Hey Bloggernacle. All those snarky comments complaining about Utah’s porn use have been heard. The problem is, I don’t think you’re going to like Utah’s solution. Several media outlets, such as the Deseret News, and the Washington Post, are reporting that Utah is the first in the nation to declare that porn is a public health crisis.
Let’s be clear. I’m not pro-porn.
But I am anti-bad science.
A psychologist I know wrote the following on his Facebook page.
A few reasons why using the term “sex addiction” or “porn addiction” (or hypersexual disorder, or others) may not be the best available way to describe the problem:
1. These labels often also include non-consensual sexual behaviors, thus putting in a porn viewer in a category with a child molester.
2. It is not clear if adding a disease model (addiction) to what is already clear as a problem regulating sexual behavior, adds anything to explain the problem. I.e., it may not be a necessary label.
3. There is not enough data to demonstrate that these labels are distinct disorders.
4. Therapists and others may unwittingly create a bigger problem. Some clients experience negative effects from labels, such as beginning to display symptoms of the new label that they had not had prior.
5. There is a lack of scientific consensus on the addiction model for these behavior problems, yet the public and many professionals widely accept it (because let’s face it, it’s sexy; it’s great marketing).Fwiw, I’m not anti-the addiction model for behavioral issues, but I want to wait and see, and meanwhile use the best available treatment with my clients based on the available evidence. I know some people have found a lot of help with the addiction model. More power to them. I’m not convinced in my own practice, however.
The question is this: is the term “sex addiction” even real? The Salt Lake Tribune did an interest Trib Talk with 2 social workers in favor of a sex addiction model, and 2 academics against a sex addiction model. You can listen for yourself whether you think sex addiction is even real. I heard a story of a man whose bishop told him to visit a Sexaholics Anonymous meeting, only to discover he had a normal sex drive. (There were people with a lot bigger problems than he had.)
Here are several links concerning whether porn addiction is even real:
- https://www.smore.com/ewqsj
- http://www.primemind.com/articles/your-brain-on-porn?aid=277
- https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/women-who-stray/201509/your-belief-in-porn-addiction-makes-things-worse
- http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/2015/09/04/sex-addiction-does-not-exist/
- http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johann-hari/the-real-cause-of-addicti_b_6506936.html
- http://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/skeptical-of-the-porn-skeptics/
- https://www.rawstory.com/2016/04/inside-the-bizarre-world-of-mormon-porn-which-is-freaking-out-the-church-and-utah-lawmakers/
Utah Physicians for Healthy Environment said that there are a lot of other things the Utah Legislature should be more concerned about than porn.
It’s been a big week for air pollution research. Following almost 67,000 people, researchers found there is a strong correlation between chronic exposure to particulate pollution, and death due to all types of cancer. In particular for every 10 ug/m3 of PM2.5 (which is about the annual average for the Wasatch Front),
there was an overall increase of 22% in death from cancer, and even higher rates for lung and digestive system cancers, and an extraordinary increase of 80% in death rates for breast cancer, the most common cancer in women. Any of your loved ones have breast cancer? This should make the issue of air quality very personal to everyone.Remember that the World Health Organization declared air pollution the most important environmental cause of cancer. Remember also that one out of every two men, and one out of every three women will get cancer in their life time.
Send this information to your state legislators, Gov. Herbert’s office and our Congressional delegation. Tell them their love affair with dirty energy and disregard for cleaning up our air, is a serious risk to the lives and health of your family. And that if they won’t clean up our air, you’ll elect someone who will.
Why is porn a bigger problem than air pollution? Or health insurance for the poor? (Utah still won’t accept federal funds to expand Medicaid, and thousands of poor have a public health crisis because they simply can’t afford health insurance and aren’t eligible for Obamacare. Governor Herbert has sent 2 bills that have died in the legislature to help these people.) Utah also has a prescription drug problem. Why isn’t this a public health crisis? Why isn’t obesity a public health crisis?
