on, we aren't about talking, or romantic scenarios. It's much more primal, we want to see good old fashioned T&A. The female body wasn't made into such a wonderful combination of curves and softness for nothing as far as I can see.

So write all the weird psycho-sexual theories you want. In the back of every man's head is a primal man that wants to spread his seed, with as many women as possible. That doesn't mean that he will. I make no apologies for being masculine and indulging in fantasy that speaks to male urges. That's why these fundamental religious folks are so uptight, they repress their sexual desire. Then you get the Mark Foleys and the Ted Haggards of the world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE:If that were true... Posted by: jimidee
» RE: learn from the pros Posted by: jimidee
Porn is to jack off with, Bob
Posted by: logansafi on Nov 17, 2007 8:20 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From reading Pastor Bob's thoughts once again in regard to porn, it occurred to me that he is unaware that porn is a tool for jacking off. Many have tried to jack off while thinking purer thoughts, such as Pastor Bob advocates for men to do, but it just doesn't work as well as when using high quality porn.

'Does Porn Make the Man?', asks Pastor Bob. Well, Sir, not like clothes makes the man, for sure.

Most jacking off is done quite in private, and because of that basic fact, the only thing that porn is designed to do is make the man's penis softer, and that for only a short time. Bob, that certainly does help man come to know more the feminine side of himself in an actual physical sense, too.

We encourage you, Bob, to use porn more to jack off with, and get to know your feminine side just that much better. Though,if you were to grow any hair on the palm of your hands, Bob, then get yourself to a doctor ASAP.

Good luck, and remember... porn is to jack off with ONLY. Do not attempt to roll up any of the porn magazines into a stick and then beat the little woman with, Bob. If you did, that would degrade both her, and even you The Man.

If you are tempted to hurt her in such a manner, then take yourself off to the side and cry some. Then try using the porn in the correct manner once again.

Use the porn in the correct manner as directed, and I think that you will become a softer you, Bob. You have been jacking off in the wrong way, and it is hurting you as a man. Porn can help.

We wish you luck in dealing with your preaching addiction, Bob. Many have suffered from it in the way you do, and were saved by turning to porn. There is hope for you, your frustrations can be dealt with in a cleaner healthier manner.

Maybe you should start with just a naked woman's foot, Bob. Something that is not too hard a type of porn for the beginner sinner. Focus hard on that naked foot, and then just relaxxx some. You can loosen up and be whole again.

Porn is to jack off with, Bob. Give it another try.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Porn makes the man get off Posted by: messedup
Survival of what works
Posted by: fdgsr on Nov 17, 2007 10:07 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Feminism is a human contrivance, not a natural consequence of evolution. The female sex is the consequence of evolution. The female role in sexual reproduction is well documented. The male role is also well documented at the cellular and somatic levels. It is not well understood at the social or political level.

Sexuality is lateral to reproduction. That is, mating and the motive for sexual union is rarely a desire for offspring, though it may be an excuse and a biological motive to accomplish the function of reproduction that would not be done without a reward.

Reward is the motivitation for all action and functions. Reward is the motivation to produce products in commerce. Like sexual pleasure in biological functions, money satisfies a pleasure to motivate other activities. Business functions to bring labor, capital, and invention under control to produce useful products at the lowest cost in human contributions. That necessarily works against jobs and security for all. Charity can take care of the sick, lame, and the lazy. But charity uses products of labor and distribution, the humanitarian answer to raw nature.

Truth over all is the justification for any act or fact. Truth has it that what works succeeds, and what does not work, will ultimately fail. Extinction of unsuccessful attempts in biology is the truth that drives our existence and our lives.

Human evolution has found solutions to some of our problems, but not the one that involves our relations in functional humanity. It is the need for personal worth and worthiness. We measure it in terms of our pleasure and security. Pornography is an answer to denial of our pleasure in sex acts at will when deference to personal decision is necessary. Pleasure in the sexual union, and security of our personal worth and the rights of others.

Just as nature follows some cruel procedures because of evolution gone askew, man uses sexual pleasure for undesirable purposes not in line with human rights and individual safety.

Feminism must find a way to channel the feminine mystique lateral to the masculine physique so that the purpose of sexual reproduction can be maintained optimal to survival of the species, and to the human rights and individual freedom and hormonal output.

Chanelling or war and other competition is also necessary in order to give security to the other human activities. Just as children must be protected from themselves and their own personal errors, all citizens must be protected from themselves and from each other. That requires organization and purpose without prejudice to individual rights and freedom.

