Beauty Redefined Blog

Bo461003-03-2011

THis is a really good post. I agree in everything you said here. Pornography seems like accepted now in every culture and media is to blame here. But these stuff in my opinion are gonna be with us until the end of this earth. The way we an avoid these and of course protect our children too I think is to strengthen our characters by indulging our selves to positive things, don’t want to be religious here but I strongly agree with what the scriptures are saying and showing us. IT IS STILL THE WORD OF GOD THAT HAS MORE POWER TO CHANGE SOMEONE THAN ANYTHING WE CAN THINK OF. =)

Christopher Reeves06-07-2011

If you haven’t yet, you should check out the book, “Drug of the New Millenium” by LDS author Mark Kastleman. It is all about the science of how Internet pornography radically alters the human brain and body.

Sydne08-03-2011

I still don’t think porn is that bad. ( I could go on about both side of that for a while but I wont) But I do agree with you that it should be separated from public media and be represented as “normal”.

pornisextremelysexistsick,damaging&womanhating!09-06-2011

Pornography is extremely sexist and woman-hating and it teaches and normalizes sick distortions of women,men and sexuality,and it sexualizes male supremacy,sexist gender inequality,male dominance,women’s subordination and submission to men,,male supremacy objectification and dehumanization of women as only sex objects to be used,ejac*lated all over,and disgarded, for men,often calls women woman-hating names like s***s,b******,and w***** and even male violence!

And because it sexualizes and normalizes all of these sick things and sexist injustices, and has been wrongly mainstreamed and made acceptable in a sexist sick woman-hating male dominated society,that created and normalized it in the first place,more women are sadly disturbingly being influenced to think this is what normal hetrosexuality is,and it teaches men that this is what women want and like, and that they want to be treated by them this way! Attitudes like yours really make any hope for change seem hopless!

Many men who used to use pornography when they were younger who are now anti-pornography anti-sexist anti-male violence educators include, former all star high school football player Jackson Katz who wrote the great important book,The Macho Paradox How Some Men Hurt Women and How All Men Can Help and he writes about how pornography sexualizes men’s power,woman hatred,sexual objectification and dehumanization and subordination of women,and this is all connected to male violence,and gender inequality,and how the pornography industry has sold this woman-hatred and men’s power as normal and liberating to the public.

Therapist Russ Funk who is a anti-racist,anti-sexist,anti-male violence educator has written books and articles on this as well and he had a chapter ,What Pornography Says About Me(n) in the book,Not For Sale:Feminists Resisting Prostitution & Pornography in which he said that when he used pornography he saw all women as just f***able even women he saw in classes,business coleagues and women on the street .He said being commited to justice and using pornography is inherently contradictory,because one can not look at others as fully equal,empowered,dynamic human beings if one is also looking at them through the pornographic gaze.

He also did a presentation in 2006 at The Center For Women Children and Families,Pornography What’s The Harm? On his site it describes 3 workshops he presents to people on the harms of pornography.He also wrote a book in 1993,Stopping Rape:A Challenge For Men and he includes pornography as one of the causes of rape culture.

The important organization,Men Can Stop Rape also discusses and educates on how men’s sexuality is socialized by pornography.

And Robert Jensen has written great articles and his important book,Getting Off Pornography And The End Of Masculinity.And Dr.Michael Flood’s recent report is great too.John Stoltenberg’s excellent 1989 book,Refusing To Be A Man Essays On Sex and Justice that consists of brilliant important speaches he made from the late 70′s -the late 80′s also discusses how pornography eroticizes and sexualizes male supremacy, sexism,woman hatred,violence,male dominance and female submission and subordination of women,and makes it feel and seem like sex to people and even makes sexism necessary for some people to have sexual feelings and arousal,keeps it this way, makes it the reality that people believe is true, and keeps people from knowing any other possibility.He co-founded Men Against Pornography In New York.

Paul Kivel who is the founder of The Oakland Men’s Project in California who has been a long time anti-sexist,anti-racist,anti-male violence educator,also wrote about how harmful and sexist pornography is in his great important 1999 book,Boys Will Be Men Raising Our Sons For COURAGE,CARING,and COMMUNITY.

He writes that it is not surprising that an industry worth billions of dollars a year,which may be bigger than the record and movie industries combined,has developed many ways to justify it’s existence and insinuate itself into mainstream male culture.

Paul then says that there are several books that describe in detail the harm pornography does to men as well as to women.He says these books listed in the bibliography,also contain descriptions of the pornography industry’s efforts to suppress and disrupt people organizing against it.The books he lists are,Men Confront Pornography edited by Michael S.Kimmel,Making Violence Sexy:Feminist Views On Pornography by Dianna E.H.Russell,and Pornography:The Production and Consumption Of Inequality by Gail Dines et.al.

Paul also says in this book that talking to another adult can also help you decide if this is a situation in which you want to forbid the presence of porn in your house or if you just want to make it clear to your son how you fell about pornography but will let him decide what to do with the magazines or videos he has.He says in either case,it’s important to find out your son’s thoughts about pornography .He then says he may no little about the industry,it’s exploitation in the production of pornography,or the effects on women,men,and their relationships when men use it.He says it might be useful,if you have the stomach for it,to look through some of the material with him and talk about what you see.

Brooklyn College psychology professor Dr.Robert Brannon was a co-chair with Phylis B.Frank for 20 years from 1990 of The New York NOW’s Task Force on the harms of pornography,trafficking, and prostitution and he is co-founder of NOMAS National Organization For Men Against Sexism and he;s the organization’s group leader of their Task Force on prostitution and pornography.THere islso a n excellent recent report by pro-feminist Australian gender studies and sociology professor Dr.Michael Flood,The Harms Of Pornography Exposure Among Children And Young People and he also includes a lot of great research studies about the effects on adult users.He explains that Adults also show an increase in behavioral agression following exposure to pornography including non-violent or violent depictions of sexual activity (but not nudity) with stronger effects for violent pornography.He has a lot of researchers as references.

Dr.Flood also then explains that in studies of pornography use in everyday life,men who are high frequency users of pornography and men who use ‘hardcore’,violent, or rape pornography are more likely than others to report that they would rape or sexually harass a woman if they knew they could get away with it.And they are more likely to actually perpetrate sexual coercion and agression.His reference for this is studies by psychologist Neil Malamuth et al 2000.Dr.Flood also says that perhaps the most troubling impact of pornography on children and young people is it’s influence on sexual violence. And he then says that a wide range of studies of the effects of pornography have been conducted among young people age 18-25,as well as older polualtions.

He says across these,there is consistent and reliable evidence that exposure to pornography is related to male sexual aggression against women.This association is strongest for violent pornography and still reliable for non-violent pornography particularly for frequent users. His source is psychologist Neil Malamuth et al 2000.He also says that in experiemental studies adults show significant strengthening of attitudes supportive of sexual aggression following exposure to pornography.He then says the association between pornography and rape supportive attitudes is evident as a result of exposure to both non-violent (showing consenting sexual activity) and violent pornography while the latter results in significantly greater increase in violence-supportive attitudes.He also says exposure to sexually violent material increases male viewers acceptance of rape myths and erodes their empathy for victims of violence.

His source for this is Allen et al 1995.He explains adults also show an increase in behavioral aggression following exposure to pornography including non-violent or violent depictions of sexual activity(but not nudity) with stronger effects for violent pornography.Allen et al 1995.

He also explains there are many studies that show that teen boys who are frequent users of pornography more often sexually harass girls and believe it’s perfectly OK to hold a girl down and force her to have sex.

Cindi09-06-2011

Pornography is extremely sexist and woman-hating and it teaches and normalizes sick distortions of women,men and sexuality,and it sexualizes male supremacy,sexist gender inequality,male dominance,women’s subordination and submission to men,,male supremacy objectification and dehumanization of women as only sex objects to be used,ejac*lated all over,and disgarded, for men,often calls women woman-hating names like s***s,b******,and w***** and even male violence!

And because it sexualizes and normalizes all of these sick things and sexist injustices, and has been wrongly mainstreamed and made acceptable in a sexist sick woman-hating male dominated society,that created and normalized it in the first place,more women are sadly disturbingly being influenced to think this is what normal hetrosexuality is,and it teaches men that this is what women want and like, and that they want to be treated by them this way! Attitudes like yours really make any hope for change seem hopless!

Many men who used to use pornography when they were younger who are now anti-pornography anti-sexist anti-male violence educators include, former all star high school football player Jackson Katz who wrote the great important book,The Macho Paradox How Some Men Hurt Women and How All Men Can Help and he writes about how pornography sexualizes men’s power,woman hatred,sexual objectification and dehumanization and subordination of women,and this is all connected to male violence,and gender inequality,and how the pornography industry has sold this woman-hatred and men’s power as normal and liberating to the public.

Therapist Russ Funk who is a anti-racist,anti-sexist,anti-male violence educator has written books and articles on this as well and he had a chapter ,What Pornography Says About Me(n) in the book,Not For Sale:Feminists Resisting Prostitution & Pornography in which he said that when he used pornography he saw all women as just f***able even women he saw in classes,business coleagues and women on the street .He said being commited to justice and using pornography is inherently contradictory,because one can not look at others as fully equal,empowered,dynamic human beings if one is also looking at them through the pornographic gaze.

He also did a presentation in 2006 at The Center For Women Children and Families,Pornography What’s The Harm? On his site it describes 3 workshops he presents to people on the harms of pornography.He also wrote a book in 1993,Stopping Rape:A Challenge For Men and he includes pornography as one of the causes of rape culture.

The important organization,Men Can Stop Rape also discusses and educates on how men’s sexuality is socialized by pornography.

And Robert Jensen has written great articles and his great book,Getting Off Pornography And The End Of Masculinity.And Dr.Michael Flood’s recent report is great too.John Stoltenberg’s excellent 1989 book,Refusing To Be A Man Essays On Sex and Justice that consists of brilliant important speaches he made from the late 70′s -the late 80′s also discusses how pornography eroticizes and sexualizes male supremacy, sexism,woman hatred,violence,male dominance and female submission and subordination of women,and makes it feel and seem like sex to people and even makes sexism necessary for some people to have sexual feelings and arousal,keeps it this way, makes it the reality that people believe is true, and keeps people from knowing any other possibility.He co-founded Men Against Pornography In New York.

Paul Kivel who is the founder of The Oakland Men’s Project in California who has been a long time anti-sexist,anti-racist,anti-male violence educator,also wrote about how harmful and sexist pornography is in his great important 1999 book,Boys Will Be Men Raising Our Sons For COURAGE,CARING,and COMMUNITY.

He writes that it is not surprising that an industry worth billions of dollars a year,which may be bigger than the record and movie industries combined,has developed many ways to justify it’s existence and insinuate itself into mainstream male culture.

Paul then says that there are several books that describe in detail the harm pornography does to men as well as to women.He says these books listed in the bibliography,also contain descriptions of the pornography industry’s efforts to suppress and disrupt people organizing against it.The books he lists are,Men Confront Pornography edited by Michael S.Kimmel,Making Violence Sexy:Feminist Views On Pornography by Dianna E.H.Russell,and Pornography:The Production and Consumption Of Inequality by Gail Dines et.al.

Paul also says in this book that talking to another adult can also help you decide if this is a situation in which you want to forbid the presence of porn in your house or if you just want to make it clear to your son how you fell about pornography but will let him decide what to do with the magazines or videos he has.He says in either case,it’s important to find out your son’s thoughts about pornography .He then says he may no little about the industry,it’s exploitation in the production of pornography,or the effects on women,men,and their relationships when men use it.He says it might be useful,if you have the stomach for it,to look through some of the material with him and talk about what you see.

Brooklyn College psychology professor Dr.Robert Brannon was a co-chair with Phylis B.Frank for 20 years from 1990 of The New York NOW’s Task Force on the harms of pornography,trafficking, and prostitution and he is co-founder of NOMAS National Organization For Men Against Sexism and he;s the organization’s group leader of their Task Force on prostitution and pornography.THere islso a n excellent recent report by pro-feminist Australian gender studies and sociology professor Dr.Michael Flood,The Harms Of Pornography Exposure Among Children And Young People and he also includes a lot of great research studies about the effects on adult users.He explains that Adults also show an increase in behavioral agression following exposure to pornography including non-violent or violent depictions of sexual activity (but not nudity) with stronger effects for violent pornography.He has a lot of researchers as references.