If Utah was trying to help minors escape porn and prostitution, or tried to cut down on sexually transmitted infections, and were putting efforts to avoid this, I can accept that as a valid public health crisis. Last year, I wrote about how Ed Smart is trying to help women forced into prostitution and sex slavery, but the Utah legislature doesn’t seem be concerned about these issues, so I think the “public health crisis” label is an example of all talk, no action. Are we really concerned about sex slavery and want to end it? What is the legislature doing to combat these problems? Why even declare porn is a public health crisis when there are so many other legitimate public health issues are a crisis? Can you help me here?
Wheat & Tares 
Government in the US generally responds to issues (public health or otherwise) one at a time, and generally to the ones that have well organized and effective lobbying groups advocating for them before the ones that have less organized and less effective lobbying groups advocating for them. And the ones that can be passed with a quick, sweeping, general law, get through faster than the ones where decision will affect recognized, essential, institutions, businesses and production systems that want to have a say in the process. And the ones that will not require the establishment of a new government department, or the expansion of an existing one to deal with it also go through faster.
And a constituent who is in favor of a less well lobbied issue or an issue that will require much more discussion, intricate problem solving, education, and/or departmental configuration generally gets angry and frustrated when another more well lobbied concern with a simpler proposed solution (that is far less important to him or her) gets passed with hoopla.
The question isn’t “is this a public health issue?”. There are lots of opinions on that and insufficient research, yet, to make a definite decision as to whether it fits that category. The question I hear you really asking is, why this issue and not other, really important ones?
The answer: the lobbying involved and the relatively simple level of complication of the proposed solution.
Please keep lobbying and working and donating to organzations who are advocating for the other excellent causes you espouse in your piece. Those issues will not be addressed and solved if people just complain that they haven’t been dealt with yet. If you have an issue that you think is important, get involved in the sloggingly diligent, unglamourous, time consuming work of legislative advocacy, and get yourselves some talented people who know how to do that.
It will happen, but only if we do the work.
Great post. A couple of thoughts, speaking as someone who, if not pro-porn, is certainly, pro-the legal existence of porn as protected speech/expression:
1. Porn is absolutely not a public health crisis. A lot of this, clearly, is influenced by, IMHO, unhealthy LDS views of sex. Christianity in general and Mormonism in particular have a long-established fear of the body and the bodily, including, but certainly not limited to, sex. This fear, I think, is unhealthy in part because the fear drives the LDS (and by extension, Utah) thinking that any sex besides between married people, any curiosity about sex, any thoughts about sex, any talking about sex, basically anything having to do with sex, is absolutely perverse and condemnable. This is unhealthy and unhelpful in the extreme. If you tell a bunch of hormonally addled young (or even older) single people that they are allowed literally no expression or exploration of their sexuality except within the strict bonds of matrimony, that’s not going to cut it. Human beings by nature are both sexual and curious and so will be interested in that which is an innate part of them. It also puts a great deal of unhelpful pressure on married sex to be the end-all be-all that we’re told it should be and when it doesn’t measure up, people who haven’t had any license to explore their sexuality previous to marriage don’t know what to do. This isn’t so much a health crisis as a theological crisis created by the LDS church, in my opinion.
2. Black and white thinking with regards to social issues is rarely helpful. Related to no. 1 above, the tendency Mormons have to equate a social practice with an absolute evil is unfortunate and unhealthy. There are many people who drink who aren’t alcoholics, there are many people who use marijuana who don’t end up using heroin and there are many people who explore their sexuality without becoming “addicts” (an unfortunate and incorrect word choice) to either porn or sex. Mormons seem simply unable to see/accept that because of the (generally) extremely black and white way they’re taught about stuff like this.
3. Sometimes solutions are counterintuitive. There have been a few examples, for instance, where legalizing prostitution has actually improved women’s health, giving them access to health care, access to counseling and to people who can help them leave “the life” if they so choose. I’ve always thought that legalizing prostitution and outlawing pimping might be an interesting solution in the states. Providing clean needles for heroin addicts has been shown to cut down instances of HIV/AIDS and other health issues related to sharing needles. The orthodox, black and white mind has a hard time with these solutions, but they can work. Better to try things like this, I think, than to label something a “health crisis” (with no real evidence, btw).
