Is Porn Ruining Our Sex Lives?

[JackLuis]

This week, the topic of porn’s impact was raised again in response to a survey finding that excessive porn viewing causes performance problems in young men. So, I decided to give Gallop a call — at her all-black Manhattan “bachelorette pad,” which was formerly the men’s locker room at the historic YMCA — to talk about smut-induced erectile dysfunction, the sex talks parents should be having with their kids and what she really means by “make love not porn.”

Can you elaborate a bit for those who haven’t seen your TED talk or read the e-book version of it?

I’m 51, I’m old enough to remember back in the day when the guys I slept with were extremely keen that I came, that I came first, that I came at least once, if not several times. These days, I don’t come and it’s not even remarked upon. Bear in mind that I date utterly lovely younger men – but this is simply what has been imprinted on them. Because 99.9 percent of all mainstream porn is made by men for men, the entire raison d’être of every single mainstream porn film is to get the man off. As a result, an entire generation of guys and girls is growing up believing that the be-all and end-all of sex is to get the man off.

Isn't this true? Isn't "Porn", as you normally see it, less than Sexual Congress?

Just a thought to keep in mind as you write.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Your question goes back to the purpose of all fiction: The story answers a question and shows you how to perform the solution without all the math homework.

So porn may or may not create discontent.

 

[Iamnotthe1]

I like porn myself. It just looks good and is fun to watch. I don't care if my man watches it and doesn't mind if I do too. We like to watch it together. We sometimes have used it as a learning tool as well as just for fun. Sex is sex and we all like to watch it. It only messes with you if you want it to. Nothing like being in a great sexual relationship and a place to go to watch and learn also..

 

[CWatson]

Isn't this true? Isn't "Porn", as you normally see it, less than Sexual Congress?

It is, but it's a balance.

First off, I've always been a proponent that The Writer needs to think about what message the story is sending. And I'm not going to recant, because I do think that's an important duty.

But on the other hand, The Reader also has a duty to think about what message the story is sending. That's how we get fiction like Candide, like 1984, like Chicago, that present a message ironically or sarcastically. The Reader has a duty to look past the surface, and if he or she isn't, then frankly they have much larger problems than the fact that they're bad lovers.

(And women not cumming is rarely a problem in written erotica. Filmed pornography, sure, but then how the hell are you supposed to establish if a woman came anyhow? The only people who would know the truth of it are her and God. I'm not saying it's a great choice to just sideline the female orgasm, but I certainly understand why they would choose it.)

 

[SevenSquared]

Sounds like bollocks to me

 

[wafflecone111]

Nah, it's just guys.

 

[mikey2much]

I sometimes wonder

I wonder sometimes if women are evoling into something different then what men expect them to be.

A working woman owes her loyalty to her boss. Her job gets first call over her man or in many cases her children.

Many of them will come on a site like this and moan and groan about how long it been since they had sex but will say nothing about all the men they turned down during that time.

In short I think there are men out there who would perfer their imaginary sex partners to the real women that they can get. That being the case why wouldn't they rather have porn to watch while they jack off, instead of waiting until some women runs out of anything else to do before she decides she has time for sex.

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

I wonder sometimes if women are evoling into something different...Her job gets first call over her man... say nothing about all the men they turned down...
...there are men out there who would perfer their imaginary sex partners... instead of waiting until some women runs out of anything else to do ....

With the world population just reaching seven billion do you think this is a bad thing?

 

[CWatson]

I wonder sometimes if women are evoling into something different then what men expect them to be.

...Wow. Your whole comment has a higher of misogyny-to-word ratio than I've ever seen.

Speaking only as a man, I don't see how I have any right to "expect" a woman to evolve into anything whatsoever. Maybe I'm some sort of bleeding-heart liberal, but I think women have the right to guide their own growth and make their own decisions.

And yes, you see women on here whining that they never get laid because they're at work too much. Under those circumstances it is perfectly legitimate to say to them, Maybe you shouldn't work that much. It's the same thing you'd say to a man. "Don't like your life? Change it."