Dr.Flood also then explains that in studies of pornography use in everyday life,men who are high frequency users of pornography and men who use ‘hardcore’,violent, or rape pornography are more likely than others to report that they would rape or sexually harass a woman if they knew they could get away with it.And they are more likely to actually perpetrate sexual coercion and agression.His reference for this is studies by psychologist Neil Malamuth et al 2000.Dr.Flood also says that perhaps the most troubling impact of pornography on children and young people is it’s influence on sexual violence. And he then says that a wide range of studies of the effects of pornography have been conducted among young people age 18-25,as well as older polualtions.

He says across these,there is consistent and reliable evidence that exposure to pornography is related to male sexual aggression against women.This association is strongest for violent pornography and still reliable for non-violent pornography particularly for frequent users. His source is psychologist Neil Malamuth et al 2000.He also says that in experiemental studies adults show significant strengthening of attitudes supportive of sexual aggression following exposure to pornography.He then says the association between pornography and rape supportive attitudes is evident as a result of exposure to both non-violent (showing consenting sexual activity) and violent pornography while the latter results in significantly greater increase in violence-supportive attitudes.He also says exposure to sexually violent material increases male viewers acceptance of rape myths and erodes their empathy for victims of violence.

His source for this is Allen et al 1995.He explains adults also show an increase in behavioral aggression following exposure to pornography including non-violent or violent depictions of sexual activity(but not nudity) with stronger effects for violent pornography.Allen et al 1995.

He also explains there are many studies that show that teen boys who are frequent users of pornography more often sexually harass girls and believe it’s perfectly OK to hold a girl down and force her to have sex.

Cindi09-06-2011

The Harms of
Pornography
Exposure Among
Children and
Young People

Exposure to pornography is routine among children and young people,
with a range of notable and often troubling effects. Particularly among
younger children, exposure to pornography may be disturbing or
upsetting. Exposure to pornography helps to sustain young people’s
adherence to sexist and unhealthy notions of sex and relationships.
And, especially among boys and young men who are frequent
consumers of pornography, including of more violent materials,
consumption intensifi es attitudes supportive of sexual coercion and
increases their likelihood of perpetrating assault. While children and
young people are sexual beings and deserve age-appropriate materials
on sex and sexuality, pornography is a poor, and indeed dangerous,
sex educator. Copyright ! 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
KEY WORDS: pornography; sexuality; violence; boys
Children and young people are routinely exposed to pornography.
They encounter sexually explicit images while on the
Internet, some watch X-rated videos and, like adults, they live in
a culture increasingly saturated in sexualised representations.
What is the impact among children and young people of exposure
to pornography? This article explores the likely effects of children’s
and young people’s exposure to sexually explicit media. It
argues that while there are disagreements over how to judge pornography’s
effects, pornography exposure can lead to emotional
disturbance, sexual knowledge and liberalised attitudes, shifts in
sexual behaviour, and sexist and objectifying understandings.
Particularly for boys and young men, the use of pornography may
exacerbate violence-supportive social norms and encourage their
participation in sexual abuse.

This review focuses on children’s and young people’s
exposure to pornography, rather than children in pornography,
Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Accepted 11 August 2009
* Correspondence to: Dr Michael Flood, Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society, La Trobe University, PO Box 4026, Ainslie ACT 2602, Australia. E-mail:
mfl ood@vichealth.vic.gov.au
Michael Flood*

Australian Research Centre in Sex,
Health and Society, La Trobe
University, Australia
Child Abuse Review Vol. 18: 384–400 (2009)
Published online 2 November 2009 in Wiley InterScience
(www.interscience.wiley.com) DOI: 10.1002/car.1092

‘Exposure to
pornography helps
to sustain young
people’s adherence
to sexist and
unhealthy notions
of sex and
relationships’

‘Pornography is a
poor, and indeed
dangerous, sex
educator’

‘May exacerbate
violence-supportive
social norms and
encourage their
participation in
sexual abuse’

The Harms of Pornography Exposure 385
Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Child Abuse Review Vol. 18: 384–400 (2009)
DOI: 10.1002/car

notwithstanding the fact that child pornography is a deeply troubling
aspect of sexually explicit media. It focuses on children’s
and young people’s own accidental and deliberate encounters
with pornography, and it does not regard such exposure necessarily
as a form of child abuse or child sexual abuse per se. At the
same time, one component of child abuse is adults’ deliberate or
neglectful exposure of children to pornography, including adults’
use of pornography to ‘groom’ children for sexual abuse (Russell
and Purcell, 2005). This review explores the harms among children
and young people associated with pornography exposure,
including the intensifi cation of their risks of both violence perpetration
and victimisation.

Pornography is defined here as ‘sexually explicit media that are
primarily intended to sexually arouse the audience’ (Malamuth,
2001, p. 11817). ‘Sexually explicit’ materials show ‘genitals and
sexual activities in unconcealed ways’ (Peter and Valkenburg,
2007, p. 383). While this definition is broad enough to include
literary as well as visual forms, my area of primary concern is
image-centred media.

Encounters with Pornography

How are children and young people exposed to pornography? On
the one hand, children and young people may deliberately seek
sexually explicit materials, whether online or offline, often with
motivations similar to those among adults. On the other hand, they
are exposed to pornography accidentally or involuntarily. In this
discussion, the term ‘exposure’ refers to both deliberate and accidental,
voluntary and involuntary, viewing of pornography. While
‘exposure’ is a useful catch-all for all forms of viewing, it also
obscures the complexity and diversity of viewers’ relationships
to pornography, discussed below.

The context for children’s and young people’s exposure to
pornography includes a highly sexualised cultural environment
(APA, 2007; Levine, 2002). The frequency and explicitness
of sexual content in mainstream media has increased steadily
(Strasburger and Wilson, 2002). More widely, there has been a
‘pornographication’ of popular culture (Attwood, 2002; Levy,
2005). In tandem with these trends, shifting information and communication
technologies have allowed new forms of pornography
production and exchange (Hearn, 2006).

A growing body of international scholarship documents that
significant proportions of children and young people are exposed
to pornography. While different studies define and assess
‘pornography’ and exposure in varying ways, large numbers of
young people, particularly boys, are growing up in the presence

‘ “Exposure” refers to
both deliberate and
accidental, voluntary
and involuntary,
viewing of
pornography’
‘Large numbers of
young people,
particularly boys, are
growing up in the
presence of sexually
explicit media’
‘Children’s and
young people’s
own accidental and
deliberate encounters
with pornography’

of sexually explicit media, according to studies in Australia
(Flood, 2007), Cambodia (Fordham, 2006), Canada (Check,
1995), Denmark and Norway (Sørensen and Kjørholt, 2006),
Iceland (Kolbeins, 2006), Italy (Bonino et al., 2006), Sweden
(Forsberg, 2001; Johansson and Hammarén, 2007; Wallmyr and
Welin, 2006) and Taiwan (Lin and Lin, 1996; Lo et al., 1999; Lo
and Wei, 2005).

Significant proportions of children and young people have been
exposed to pornography online, especially accidentally and also
deliberately, as I have summarised elsewhere (Duimel and de
Haan, 2006; Flood, 2007; Sabina et al., 2008; Soeters and van
Schaik, 2006). There is evidence too that rates of unwanted exposure
to pornography are increasing (Mitchell et al., 2007b). Rates
of deliberate consumption of Internet pornography among minors
in international studies appear to vary from around one tenth to
one third (Flood, 2007; Livingstone and Bober, 2004; Mitchell et
al., 2003).

The deliberate consumption of pornography is highly gendered
among young people, as it is among adults. Males are more likely
than females to use pornography, to do so repeatedly, to use it for
sexual excitement and masturbation, to initiate its use (rather than
be introduced to it by an intimate partner), to view it alone and
in same-sex groups, and to view more types of images (Cameron
et al., 2005; Flood, 2007; Flood and Hamilton, 2003a; Nosko
et al., 2007). Males are more likely than females to be sexually
aroused by pornography and to have supportive attitudes towards
it (Johansson and Hammarén, 2007; Sabina et al., 2008; Wallmyr
and Welin, 2006).

The Effects of Exposure to Pornography

What are the likely effects of such exposure among children and
young people? Three bodies of scholarship help to answer this
question: a wide range of studies (1) on the impact on children of
non-pornographic sexual content in the mass media (APA, 2007;
Escobar-Chaves et al., 2005; Strasburger and Wilson, 2002) and
(2) on pornography’s impact among young adults and adults in
general, and (3) a small body of work on pornography exposure
among minors. While this review explores effects for both pornography
and other sexually oriented media, it focuses on effects
which are distinctive to or heightened for pornography. Pornography
may have stronger effects among children and young people
than other forms of sexual media, and it may have effects on
domains of sexuality which are relatively unaffected by other
forms of sexual media, for two reasons. First, pornography shows
a much higher degree of sexual explicitness (by definition) than
other sexual media. Second, pornography’s content arguably is

‘Pornography may
have stronger effects
among children and
young people than
other forms of sexual
media’
‘The deliberate
consumption of
pornography is
highly gendered
among young people,
as it is among adults’

The Harms of Pornography Exposure 387
Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Child Abuse Review Vol. 18: 384–400 (2009)
DOI: 10.1002/car

more sexist and hostile towards women than other sexual media content.
There are debates regarding the methodological rigour of
studies of sexual and sexually explicit media’s effects. Some
studies are experimental, often in laboratory conditions, and
involve testing the impact of exposure on participants’ attitudes
or behaviour. Other studies are correlational, investigating possible
relationships between ‘naturalistic’ use of sexual or sexually
explicit media (in everyday life) and attitudes or behaviour (Flood
and Hamilton, 2003a). Laboratory-based studies on pornography
have been criticised as excessively artificial (Boyle, 2000).
However, given that they usually exclude masturbation to
orgasm—a powerful physical and psychic experience central to
pornographic experience—they may in fact underestimate
pornography’s effects (Jensen, 1998). They are criticised too
for using low durations of exposure and short time scales
(Thornburgh and Lin, 2002). Correlational studies do not allow
determinations of causality: associations between exposure to
sexual media and particular attitudes or practices may go either
way, be reciprocal, or shaped by other factors such as sexual
interest (Hald, 2006; Janghorbani et al., 2003). Very few studies
are longitudinal, tracing the use of sexual media and the formation
of sexual and gender identities over time. More broadly, study
participants’ self-reports of attitudes and behaviours are shaped
by gendered social locations and other factors (Mitchell et al.,
2007a). In any case, pornography by itself is unlikely to influence
an individual’s entire sexual expression, and consumption may be
part of a broader sexual repertoire, ‘a larger sexual space and
sexual experimentation’ (Johansson and Hammarén, 2007, p. 66).
At least three types of factor mediate the impact of exposure
of pornography: the characteristics of the viewer, their own
engagement with the material, and the character and context of
exposure. First, research on children’s consumption of sexual
content in mainstream media documents that its effects are moderated
by such variables as age, gender, sexual experience, physical
maturation and parental involvement. Age influences children’s
levels of understanding of, comfort with and interest in content
such as sexual humour and innuendo. Correlations between adolescent
viewing of sexual media and sexual behaviour are moderated
by parental involvement, including such factors as discussions
of television content, communication patterns and home environments
(Huston et al., 1998; Malamuth and Impett, 2001). Further
variables moderating the impact of pornography include the individual’s
cultural background (emphasis on gender equality or
inequality), their home background (sexually permissive or
restricted), their personality characteristics and their current emotional
state (Malamuth et al., 2000).

‘Consumption may
be part of a broader
sexual repertoire,
“a larger sexual
space and sexual
experimentation” ’

Second, the effect of viewing pornography is influenced by
the viewers’ sexual, emotional and cognitive responses to the
material (Fisher and Barak, 2001; Jensen, 1998). Not a great deal
is known about adolescent or adult observers of pornography,
their preferences for different types of sexual content or the
forms of consumption they practise (Boyle, 2000), but the effects
of exposure are likely to be mediated by viewers’ interpretations
and evaluations of the material (Malamuth and Impett, 2001).
Children and young people are active and agentic consumers
of media, using critical skills and perspectives in interpreting
sexual content (Buckingham and Bragg, 2003). For example,
there is evidence among Swedish youth of a convergence in
critical responses to pornography over the life course, as boys
become more critical and girls less so (Löfgren-Mårtenson and
Månsson, 2006).