4. Lastly, porn is clearly not a bigger problem than the other issues you mention. In fact, I believe that as long as makers of porn follow the legal guidelines in place (porn IS legal, btw), then there’s no problem that porn is creating. Problems come when people who aren’t sexually well-adjusted don’t know how to deal with their predilections, their healthy desire, their fetishes, their fantasies, etc. If Utah legislators and LDS leaders could actually talk openly and healthily about this stuff and encourage others to do so, we’d have much less of a problem. And we’d stop blaming porn. And we’d stop judging people who use it. But that won’t happen. It’s both tragic and humorous, for example, that leaders have to still use euphemisms for things, or just avoid them altogether. I love the phrase “porn usage”. I still don’t know what it means because we, as a religion, don’t feel like we can use words like “masturbation” to talk about what’s actually happening. Especially our leaders don’t feel like they can use these words over the pulpit.
As a person who grew up outside the church before he converted, I think the lack of communication and the lack of nuanced thinking about a host of so-called moral issues actually leads to a less healthy church population, in large part because we’re not having the dialogues we should be having. That goes for the Utah legislature, too. The solution is to be less judgmental and more accepting of the wonderful variety of human sexuality and humanity generally. But neither Mormons nor the Utah legislature seem inclined to do that, either. More’s the pity.
We know that the church’s new policy and their historical ham-handed approach to non-conventional sexual identity in general cause great personal turmoil, family disharmony & break-ups and even suicides. And porn is what they’d like to declare a “public health crisis”?
This is the thing too, is something bad because the Church says it is or is it bad regardless of what the Church says? if some Bishop told me I have a problem but is it really a problem or what if some other Bishop said it isn’t and just work it out and get it under control?
It most definitely is a public health crisis. Lets erradicate it from society. Not one single good thing comes from the pornography industry. Passing laws to acknowledge its devastating effects is a step in the right direction.
Rob, what is the devastating health consequence of viewing porn, and how is that worse than cancer, obesity, or no health insurance?
In other words, it may be a spiritual health crisis, but how do you justify the crisis label in terms of damage to public health? What is the health cost?
To me, it’s a fluff bill, designed to show the constituents that they’re accomplishing something that costs the taxpayers nothing. To fix any of those other problems, we’d have to create “evil” regulations and raise “evil” taxes to pay for them.
Can’t have that. Free market will fix it all, eventually. 😛
Ha! Maybe I’m missing the sarcasm, Frank. I think the free market will keep the porn industry alive and well, especially if demand is high enough to call it a public health crisis.
I know that it’s tempting to dismiss LDS culture’s reflexively puritanical approach, and how that might be influencing the legislature, but we should not forget that porn IS a big problem in modern society.
Porn is a 10 billion dollar a year industry devoted to cultivating virtual relationships with non-existent individuals which compete alarmingly with real relationships. Common sense tells us there is something seriously wrong with this, even if we can’t pin it down with exact science at this point. Philosopher Alain de Botton said of porn: “and this 10 billion a year figure doesn’t begin to evoke its true cost in terms of squandered human energy: perhaps as many as 200 million man-hours annually that might otherwise have been devoted to starting companies, raising children, curing cancer, writing masterpieces or sorting out the attic…
“Only religions still take sex seriously, in the sense of properly respecting its power to turn us away from our priorities. Only religions see it as something potentially dangerous and needing to be guarded against. We may not sympathise with what they would wish us to think about in the place of sex, and we may not like the way they go about trying to censor it, but we can surely – though perhaps only after killing many hours on pornography sites online – appreciate that on this one point religions have got it right: sex and sexual images can overwhelm our higher rational faculties with depressing ease.”
Nate. I do agree it is AN issue, but is the online gaming industry more of a “health threat” as it turns people into couch potatoes? It is a $70B industry that takes probably more time away from “other activities”. What about commenting on blogs. I know I waste more time writing blog comments than I dare to want to count.
