Probably in part. On the other hand there are studies showing that most women prefer written erotica; for that matter, women read significantly more fiction than men in general. So even with “porn equality” I’d expect the content to lean heavily towards the written word.
Maybe “bodice rippers” are porn for women. Or at least for most women.
To answer the OP I think there are inhuman malevolent entities best described as demons but not necessarily in the biblical sense. It also doesn’t mean every reported demon encounter is real. I also think some kinds of pornography are immoral or something you shouldn’t want to be the kind of person that enjoys consuming. I don’t believe in sin. Just moral wrongdoing and unhealthy behavior.
We’ve all had run ins with Chihuahuas.
I don’t believe in demons, it’s just an excuse for why people do bad things.
I don’t think pornography is sinful. They say to be virtuous you must resist you urges, but why do these urges exist?
There’s usually more to romance novels than porn, but certainly some parts are meant for titillation. Romance runs the gamut from buttoned-down and modest to basically one sex scene after another. Classic bodice rippers had more story than sex, and the sex was described in weirdly puritan ways. Also non-consenual sex was much more likely in mainstream romance because women were still very much tied up in the idea that they weren’t supposed to want sex.
Now you only find non-con in dark romance. I have some issues with that subgenre. If it would just stick to one lane: “here’s a sexy fantasy” then fine (not my thing, but fine), but it doesn’t, it often makes those non-consenual experiences titillating and dark and traumatic and not fun at all. They are elaborate abuse fantasies, and I don’t understand them. But I’m guessing that market is not very broad.
Personally I find too much sex in romance novels off-putting, especially if it doesn’t serve the story. My novels are very sexy but usually 1-2 explicit sex scenes and they MUST serve the story. That’s suitable to me.
They prefer it compared to what? Porn made for men?
Visual porn. Same in the other direction; males statistically prefer visual porn over written porn, and read less than women in general.
I read a study a while ago that looked at the arousal of women and men viewing porn. Straight men were mostly aroused by pictures of women. Gay men were mostly aroused by pictures of men. Bi men were mostly aroused by pictures of men. And women, of all sexual preferences, were mostly aroused by suggestive situations, featuring people of any sex.
(Arousal was measured by, um, blood flow to the penis/clit, iirc.)
This suggests that literature, with more room to develop an erotic situation, may be more appealing to women, and that men want pictures.
Maybe. But it could be that women prefer written porn to visual porn (or more likely, an innate preference is exaggerated) because the overwhelming majority of visual porn is made by and for men.
I can also see an argument for innate preference. I think most women need to feel safe and emotionally engaged to enjoy a fantasy. Visual porn doesn’t tend to satisfy those needs. But that doesn’t mean it couldn’t.
I see what you did there. I also suspect it was non-consensual on the part of your conscious mind; it just happened w no awareness & hence no consent. 
.
Seriously, thanks for a well thought through response.
I suppose we have a bit of a chicken and egg and rooster problem with the definition of “porn”.
If “porn” is defined as visual depictions of sex acts, well then that’s not what most women seem to mostly want. So no, there’s not much women’s porn.
If “porn” is defined as “the stuff I like to consume that gets me hot and bothered”, then it sorta makes sense men and women would want different stuff. How different? That’s what we don’t really know.
So what story product delivered in what media with what trappings would be what works for getting women hot and bothered in a way they’d seek it out and happily consume it regularly?
Or is the issue more that most women are still too hung up about sex, so the problem becomes that even well-executed well-targeted women’s preference porn would be aiming at a target market not the size of men-focused porn, but maybe 5% that large?
I know I don’t know.
Don’t believe in demons at all.
Never had any use for pornography but don’t believe in sin.
If you like it enjoy it.
Because humans are animals and our DNA is closer to apes than angels.
“Monsters from the Id,” to quote a classic science fiction movie. Human minds are very complex, and the advance of civilization has done nothing to delete what we think of as primitive urges; instead, it has given us tools to turn them to better uses, or at least to resist them. For some people, that resistance becomes second nature to the extent that they may not even be aware of the urges; other people give in to them a little or a lot. Some minds are apparently wired to have little resistance to their most primitive urges, and this we regard as one or more flavors of mental illness.
Or there are other, magical and mystical answers to your question, but I don’t find them useful or interesting.
I don’t think most women are that hung up about sex. Maybe the ultra-conservative women. If you look at the robust erotic fiction market, including the crazy success of books like 50 Shades of Gray - which some women were caught reading on the damned subway - I think a lot of those issues are behind us.
Though I’ve read some bonkers takes from some women on the Internet, like porn is adultery 
That one really gets my gears up because it’s wrong to police what someone does with their own body. It feels very repressive to me. Like sure, if a guy is so addicted to porn he’s not meeting basic relationship responsibilities, if it’s interfering with intimacy, then probably that needs to be dealt with. But running around crying like a jilted lover every time your partner jerks off is ridiculous.
An additional point of clarification. I read a study that indicated men tend to want their fantasies to come true, whereas women do not. This can create some confusion and surprises.
We are different. I’m not trying to deny the difference, if it seems like I am. I just don’t know if it’s a total binary situation.
No worries. I agree were different and you’re making that point very well as we try to explore what that difference really is and how much is nature and how much is the fucked-up nurture of American Xian puritanical patriarchy.
It’s not binary in the sense there’s men’s interests and women’s interests with zero overlap in what they each want. It’s also not binary in the sense that there are only plain women wanting the official “women’s interests list” and only plain men wanting the official “men’s interests list” .
Instead, there’s a whole lotta overlapping shades of gray (not Grey) stuff going on in all of this.
Yeah, I can sure see how that might lead to some major unhappiness given the pitiful state of many couples’ communication.
“Caught” reading that book on a subway?
I personally hated the book. I think I got one chapter read before it got tossed.
Bad writing that got famous just for the salaciousness.
Lucky author.
Still they won’t put out any Hemmingwayesque books, I’m thinking.
I hate it for existing but I haven’t actually read it. I thought today maybe I should make myself read it just to see if it’s as bad as I think it is.
It’s bad.
As literature, I would rate “Shades of Grey” better than a lot of popular books. Perhaps even better than most popular books (which, are, as an observed fact, read more by women than by men now.)
That’s a very low bar. I rate it lower than Harlequin romance on that scale.
I failed to complete even the first volume. Beautiful woman making out with rich powerful man is not a plot that interests me, when the writing is only marginally better than typical detective fiction or fantasy pot-boiler.