The No-Porn Pledge

[fierceawakening]

I wish I could say I'm surprised this exists, but I'm not.

It's a site on which people can pledge not to use pornography, and not only that, to refuse to have an intimate relationship with anyone who does.

Which, yeah, hardly news, some conservatives do that sort of thing all the time, right? Except that this appears to be linked to anti-porn

Comments

[fierceawakening]

Well, yes, I'd agree with that, though I'd probably also say that the Patriarchy exists in something of a different sense from the sense they say it does.

But I do think the parallels are worth thinking about, particularly the parallels in the way desire is supposed to be disciplined -- the one moment of profound commitment to the "pledge", possibly backed up by the support of the "help through addiction" paradigm.

I think if we want to say the paradigm is okay UNLESS the fundamentalist Christians are the ones using it, we need to say why. I don't think the harmfulness of the paradigm rests on the Christian ontology at all. I think it rests much more on psychology and on what such a commitment actually demands and when such commitments are realistic. And whether one pledge, and a setup that makes oneself intoa backslider, does psychological harm or good.

As well as, of course, whether such commitments are actually warranted at all -- which I don't think they are anyway.

[static_hiss]

WHUT.

This just makes me want to get more porn.

[fierceawakening]

I KNOW RIGHT.

So often people always claim there's no connection to conservative religion in their movement, and then... bam! Stuff like this.

I mean, for the record I hardly think every anti-porn feminist is OK with such an alliance, or even OK with tactics like these at all. But it does crop up often enough for me to have a "creepy alliances" tag and seem to find myself dusting it off a LOT when I peruse a big anti-porn site closely.

[amblinwiseass]

We don't care how you got here, as long as you are willing to declare yourself one of us.

Oh. Well, okay, there's nothing creepy about that.

[fierceawakening]

Yeah, that.

It always flabbergasts me when people try so hard to prove that "there are no" such alliances, and then they go around happily recommending the people who do make such alliances.

I hope everyone who links to OAG is aware of this. I doubt many people are, though... and, when push comes to shove, I can think of a few who'd choose the alliance.

[absofrickinlute]

There are lots of points raised on this post and they are all really interesting but just in response to your comment Hex, I think that the problems people have sometimes go beyond moral and ethical objections, but also go to experiences they have had with or as a result of porn.

Signing a pledge to not use porn is sometimes their way of saying that they are refusing to participate in something that they have been hurt by. That is public, re-affirming and important to some people.

There is of course more to all than what I've said, or what the OP said or what anyone is likely to say because it's a complicated thing, but just as another point thrown in the mix =)

[fierceawakening]

abso: I half understand this and half don't. On the one hand, as a person with PTSD myself, I know that sometimes people just don't want to expose themselves to triggers. Flashbacks are no fun. And I totally understand that sometimes pornography is used as a weapon: shown to women or children during sexual assaults, used to tell people they are bad for not complying with an assaulter's demands, etc. It makes complete sense to me that for some people, all pornography would be a trigger, and something they will always avoid. (And, if it's not clear somehow, I have absolutely zero problem with this

[absofrickinlute]

I don't feel qualified to talk about PTSD because it's really not my place to make that claim on behalf of anyone else, I can't say if that is the issue or not

nice try

[anonymous]

Yes, some feminists are inconsistent with how they cherry-pick their sacred scriptures to support their ideas.

Your argument that none of these ancient texts explicitly mentions porn isn't very convincing. It seems self-evident to me that the purpose of pornography is feeding sexual lust. I think all porn producers would agree that such is their goal in creating a quality porn film or photo.

Your thought about "addiction" being a compulsive behavior and therefore an amoral behavior is a common misconception about addictions. While the term "addiction" highlights the biological side of the behavior, for the most part we choose our addictions before the biological factors take control. Other than cases of infants being born dependent on a substance because of a mother's choice, addictions are born in moral and immoral choices.

Re: nice try

[fierceawakening]

Sure, pornography feeds sexual lust. But I don't think that feeding sexual lust is in any way bad or wrong, so I don't agree with those scriptures. The issue I am taking with feminists linking to those scriptures, then, is this:

As I understand it, standard feminist objections to the content of porn (production is another matter) are that it depicts the dehumanization or objectification of women. This isn't a criticism of the fact that the images cause lust, but rather a criticism of the way in which they use the powerful emotional impact of lust to, so the theory goes, train men to think of women more and more often in those objectified terms

Re: nice try

[fierceawakening]

(Now, I will admit that I do think some feminists, i.e., some individuals, fall down a slippery slope and end up de facto condemning all lust. This propensity is one of many reasons I look askance at anti-porn feminism in the first place.)

Re: nice try

[fierceawakening]

Also, I'm not even going to touch what you say about "choosing addictions." I tend to think most of the things people call "addiction" that aren't physical dependency on a drug don't count.

[preciouslilme]

I haven't signed the pledge but won't date someone who watches porn simply because in my experience the men who watch porn and then want to fuck me treat me like crap, and from what I hear off friends they have exactly the same experiences, although some are more willing to put up with it. I'm just a bit astounded that you seem to think that people like me are trying to manipulate others or something. For me there's simply no point dating someone who watches porn because I know it's not going to last, that simple. It's like someone who doesn't drink alcohol going out with someone who does: eventually the differences catch up with you.

[fierceawakening]

That hasn't been my experience, or that of some of the people I know at all, so I rather resent people talking in universals about this. Especially when they then create "pledges," as if "pledges" not to engage in sexual activity deemed unclean weren't a common tactic by obvious representatives of the patriarchy to control women already.

And that still doesn't answer my question: *I'm* someone who uses pornography. Do you feel you know, from that, that I am not worth dating? Do I treat women the way you think the average cisgendered man does? I'm still waiting for an answer on that.

[preciouslilme]

That may be very true for a lot of people but I think that it does differ greatly from age group to age group. I'm only 20 and the people around my age group are the ones who have been watching porn since they were young teens, way before they were having sex, way before they realised what real women/men look/act like etc. I personally wouldn't date you. I've found it's just not worth the hassle figuring out exactly how involved in porn someone is and exactly how much it has shaped their behaviour. I have better things to do with my time so I choose to date people that I know I am not going to have to go through all of that with.

[fierceawakening]

That may be very true for a lot of people but I think that it does differ greatly from age group to age group. I'm only 20 and the people around my age group are the ones who have been watching porn since they were young teens, way before they were having sex, way before they realised what real women/men look/act like etc.

That's logical, but I'm really not sure it makes sense in this case. I'm 29, and porn was already becoming very popular when I was young. Friends asked if I used it as far back as my late teens, and I knew about it far earlier than that. So I don't think I was raised in some innocent, bygone age or anything.