Third, the character and circumstances of exposure are important:
the type of material involved, the duration and intensity of
viewing, and the context (whether voluntary or involuntary, and
whether solitary or collective) (Thornburgh and Lin, 2002). Little
is known about how particular forms of pornography shape the
significance of their use, other than in terms of homogenising
categorisations of ‘violent’ and ‘non-violent’ content. In relation
to the contexts for use, there is some suggestion that masturbating
alone while watching pornography may lend greater intensity to
the sexual images viewed (Jensen, 1998), while watching pornography
in groups may enhance collective acceptance of its value
systems. Thus, there are complex interactions between the viewer
or reader, pornographic texts and the context of consumption
(Attwood, 2002; Brown, 2000). More widely, the shifting cultural
and collective dynamics of children’s and young people’s social,
sexual and gender relations are likely to have a profound infl uence
on the use, meaning and impact of pornography.
With these caveats in mind, what then are the likely effects of
exposure to pornography?

Emotional and Psychological Harms Associated with
Premature or Inadvertent Exposure

Children and adolescents may be shocked or disturbed by premature
or inadvertent encounters with sexually explicit material per
se. They may be at an age or developmental level where they are
unaware of, inexperienced in, or uninterested in sexual activities.
In a US survey, ten per cent of young people aged ten to 17
described themselves as very or extremely upset by unwanted
exposure to pornography (Mitchell et al., 2007b). In an Australian
survey, 53 per cent of young people aged 11 to 17 had experienced
something on the Internet they thought was offensive or

‘Not a great deal is
known about
adolescent or adult
observers of
pornography’
‘The character and
circumstances of
exposure are
important’

‘53 per cent of young
people aged 11 to 17
had experienced
something on the
Internet they thought
was offensive or
disgusting’

The Harms of Pornography Exposure 389
Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Child Abuse Review Vol. 18: 384–400 (2009)
DOI: 10.1002/car

disgusting (Aisbett, 2001). Pornography dominated the list of
content reported. The young people said that they felt ‘sick’,
‘shocked’, ‘embarrassed’, ‘repulsed’ and ‘upset’ (Aisbett, 2001,
p. 41).

While children and adolescents are not necessarily disturbed
by unwanted exposure to sexually explicit depictions, a consistent
minority do experience distress, as two American studies demonstrate.
In a survey of 1500 youths, six per cent of ten to 17-year
olds reported that accidentally viewing a sexually explicit image
had been distressing to them (Thornburgh and Lin, 2002). In
another survey, 45 per cent of the 15 to 17-year olds who had
stumbled across pornography were ‘very’ or ‘somewhat’ upset by
it (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2001). Some children inadvertently
exposed to Internet pornography are upset not by its content
but by the potential reactions of their parents (Aisbett, 2001;
Thornburgh and Lin, 2002).

Children’s Reactions to Sexually Explicit Content are
mediated both by Age and Sex

Younger children may not find such images remarkable or
memorable; older children may be more upset or disturbed;
while teenagers may only be annoyed (Thornburgh and Lin,
2002). Girls are more likely than boys to be troubled by sexually
explicit images. In one study, 35 per cent of girls but only six
per cent of boys reported that they were very upset by the
experience (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2001). In another, retrospective
study, males who had seen online pornography were
much more likely than girls to report feeling sexual excitement,
while females were much more likely to report embarrassment
and disgust (Sabina et al., 2008). In a study among 14–17-year
olds, boys were more positive about sexually explicit websites,
while most girls saw them as ‘dumb’, ‘gross’ or demeaning to
females (Cameron et al., 2005).

Children also may be troubled or disgusted by images or
accounts of non-mainstream sexual behaviours and relations in
particular, just as adults may be, given the wide range of sexual
activity found on the Internet for example (Thornburgh and Lin,
2002). Videos and Internet pornography often depict sexual practices
which are outside common cultural norms or even criminal,
including anal intercourse, multiple partners, bondage and sadomasochism,
transsexual sex, urination or defecation, bestiality
and rape. Minors do encounter such material (Sabina et al., 2008).
Children may also be alienated, as many adult women are
(Chancer, 1998), by the subordinating representations of women
common in pornography.

‘Children may also
be alienated, as
many adult women
are, by the
subordinating
representations of
women common in
pornography’

‘A consistent
minority do
experience distress’
‘Older children may
be more upset or
disturbed’

The Inappropriate Acceptance and Adoption of
Non-mainstream Sexual Practices

A second effect of exposure to pornography concerns children’s
acceptance and adoption of particular sexual practices, relations,
or identities. It is possible that portrayals of the non-mainstream
sexual practices identified above may incite, eroticise and give
legitimacy to them. There is one version of this argument that I
reject, the notion of the ‘recruitment’ of children into homosexuality.
There is no evidence that being exposed to sexually explicit
materials, or indeed any kind of representation, can change a
person’s overall sexual orientation, their attraction to one sex or
the other (Allgeier and Allgeier, 1995), although some argue for
example that exposure to child pornography can inspire a sexual
interest in children (Russell and Purcell, 2005).

However, it is clear that pornography can influence users’
attitudes towards and adoption of particular sexual behaviours
(Thornburgh and Lin, 2002; Zillmann, 1989). Among young
people, there is evidence at least of associations between pornography
consumption and participation in sexual practices such as
anal intercourse. Male-female anal intercourse became an almost
mandatory inclusion in X-rated heterosexual videos in the 1990s
(Jensen and Dines, 1998). Five studies among Swedish young
people find that young men who are regular consumers of pornography
are more likely to have had anal intercourse with a girl,
and to have tried to perform acts they have seen in pornography,
and that girls who have seen pornography also are more likely to
have anal intercourse (Haggstrom-Nordin et al., 2005; Johansson
and Hammarén, 2007; Rogala and Tyden, 2003; Tyden et al.,
2001; Tyden and Rogala, 2004). Pornography consumption may
have shaped these young men’s (and women’s) sexual interests
and behaviours, or perhaps both their pornography consumption
and participation in anal sex represent a sexually adventurist or
experimental orientation.

Sexual Knowledge, Liberalised Sexual Attitudes and
Earlier Sexual Involvement

Regular and frequent exposure to sexual content in mainstream
media produces greater sexual knowledge and more liberal sexual
attitudes among children and young people, as a series of reviews
document (APA, 2007; Huston et al., 1998; Strasburger and
Wilson, 2002; Thornburgh and Lin, 2002; Ward, 2003). Experimental
studies document that children and young people exposed
to sexual media content have greater sexual knowledge (about
such topics as pregnancy, menstruation, homosexuality and prostitution)
than control groups, and they are more accepting of

‘Pornography can
influence users’
attitudes towards and
adoption of particular
sexual behaviours’
‘Experimental
studies document
that children and
young people
exposed to sexual
media content have
greater sexual
knowledge’

The Harms of Pornography Exposure 391
Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Child Abuse Review Vol. 18: 384–400 (2009)
DOI: 10.1002/car

pre-, extra- or non-marital sexual relations (Huston et al., 1998).
Correlational studies find associations between greater exposure
to sexual content on television and the belief that one’s peers are
sexually active and a more favourable attitude towards recreational
sex (Strasburger and Wilson, 2002). Similar if not greater
effects are likely for pornography, given its explicit and decontextualised
depictions of diverse sexual relations. For example,
15–18-year olds in a Swedish study who had ever watched
a pornographic film were more likely than others to be less
ashamed about masturbation and to see prostitution, pornography
and sex without love as ‘okay’ (Johansson and Hammarén,
2007). In experimental studies, young men (and to some extent
women) exposed to large amounts of explicit sexual content often
become more supportive of and less offended by such material
(Thornburgh and Lin, 2002).

There is also evidence of associations between young people’s
actual sexual behaviour, including early sexual involvement, and
the consumption of sexual media content, including pornography
(Huston et al., 1998; Strasburger and Wilson, 2002; Ward, 2003;
Wingwood et al., 2001). Johansson and Hammarén (2007) report
that young pornography users are more likely than non-users also
to have had sexual intercourse, masturbated, had same-sex sex
and a one-night stand. A survey of 522 African-American females
aged 14 to 18 found correlations between viewing X-rated movies
and having multiple sex partners, having sex more frequently and
testing positive for chlamydia (Wingwood et al., 2001).

Sexist, Sexually Objectifying and Inappropriately
Sexualised Attitudes and Behaviours

It is well documented that sexual media, particularly sexualised
representations of girls and women, can encourage girls and
young women to see themselves primarily in sexual terms, to
equate their worth and appeal with narrow standards of physical
attractiveness, and to see themselves as sexual objects—to focus
on others’ sexual interest in and judgment of them rather than
their own desires and interests (APA, 2007). Both correlational
and experimental studies find that adolescents’ and young adults’
exposure to media which sexualises girls and women is associated
with greater acceptance of stereotyped and sexist notions about
gender and sexual roles, including notions of women as sexual
objects (Frable et al., 1997; Ward, 2002; Ward et al., 2005; Ward
and Friedman, 2006). Exposure also influences how men treat and
respond to real women in subsequent interactions (APA, 2007).
Pornography is sexually explicit by definition, and much contemporary
pornography offers a decontextualised portrayal of
sexual behaviour, a relentless focus on female bodies, and sexist

]

‘Exposure to media
which sexualises
girls and women is
associated with
greater acceptance
of stereotyped and
sexist notions
about gender and
sexual roles’

‘Young men exposed
to large amounts of
explicit sexual
content often become
more supportive of
and less offended by
such material’

and callous depictions of women (Flood and Hamilton, 2003a).
Given this, pornography is likely to contribute to sexually objectifying
understandings of and behaviours towards girls and
women. Experimental studies among adults confirm such effects
(APA, 2007).

Attitudes and Behaviours related to Sexual Violence
Perpetration and Victimisation

Perhaps the most troubling impact of pornography on children
and young people is its influence on sexual violence. A wide range
of studies on the effects of pornography have been conducted
among young people aged 18 to 25, as well as older populations.
Across these, there is consistent and reliable evidence that
exposure to pornography is related to male sexual aggression
against women (Flood and Hamilton, 2003a). This association
is strongest for violent pornography and still reliable for nonviolent
pornography, particularly by frequent users (Malamuth
et al., 2000).

In experimental studies, adults show significant strengthening
of attitudes supportive of sexual aggression following exposure
to pornography. The association between pornography and
rape-supportive attitudes is evident as a result of exposure to
both non-violent pornography (showing consenting sexual
activity) and violent pornography, while the latter results in significantly greater increases in violence-supportive attitudes.

Exposure to sexually violent material increases male viewers’
acceptance of rape myths and erodes their empathy for victims of
violence (Allen et al., 1995a). Adults also show an increase in
behavioural aggression following exposure to pornography,
including non-violent or violent depictions of sexual activity (but
not nudity), with stronger effects for violent pornography (Allen
et al., 1995b).

In studies of pornography use in everyday life, men who
are high-frequency users of pornography and men who use
‘hardcore’, violent or rape pornography are more likely than
others to report that they would rape or sexually harass a woman
if they knew they could get away with it. And they are more likely
to actually perpetrate sexual coercion and aggression (Malamuth
et al., 2000). There is a circular relationship among some men
between sexual violence and pornography: ‘Men who are relatively
high in risk for sexual aggression are more likely to be
attracted to and aroused by sexually violent media . . . and may
be more likely to be influenced by them’ (Malamuth et al., 2000,
p. 55).

While such findings cannot simply be extrapolated to children
and young people, there is some evidence that high-frequency

‘Perhaps the most
troubling impact of
pornography on
children and young
people is its
influence on sexual
violence’

‘There is a circular
relationship among
some men between
sexual violence and
pornography’

pornography use or consumption of violent pornography is associated
with sexually aggressive attitudes and behaviours among
adolescent and older boys. In a study of Canadian teenagers with
an average age of 14, there was a correlation between boys’ frequent
consumption of pornography and their agreement with the
idea that it is acceptable to hold a girl down and force her to have
sex (Check, 1995). Among US boys and girls aged 11 to 16,
greater exposure to R- and X-rated films was related to stronger
acceptance of sexual harassment (Strouse et al., 1994). Among
Italian adolescents aged 14 to 19, there were associations between
pornography use and sexually harassing a peer or forcing someone
into sex (Bonino et al., 2006).

