Latest Stats and Facts on Punography

[Jeff Lebowski]

So how are we doing Donuthole? Are we gaining on the Lakers thread yet?

It's always interesting to see which threads end up taking off.

[SeattleUte]

It's always interesting to see which threads end up taking off.

It's sad that my thread starter about the Pauline epistles got one response and 57 hits, almost an air ball. And porn is a rocking best seller. Speaks volumes.

[Babs]

A luddite is somebody resistant to technology. I'm not sure, unless we're talking about cyberporn, where it fits into this thread.

[Babs]

It's sad that my thread starter about the Pauline epistles got one response and 57 hits, almost an air ball. And porn is a rocking best seller. Speaks volumes.

what I was curious about was what led you to ask the question? You didn't say.

[RobinFinderson]

It's sad that my thread starter about the Pauline epistles got one response and 57 hits, almost an air ball. And porn is a rocking best seller. Speaks volumes.

I think that Bab's and my flame war was simply the best show in town. Sad. Speaks volumes. It has been a slow week.

[jay santos]

Thank you Marcy. This propensity to tell people that their offense at certain behavior is invalid astounds me. I'm done with trying to help these ludites explore their more sensitive sides.

Marsupial's good point on the matter was when she said the woman was wrong in "carrying on" about your charmed life. That seems to be the issue.

The "carrying on" about comparing your spouse's inadequacies to others is a mega problem in marriage, and relates to many things not just porn or sexiness.

[myboynoah]

I don't think that means what you think it means.

I stand corrected. Lug nut would be much more appropriate.

[RobinFinderson]

Maybe this will help keep it chugging.......so.....Robin.....since you've gone on record repeated times at willing to defend any artist's work as part of a creative effort (not defending its quality, but its existence as a creative product), what are your thoughts about the quality (not existence) of this work (The Girlfriend Experience) by Stephen Soderbergh? Since it stars some pornstress 'named' Sasha Gray who normally takes money for having sex 'legally' playing the role of someone who has sex for money 'illegally' does it cross a line......does it help the 70's dream of taking porn mainstream.....is it going to be in your Netflix queue? Is this just really high-quality porn because Soderbergh has lots of money?

Just asking because I just read a review of the film and it reminded me of this thread.



[YOUTUBE]<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/zqNvnicN-PY&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/zqNvnicN-PY&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>[/YOUTUBE]

I will see it just because I respect Soderbergh's work. I don't really care where the line between 'porn' and 'art' is drawn. Some art is sexually graphic and some porn has artistic merit. The distinction between which is what only matters for people who set personal restrictions.

[ERCougar]

Are you serious? You act as if impacts are limited just to two consenting adults acting in one moment in time. You don't see connections beyond something that takes place in their bedroom?

Given your church's view on the sanctity of sexual intimacy and its connection to the power or procreation, I find it odd that you would say there is nothing inherently evil with porn.

OK...point taken.
I'm playing devil's advocate a little as I don't look at porn personally and my wife certainly isn't cool with it. I was just trying to reach out to Robin.

[ERCougar]

what I was curious about was what led you to ask the question? You didn't say.

I think's that why SU got no response. It seems such a lazy question that it must be some sort of trap. And no one's really interested in the fight.

[Clark Addison]

I'll admit that it could probably be fun for a couple to enjoy porn together. However, I have to agree with MBN. It basically comes down to paying people to perform sex acts for your own gratification and I can't reconile that with my religious beliefs.

There are other things a couple can do that would offer a similar experience --mirrors, home videos, etc--without having to support what I believe is an evil industry.

My wife is very anti-porn (as, for the record, am I), but I think if given the option between porn and home videos, she'd opt for the porn.

[Babs]

I think's that why SU got no response. It seems such a lazy question that it must be some sort of trap. And no one's really interested in the fight.

I think lazy might have something to do with it, alright. Leave it to the librarian to have to look it up.

[Surfah]

I'll admit that it could probably be fun for a couple to enjoy porn together.

It is.

[Color Me Badd Fan]

In short--I'm not sure that porn itself is inherently evil, but like most things in life, it can have awful consequences in many settings. If both spouses are into it (together), I'm not going to step in and tell them what they can and can't do. Isn't the church's position to stay out of the bedroom?

Listen, I'm quite positive that porn is inherently evil. To be sure, there's varying degrees of evil in relation to porn. Depictions of sexual intercourse and/or depictions of more perverse acts are certainly evil. This kind of porn diminishes a private, and in a lot of ways, a sacred act. It cheapens the humanity of those who are involved with the production and those who view it.

Then there's the playboy/European versions of magazines like Maxim which still falls under the umbrella of porn, it's still evil but definitely not to the same degree as hardcore pornography. Playboy is marijuana, hardcore pornography is meth. Fact is, we'd all be better off without any of this stuff. There's certainly artistic and redeemable value in nudity that occurs in art (Rodin statues, the David statue).

Fact is, a majority of women and an overwhelming majority of LDS women would be crushed if they found some stash of porn that belonged to their husband. I don't think this is particularly an LDS problem, I think its an issue of intimacy between couples, trust and the husband making an all out effort to ensure that his wife feels loved by him and completely secure in the relationship. If you look at porn, you're not doing the best you can.

With that said, I still don't think it serves a good purpose to: a) Talk about it incessantly in every other church meeting and every GC; b) Frame it in terms that leads the church body to believe that it sets in motion a sequence of events that causes the consumers to turn into Ted Bundy; and c) Lead a number of women to believe that porn consumption is damned near the equivalent of adultery.

First, porn consumption by members of the church shouldn't be constantly marched out front and center every other week. It serves the dual purpose of making some feel that every Tom, Dick and Harry is looking at the stuff while at the same time deepening the level of fear in women. While porn is worthy of fear and loathing, a woman shouldn't be made to feel that her husband is committing some egregious atrocity, I just don't see how that's productive.

Second, tell every single member of the church to put a porn blocker on their computer. Only the wife may have the password to the porn blocker. I know this isn't new, but instead of constantly harassing people about the dangers of pornography and how one day you can be looking at a playboy and the next you could kidnapping a woman in the back of your van, just pound it home on a church wide basis that everyone should have a porn blocker and/or a program that monitors web usage that is controlled by the woman These programs aren't perfect but I assume they're getting better every year. My work had a blocker (came with a new internet service) for a short period of time and it prohibited me from doing a Westlaw search that included a reference to drugs (legal, not illegal) or gambling, it was ridiculous. BYU, I thought, had a pretty good one. I was rarely prohibited from conducting a search that I needed to do.

Third, when porn is finally talked about, say, 90% less than it is right now keep the emphasis on the relationship with the spouse. To the extent a man engages with porn, that man is distancing himself from his wife. Wives can forgive and usually will forgive but it's difficult, if not impossible for them to forget- don't diminish the relationship with the most important person in your life for something so cheap. If a guy has a problem with it, then he should be counseled to repent. The church already teaches all of this, again this isn't new either. This may not help the husband with a cold spouse or a lousy marriage that has more significant underlying issues, but it will help some other men. Quit bringing in the weird LDS counselor that recounts the connection between picking up a Maxim (Euro version) magazine and then engaging in bestiality.

[beefytee]

Second, tell every single member of the church to put a porn blocker on their computer. Only the wife may have the password to the porn blocker....

How would they have wives if they are single?