Porn is a 10 billion dollar a year industry devoted to cultivating virtual relationships with non-existent individuals which compete alarmingly with real relationships. Common sense tells us there is something seriously wrong with this…
Very well said, I agree. But given internet access it’s highly unlikely that porn can be stamped out. So if you’re serious about the harm this causes Porn should be turned into a couple sport and only approved couple porn watched by couples allowed for faithful LDS members.
This Bagley cartoon sums it all up for me. http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/3805631-155/bagley-cartoon-the-bad-samaritan
“Porn is a 10 billion dollar a year industry devoted to cultivating virtual relationships with non-existent individuals which compete alarmingly with real relationships. Common sense tells us there is something seriously wrong with this…”
I can’t say I disagree with this sentiment, but at the same time, if we’re going to be lofty about our use of time, money, and energy, I mean, come on, video games…….?? It could be argued those are also an addictive waste of time. How about sports? How much money and time is spent on professional sports in our country? And for what? Entertainment, and the economy…. If you’re going to get judgey, then be at least be an equal opportunity judge. Some people have a huge problem with porn, but what about the addictive tendencies with video games, the violence? What about all the betting that takes place on sports? What about our culture of permissiveness toward professional athletes?
I think it becomes real easy for people who are religious to point toward certain (what they judge to be) ‘sinful’ behaviors, and then forget to look in the mirror and ask what perhaps they might be doing that is ALSO unhealthy, or a waste of time or money.
I believe the declaration of porn being a public health crisis is mostly due to the theocracy in Utah.
A Happy Hubby, you are probably right that “commenting on blogs” is also a health crisis, at least in my case.
Howard, you are right that it is impossible that porn can be stamped out, given the internet. We need to learn how to live with it. So it is unlike a “health crisis” that can be eradicated with a vaccine or something like that. It is similar to obesity. Combating it will have to come from education and self-regulation, not eradication. Couple porn, watched only by couples could be a certain way of regulating it for some people. But I think the nature of porn leads people towards isolation and away from cultivating real sexual relationships. So I don’t agree that only watching porn as a couple will work in the long term.
KT, I think that internet addiction in general is a “health crisis” of sorts, including video games, online gambling and even blogs like these for some people. So I WOULD be in favour of expanding this health crisis to internet addiction in general. People need to be aware first of all that the internet IS addictive, that porn IS addictive, and we can’t allow ourselves to be casual about it because it can “overwhelm our rational faculties with depressing ease” as Alain de Botton says.
Nate wrote: Combating it will have to come from education and self-regulation… The church has been beating this drum for many years. The result? The estimates I’ve read are that at least 1 out of 4 priesthood holders use porn. Will this improve with more jawboning? No. On the other hand couple porn used by couples and approved by the church would bring that portion of porn out of isolation cultivating real sexual relationships. This would be a tangible improvement!
Porn is what passes for sex-Ed in Utah. If the legislature (which operates as cover for the theocracy) really thought porn was a public health crisis, it would mandate comprehensive sex- ed as inoculation. So long as the theocracy remains sex-phobic, that course is not likely.
#17 I gave you a thumbs up but can you hear me applauding from here?
MH,
I have an extended family member who is in prison because his addiction to porn over his life led him into coerced sexual relations with a minor. His son, also exposed, took his life because of his actions leading likewise. One of their other children, also exposed, grew up and committed acts that now has led to his being banned from places of public where children are. The father realizes that his porn addiction has caused the entire destruction of his life, his children, others children and cost at least one death.
So, you tell me why its not a public health concern.
It’s interesting that Utah believes they have a porn crisis, but doesn’t believe they have a rape reporting crisis at BYU. I guess only things that disproportionately affect men are elevated to crisis status.
Rob Osborn: All due respect to your anecdote, but I’ve watched enough Law & Order SVU to know that your relative’s porn viewing was likely a symptom of his proclivities and not the cause of it. He wasn’t strapped down Clockwork Orange style and forced to view porn. He chose the porn he wanted to watch based on his interests, and then he chose to act on his fantasies. Watching porn didn’t “cause” it. He made choices all along the way.
I’m no fan of porn either, but it’s like calling the Big & Tall store the cause of obesity.