Turning to mainstream media, experimental studies among
young adults find that males and females exposed to sexualised
or objectifying content are more accepting of rape myths, violence-
supportive and adversarial beliefs (Kalof, 1999; Lanis and
Covell, 1995; Milburn et al., 2000; Ward, 2002), while correlational
studies among adolescents also show such associations
(Cowan and Campbell, 1995; Kaestle et al., 2007).

Perhaps even more troubling is the finding that growing
numbers of adolescents are being convicted of possession of child
pornography (Moultrie, 2006), with a New Zealand study among
offenders finding that the largest group of Internet traders of child
pornography are aged 15 to 19 (Carr, 2004).

Exposure to pornography may increase children’s and young
people’s own vulnerability to sexual abuse and exploitation. Some
adult perpetrators use pornography as a deliberate strategy to
undermine children’s abilities to avoid, resist, or escape sexual
abuse (Russell and Purcell, 2005). More generally, given that
pornography encourages sexist and sexually objectifying attitudes
among girls and women, it may increase their vulnerability to
violence. For example, an Italian study found associations among
adolescent girls between viewing pornographic films and being a
victim of sexual violence (Bonino et al., 2006), although the
causal mechanisms are unclear.

Further Negative Impacts on Young People’s Relationships

Young people’s use of pornography may have further negative
impacts on their sexual and intimate relationships, given that
research among adults highlights such impacts as decreased
sexual intimacy, perceived (and actual) infidelity and sexual
‘addiction’. For example, US studies find that a consistent minority
of female partners of male regular pornography users find it
damaging both for their relationships and themselves. They see
their male partners’ pornography use as a kind of infidelity, feel
betrayal and loss, feel less desirable, and describe other negative

‘Growing numbers
of adolescents are
being convicted of
possession of child
pornography’

‘Young people’s use
of pornography may
have further negative
impacts on their
sexual and intimate
relationships’

effects on their relationships, sex lives and themselves (Bridges
et al., 2003). Other studies find that partners of adult pornography
users report decreased sexual intimacy, lowered esteem and
demands that they participate in activities they find objectionable
(Manning, 2006). While there has been very little research on
pornography use in young people’s sexual relationships, studies
among Swedish young women (with a mean age of 23) find, for
example, that there is an association between having viewed pornography
(typically with a partner) and anal sex, with most women
finding anal sex a negative experience (Tyden et al., 2001).

Finally, there is an emerging scholarship on sexual, internet and
cybersex ‘addiction’ which suggests that some pornography consumers
come to use pornography in ways which are obsessive,
compulsive, and have damaging consequences for themselves or
others (Cooper et al., 2004; Young, 2008). Similar patterns may
emerge among younger users (Sussman, 2007).

The discussion so far has focused on the negative effects of
sexual and sexually explicit media, but it also has been argued
that such media can have positive effects, including among children
and young people. First, sexual material, including pornography,
has been seen as educational in teaching sexual knowledge
(Helsper, 2005; McKee, 2007). Second, pornography has been
seen to offer a valuable and ‘sex-positive’ challenge to sexual
repression and restrictive sexual norms (Duggan et al., 1988;
McNair, 1996). Third, gay and lesbian pornography is seen to
challenge heterosexism. For example, among same-sex-attracted
young people, online gay and lesbian pornography has functioned
as a counter to the invisibility of same-sex sexualities in offline
life (Hillier et al., 2001). However, pornography’s contribution to
sexual liberation is highly contested, with others arguing that it
‘sexualises and normalises inequalities’ (Russo, 1998) and that
gay male pornography is complicit in pornography’s perpetuation
of inequalities (Kendall, 2004).

Conclusion

The notion that sexual materials are ‘harmful to minors’ has been
frequently invoked as a justification for the regulation and censorship
of such materials when available to children or to both
children and adults (Heins, 2001; Levine, 2002). However,
children and youth are sexual beings and should be provided with
age-appropriate and compelling materials on sex and sexuality.
Protecting children from sexual harm does not mean protecting
children from sexuality. In fact, maintaining children’s sexual
ignorance fosters sexual abuse and poor sexual and emotional
health. However, pornography is a poor sex educator. Most

‘An emerging
scholarship on
sexual, internet and
cybersex “addiction” ’
‘Sexual material,
including
pornography, has
been seen as
educational in
teaching sexual
knowledge’
‘Children and youth
are sexual beings
and should be
provided with age appropriate
and
compelling materials
on sex and sexuality’

The Harms of Pornography Exposure 395
Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Child Abuse Review Vol. 18: 384–400 (2009)

DOI: 10.1002/car

pornography is too explicit for younger children; most shows sex
in unrealistic ways and neglects intimacy and romance; most
pornography is sexist; and some is based on and eroticises
violence.

The body of research with which to document the impact of
pornography consumption among children and young people is
small, reflecting the obvious legal, ethical and practical restrictions
on such research (Thornburgh and Lin, 2002). More intensive and
sophisticated investigations of pornography’s use, meaning and
significance among young people are required. Future research
should complement quantitative assessments of the extent of exposure
among children and young people with close-focus, qualitative
investigations of their experiences and negotiations of sexual
media and the ‘social practices of pornography’ (Thomson, 1999).
It should include examinations of emerging economies of sexual
and pornographic exchange among children and young people,
including the voluntary or coerced production and/or exchange of
mobile phone images. It should include action research implementing
and assessing strategies to mobilise young people’s resistance
to sexist and violence-supportive narratives in sexual media
such as critical media literacy.

This review has noted a range of identifiable harms associated
with exposure to pornography among children and young people.
We must minimise exposure to sexist and violent sexual media
and improve the kinds of sexual materials available to young
people, without sacrificing sexual speech in general (Flood and
Hamilton, 2003b).

References

Aisbett K. 2001. The Internet at Home: A Report on Internet Use in the Home.
Australian Broadcasting Authority: Sydney.

Allen M, D’Alessio D, Brezgel K. 1995a. A meta-analysis summarizing the
effects of pornography II: aggression after exposure. Human Communication
Research 22: 258–283. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.1995.tb00368.x

Allen M, Emmers T, Gebhardt L, Glery M. 1995b. Exposure to pornography
and acceptance of rape myths. Journal of Communication 45: 5–26. DOI:
10.1111/j.1460-2466.1995.tb00711.x

Allgeier A, Allgeier E. 1995. Sexual Interactions, 4th edition. D.C. Health and
Company: Lexington, MA.

APA. 2007. Report of the APA Task Force on the Sexualization of Girls.
American Psychological Association: Washington, DC.

Attwood F. 2002. Reading porn: the paradigm shift in pornography research.
Sexualities 5: 91–105. DOI: 10.1177/1363460702005001005

Bonino S, Ciairano S, Rabaglietti E, Cattelino E. 2006. Use of pornography and
self-reported engagement in sexual violence among adolescents. European
Journal of Developmental Psychology 3: 265–288. DOI: 10.1080/
17405620600562359

‘We must minimise
exposure to sexist
and violent sexual
media and improve
the kinds of sexual
materials available
to young people’
‘Most pornography
is sexist; and some
is based on and
eroticises violence’

396 Flood
Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Child Abuse Review Vol. 18: 384–400 (2009)
DOI: 10.1002/car

Boyle K. 2000. The pornography debates: beyond cause and effect. Women’s
Studies International Forum 23: 187–195.

Bridges A, Bergner R, Hesson-McInnis M. 2003. Romantic partners’ use of
pornography: its signifi cance for women. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy
29: 1–14.

Brown J. 2000. Adolescents’ sexual media diets. Journal of Adolescent Health
27: 35–40.

Buckingham D, Bragg S. 2003. Young People, Media and Personal Relationships.
Advertising Standards Authority: London.

Cameron K, Salazar L, Bernhardt J, Burgess-Whitman N, Wingood G,
DiClemente R. 2005. Adolescents’ experience with sex on the web: results
from online focus groups. Journal of Adolescence 28: 535–540. DOI:
10.1016/j.adolescence.2004.10.006

Carr A. 2004. Internet Traders of Child Pornography and other Censorship
Offenders in New Zealand: Updated Statistics (November 2004). Department
of Internal Affairs: Te Tari Taiwhenua, Wellington.

Chancer L. 1998. Reconcilable Differences: Confronting Beauty, Pornography,
and the Future of Feminism. University of California Press: Berkeley, CA.

Check J. 1995. Teenage training: the effects of pornography on adolescent
males. In The Price We Pay: The Case Against Racist Speech, Hate
Propaganda, and Pornography, Lederer LR, Delgado R (eds). Hill and Wang:
New York; 89–91.

Cooper A, Delmonico D, Griffi n-Shelley E, Mathy R. 2004. Online sexual
activity: an examination of potentially problematic behaviors. Sexual Addiction
& Compulsivity 11: 129–143. DOI: 10.1080/10720160490882642
Cowan G, Campbell R. 1995. Rape causal attitudes among adolescents. Journal
of Sex Research 32: 145–153.

Duggan L, Hunter N, Vance C. 1988. False promises: feminist antipornography
legislation in the U.S. In Caught Looking: Feminism, Pornography and
Censorship, Caught Looking Inc. (eds). Real Comet Press: Seattle; 72–85.

Duimel M, de Haan J. 2006. Nieuwe Links in Het Gezin: De Digitale Leefwereld
Van Tieners en de Rol Van Hun Ouders (New links in the Family: The Digital
World of Teenagers and the Role of Their Parents). SCP: Den Haag.

Escobar-Chaves S, Tortolero S, Markham C, Low B, Thickstun P. 2005. Impact
of the media on adolescent sexual attitudes and behaviors. Pediatrics 116:
303–326.

Fisher W, Barak A. 2001. Internet pornography: a social psychological
perspective on Internet sexuality. Journal of Sex Research 38: 312–323.
Flood M. 2007. Exposure to pornography among youth in Australia. Journal of
Sociology 43: 45–60. doi:10.1177/1440783307073934

Flood M, Hamilton C. 2003a. Youth and Pornography in Australia: Evidence
on the Extent of Exposure and Likely Effects. The Australia Institute: Canberra.

Flood M, Hamilton C. 2003b. Regulating Youth Access to Pornography. The
Australia Institute: Canberra.

Fordham G. 2006. ‘As if They Were Watching My Body’: Pornography and the
Development of Attitudes Towards Sex and Sexual Behaviour among
Cambodian Youth. World Vision Cambodia: Cambodia.

Forsberg M. 2001. Does pornography infl uence sexual activities? In Children
in the New Media Landscape: Games, Pornography, Perceptions, von
Feilitzen C, Carlsson U (eds). UNESCO International Clearinghouse on
Children and Violence on the Screen: Goteberg, Sweden; 159–161.

Frable D, Johnson A, Kellman H. 1997. Seeing masculine men, sexy women,
and gender differences: exposure to pornography and cognitive constructions
of gender. Journal of Personality 65: 311–355. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.
1997.tb00957.x

The Harms of Pornography Exposure 397

Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Child Abuse Review Vol. 18: 384–400 (2009)
DOI: 10.1002/car

Haggstrom-Nordin E., Hanson U, Tyden T. 2005. Associations between
pornography consumption and sexual practices among adolescents in
Sweden. International Journal of STD & AIDS 16: 102–107. DOI:
10.1258/0956462053057512

Hald G. 2006. Gender differences in pornography consumption among young
heterosexual Danish adults. Archives of Sexual Behavior 35: 577–585. DOI:
10.1007/s10508-006-9064-0

Hearn J. 2006. The implications of information and communication technologies
for sexualities and sexualised violences: contradictions of sexual citizenships.
Political Geography 25: 944–963. DOI: 10.1016/j.polgeo.2006.08.007

Heins M. 2001. Not in Front of the Children: ‘Indecency’, Censorship, and the
Innocence of Youth. Hill and Wang: New York.

Helsper E. 2005. R18 material: Its Potential Impact on People Under 18—An
Overview of the Available Literature. Research review conducted by London
School of Economics for Ofcom UK: London. http://www.ofcom.org.uk/research/
radio/reports/bcr/r18.pdf. Accessed September 2, 2009.