 

[Handley_Page]

I reckon "Excessive" Porn is not helping at all, particularly for younger males. It might have changed a bit since I regularly watched a whole film but:
A demonstration of a few strokes, turn over, next position (carefully organised so the camera gets a good look), a few well-chosen moans and maybe shrieks and that's it. The fact that the male lead has a limp dick seems to go unnoticed.

But surely porn should be a shared experience, leading to wholesome lovemaking ?

OK I'll get me coat. I'm obviously not in tune with the modern thing. . . .

 

[HeyItsDani]

I reckon "Excessive" Porn is not helping at all, particularly for younger males.

Especially given the state of sex education in schools today. Since those courses are so ridiculous, many people get their idea of the mechanics and "how tos" of sex from porn, since that's the only other source they have. And porn has gotten substantially more misogynistic in the past few years. Many kids nowadays think the default place to ejaculate is on a woman's face and that all anal ends in ass-to-mouth oral sex. That's not a good thing, IMO.

Having said that, I very much enjoy porn and have gotten a lot of my own personal fantasies from watching porn. My last BF and I used to watch porn together and then act out the scenes on our own. It was a lot of fun. I think you have to understand what porn is and how to use it.

 

[BuckyDuckman]

Driven by dollars

Porn is driven by dollars. If porn is male-centric and misogynistic, that's what selling.

To me, complaining about the "message" porn sends is like complaining about high gas prices while driving a SUV or worrying about the impact of violent video games while cleaning your gun collection.

In a world where we expect our problems to be fixed with a magic pill (from erectile dysfunction to depression), I think it's easy to point to whatever is loudest, brightest, or shiniest and say "Ah, THERE'S the problem!"

I think men and women consume erotica/porn differently. Just as we related differently. I'm not a huge fan of John Gray (Men are from Mars, Women from Venus) - but I have kept one element of his: Women want an emotional connection before they have sex. Men, however, open up better after sex. It's amazing we ever got to 7 billion!

 

[PennLady]

I wonder sometimes if women are evoling into something different then what men expect them to be.

So what? Even if they are, that doesn't mean that what men expected is "right" and what women evolve into (??) is "wrong."

A working woman owes her loyalty to her boss. Her job gets first call over her man or in many cases her children.

This is such a terrible generalization. And it implies that it's not okay for a woman but it is for a man. And in my experience, it's untrue. It's a balance. And I (thankfully) worked for a company that would say hey, take care of your family, and let us know how it goes. Do you have any idea how offensive this statement is? Not to mention wrong?

Many of them will come on a site like this and moan and groan about how long it been since they had sex but will say nothing about all the men they turned down during that time.

And how about the men who work and come home and veg, yet expect their working wife to make dinner, serve dinner, clean up after, deal with the kids, deal with the house, etc. etc. Are they offering to help? And if not, then don't be surprised if she's not up for sex. A little help goes along way. And as for turning men down -- wait, I've never seen quite that double standard. If they accepted all those alleged offers, wouldn't that make them sluts in the eyes of many?

In short I think there are men out there who would perfer their imaginary sex partners to the real women that they can get. That being the case why wouldn't they rather have porn to watch while they jack off, instead of waiting until some women runs out of anything else to do before she decides she has time for sex.

See above. Good lord. If the men prefer the imaginary sex partners, as opposed to the real women who are working and making a life for themselves, then maybe they're just old-fashioned chauvinists with double standards and lazy to boot. If a man wants a woman to have time for sex, then he can get up and wash a damn dish.

 

[mikey2much]

Never said it was a bad thing

With the world population just reaching seven billion do you think this is a bad thing?

I never said it was a bad thing just like I don't think the growing acceptance of homosexual relationships is a bad thing. I only meant that our cultural values are changing, and women are under the greatest pressure to change the most.

We ask them to do the job of men. We ask them to put their families aside and go to work, more women work today than men. We ask them to be decisive and take control of things much more today than in the past. We ask them to be competitive with men in the workplace.

All of these changes we demand they make are bound to change them in more ways then we can foresee. We are asking women to become a different animal then they were just a couple of generation ago.

I am not against women, indeed I feel they are being forced into this situation by the same people who have fucked this country up in so many other ways.

Overall porn is just another symptom of what is happening to us as a country and society as a whole..

 

[mikey2much]

I love women, I'm no misogynist

...Wow. Your whole comment has a higher of misogyny-to-word ratio than I've ever seen.