Rob,
I don’t want to make fun of your relative, but 1 anecdote is not exactly “proven fact” especially in light of the SEVEN articles I posted that clearly dispute your position. (I’m sure I could find a multitude of other articles too, but I liked these that I posted.)
Your relative had other issues and I will agree that porn was correlated with his actions, but porn did not cause him to act that way. You have a false cause there. Listen to the Trib Talk link I posted. Porn is correlated with high salaries, good GPA, as well as with rapists and lots of other bad things in society. As my psychologist friend said, porn addiction is “great marketing” for the problem.
What I think is interesting is that there are few “neutrals” in this discussion. It seems to me the most objective position is that porn, like so many other things, is an outgrowth of human nature that can be harmful for some people and relatively benign for others.
The question of whether it’s an “addiction” is also interesting, because no scientific study is going to answer the question for us. It’s just a matter of how we define a word – either we define “addiction” broadly and include compulsive behavioral patterns, or we define it narrowly and require some kind of chemical dependence (or whatever). Compulsive porn use is similar to addiction to alcohol in some ways, and it differs in other ways. What label we attach to it is guided by our values as a culture, and not by some scientific study.
I’m inclined to see compulsive or problematic porn use, or hypersexuality, defined differently than chemical dependence types of addiction, mostly because I think the treatment differs enough to warrant a different category made. I also think that the context is incredibly important – put an alcohol-addicted person on a deserted island with food, water, but no alcohol, and the person might literally die. Put a porn “addict” on an island without porn and, he’s cured? Secondly, our desire for drugs seems to piggyback on our biological wiring for other things, while our desire for unity and procreation through sex seems to quite literally be our reason for existing (even according to some theologies). It seems to me we’re talking about two different processes there. If we could somehow eliminate a person’s desire for drugs, we’d call that a miracle cure, while if we eliminated a person’s desire for some sort of unity with others and sex, most would say we’ve made a person a little less human. (some might scoff at my idea that porn is somehow about unity, but I would argue that underneath the desire to watch porn is a frustrated desire for some kind of human connection beyond the pixels and reproductive parts)
But again, this is a question of how we want to label things. If we really want to create this category “addiction” and make it broad enough to include anything that feels good that people want to repeatedly do, then fine. If we want to strictly, rigidly apply the label to one kind of chemically-dependent compulsive behavior, then fine. Let’s just seek to educate ourselves on the nuances of labels rather than argue about which combination of letters to put on something.
MH,
Pornography was the very cause that led to his incarceration. I have a good friend who has a son who also is in prison because of his actions that stemmed from a pornography addiction. He freely admits to that fact.
Im sure there are lots of folks who view porn on a regular basis who do not have the extreme problems like I presented, but, its the same path that leads to the same path- a loss and destruction of ones agency that ultimately will destroy their mind and soul. Its far worse than any drug because of its devastating effect on the mind and its ability to ensnare victims slowly over a long period of time.
Im not exactly sure why but it really appears you are making a case in support of pornography not against it.
Hawkgrrl,
I can state quite factually that the repetitiveness of his porn viewing over many decades conditioned his mind to go ahead and make the series of bad decisions that slowly led to his crossing the line illegally into a world where he was no longer in control of his sexual appetites.
Take drugs for example- it doesnt matter what neighborhood a drug dealer moves his operations to, if he dangles drugs long enough in front of youth with lits of frequency and temptation, he is going to force someone to bite the hook and try it and then it spreads quickly and right along with it you have a higher increase in the frequency of crime and problems in said area. What caused it? It was the effect of the drug being present as a frequent temptation.
So too with porn- if we dangle it with high frequency in front of people people bite and along with its addiction comes all sorts of marital and relationship problems, increase in crime, increase in STD’s, lower value for women and children, etc. Pornography viewing is a conditioning similar to drug addiction with the same chemicals in the brain overacting creating an imbalance that one cannot control if they exceed the limit, just like drugs.
Sex sells. But why? Because it creates pleasure physically. But, sex in itself should be a good thing, right? The problem is that porn conditions one to overindulge and lose control easier and make rash decisions they otherwise wouldnt make. It also conditions the brain to just seek physical pleasure and release with no emotional ties which has the devastating effect of turning people into objects to fulfill their pleasure only.