Hillier L., Kurdas C, Horsley P. 2001. ‘It’s Just Easier’ The Internet as a
Safety-Net for Same Sex Attracted Young People. Australian Research Centre
in Sex, Health & Society, Latrobe University: Melbourne.

Huston A, Wartella E, Donnerstein E. 1998. Measuring the Effects of Sexual
Content in the Media: A Report to the Kaiser Family Foundation. Henry J.
Kaiser Family Foundation: Menlo Park, CA.

Janghorbani M, Lam T, Youth Sexuality Study Task Force. 2003. Sexual media
use by young adults in Hong Kong: prevalence and associated factors.
Archives of Sexual Behavior 32: 545–553. DOI: 10.1023/A:1026089511526

Jensen R. 1998. Using pornography. In Pornography: The Production and
Consumption of Inequality, Dines G, Jensen R, Russo A (eds). Routledge:
New York; 101–146.

Jensen, R, Dines G. 1998. The content of mass-marketed pornography. In
Pornography: The Production and Consumption of Inequality, Dines G,
Jensen R, Russo A (eds). Routledge: New York; 65–100.

Johansson T, Hammarén N. 2007. Hegemonic masculinity and

cindi09-07-2011

– 1 –
Just Harmless Fun?
Understanding the Impact of Pornography
All healthy men, ancient and modern, Eastern and Western, know there is a
certain fury in sex that we cannot afford to inflame, and that a certain mystery
and awe must ever surround it if we are to remain sane.
G.K. Chesterton
More and more we are asked to believe that pornography is merely harmless “adult
entertainment.” Polls show that most people don’t buy that line, but where do you find
the evidence (rather than just rhetoric) to demonstrate its impact? To answer that
question, Enough Is Enough has prepared this Special Report to provide an up-to-date
overview of the evidence of harm. We survey recent empirical research, media
studies, experience of clinical psychologists and other compelling information, and we
respond to many of the porn advocates sound-bites.
Read the evidence and decide for yourself: is pornography “just harmless fun”?
Should we be concerned about the increasing intrusion of pornography into our society?
Interestingly, most people say “yes,” according to surveys giving as much as 75%1 or even 94%2
approval to pornography restrictions on the Internet.3 This report will review the evidence that
these concerns are eminently justified.
The advocates of pornography usually attribute such concerns to mere prudishness. Sex,
however, is hardly just another appetite, like hunger for food. Our sexual appetites are a bit more
complex than eating too much pizza, and the consequences of poor sexual decisions usually can’t
be fixed with two Alka-Seltzers.
Most adults can intuitively relate to G.K. Chesterton’s wise caution above. Such shared
experience isn’t a bad place to start, remembering the observation of eminent jurist Mr. Justice
Cardoza that “all laws in western civilization are guided by a robust common sense.” In 1973,
Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger, after quoting Cardoza, went on to write:
“The sum of experience including that of the past two decades affords an ample basis
for legislators to conclude that a sensitive, key relationship of human existence (central to
– 2 –
family life, community welfare and the development of human personality) can be
debased and distorted by crass commercialization of sex. Nothing in the Constitution
prohibits a State from reaching such a conclusion and acting on it legislatively simply
because there is no conclusive evidence or empirical data.” 4
Law, however, is not the focus of this report. Rather, the focus is the considerable amount of
work carried out since Justice Burger’s day to better understand the impact of pornography.
Surveying the Evidence
A favorite tactic of pornography’s advocates is to argue that it is “harmless fun,” mere “adult
entertainment.” They would have us believe that any difference between Venus De Milo and
Debbie Does Dallas is simply personal taste, not discernment. They like to challenge the public
to prove that pornography causes harm.
Well, there is proof of harm. The best-kept secret about pornography is that it causes real
harm to real people.
Every Boy Scout knows that you can define any point on a map with two compass bearings
from different perspectives: just draw the two cross-bearing lines on the map, and look where
they intersect. In the case of pornography there are cross-bearings from many perspectives – all
intersecting at the point of harm. Each perspective is persuasive in its own right. Taken
together, the evidence of harm is difficult to ignore.
The different perspectives are:
1. Advertising
2. Impact of sexually-oriented businesses
3. Empirical research studies
4. Correlational studies
5. Media studies
6. Experience of clinical psychologists
7. Anecdotal evidence
This report will review each of these areas, then finally discuss factors particularly affecting
children.
______________________________________________________________________________
1. Advertising
It has been said that the most disingenuous argument in the pornography debate is that porn
doesn’t influence people. If images don’t influence attitudes and behavior, how do we explain
the existence of the advertising industry?
– 3 –
Of course, none of us likes to admit we are influenced by advertising. Few proud car owners
would say: “I bought my Volvo because their advertisements create an image of a thinking
person’s car, and that appeals to my ego.” We value our self-image as rational beings and, as a
result, most of us are in denial about the influence of advertising.
Those in the advertising business, however, know that images have impact. In 1997,
America’s top ten advertisers alone spent a total of $5.2 billion helping consumers part with their
hard-earned cash.5 It might be nice to think that investments like Nike’s Michael Jordan
campaign are made out of blind hope, but market research predicts and confirms the impact of
advertising. “The enormous advertising and marketing industries are built on the premise that
the media do influence a wide range of behaviors.” 6
To believe pornography does not impact attitudes and behavior is to believe we are not
affected by what we see. Our collective state of denial of the impact of advertising illustrates
that people can believe they are not affected. But the evidence illustrates how improbable that
would be!
To argue that advertising has no impact (as opposed to merely being blind to it) requires
impressive faith that we invariably intercept and rationally defuse the power of suggestion in
advertising images. Oftentimes we do. But communications experts note that advertising works
precisely because it appeals to human emotion rather than to rational considerations:
“TV commercials do not use propositions to persuade; they use visual images…and
only rarely…verifiable assertions. Therefore, commercials are not susceptible to logical
analysis [and] are not refutable…It is not facts that are offered to the consumers but idols,
to which both adults and children can attach themselves with equal devotion and without
the burden of logic or verification.”7
If the effectiveness of advertising is based upon its appeal to emotion, do we really believe
that pornography appeals to reason? Pornography, ultimately, is a form of advertising. (Can you
spell “sex sells”?) Pornography advertises a particular view of human sexuality, as surely as the
Marlboro Man conveys a particular image of a cigarette brand. The only question is: what brand
of sexuality is pornography promoting?
The messages of pornography
The Hugh Hefners of the world sometimes describe their product as simply “the joys of
consensual sexuality.” The reality is much less elevated and considerably more one-sided.
Studies indicate that individuals use pornography to inform and teach themselves about sexual
behavior.8 So what does pornography teach?
About sexuality:
Scholars note that human sexuality in pornography is never more than physical, since
“depictions of other basic aspects of human sexuality—such as communication between
– 4 –
sexual partners, expressions of affection or emotion (except fear and lust)…and concerns
about …the consequences of sexual activities—are minimized.”9
Pornography advertises sex without relationships, without commitment, and especially,
without consequences. How many porn videos include the resulting teenage pregnancy with the
child-mother dropping out of school? Or catching human papilloma virus (HPV), leading to
infertility or cervical cancer, or even catching AIDS?
About women:
In the words of one academic study: “The characteristic portrayal of women in
pornography [is] as socially nondiscriminating, as hysterically euphoric in response to just
about any sexual or pseudosexual stimulation, and as eager to accommodate seemingly any
and every sexual request.”10 Another study notes that women are depicted as “malleable,
obsessed with sex, and willing to engage in any sexual act with any sexual partner.”11
Pornography presents women in stereotype, as insatiable sex machines to accommodate
every possible sexual request. Women, it tells us, are here to please men, and if they say “no” it
is just token resistance. In pornography, the typical woman is always ready, available, and eager
to please, unlike a real woman who might have inconvenient expectations of her own.
About men:
In pornography, men are apparently here to have sex with as many women as possible.
Marriage is either a hindrance to their purpose, or irrelevant because fidelity is abnormal and
possibly unnatural. In pornography, men certainly don’t value women for their minds, since they
don’t appear to have discovered that women have such a thing.
False advertising?
In our society, “the learning of sexual techniques and attitudes is too often left to chance,
which may include such sources as X-rated video shops. As a result, a great number of people
acquire faulty information and expectations that can impair their sexual enjoyment and
adequacy.”12 The message of pornography is that sex is the only human activity where there is
no such thing as a poor choice, and where there are no consequences to actions.
Pornography’s portrayal of human sexual behavior is so erroneous as to be fraudulent. Most
obvious are the unrealistic body types, unrealistic sexual situations, and routinely multi-orgasmic
sexual performances. More subtly, the most desirable sexual behaviors are depicted as excluding
monogamy, fidelity, responsibility, commitment, or even an established relationship of any sort
between partners.
This stands in direct contrast to the most rewarding and satisfying sexual relationships in real
life. In the most definitive scientific survey ever done on human sexual behavior, the vast
majority of both males and females were found to have few sex partners over a lifetime. Once
– 5 –
married, the vast majority have no other sex partner than their spouse. Americans generally
show considerably more sexual restraint than the entertainment media (including pornography)
would suggest, but it is the couples who are married or cohabiting who have more frequent and
more satisfying sex.13
There is a vivid contrast between pornography’s portrayal of desirable sexual behaviors, and
the behaviors found most satisfying by most individuals. Because people often judge themselves
by how they perceive that others behave, individuals using pornography set themselves up for
unrealistic expectations leading to damaged relationships.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
2. Impact of Sexually Oriented Businesses
The curiously toxic nature of pornography is also illustrated by the consistently negative
impact that sex businesses have upon the areas in which they are located. This impact of
sexually oriented businesses (SOBs) has been clearly demonstrated through land use studies.
U.S. courts allow restrictive zoning of SOBs because such businesses have significant
negative impacts on their surrounding communities. These impacts are called “secondary
harmful effects” (as distinct from the primary harmful effects on the mind of the porn-user,
which are not a constitutional basis for zoning ordinances).
Such secondary harmful effects in neighborhoods with SOBs include a significant increase in
property crimes and sexual crimes (including voyeurism, exhibitionism, and assault), and an
overall decrease in property values. In the words of columnist George Will: “One doesn’t need a
moral micrometer to gauge the fact that the sex industry turned Times Square into a slum.”14
Other examples of the negative impact of the sex industry include15:
♦ Austin, TX — 1986 – in four study areas with SOBs, sexually related crimes were 177%
to 482% higher than the city’s average.
♦ Indianapolis, IN — 1984-1986 – Between 1978-1982, crime in study areas was 46%
higher than for the city as a whole. Sex related crimes were four times greater when
SOBs were located near residential areas vs. commercial areas.
♦ Garden Grove, CA — 1981-1990 – On Garden Grove Blvd., seven adult businesses
accounted for 36% of all crime in the area. In one case, a bar opened within 500 feet of
an SOB and serious crime within 1000 feet of that business rose 300% during the next
year.
♦ Phoenix, AZ — 1978 – Sex offenses, including indecent exposure, were 506% greater in
neighborhoods with SOBs. Even excluding indecent exposure, the sex offenses were still
132% greater in those neighborhoods.
– 6 –
♦ Whittier, CA — In comparison studies of two residential areas conducted between 1970-
1973 before SOBs, and 1974-1977 after SOBs, malicious mischief increased 700%,
assault increased 387%, prostitution increased 300%, and all theft increased 120%.
Virtually all SOBs, regardless of the city in which they are located, have similar negative
effects upon their surrounding neighborhoods. The Indianapolis study concluded that: “Even a
relatively passive use such as an adult book store [has] a serious negative effect on [its]
immediate environs.” It is difficult to miss the implication that these harmful secondary effects
simply reflect something harmful in the nature of the material.
3. Empirical Research Studies16
In her book Defending Pornography, American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) President
Nadine Strossen quotes with approval a writer’s observation that: “Pornography tells me…that
none of my thoughts are bad, that anything goes [emphasis in original].”17