I feel that I have been misunderstood here. I am not trying to be a misogynist, I am just saying, you can't expect women to be there for a man like you used to think they were.

Our mothers worked at home, their boss was their husband, they worked for love of family not money. It was a very important job. A job that the daycare centers cannot do as well as the mothers used to do it. When you look at the young people today you can see the results.

As a man, do you think you would be able to take back control of your family if you wanted to. Most of us couldn't, we need the income the women bring in to survive.

The conditions in which we live our lives change, we have to change with them or follow the others who didn't make the change and became extinct.

 

[mikey2much]

This is for Penn Lady

You are right to a point. Like you say a man can't come home and expect his wife to cook and clean for him, yet it seems that men as a whole do not do the chores that it would take to divide the housework.

Women have had the shiny object of indepenence dangled before them and have taken the bait. Men, have to pay part of the cost by sharing the work that women used to do. They don't do it.

The average man would rather have his woman waiting on him when he comes home with supper on the table. I know this sounds like a throwback to the days of female slavery to a modren woman but that is the way it is,

When you look at the kids today and the divorce rates as well as the amounts of people who never get married to start with. You should ask yourself what is causing this breakdown that is ruining families as we know them.

I ask this question of myself and give the answer that I think is correct. I'm no expert, just a guy wondering what has happened to a system that had served us well for centries.

 

[BuckyDuckman]

... I only meant that our cultural values are changing, and women are under the greatest pressure to change the most.

We ask them to do the job of men. We ask them to put their families aside and go to work, more women work today than men. We ask them to be decisive and take control of things much more today than in the past. We ask them to be competitive with men in the workplace.

Women have already proven they can do the job of men (and then some in many cases). My best example is looking back to WWII and Rosie the Riveter. (And no, I'm not THAT told - but my parents were.) With "able bodied" men joining the war effort right and left, it wasn't the children and section 8's filling the factories - it was women. The same women who were asked to step aside when the boys came home.

I don't believe we (as a society) have "asked" women to do the job of men. I think it's an extension of the suffrage movement and women gaining equal rights. (Let's not forget, African American males received the right to vote before women did!)

What's more, I think we (again, as a society) have insisted women work (which, in general, it appears they were glad to do). And why have we asked women to join the workforce? How else can we afford to live? Affording a house, car, food, big screen TV, high speed internet connections, etc., all requires more money. The dynamic of a single earner family has passed.

And I think we're caught in middle of a simpler time and more dynamic time. Women cannot maintain their former roles of primary caretaker if they have to work. Too many men are too slow to pick up the slack (or a dish). And I think our children suffer from too little supervision.

All of these changes we demand they make are bound to change them in more ways then we can foresee. We are asking women to become a different animal then they were just a couple of generation ago.

I couldn't disagree more. A woman, like a man, has always had a near infinite potential to create, perform, and produce. It's called "being human" and I believe to suggest otherwise is to suggest that women are a lesser species. We haven't asked women to become a different animal, we're learning to accept them as the equals they have always been. And unlike some, I don't believe "empowering" women requires "dis-empowering" men anymore than when our second child was born, I didn't need to half the love I felt for our first child to make room for the new one. Power is not a finite resource. We didn't become a lesser society by ending slavery.

Overall porn is just another symptom of what is happening to us as a country and society as a whole..

Again, I disagree. To me, that statement suggests that celebrating the human form and the interpersonal combinations possible between humans is somehow wrong. And, that in some sort of magical, perfect society - there would never be porn. I think there will always be porn (why not? There always has been). My sincere hope is that we can lose our sense of shame about it.

 

[PennLady]

You are right to a point. Like you say a man can't come home and expect his wife to cook and clean for him, yet it seems that men as a whole do not do the chores that it would take to divide the housework.

Women have had the shiny object of indepenence dangled before them and have taken the bait. Men, have to pay part of the cost by sharing the work that women used to do. They don't do it.

This is true, as I'm sure study after study will bear out. There are many reasons for it, I'm sure. But it has to change somewhere. And why don't they do it? Do they not value a woman's contributions? Do they think it just magically happens?

