The results above suggest that potential rapists perceive pornography as a substitute for rape. With the mass market introduction of the world wide web in the late-1990’s, both pecuniary and non-pecuniary prices for pornography fell. The associated decline in rape illustrated in the analysis here is consistent with a theory, such as that in Posner (1994), in which pornography is a complement for masturbation or consensual sex, which are themselves substitutes for rape, making pornography a net substitute for rape.
Given the limitations of the data, policy prescriptions based on these results must be made with extreme care. Nevertheless, the results suggest that, in contrast to previous theories to the contrary, liberalization of pornography access may lead to declines in sexual victimization of women. The results in Table 7 suggest that the internet has had large effects on important social behaviors; further exploration of these effects is necessary to fully understand these results, however.
The subject for debate is that this flies in the face of the Andrea Dworkin/Catharine MacKinnon belief that pornography incites men to rape. The LA Times reported that the U.S. Justice Department’s National Crime Victimization Survey data showed that “rape has been falling dramatically for decades.”
This decline correlates with vastly easier access to vast array of pornography cheaply or for free. My bias is that I wish that nobody ever be raped and I consume and enjoy pornography. Discuss.
I think it’s probably true; despite the common “rape is about power” rhetoric, I see no evidence that most rape is anything more than a combination of sexual frustration and ruthlessness.
I do think that the rise in respect for women has a lot to do with the reduction in rapes as well, however. While I don’t believe that rape is normally * part of some male plot to reduce women to just sex objects, I’m quite sure that men who just look at women as sex objects are more likely to rape.
Yes, it IS in some cases, or otherwise designed to grind women down; I just don’t think that it’s the norm
Biggest problem with analyzing this, I figure, is that countries that don’t have access to porn also don’t have access to reliable crime statistics. How common is rape in Saudi Arabia, for example? Given the culture, I suspect massive underreporting.
I just skimmed the study, but it appears to just compare populations in the US.
And while the author notes underreporting might be a problem, one would think that places with easier access to porn would be more likely to have fewer sexual taboos and be more likely to have people report sexual assaults. So if anything, under-reporting would make the effect seem less prominent.
All the serious and genuinely scientific studies of the effects of pornography on a society as a whole have reached the same conclusion that it falls somewhere between neutral and helpful.
If that is true it would hinge on a static pornography business. When Playboy first came out the pictures were limited in what they showed and were basically photo pinups. Moving up the ladder of porn was Penthouse which was more graphic. Today magazines cover every fetish imaginable. When VCR tapes came out the early videos made some attempt at a plot. Today, the DVD videos are far more graphic.
The trend, as I see it, will be an ever increasing level of shock value which will include greater levels of submission and even violence (primarily toward women). If this level of sexual submission reaches into the internet with free videos then kids will be exposed to women as objects to be ridiculed and demeaned for sex.
I think this dynamic will change rape statistics over time.
The trend is no longer in terms of what’s there or not, but in what amounts something is compared to the whole. Demand serves to fill need; I would say the problem will come not when porn of this type exists on the 'net (because really, by now, porn involving anything imaginable is there somewhere), but when it becomes a large percentage of all porn.
But societies without net porn already see women that way. I don’t think more porn leads inexorably to more subjugation porn. More good (positive toward both sexes) porn should make bad (negative) porn less attractive. “Bad” porn fills a need in an environment where there is little porn.
And there was porn availible in the past far more extreme than Penthouse. It’s just easier to get now.
They always have been. It’s women being treated with respect that’s new. And why is it you assume that porn of men dominating women will turn them into sexists, but porn of women dominating men won’t turn them into grovellers ?
Why do you assume an “ever increasing level of shock value” ? The point is to arouse people, not shock them. And I don’t think it’s possible for it to get any more extreme than it already has, once you include written and drawn erotica ( and not just towards women ). There’s been some pretty extreme stuff available since long before the Internet.
In 1970 Nixon set up a committee to investigate porn. The commission concluded that society was the problem. It was due to peoples inability or reluctance to be open or direct in dealing with sexual matters. It suggested that we repeal all Fed,local and state porn laws and replace them with laws to shield children and prevent public displays.
It was the wrong answer. Nixon and his people disowned it. They refused to allow it to come out. But eventually it was snuck out.
As far as I can tell, the majority of porn is about a world where you can’t “push a woman down to use her for a doormat for your dick”, because she’s far too busy dragging you on top of her. Or behind her, or under her. Most porn as I see it, is about women as sex maniacs, not subjugating them. The latter exists, and is quite common; but so is the opposite.
Because the latter would be fantasies about power, not sex. Like all those one-man-against-an-army movies and games, or superhero fantasy, and so on.
I made no such statement nor should you infer that. I pointed out the majority of it on the internet is aimed at men at the expense of women.
Sexual arousal is a mental process that is often augmented visually by men. To say that all forms of erotica have been around for a long time is technically true but the level of availability (particularly to children) has increased exponentially. There was nothing even remotely available to me as a child compared to the internet today.
And I don’t think that it is. I think that you are focusing on a subset of porn, assuming it’s the majority, and taking it as a political agenda and not as a fantasy. Rather like assuming a Batman fan is a supporter of vigilantism.
To say that demand fills a need discounts the idea that need can be influenced by demand. If the need involves the subjugation of women then a feedback loop is created.
If you accept the idea of a feedback loop for purposes of discussion does that fulfill a need or does it create a person more inclined to subjugate women? Since I don’t think they are mutually exclusive events then both would occur.
Unfortunately, I don’t see how this can be measured due to the incredibly complex nature of the test environment.
And why is the porn that involves the “subjugation” of women the only porn that influences people ? Should we worry about Femdom porn turning men into weaklings, or gay porn turning people gay ?
Using Batman as a gauge of violence, a movie such as “Natural Born Killers” would fall on the far end of the scale. If this were a trend in movie violence, then I would expect an increase in violent behavior. I personally feel that the violence I was subjected to as a child is a fraction of what kids are exposed to today, both in content and intensity.
If by Femdom porn you mean the subjugation of men then the result would be more violent and aggressive women. Your point about sexual orientation doesn’t make sense unless you believe sexual orientation is environmentally based.