Truth is God.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Survival of what works Posted by: psychochurch
Brilliant!
Posted by: schnak on Nov 17, 2007 10:23 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Robert Jensen does it again. Keep these articles coming! At first, everyone passionately resisted the idea that slavery was wrong in the 1800s, but that didn't stop people from speaking out against it. The same is true for the relentless oppression of women now and the ways in which it so obviously, and grotesquely, plays itself out in porn.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Brilliant! Posted by: goldmarx
» RE: Brilliant! Posted by: Krotos
dworkin, mackinnon oh my
Posted by: hatefreezone on Nov 17, 2007 10:32 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I stopped taking this guy seriously as soon as he cited A Dworkin and C Mackinnon. I knew Dworkin in Brooklyn and she was aself-loathing and man-hating individual wo was the proponent of the lovely theory that ALL heterosexual sex was misogynistic and Mackinnon was a Robespierre of smut who allied herself with the loathsome Ed Meese in his porn wars.


Daniel Goleman has a great bit on male responses to visual sexual images in Social Intelligence. men are genetically wired to respond to visual sexual images as the FMRIs show. I have seen and experienced plenty of women getting aroused to the point of orgasm while watching pornography, and Jensen's simplistic and reductive theory doesn't account for that or the prevalence of porn where women dominate men.

But to the main point - to cite the utterly discredited Dworkin and Mackinnon to buttress an argument with only one flimsy paragraph even touching on his thesis, is akin to citing Milton Friedman and Grover Norquist as to why universal health care is a bad idea...


The truth is, you can put it in the bank. The more repressive a society is towards porn and other open expressions of sexuality, the more repressive it is towards woman, all the way to the honor killings of Pakistan and the slaughter of daughters in India. On the other hand, countries with less repressive attitudes, such as Denmark, Sweden, France, Canada and yes, even the much-reviled US of A, have far more women in positions of power and far stronger laws against misogyny.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What's left?
Posted by: left-leaning-libertarian on Nov 17, 2007 11:13 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not satisfied with trying to deprive me of red meat, Mr. Jensen now tells me I'm an evil sleazeball if I like to look at the occasional image of a naked woman.

Frankly, I wouldn't even know where to begin to find the low-down violent porn he claims is so pervasive. . . nor would I want to find it; in my experience hard-core porn is usually boring to the point of being anti-erotic; most soft-core stuff is merely laughable, and I can turn myself on far more effectively with what comes from my own imagination than anything I could find on-line.

Now, maybe I'm just a weird aberation, the exception that proves a rule, but I don't think so. I really, REALLY enjoy sex (though I've been deprived of any for a number of years) but I really, REALLY hate violence, and that, I think, is a fact that deflates Jensen's theories faster than my now-thankfully ex-wife's nagging could deflate even my most priapically-obstinate erections.

I am a nice man; a kind man and a gentle man who tries to be a gentleman every day (and often gets p***ed on for his efforts); I hate guns, I don't believe in violence, especially not towards other human beings, I'm not turned on by rape fantasies or ritual humiliation. I believe in the equality of the sexes (not the superiority of one over the other), I believe in gentle, quiet, warm, unhurried celebratory intimacy (and I have an encyclopedic knowledge of how to achieve this if anybody'd ever give me the chance!) I have no need to prove my masculinity or dominate another human being.

Meanwhile, we have an insanely evil president who has called the US Constitution that he twice swore an oath to uphold a "goddamned piece of paper" and (if possible) an even more despicably loathsome vice president, both bound and determined to bring on their version of the Biblical end-times, and a group of elected representatives that won't hold them accountable for the crimes against humanity they've already committed, or do anything to stop them from launching a suicidal war even knowing what they know about how they got us into the first one!

And you raise a stink about porn? Let's get some perspective and talk about something that actually EXISTS and genuinely has some bearing on the survival of the species!

Is it any wonder so many people are so lonely?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ho Hum
Posted by: dumdumboy on Nov 17, 2007 12:11 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Old lady judges watch people in pairs
Limited in sex, they dare
To push fake morals, insult and stare
While money doesn't talk, it swears
Obsenity, who really cares
Propaganda, all is phony."
-Bob Dylan

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wack
Posted by: ArtemInox on Nov 17, 2007 12:15 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
wack wack wack wack wack wack

www.addictedtoaggravation.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Porn curbs unwanted pregnacies!
Posted by: Landbaron on Nov 17, 2007 12:27 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Society teaches women to say no until marriage and porn can help the men. For men it's a biological need and porn helps relieve that safety valve. On the other hand we need more economic slaves to support the mushrooming baby-boomers that are retiring, so down with all porn and start making more babies, babies and more babies!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Porn is...
Posted by: Pirate1 on Nov 17, 2007 1:13 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Another avenue of control by anxiety that the system allows to go on for that reason. It keeps you off center and thus distracted and so less apt to be paying attention to the big picture while you worry that your dick might be too small. You never see a guy with an average anything in porn movies, they are all endowed like various quadrupeds. And women are made to feel that they haven't had sex until they've balled on of these freaks. I think it's a waste of time. All this focus on the genitals and not the people that have them says a lot about the duration of relationships in this land.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bob's personal problem...
Posted by: danielgeery on Nov 17, 2007 1:51 PM