The average man would rather have his woman waiting on him when he comes home with supper on the table. I know this sounds like a throwback to the days of female slavery to a modren woman but that is the way it is,

Personally, I think that's a load of B.S. Maybe you would rather that, but I'm not sure about the "average" man. And you know, perhaps the "average woman" would like the same.

When you look at the kids today and the divorce rates as well as the amounts of people who never get married to start with. You should ask yourself what is causing this breakdown that is ruining families as we know them.

I ask this question of myself and give the answer that I think is correct. I'm no expert, just a guy wondering what has happened to a system that had served us well for centries.

Served us well? Seriously? Look, I'm married, and happily so, but let's face some facts. Marriage was often done (and still is in some places) against the woman's will, or at least with her having no say in it. She was often cast aside if widowed, with no support, and spousal abuse was considered a normal state of affairs, and something her husband had a right to do if he so chose. Not everyone is cut out for marriage, or at least conventional marriage.

I'm not so sure there have always been "families as we know them." Women used to die in childbirth at young ages; their husbands took second (and more) wives, who would have children -- ta da, blended family with stepparents and half-siblings. There is a lot about life and family life that we take for granted now, but things haven't always been that way.

"Childhood," I've read in a few places, is a pretty recent concept and construct. I'm not saying it's a bad one, certainly. However, it was way different not all that long ago, and it will probably be different yet again some years in the future.

You talk about the "bait" of independence, as though it's some kind of lure and then things get switched. I'll be the first to admit that some things have to be given up. You can't do everything; if you work, then time with your kids will likely have to give, and/or time for yourself so you can spend more with your kids.

There are ways around it, though, and one big one would be if the US was more family-friendly. Europe (not saying it's the best example, just an example) in many places has far more family-friendly laws. And why not? If the family is such an important building block, why doesn't society, and corporate society, do more to support it?

 

[Cruel2BKind]

As far as the population thing, the American population has actually reached stage four of the population curve.

Geography in a nutshell,

STage one is when there are high birth rates and high death rates, only a few 3rd world countries are like that now.

Stage two. Simple changes decrease death rates (Clean water, antibiotics, more food), and birth rates are still very high. Causes a population boom. India, and many African nations are at this stage now.

Stage three. Birth rates finally start to decline. (Due to contraceptives, and awareness) Population growth starts to level off. Kenya and China are in this phase.

Stage four, Birth rates drop below death rates and population starts to decline. America, several European countries and Japan have reached this phase.

Of course, America's population is still growing because we still have a steady flow of Immigrants.

 

[LettersFromTatyana]

A woman, like a man, has always had a near infinite potential to create, perform, and produce. It's called "being human" and I believe to suggest otherwise is to suggest that women are a lesser species. We haven't asked women to become a different animal, we're learning to accept them as the equals they have always been. And unlike some, I don't believe "empowering" women requires "dis-empowering" men anymore than when our second child was born, I didn't need to half the love I felt for our first child to make room for the new one. Power is not a finite resource. We didn't become a lesser society by ending slavery.

This.

I'll also add that the notion that women weren't doing work in exchange for some form of payment until recently is false; being in the workforce (which has a very specific definition) and taking in payment for services rendered are two different things. Married women may not have worked outside the home in a formalized system for wages (though many, including my own grandmothers and great-grandmothers, did), but they often took in piecemeal work (mending, washing, childcare for friends and family, etc) for money or in exchange for other goods and services to help make ends meet. This is work, as the IRS will be happy to tell you.

And then there's the unpaid work, which, in addition to raising kids, doing laundry, growing and storing food, etc. could include things like helping customers at the family store, serving meals at a family-owned restaurant, etc. My grandfather, for example, earned wages for working at the family bar on the weekend; my grandmother didn't, even though she worked just as much. He was counted as an employee, and thus shows up in government statistics; she wasn't, and therefore doesn't.

Our collective memory about the way things used to be is often false or exaggerated, and the notion of what women used to do is, I think, a key example of that. Yes, they stayed home and watched the kids and cooked meals and cleaned, but that wasn't all they did.

There are ways around it, though, and one big one would be if the US was more family-friendly. Europe (not saying it's the best example, just an example) in many places has far more family-friendly laws. And why not? If the family is such an important building block, why doesn't society, and corporate society, do more to support it?