The message that anything goes is certainly inherent in pornography. Unfortunately,
pornography makes short work of any distinction between sexual liberation (in the sense of a
mature awareness and understanding of one’s sexuality) and sexual exploitation.
The characteristic message of pornography is that women are sluts (or, in the more measured
terminology of scholarly analysis of content, “promiscuous sexual creatures who [are]
subordinate and subservient to men”18). Empirical research sets out to test the obvious question:
do users absorb the message that pornography is selling?
A useful way to overview the empirical research is to divide it into two chronological
periods: the work reviewed by two government commissions, and the research that has taken
place subsequently.
The Government Commissions
The then-available evidence as to the influence of pornography was assessed by two major
Commissions established in 1970 and 1986, respectively. In 1970, the Presidential Commission
on Obscenity and Pornography concluded that there was insufficient evidence that exposure to
explicit sexual materials played a significant role in the causation of delinquent or criminal
behavior. In 1986, the Attorney General’s Commission on Pornography reached the opposite
conclusion, advising that available pornography was in varying degrees harmful. In effect,
however, the two Commissions were answering different questions.
Between 1970 and 1986 the nature of the available material changed substantially. In 1970,
full frontal nudity was rarely found in newstand magazines, since it could be successfully
prosecuted as obscenity. One scholar noted that “in 1970, many of the experimental studies
utilized sexually explicit materials from sex research institutes . . . because of the difficulty of
obtaining materials from the local market.”19 Needless to say, by 1986 this was no longer a
research constraint! By 1986, gynecological close-ups were available in newsstand magazines
– 7 –
and hard-core material (“penetration clearly visible”) was not difficult to find in adult video
stores.
This complete change in the pornography “scene” contributed to the change in findings
between 1970 and 1986. Also, in 1970 only a limited amount of research had been carried out,
much of it originated by the Commission itself, in comparison to the extensive studies completed
since then. The 1970 Commission was criticized for failing to adequately address the impact of
violent pornography and, as a result, much of the research over the next sixteen years went into
this area.
By 1986, there was “some convergent validation”20 of the effects of violent pornography,
including findings that sexually violent depictions led to:
♦ Aggression against women under laboratory test conditions.
♦ Significant increases by college males in the acceptance of rape myths and of
sexual violence towards women.
♦ Seeing the rape victim as more responsible for the assault, with perpetrators
absolved and viewed less negatively.
♦ More aggressive sexual fantasies.
Even certain scholars who attributed such results primarily to the violence component noted
that “a nonrapist population will evidence increased sexual arousal to media-presented images
of rape … when the female victim shows signs of pleasure and arousal, the theme most
commonly presented in aggressive pornography.”21
The Surgeon General’s Workshop on Pornography and Public Health met from June 22-24,
1986, and, like the 1986 Attorney General’s Commission, concluded that “pornography does
stimulate attitudes and behavior that lead to gravely negative consequences for individuals and
for society.”22
Subsequent Research
Subsequent work has indicated that detrimental effects are not limited to violent
pornography. Since social science studies are rarely unanimous in their findings (there are
exceptions to every trend), the most compelling academic evidence comes from reviewing a
multitude of research studies and looking for patterns. Such work can take the form of “review
studies” (which review and compare the results of a number of original research studies) and
“meta-analyses” (which aggregate the results of original research studies meeting stringent
criteria of comparability). Some recent examples are:
♦ A review study in 1994, based on 81 original peer-reviewed research studies (35 using
aggressive stimuli and 46 using non-aggressive stimuli), concluded that “the empirical
research on the effects of aggressive pornography shows, with fairly impressive
consistency, that exposure to these materials has a negative effect on attitudes toward
women and the perceived likelihood to rape.” The study also noted that 70 percent of
the 46 non-aggressive studies reported clear evidence of negative effects of exposure.23
– 8 –
♦ A meta-analysis in 1995, using the results of 24 original experimental studies, found that
“violence within the pornography is not necessary to increase the acceptance of rape
myths” (i.e. the myth that women secretly desire to be raped). The study noted that the
link between acceptance of rape myths and exposure to pornography stems from a simple
premise – “that most pornography commodifies sex, that women become objects used
for male pleasure, and that as objects of desire, they are to be acted on.” The study also
noted that such attitudinal changes are of concern because “several recent meta-analyses
demonstrate a high correlation (about r = .80) between attitude and behavior.” 24
♦ A separate meta-analysis in 1995, using a set of 33 studies, found that “violent content,
although possibly magnifying the impact of the pornography, is unnecessary to
producing aggressive behavior.”25
Another line of research into non-violent pornography makes the distinction between “nonviolent
erotica” and “non-violent dehumanizing pornography,” where dehumanizing
pornography is characterized by depictions which degrade and debase women. Dehumanizing
pornography is also referred to as “standard-fare” or “common” hard-core pornography by some
academic researchers – “the characteristic portrayal of women in pornography as socially nondiscriminating,
as hysterically euphoric in response to just about any sexual or pseudosexual
stimulation, and as eager to accommodate any and every sexual request.”26
Examples from this line of research include:
♦ A study in 1989 for the Canadian Department of Justice found that “high-frequency
pornography consumers who were exposed to the nonviolent, dehumanizing pornography
(relative to those in the no-exposure condition) were particularly likely to report that they
might rape, were more sexually callous, and reported engaging in more acts of sexual
aggression. These effects were not apparent for men who reported a very low frequency
of habitual pornography consumption.”27 The authors noted that “the effects of exposure
were strongest and most pervasive in the case of exposure to nonviolent dehumanizing
pornography, the type of material that may in fact be most prevalent in mainstream
commercial entertainment videos.”
The study found that more than twice as many men indicated at least some likelihood of
raping after exposure to this material – 20.4 percent versus 9.6 percent. Detailed analysis
revealed that these effects occurred primarily for high P (psychotism) subjects – those
who are inclined to be rather solitary and hostile, lack empathy, disregard danger and
prefer impersonal, non-caring sex (although not meeting clinical criteria as psychotics).
♦ A 1989 review of a series of studies of “common” pornography found that its
consumption led to insensitivity towards victims of sexual violence, trivialization of rape
as a criminal offense, trivialization of sexual child abuse as a criminal offense, increased
belief that lack of sexual activity leads to health risks and increased acceptance of preand
extra-marital sexuality The study noted that “habitual male consumers of common
pornography appear to be at greater risk of becoming sexually callous” towards female
sexuality and concerns.28
– 9 –
♦ A review of the literature and research in 1994 discusses the “sexual callousness” effect
associated with standard-fare pornography, noting that: “Enhanced perceptual and
behavioral callousness toward women is most apparent following consumption of
materials that unambiguously portray women as sexually promiscuous and
indiscriminating – a depiction that dominates modern pornography.”29
Straw Men
It is customary for pornography advocates to counter such findings by overstating them. For
example: “It is ridiculous to suggest that one look at Playboy turns a man into a rapist.” Of
course that would be ridiculous: it’s also not what the research is suggesting. Or: “Pornography
can’t compel anyone to act in a particular way.” True, and neither did liquor or tobacco
advertisements (now banned or restricted) compel anyone to buy their products. Or:
“Pornography doesn’t affect everyone the same way.” True, and neither did tobacco or liquor
ads – but their influence was undeniable.
What the research does show is that pornography is a strong, negative influence affecting
attitudes and behavior. It promotes the same attitudes towards women that breed sexual
harassment and destroy relationships. It promotes the same attitudes towards sexuality that breed
promiscuity and the spread of STDs. It teaches that the main function of “a sensitive, key
relationship of human existence” is simply self-gratification at the expense of others. And it is
sold without even a “Surgeon-General’s Warning.”
4. Correlational Studies
The research in the previous section was conducted largely in controlled circumstances, to
measure cause and effect without extraneous variables. Another type of research looks at the
“laboratory of life” to measure actual experience, although with less ability to neutralize
extraneous variables. This type of research can prove correlation (i.e. that certain things happen
together) without necessarily proving causation (i.e. that one thing caused the other).
Correlational research may be conducted when, for any number of reasons, causal research is
impractical, impossible, or unethical. For example, if you want to learn the impact of brain
damage on speech patterns, you obviously can’t go around bopping people on the head. Rather,
you identify a number of subjects who already have brain damage. Your findings would indicate
correlation, not causation, but would still be relevant.
There is a great deal of correlational evidence about the effects of pornography. Examples
include:
– 10 –
♦ Oklahoma City: During the years 1984 to 1989, Oklahoma City closed 150 out of 163
sexually oriented businesses. During the same period, reported rapes declined 27% in
Oklahoma City while rising 19% in the remainder of the state. Law officers were aware of
no other likely cause of the difference.30
♦ Porn magazines and rape rates: A number of studies have found “strong evidence of a
very robust, direct relationship between the circulation rates of sex magazines [in a state] and
rape rates,”31 even after controlling for other variables.
♦ Police records: A study by Darrell Pope, a former Michigan State police officer, found that
of 38,000 cases of sexual assault on file in Michigan over a 20 year period, 41% involved the
use of pornography just prior to or during the act.32
The advocates of pornography usually reject correlational evidence of pornography’s harm,
saying it provides no evidence of causality. Of course, they also challenge experimental studies
as “true in the laboratory, perhaps, but unproven in the real world” – thus precluding almost any
conceivable input from social science research! Setting the hurdle impossibly high is the same
device the tobacco companies used for decades to evade the link between smoking and cancer.
Porn advocates often challenge correlational findings with questions like: “Does pornography
lead to rape, or are rapists simply the sort of people who use pornography?” Curiously, no one
asks: “Does drunk driving cause accidents, or are reckless drivers simply the sort of people who
drink a skinful?” In some fields, correlational research is all there is. The evidence against
drunk driving is based largely on correlation, it being difficult to obtain research funding to ply
test subjects with liquor then set them loose on the nearest Interstate.
Correlational results must be used with caution, since they do not always speak to the causal
direction of a link (for example, between rape rates and porn usage). In the case of pornography,
however, correlational studies are a complement to the experimental lab research discussed
earlier. Taken together like scissors, with one blade for causality and the other for real-world
application, the results are certainly indicative that porn is a “potent catalyst for sexually abusive
behaviors, such as rape.”33
Experience In Other Countries
One area where porn advocates are happy to talk about correlational studies is in relation to
Denmark, where the government lifted pornography restrictions in 1969. Studies in the early
1970s by Berl Kutchinsky of the University of Copenhagen suggested that the easy availability
of pornography had caused sex crimes to decrease by acting as a “safety-valve” for potential
offenders.
Although this study is still quoted today, subsequent reviewers identified serious flaws in the
conclusions. In particular, two factors distorted the results: (1) at the same time that
pornography was legalized, a number of other sex crimes were decriminalized, including
– 11 –
voyeurism (peeping), “indecency towards women,” and certain categories of incest; and (2)
Kutchinsky grouped rape along with other lesser categories of sex crime. The study thus
obscured the fact that the more serious types of sex crimes such as rape actually increased in
number and rate following the legalization of pornography in Denmark.34
Porn advocates are usually quieter about the results of studies of Sweden, Great Britain, New
Zealand and Australia, where “as the constraints on the availability of pornography were lifted
… the rates of rape in those countries increased.”35 For example, “in two Australian states
between 1964 and 1977, when South Australia liberalized it’s laws on pornography and
Queensland maintained its conservative policy … over the thirteen-year period, the number of