I don’t doubt that Rob’s relative’s particular brand of sex addiction was fueled and nurtured by porn.
But I think in general, porn use leads to the opposite extreme: it doesn’t whet men’s appetite for real sex, it turns them off to the real thing. It kills relationships NOT by introducing bondage and rape, but by rewiring the brain, making it increasingly difficult for men to be turned on by real women. This is the central thesis of http://www.yourbrainonporn.com which is one of the more helpful and less hysterical anti-porn websites out there.
How about this: choose to not look at it.
Yes, you can choose. Imagine the possibilities…
Hawkgrrrl’s #21 and Justin’s #27 are interesting responses. People can just choose not to take drugs or use tobacco (just say no, anyone?) and no one has tied those same people down and forced a cigarette between their lips or injected them with heroin. Yet I don’t think anyone would take issue with calling drugs and tobacco public health crises. The fact that Rob Osborne’s relative had proclivities which made him vulnerable to porn and its effects don’t seem to be insightful either. I’ve heard many times that native american’s genetics make them more susceptible to the effects of alcohol abuse, should we just dismiss them with the edict to simply choose not to drink and remind them that no one tied them down and forced alcohol into their stomachs? Should we deny that alcohol on native reservations is not a public health crisis simply because they have the agency to say no?
Rob,
I have no illusions that I’m going to change your mind, especially given your personal connection to your beliefs. I have a response, but I think I’ll save it for my post next week. If you’re interested, my post will be based on this link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johann-hari/the-real-cause-of-addicti_b_6506936.html
We can talk about addictions of all kinds: food, drugs, sex, gambling more on that topic.
That link is a false fabrication. Under his assumptions, my own addiction to cigarettes must have been due to a disconnection in society or family. The reality of it is this fact- it created a type of pleasure that I enjoyed along with my great connection to family and society. I no longer smoke but I do realize what addiction is and where it comes from. Pornography is no different.
I wasn’t planning on commenting on this article, since I don’t feel I really have a solid opinion either way, but in the two years I have been in the bloggernacle, this is the closest I have ever come to agreeing with Rob Osborn, so I felt I needed to comment to mark the occasion.
I definitely think addiction is a real thing and that no matter how you define it, the causes are varied and complex, depending on the substance/activity, the individual and the circumstance. I also think that when terrible things happen in the life of someone who is an addict, it is easy to assume that the addiction is the cause of everything, but cause and effect is more complex than that.
Here is where I agree with Rob: That article linked by MH makes the assumption that addiction is caused by lack of human connection. First and foremost, it is hard for me to take an article that is claiming certain scientific facts seriously when it doesn’t actually link to any studies and I am required to buy the author’s book to find out if anything she has to say is even remotely valid. Second, this flies in the face of my personal experience. Literally 100% of the people I know who have an addiction do have human connection. They have family that they love and are connected with, they have close friends. This hasn’t stopped them from becoming addicted. The assertion that if everyone just had a happy life, there would be no addiction makes no sense. On top of that, there is no effective way to make sure everyone has a happy life. Let’s focus on solutions that are at least somewhat plausible. I think the conclusion has it’s cause and effect backwards. While I agree that people who are unhappy are vastly more likely to suffer from addiction than those who are happy, that doesn’t prove that addiction is caused by lack of human connection. More likely, addiction causes disconnection from society (although it seems most likely that this is a cycle where lack of sufficient human connection can increase the likelihood of addiction which decreases human connection and so forth). Lastly, the author admits in this article that at least 17% (although I’m wary of her “studies” that don’t have back up) of addiction is not caused by lack of human connection.