Sigh. We can dream.

 

[LettersFromTatyana]

With regards to the OP, her interview really isn't about how porn is ruining our sex lives. A more fitting statement is that the lack of communication with our sex partners is ruining our sex lives.

As she says:

The reason I say that what I’m combating is not porn but a lack of dialogue around it is because if you boiled my entire message down to one thing it would be purely and simply: Talk about it. We all get enormously vulnerable when we get naked. Sexual egos are very fragile and people find it bizarrely difficult to talk about sex with the people they’re having it with while they’re actually having it — because you’re terrified of hurting another person’s feelings or derailing the entire episode. At the same time, you do want to please your partner, so you seize the cues from anyplace you can and if the only cues you have are from porn, then those are the ones you’ll take.

and

Well, I’m pro-porn generally. I don’t judge what is good and bad porn. The issue I’m tackling is not porn, it’s the complete lack of an open, healthy dialogue in our society around sex and porn.

Personally, I tend to prefer my porn/smut/whatever to include this dialogue. Nothing makes me laugh more than reading a section where a woman comes in about, oh, a minute (especially when this sex includes no clitoral stimulation), or when two people hook up for the first time and magically know what the other wants and have mind-blowing orgasms together.

Maybe this happens in real life, and maybe it's what people want to read about. It hasn't happened for me this way, and frankly, I'm OK with that. It would bore me, and in fact, I think talking about sex with the people your having it with is half the fun.

 

[BuckyDuckman]

If the family is such an important building block, why doesn't society, and corporate society, do more to support it?

Amen, PennLady! I'm not sure we can ever get back a single earner family like my parents and my parents before them did. Maybe that's a false motto. If we tick the clock back, the amount of work required to maintain a household was much greater than it is now.

As LettersFromTatyana pointed out:

Married women ... often took in piecemeal work ... for money or in exchange for other goods and services to help make ends meet.

That IS very much so work. And so was maintaining a house before the convenience of refrigerators, freezers, dishwashers, - not to mention the hassles of shopping and preparing meals. No microwaves - but also fewer prepared meals, too.

Add to that the requirements for larger families to tend to the farm. At that point, the woman of the family often became chief medic, cook, and bookkeeper and a very important aspect of a functioning family.

And how much of this has changed in a relatively short (by historical measurements) period of time? Life for the people of the 1911 wasn't much different than the 1811, and those differences really go away when comparing 1811 to 1711 or 1611, etc.

Television, air conditioning, and electric lights did more to change our society than anything else. It isolated us and made front porches quaint. We lost the "village" feel to our world, which maybe we're regaining through social networking?

I moved far afield from your comment about corporate society - but then again, maybe not?

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

...I am not against women, indeed I feel they are being forced into this situation by the same people who have fucked this country up in so many other ways...

Oh come now, don't be coy. Come right out and identify these people who, in your mind, have fucked up the country.

Clarity expedites understanding, don't you know.

 

[Iamnotthe1]

In short I think there are men out there who would perfer their imaginary sex partners to the real women that they can get. That being the case why wouldn't they rather have porn to watch while they jack off, instead of waiting until some women runs out of anything else to do before she decides she has time for sex.

When I was married, I don't recall ever not having time for sex. It does slow down but I don't think anyone should ever not make time for it. It's too much fun! That being said, I don't blame a man or woman for looking to porn when there is no other way to get turned on.

 

[mikey2much]

It is the people who are fucking us now

Oh come now, don't be coy. Come right out and identify these people who, in your mind, have fucked up the country.

Clarity expedites understanding, don't you know.

I would have to say that 'they' is big business. I have read that the earning power of both man and wife today is pretty much equal to what the single earner household used to make.

Would I be wrong to think that corp america is getting two workers for the price of one. Today American companies are sending all their jobs to china, before that we sent them to mexico, before that we liberated women. even today, women only get 75% of what a man makes.

When mommy went to work was the same time that everybody started to get the labor saving devices. Who sold them to the working folks of america. Who made a profit when Mommy needed to get a second car to drive to work.
I know that when you make statements like this it is easy to say I'm being extreme . But am I? When I look at my country today, I don't see anything to make me think I am wrong.