True story. I heard on TV once, Professor Stephen Hawking made a bet with another scientist. Some discovery in physics. I forget exactly what the bet was about, and probably would need a degree in physics to understand it anyway. But if Mr. Hawking lost, he would have to pony up a free subscription to *Hustler * magazine to the presumably victorious scientist. Reportedly, the other scientist was relieved he lost, because his wife was a feminist. (Which I could never understand. I don’t think sex per se exploits women. I digress.)
Anyway, as I said, it was a little while ago. And I have forgotten some of the details. But I remember, implicit if not explicit, in the story is the fact Professor Stephen Hawking read *Hustler * magazine.
Forgive me if this sounds naïve. But how did Hawking go about doing this?
Most men, I would think, want to be alone when they view porn. This might have been exceedingly hard for a man with Hawking’s disability. I don’t think he would want his nurse leafing thru the pages for him. Also *Hustler * has gone hardcore now, though possibly not in the European edition. This could complicate matters too.
I know I heard, when Hawking wanted to be alone, they would lay out the paperwork on a table before him. But to do this with *Hustler *, they would have to take the magazine apart, won’t they? Sounds way too complicated.
I trust you can see my confusion, or at least curiosity, in the matter. (And BTW, this is not a joke.)
And I trust you see why I bring this to the SDMB. Where else can I get the answer to such a question?
Mr. Hawking was not “most men,” and his will to experience life despite his disability apparently included indulging in certain varieties of procreative stimulation, societal shame and guilt be damned. Given this willingness, reading a magazine would present at most a minor practical problem rather than being (ahem!) “exceedingly hard.” There is also the possibility that he read magazines online, which would have reduced the practical issues even more.
You’re thinking of the Thorne-Hawking bet, but it’s irrelevant as to whether someone as severely disabled as Hawking was later in his life could’ve ‘enjoyed’ porn as:
-The bet was made in 1974 when Hawking was considerably more able, was not wheelchair-bound and did not need round-the-clock care.
-Hawking lost the bet
-If Hawking had won he would’ve received a year’s subscription to Private Eye the (non-pornographic) British satirical magazine.
He also had a much later bet with John Preskill, which he also lost and had to pony up a baseball enclyopedia as a result. However I believe if Hawking had won that bet his winnings were to be a copy of Wisden’s (the cricket almanack).
Remember also that Hawking was married. It’s quite possible that his wife was the one helping him with such matters.
And as a nitpick, the wager you’re thinking of was with Kip Thorne, and Thorne won. Hawking was relieved to have lost, but that was because of the nature of the bet, not because of the prize: They were betting on whether black holes actually exist. Both thought that they did, but Hawking was betting (at odds) that they didn’t, as a sort of insurance policy: If it turned out that they didn’t exist, his career would come crashing down around him, but at least he’d have a magazine subscription.
Thorne is somewhat infamous among physicists for these bets, which he’s made with all sorts of prominent physicists (including other bets with Hawking). Notably, he (Thorne) has won every single one of the bets that didn’t involve human intervention (like this one, one about the Black Hole Information Paradox, and one about naked singularities), and has lost every single one that did involve human intervention (like when gravitational waves would be detected, and when he would finish his book).
I don’t think the existence of the bet shows anything about Hawking’s use or non-use of pornography. If he won, he wouldn’t have received pornography. Agreeing to order a magazine subscription for someone else doesn’t mean he had that magazine himself.
Either you misunderstand what anti-porn feminists have been saying all along or you think sex and porn are interchangeable. But that’s a topic for another thread.
This thread made me think of this movie: The Sessions. Helen Hunt stars as a sex surrogate hired by a 38-year-old man who uses an iron lung to help him lose his virginity.
…wow, that’s some awkward phrasing. To be clear, he doesn’t use the iron lung to help him lose his virginity; I’m not even sure how you’d do that. He wants to lose his virginity, and he has to use an iron lung to live.
It’s a good movie, but go in knowing that you will see a LOT of Helen Hunt.
And note, as per the bet, Stephen Hawing was to receive four years subscription to Private Eye, presumably, the coast was comparable to Penthouse. Nobody had to process the pages of Screw magazine for Hawking to review prior to trading it to settle a bet.