Maybe this comment would be better served on MH’s follow up post that he mentions in his comment. I apologize if I have derailed the conversation.
http://yourbrainonporn.com/cambridge-university-brain-scans-find-porn-addiction
Are drugs and alcohol and tobacco addictive? Yes, but you are ingesting something when you take them. Many studies debunk the notion that sex or porn addiction are a real thing. Here are several:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2370211/Sex-addiction-Scientists-believe-hypersexuality-just-high-libido.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/brain-scans-suggest-sex-addiction-may-not-be-real-disorder/
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-sexual-continuum/201307/new-brain-study-questions-existence-sexual-addiction
http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2013/07/sex_addiction_study_ucla_researchers_find_that_sex_and_porn_might_not_actually.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jonathan-alpert/does-sex-addiction-even-e_b_7476092.html
Next we can discuss whether ADHD is a real thing. Let the games begin.
A problem is identified. Therefore the government must respond. No!
Some problems are not best addressed by another ineffective government solution unless you desire slavery to a government that is master over everything in your life. This not a call for anarchy, only reasonable consideration for the best way to solve problems. Passing unenforceable or unreasonable laws is not helpful. Creating another expensive government initiative that doesn’t work isn’t helpful either.
The connection between modesty and pornography and the respective definitions thereof is of concern. I live in the South and my family visits places as diverse as Florida and Utah a few times every year. One thing all members of the family can’t help but notice is the difference in climate and how it affects what we see other people, especially women wear. Utah is a cold dry climate and has high modesty standards. Florida is warm and humid year around and as far as modesty goes, wearing dental floss is adequate in too many cases.
What a guy sees walking around on the beach or sliding down the ski slopes just might influence what he views in his spare time. Why pay money to see contrived images of what is walking around in real life? What is normal and who determines it? This might influence what local guardians of the nanny state think is a crisis.
Our religions originated in the middle east where it is even warmer and modesty is paradoxically even more extreme. So it is not as simple as climate. And the modesty standards expected of LDS youth in Utah appear to go beyond what climate favors. What is anatomically viewed is far less important than the social context, meaning and implications of the activity.
I am fascinated by the Japanese. They are among the most modest people on the earth. Yet they bathe together in public. (At least they did when I was a missionary there a hundred years ago). I was told by a native companion my first trip to the bath house that one is not to look at what they will find embarrassing. If a person should walk naked down the street, that person has nothing to be ashamed of; but the people who do not avert their gaze and look at them are the ones who are embarrassed.
I found this very difficult to practice when a cute 20ish year old female student in our English class came into the public bath house, undressed completely and sat next to me in a hot tub and began chatting as if everything was normal, which it was for her. (I heard similar accounts of the perils of house-to-house tracting in Sweden). And yet the Japanese are among the most voracious consumers of the most obnoxious and filthy literature and images around.
For me it is not what the guys are looking at that is the major problem. What really stinks is the way the women photographed are exploited. Many of these so-called models are addicted to drugs or dealing with a history of extreme abuse and are socially slaves. Throwing more money into this obnoxious industry is outrageous. I say raise the minimum wage for “workers” in this industry to $10,000 a hour and tax the hell out of it. Make a plane ticket to Florida cheaper than one issue of a magazine. The internet makes this all obsolete.
Perhaps we should begin requiring that all of our children run around naked all the time for the first 30 years of their life to the point that no image of a physical body has any erotic meaning to them at all. They would have to learn to rely entirely on social signals to indicate erotic interest.
While we are discussing addictions in general, does anyone else notice the inconsistency in the discussions about legalizing marihuana? Alcohol kills more people than heroin and yet it is legal. Marihuana has a number of adverse effects but only rarely results in death. It causes far fewer deaths than several food allergies like peanuts or shell fish. Why not put the same amount of energy into prohibiting the most common and dangerous substance, alcohol, as applied to marihuana?
Oh, we already tried that and it didn’t work. Don’t forget, Utah was the swing state that made alcohol legal again on Dec 5, 1933. A day celebrated in bars across the country. The southern states of the old Confederacy held true to the cause of alcohol prohibition but not the Mormons.
Does our experience with prohibition of alcohol have any bearing on the current discussion of prohibiting what we view?
I know this is an old post, but this link for LDS people explains the difference between shame and guilt, and why shame feeds pornography.
https://byrslf.co/the-naked-people-in-your-ipod-f770a27fdb59#.qhy9mrm75
a surprising new study by BYU: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/women-who-stray/201704/religious-conflict-makes-porn-bad-relationships