rapes in Queensland remained at the same low level while South Australia’s’ showed a sixfold
increase.”36
______________________________________________________________________________
5. Media Studies
The tragic shootings at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado in the summer of 1999
brought renewed public focus on the impact of media violence. Tensions run high in the wake
of trauma, and some media representatives were quick to deny that movies and TV have any
influence at all, suggesting that the impact of media violence on actual behavior is an undecided
question.
In fact, the question was decided long ago. Film critic Michael Medved notes that: “More
than 3,000 research projects and scientific studies between 1960 and 1992 have confirmed the
connection between a steady diet of violent entertainment and aggressive and anti-social
behavior”37 The American Academy of Pediatrics concluded: “The vast majority of studies
conclude that there is a cause-and-effect relationship between media violence and real-life
violence. The link is undeniable and uncontestable.”38
Even Time magazine has noted: “As for media violence, the debate there is fast approaching
the same point that discussions about the health impact of of tobacco reached some time ago –
it’s over. Few researchers bother any longer to dispute that bloodshed on TV and in the movies
has an effect on the kids who witness it.”39
If there is an undecided question, it comes from overstating the claims of the research. Thus,
nay-sayers like to point out there is no proof that media violence is the “principal” cause of
actual violence. True – but what the research says is that media violence is clearly a contributing
factor, escalating the problem. Heart disease is caused by heredity, blood pressure, cholestorol
and smoking – should concern be limited to only the “principal” cause?
Nay-sayers also point out that the number of clear “copycat” incidents, mirroring actual
scenes in movies or on TV, is relatively small (though certainly not non-existent). True – but the
greater concern is the broader desensitization that breeds wider acceptance of violent solutions.
– 12 –
Military psychologist Lt. Col. David Grossman points out that media violence fosters the same
desensitization the military strives for in combat training.40
In a rare admission that media violence does affect behavior, a 1994 survey found that “87%
[of the Hollywood elite] say that violence in the media is a factor in contributing to violence in
society.”41 Although such public admissions are rare, there is no doubt Hollywood recognizes
the value of its media impact. “Product placements” in movies, where companies pay a fee to
have their product featured on-screen (think of the BMW roadster in the James Bond movie
Goldeneye, or Bond’s Ericsson cell-phone), bring in multi-millions of dollars for major movies –
and enhanced sales for the products advertised.42
Hollywood also takes pride in scripts written to subtly promote behavior the producers view
as responsible, such as seat belt use, avoiding cigarette smoking, condom use and environmental
responsibility.43 Their expectation that positive images can improve behavior is an intriguing
counterpoint to their public posture that negative images have no impact.
Since studies indicate that violence in the media affects violence in society, and since
Hollywood believes positive media images can influence individuals to behave in a more
“responsible” manner, one might reasonably expect sexual images to influence people also. True
enough, considerable research demonstrates that “the assumptions, beliefs and values of heavy
viewers differ systematically from those of comparable groups of light viewers.”44
One of the most common findings from media studies is that “increased media viewing is
associated with more stereotypical views, especially about gender,” and that “being exposed to
consistent and repeated stereotypical gender images shapes cognitive structures.”45 Simply
stated, what we see affects how we think.
In some quarters – as with the analogous research on pornography – there is a reluctance to
review the evidence objectively in case the cure is worse than the disease. Thus Hollywood
producers and others are often quick to leap-frog past the research and claim their First
Amendment right to produce whatever they choose. But they miss the point, which is about
choices, not rights. Nothing in the First Amendment forces anyone to choose to contribute to
violence in society.
6. Experience of clinical psychologists
The May 15, 1999 cover story of the highly-regarded business magazine Fortune was a feature
article, “Addicted to Sex – Corporate America’s Dirty Secret,” discussing the destructive effects
of pornography, promiscuity and prostitution in the business world. It is ironic that, while the
pornographers make intellectual arguments that their product is harmless, businesses in the real
world are dealing with its consequences.
– 13 –
The sub-head for the Fortune article was: “Companies used to wink at these troubled executives,
now they send them to desert clinics for ‘The Cure.’” One such clinic is run by Dr. Patrick J. Carnes,
a leading expert on sexual addictions, who commented in the article that: “Most of my patients are
CEOs or doctors or attorneys or priests. We have corporate America’s leadership marching through
here.”
Fortune, of course, has no advocacy position on either side of the pornography debate and its
interest was simply to report a growing problem for business. For years, however, some clinical
psychologists have expressed concern about pornography because of the evidence of their patients’
experiences. In a previous study by Dr. Carnes, for example, 90% of the men and 77% of the women
(out of 932 sex addicts) indicated that pornography played a significant role in their addiction.46
Other clinical psychologists who have published their work include:
♦ Dr. Gary Brooks, who describes five principal symptoms of a “pervasive disorder” linked to
consumption of even soft-core pornography like Playboy:47
• Voyeurism – An obsession with visual stimulation trivializing all other mature
features of a healthy psychological relationship.
• Objectification – An attitude where women are rated by size, shape and harmony
of body parts.
• Validation – Where men who never come close to sex with their dream woman
feel cheated or unmanly.
• Trophyism – Where women become the property of the man as a symbol of
accomplishment and worthiness.
• Fear of true intimacy – A preoccupation with sexuality, handicaping the capacity
for emotional or non-sexual intimacy.
♦ Dr. Victor Cline of the University of Utah, who identifies four stages of viewing pornography
following the initial exposure:48
• Addiction – The desire and need to keep coming back for pornographic images.
• Escalation – The need for more explicit, rougher, and more deviant images for
the same sexual effect.
• Desensitization – Material once viewed as shocking or taboo is seen as
acceptable or commonplace.
• Acting out – The tendency to perform the behaviors viewed, including
exhibitionism, sadistic/masochistic sex, rape, or sex with minor children.
Although not all men are equally vulnerable to habitual porn use, Dr. Cline concluded that
for some men pornography “is the gateway drug to sexual addiction.”
Dr. William Marshall and Dr. Gene Abel have published important research with child molesters,
rapists and other sexual offenders.49 Abel’s research indicated that more than 50% of sex offenders
used pornography, and that offenders who used it were less able to control their behavior than those
who did not. Abel’s findings contradicted the “safety-valve” or “catharsis” theory (which has
basically died from lack of supporting evidence in the last twenty years). Marshall found that, in a
study of outpatient sex offenders treated over a six-year period, one-third reported they had used
pornography immediately before at least one of their crimes.
– 14 –
The body’s biological responses are one reason pornography’s effects are so powerful.
Research reveals biochemical and neurological responses in individuals who are emotionally
aroused, regardless of the stimuli. The adrenal hormone epinephrine is released, locking
memories into the brain, and explaining why men can remember pornographic images seen years
before50. Chemicals called opioids, released by nerve endings in response to pleasure, then
reinforce the body’s desire to repeat the process.
In other words, chemical responses to sexual arousal and gratification cause the body to
desire to repeat a rewarding behavior—which may be the use of pornography. Thus the
biological drive to return to rewarding behavior can lead to an actual dependence or addiction.
In addition, the release of epinephrine and opioids in the body are associated with both the
triggering sexual image and the message it conveys. Thus the biological response to
pornography rewards and hence reinforces the messages presented – which, as discussed earlier,
often include anti-social attitudes about women, relationships, and behavior. Simply stated, in
terms of pure body chemistry, sex sells!
_____________________________________________________________________________
7. Anecdotal Evidence
In addition to the experience of psychologists and therapists, the harms of pornography are
attested to by those who have experienced them directly – users and spouses of users. In the
words of Enough Is Enough President Emeritus Dee Jepsen: “Some say pornography doesn’t
have any victims. I know better. I look into the tear-filled eyes of victims nearly every time I
speak about the Enough Is Enough campaign.”51
This sort of qualitative evidence does not generate the neat, clinical percentages of
experiments under controlled circumstances. But the wife whose marriage has been destroyed
by her spouse’s pornography addiction has little interest in whether the latest research studies
confirm that pornography might have harmful effects. To the men and women whose lives have
been damaged by pornography, this is not an academic issue.
In the 1986 Final Report of the Attorney General’s Commission on Pornography,52
testimony after testimony demonstrated pornography’s damage to individuals and families.
Women spoke of husbands who insisted they imitate scenes from pornography, whether they
wished to or not. Doctors spoke of sexual dysfunction and unrealistic expectations due to
pornography. Law enforcement officials spoke of pornography’s connection to sexual crimes.
And men spoke of the damage they had witnessed, or caused, because of pornography use.
Other anecdotal evidence includes the worst-case scenarios of mass-murderers like Ted Bundy,
John Wayne Gacy, Gary Bishop and others where pornography played a role in their crimes.
Obviously, millions of men use pornography without ever going to these extremes. But while “no
one supposes that every addict of such material will act out his fantasies, it is willfully blind to think
that none will.”53
– 15 –
Some of the victims’ testimony is disturbing, but all of it demonstrates the human cost of
pornography. The person taking a first glass of wine doesn’t expect to become an alcoholic – but
some do. The evidence of victims is received daily in the offices of agencies addressing the
pornography issue. None of this information comes from “hard empirical studies,” but to ignore
it is to ignore pornography’s human toll.
______________________________________________________________________________
Factors Particularly Affecting Children54
Although no evidence will ever sway some porn advocates to concede its potential for harm
in the lives of adults, one might expect less dispute in the case of children. After all, children
usually have less maturity and discernment. How can children deal wisely with hard-core
sexuality that is (usually and hopefully) beyond their experience of life? If a neighbor exposed
your child to hard-core pornography, wouldn’t you regard that as sexual abuse?
Unfortunately, even the protection of children from pornography is now challenged in some
circles because, the argument runs, the harm to children has never been “proved.” This is a
recurring topic, for example, in the Internet discussion groups of the self-styled “intellectual
freedom” arm of the American Library Association (ALA). Similarly, in 1999, two North
American court decisions were based in part on the idea that pornography’s harm to children has
not been “proved.”55
By the same logic, one might argue that the harm of crack cocaine to children is also
unproven, since in neither case is experimental research conducted on children. In both cases the
omission is a simple matter of ethics – what kind of researcher exposes a child to putatively
harmful matter, to see if harm does, in fact, result?
The Ethical Principles of the American Psychological Association (APA) state that “the
fundamental requirements are the participants have made a fully informed and competent
decision to participate and that they emerge from their research experiment unharmed—or, at
least, that the risks are minimal, understood by the participants, and accepted as reasonable”
[emphasis added].56 Clearly, no child can give such informed consent, which is why no ethical
researcher would conduct experimental studies on pornography and children. In short, studies
including children do not exist because they would violate professional and ethical
guidelines.
This does not mean there is no evidence of harm to children. Firstly, all the considerations
already discussed with respect to adults apply at least equally to children. Secondly, there are
other considerations that particularly impact children:
Cognitive development
Although children mature at different rates, there are four or five stages of cognitive
development which are fairly standard in their occurrence.57 The child starts as the center of his
or her universe and advances through concrete thought and abstract thought to eventually be
– 16 –
capable of relationships. Every teacher knows that algebra is not taught in elementary school,
for example, because the child hasn’t yet developed sufficient faculty for abstract thought.
It is a maxim of parenting that you don’t give children more information than they are ready
to handle. For example, when a child asks “where do I come from?” the wise parent knows that
