Pornography vs Intimacy

In Pornography: Men Possessing Women  the late Andrea Dworkin defines pornogaphy as “the graphic depiction of whores.” She goes on to discuss how a “whore” is what every woman is reduced to in- and by- patriarchal society. She makes a very strong case against pornography from a feminist perspective.

A strong case against pornography has also been made by Christian conservatives. That argument is made both in Old Testament and New Testament terms: It celebrates adultery, covetousness, idolatry- to name a Mosaic few; and it does not promote love of one’s neighbor- something Jesus really drilled.

Feminists and Christian Conservatives:”Misery acquaints a man with strange bedfellows.”

The feminist argument and the Christian argument arrive at the same place, though different routes be travelled. 

Feminism 2.0: While third wave feminists are busy celebrating their sexualities and their expanded opportunities (thanks to first and second-wave feminists), there was a time when the validity of some of those sexual “choices” was in serious question. A radical feminist critique of the sex industry posited that the claim by some sexworkers that their work was empowering- or liberating, even- was preposterous. Because of women’s subjugated status in society as a whole, any “decision” by a woman to do sex work for money was an expression of that very subjugation. Sex work was theorized to be always- inherently- degrading. True liberation for women would require their refusal to participate in structures which were exploitative to women- pornography being a big, obvious one.

Feminism 3.0: There are plenty of voices for the empowerment of women who declare that women must not fall prey to easy moralizing which also comes out of the subjugation of women. Women have been denied the opportunity to define their sexuality the way they want to- that best expresses the truth as they live and understand it- but instead have been defined and controlled by men and institutions dominated by men.

Christian conservatism: God has a plan. God’s plan includes sex and sexuality. In a marriage between one man and one woman sexual expression is blessed. It is there that God’s plan for sexual joy has its greatest opportunity for full fruition, maybe its only chance.

Both the feminist and conservative arguments are moral constructions. They both claim that people injure others (and get injured) if they go down one road (and that is immoral), and so advocate a higher road. They both suggest a vision for a society where people have a better chance at being happy and fulfilled. And both visions eschew porn.

While there are plenty of feminists 3.0 who think that pornography is terrific, there are no Christian conservative voices saying the same thing publicly. Zero. Nada. So, I guess that means that Christian conservatives don’t watch any pornography.

Christian conservatives as a group consume tremendous amounts of pornogaphy, they just tend not to do it as a group. Or admit it. The Bible belt is unbuckled; conservative states have higher rates of pornography consumption than the others, with Utah being the hands-down winner.

Let’s sidestep the two moral maps referred to above, and come at porn from a purely utilitarian orientation: Does it work?

On its most basic level pornography works. It does deliver a bang for the buck. But what coins make up that metaphorical buck? What is the cost to the user?

Pornography simulates sexual intimacy. It not only simulates it by being a print or digital representation, but also simulates it because the intimacy depicted is mostly acted, i.e., fake. A consumer of pornography has the sensation of intimacy and the sensation of sexual satisfaction, but without the experience of real intimacy.

Well… that’s the point, right? All the muss without any of the fuss.

What is intimacy? Intimacy is often thought of as closeness, but closeness is a feeling, and intimacy is much more than that. Closeness alone is not intimacy. Closeness is something you get to feel if intimacy is working. Closeness- feeling close to someone- is not a healthy basis for intimacy.

The healthy pillars of intimacy are respect, trust, committment, caring, communication, boundaries, friendship, companionship… it’s an octo-temple (at least) which when solidly built can house all the closeness and passion you want. If you try to erect your temple on just the two pillars of closeness and passion, you are masturbating.

Closeness and passion are experiences that one can manufacture without the participation of a partner. If those are the only two pillars holding up the relationship temple, the roof will collapse. And that is where pornography hurts. Huge numbers of boys and men who get their information and experience about sexual relationships from pornography are themselves pornographied.

Pornography is a magical universe where nobody has to work at their relationship, and no one has to deal with any difficult feelings. There are no problems that can’t be solved by more sex.

Pornography requires neither party- not the consumer of porn nor the objectified in porn- to be authentic. As “practice” for real life, or even a temporary “substitute” for real life, it fails. Does that mean it is “wrong?” It means it doesn’t work.

There has been an entire generation (some might claim two) of boys who have grown up in a pornography saturated culture, and therefore girls, too. Although women are estimated to be a quarter to a third of pornography watchers, they are closer to two percent of pornography buyers. The consumer target is mostly male which makes sense, most consumers are male.

What is happening to our culture when a huge number of our young males are spending such a tremendous amount of their time using electronic devices, forsaking real life? TV used to be the concern, now video games and the internet- pornography, et al- have not only created a virtual cocoon, but it’s one in which the larva gets all his sexual needs met now too… or thinks he does.

Despite the strong- extremely reinforcing- behavioral consequence that’s telling him otherwise, he did not just have sex. He certainly didn’t achieve intimacy, i.e., he didn’t have to communicate, trust, be trustworthy, respect someone, be worthy of someone’s respect, care about someone else’s concerns, establish and maintian his own boundaries, negotiate someone else’s boundaries, take a friendly interest in someone’s life, enjoy hanging out with someone, be fun to be with, follow through on his word even when it was inconvenient to do so, be there for someone in their time of need… none of it.

A couple of clicks, a little friction, and all the dessert without any of the vegetables!

Multiply this by four years of high school plus four years of college plus four years of marriage… according to the associative property of pornography, he is now an addict- addicted to fake intimacy because he is now terrified of real intimacy. He’s using faux intimacy to avoid the real thing. It might not seem like a big deal on any particular occasion, but did any of it work? Did it ever make real intimacy more likely?

No. None of it. Never did, never could. Nunca.

Pornography is alienating to the consumer. This self-interest should be enough to dissuade a guy where all the moral arguments have failed. It hurts him.