sometimes the right answer may simply be “Pittsburgh.” Premature exposure to hard-core
sexuality is a bit more complex than premature exposure to algebra – particularly if the images
themselves are misleading (see “False Advertising?” above). One therapist writes:
“When a child experiences reality beyond their readiness, they have no means of
processing the material intellectually or emotionally. At that time, they will bury the
experience in their unconscious, where it will lurk in the shadows haunting them,
possibly for the rest of their lives.”58
Such interruption is of particular concern because during this same period, children are
developing morally. “Most research supports the view that cognitive development is a necessary
but not sufficient condition for advances in moral understanding”.59 If a child experiences
something beyond his understanding, particularly something traumatic, it can hinder both his
mental and moral development.
Social Learning Theory
Pornography’s effect on individuals and society can be explained in terms of Albert
Bandura’s Social Learning Theory, which maintains that people learn about the world by
responding to the stimuli around them. Social learning explains that “the consumer accept the
behavior portrayed as rewarding (to be imitated) or punishing (to be extinguished)” 60
Adolescents are particularly vulnerable to accepting media portrayals of sexuality, in part
because they are just beginning to seek out such information. For example, “after viewing less
than an hour of MTV… adolescents were more likely to approve of premarital sex than
adolescents not having viewed MTV.”61 Numerous studies have demonstrated that when such
distortions of reality are present, “heavy consumers of those media tend to distort their own
perceptions of the world around them.” 62
Adolescents who are not presented with honest portrayals of possible consequences of
sexual activity will likely downplay the possibility of such consequences in their own lives.
“These biased perceptions and attitudes could lead teens and young adults to be sexually active
and to mimic the nonrealistic sexual activity portrayed in these media.”63
______________________________________________________________________________
Conclusion
Can the harms of pornography be proved with the certainty of a proposition in geometry?
No, because that is not the standard applied to research in the social sciences. The correct
standard is to assess the preponderance of the evidence.
– 17 –
In the case of pornography, the preponderance of the evidence clearly demonstrates that the
material is not “just harmless fun.” Although almost all men are attracted by it, there are clearly
perils associated with its use – which no doubt explains why so many men are willing to resist
their own hormones and try to keep away from pornography.
Pornography is not about real human sexuality: it’s about a dehumanized, synthetic version
of sex that eliminates love, honor, dignity, true intimacy and commitment. The image of
sexuality offered by pornography comes without relationships, responsibility or consequences—
a largely fraudulent picture. Porn movies never show a girlfriend getting pregnant at 16, or a
young man getting AIDS – or a married man resisting the temptation of another woman.
Unfortunately, the research demonstrates that pornography’s fraudulent messages are
ingested, affecting attitudes and behavior. Countless studies show that the basic messages of
pornography – that a woman’s function is to satisfy a man sexually, that women have no value,
no meaning, and their desires and needs are irrelevant – breed sexual callousness and acceptance
of the rape myth (i.e. that women secretly desire to be raped).
These are the attitudes that lead to sexual harassment, failed relationships, early promiscuity
and the spread of STDs. And, unless one believes that attitudes and behaviors are unrelated, it is
difficult then to be surprised by the evidence of correlation between pornography usage and
sexually abusive behaviors.
We protect ourselves and our communities, in part, through the values we affirm as
important. Treating every human being with respect, equality, and dignity, are values we should
all be able to embrace, as a society and as individuals. The harms of pornography result from
replacing respect, equality and dignity with a candy-coated message of hate.
Just Harmless Fun?
By Bruce Watson and Shyla Rae Welch
Copyright © Enough Is Enough, 2000
1 State of the First Amendment 1999, Freedom Forum First Amendment Center, Nashville, TN, 1999
– 18 –
2 USA Today, June 27, 1997
3 In addition, a Wirthlin poll commissioned by Morality in Media in 1997 found that 80% of adult Americans
supported “vigorous enforcement” of federal obscenity laws. http://www.moralityinmedia.org (visited February 16,
2000).
4 Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, (1973) 413 U.S. 49, 63
5 Parade Magazine quoting Advertising Age, August 16, 1998, p.14.
6 Surrett, R. (1992). Media, Crime and Criminal Justice: Images and Realities, Brooks/Cole Publishing, p.104.
7 Postman, N. (1994). The Disappearance of Childhood, New York: Vintage Books, p.107-108.
8 Duncan, D. (1990). “Pornography as a source of sex information for university students,” Psychological Reports,
66, p.442.
Duncan, D., & Donnelly, J. (1991). “Pornography as a source of sex information for students at Northeastern
University,” Psychological Reports, 78, p.782.
Duncan, D., & Nicholson, T. (1991). “Pornography as a source of sex information at Southeastern University.
Psychological Reports,” 68, p.802.
9 Brosius, H.B., Weaver, J.B., & Staab, J.F. (1993). “Exploring the social and sexual ‘reality’ of contemporary
pornography,” The Journal of Sex Research, 30, p.162.
10 Zillman, D. & Bryant, J. (1984). “Effects of massive exposure to pornography,” in Malamuth, NM &
Donnerstein, E, (Ed), Pornography and sexual aggression ,. Orlando, FL: Academic Press, p.134 (Quoted by
Check and Guloien – note 27 below)
11 Diamond, S. (1985). “Pornography: Image and Reality,” in Burstyn, V (Ed.), Women Against Censorship,
Vancouver, BC: Douglas & McIntyre, p.42. (Quoted by Brosius, Weaver & Staab – note 9 above.)
12 Abnormal Psychology and Modern Life (1992). Eds. Carson, R.C., & Butcher, J.N. “ Sexual disorders and
variants,” HarperCollins: New York, p.347.
13 Michael, R.T., Gagnon, J.H., Laumann, E.O., & Kolata, G. (1994). Sex in America. Boston: Little, Brown and
Company.
14 Will, G.F. (November 11, 1996). “Big Stick Conservatism.” Newsweek, 96.
15 National Law Center for Children and Families (1997). NLC summary of “SOB land use” studies.
16 Parts of this section draw on material written by one of the present authors in the case of Amatel v. Reno (1998),
for a 1998 amicus brief to the U.S. Court of Appeal, District of Columbia Circuit on behalf of the National Coalition
for the Protection of Children & Families (NCPCF). A more technical review of the empirical research can be
found in the paper “Pornography – A Review of the Scientific Literature” by Stan Weed, Ph.D., available from
NCPCF (www.nationalcoalition.org).
17 Strossen, N. (1995). Defending Pornography: Free Speech, Sex and the Fight for Women’s Rights, New York:
Anchor Books, p.161.
18 Brosius, Weaver and Staab – see Note 9 above.
19 Einsiedel, E.F. (1995).” Social Science and Public Policy: Constraints on the Linkage,” Prevention in Human
Services, 12, p.93.
20 Ibid.
21 Donnerstein, E. & Linz, D. (1986) “Mass Media Sexual Violence and Male Viewers,” American Behavioral
Scientist, 29 (5), p.603
22 Koop, C.E., (October, 1987). “Report of the Surgeon General’s Workshop on Pornography and Public Health.”
American Psychologist, 42 (10), p.944
23 Lyons, J.S., Anderson, R.L. and Larsen, D., “A Systematic Review of the Effects of Aggressive and
Nonaggressive Pornography,” in Zillman, Bryant & Huston (Ed.), Media, Children & the Family: Social Scientific,
Psychodynamic, and Clinical Perpectives, Hillsdale, N.J., J. Erlbaum Associates, p.305
24 Allen, M., Emmers, T., Gebhardt, L., & Giery M. A. (1995). “Exposure to Pornography and Acceptance of Rape
Myths.” Journal of Communication, Winter, p.19 and pp.7-8.
25 Allen, M., D’Alessio, D., & Brezgel, K. (1995). A Meta-analysis Summarizing the Effects of Pornography II.
Human Communication Research, 22, p.271.
26 Zillman & Bryant – see note 10 above.
27 Check, J. V. P., & Guloien, T. H. (1989). “Reported Proclivity for Coercive Sex Following Repeated Exposure to
Sexually Violent Pornography, Nonviolent Dehumanizing Pornography, and Erotica,” Pornography: Research
Advances and Policy Considerations, p.160.
28 Zillmann, D. (1989). “Effects of Prolonged Consumption of Pornography,” In Zillman & Bryant (Ed.),
Pornography: Research Advances and Policy Considerations, p.155.
– 19 –
29 Weaver, J. B. (1994). “Pornography and Sexual Callousness: The Perceptual and Behavioral Consequences of
Exposure to Pornography,” in Zillman, Bryant & Huston (Eds), Media, Children and the Family: Social Scientific,
Psychodynamic, and Clinical Perspectives, p.224.
30 See letter of Feb.22, 1991 from Hon. Robert Macy, District Attorney, Oklahoma County, to Mr. George Harper;
and letter of March 2, 1990, from Mr. Ray Pasutti, UCR Supervisor, Oklahoma Bureau of Investigation, to Mr.
Harper.
31 Weaver (see note 29), describing study by Baron and Strauss (1987). Weaver also discusses similar findings by
Scott and Schwalm (1988), Jaffee and Strauss (198)7, and Court (1984).
32 Cline, V.B. (1994). Pornography’s Effects on Adults and Children, New York, Morality In Media p.9.
33 Weaver – see note 29.
34 Court, J.H., (1977). “Pornography & Sex Crimes,” International Journal of Criminology & Penology, 5, p 129.
Quoted in Cline – note 32, at page 9.
35 Work of John H. Court, described in Marshall, W.L. and Barrett, S. (1990) Criminal Neglect: Why Sex Offenders
Go Free, Toronto: Doubleday, p.141.
36 Ibid.
37 Medved, Michael, Hollywood vs. America (1992), New York: HarperCollins, p.243
38 “Media Violence,” (1995) Pediatrics 95, American Academy of Pediatrics, p. 949
39 Time, (April 6), 1998, p.39
40 Grossman, D., Trained to Kill, Christianity Today, August 10, 1998, pp. 31-39.
41 Boliek, B. “Hollywood Owns Up to Role in Violence, Study Finds.” The Hollywood Reporter, May 2, 1994, at
http://www.dove.org/research/stats/htm (visited February 23, 2000)
42 Medved, Michael, Hollywood vs. America (1992), New York: HarperCollins, p.251
43 Ibid., p.338
44 Gerbner, G., Gross, L., Morgan., M., & Signorelli, N. (1986). “Living with Television: The Dynamics of the
Cultivation Process,” in J. Bryant and D. Zillman (Eds.), Perceptions on Media Effects. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum,
p.29.
45 Allan, K., & Coltrane, S. (1996). “Gender Displaying Television Commercials: A Comparative Study of
Television Commercials in the 1950s and 1980s,” Sex Roles, 35 (3/4), pp. 187-8.
46 Carnes, P. (1991). Don’t call it love: Recovery from sexual addictions. New York: Bantam.
47 Brooks, G. R. ( 1995). The Centerfold Syndrome: How Men Can Overcome Objectification and Achieve
Intimacy With Women. Jossey-Bass Publishers
48 Cline – see note 32, pp. 3-4.
49 Marshall and Barrett – see note 35, at page 129
50 McGaugh, J.L. (February, 1983). “Preserving the Presence of the Past,” American Psychologist, p. 161
51 Empty Embrace video (1994), Enough Is Enough and National Coalition for the Protection of Children and
Families.
52 Final Report of the Attorney General’s Commission on Pornography (1986), Rutledge Hill Press Inc., Nashville,
p.197-223
53 Bork, Robert H, (1996). Slouching Towards Gomorrah, New York: Regan Books, p. 145
54 Parts of this section draw on material written by one of the present authors in connection with her Master’s
Degree thesis (unpublished).
55 U.S. v. Playboy, concerning “signal bleed” on pornographic cable TV channels; and, in Canada, R. v. Sharpe,
concerning possession of child pornography. Both decisions were subject to appeal at the time of writing.
56 American Psychological Association. (1982). Ethical Principles in the Conduct of Research with Human
Participants (p. 18).
57 Atkinson, R., Atkinson, R., Smith, E., & Hilgard, E. (Eds). Introduction to Psychology , (1987) San Diego:
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, p. 71.
58 Williams, L. Letter to Enough Is Enough newsletter, Vol.6, December 1998.
59 Fogel, A., & Melson, G.F. (Eds.), Child Development: Individual, Family, and Society (1988). St. Paul: West
Publishing, p. 418.
60 Allen, Emmers, Gebhardt and Giery – see note 24 above.
61 Greeson, L.E., & Williams, R.A. (1986). “Social Implications of Music Videos for Youth: An Analysis of the
Content and Effects of MTV.” Youth and Society, 18(2), pp. 177-189. Quoted in Buerkel-Rothfuss et all – note 62
below.
– 20 –
62 Buerkel-Rothfuss, N.L., Strouse, J.S., Pettey, G., & Shatzer, M. (1993). “Adolescents’ and Young Adults’
Exposure to Sexually Oriented and Sexually Explicit Media,” in Greenburg, B., Brown,J.D., and Buerkel-Rothfuss,
N.L. (Eds.) Media, Sex and the Adolescent. Cresskill, N.J., Hampton Press, pp. 99-100.
63 Ibid, p.99.

Daniel05-17-2012

I think we need to draw a distinction between pornography and erotica, even though both are damaging in their own right and lead society down a slippery slope.

Jade06-21-2012

I watch a little pornography the last time I was single and again now that I am. I dont feel it at all effected the relationship I was just in, to which I may have watched pornography once a month or two. Is this just a case of extremes? or would you say I have a pornography problem?
Only contructive criticism and comments please

Kev12-26-2012

Great article.

I constantly advise my sisters and young nieces to NOT watch music videos with women like Katie Perry, Rihanna, Beyonce,lil kim and Niki Minaj in. They are so sexual and pornographic. It makes me mad how these videos are aloud to play across all media platforms as if they are normal everyday cartoons for kids!

Jeanette04-04-2013

I do not have a TV and never let glossy anything (mags, ads, etc) into my home. I grew up without a tv and was shocked at the sexualized images when I would see one. My saying is “put a tv in front of me and I guarantee it will not be long before I see a sexualized image”

I am glad to see this article stating what I am trying to preach to anyone that will listen.

Thank you