The Evils of Pornography

Somebody remarked: ‘I can tell by my own reaction to it that this book is harmful.’ But let him only wait and perhaps one day he will admit to himself that this same book has done him a great service by bringing out the hidden sickness of the heart and making it visible

- Frederich Nietzsche


Kim has a great post up about blaming. She focuses on eating disorders, but it got me to thinking more about porn.

And I’ve been dwelling on Vera’s comment on a previous post: “I fail to see what could possibly be good about promoting these things - good for anything but reinforcing misogyny, eroticizing sexual assault and rape, and further fucking up our attitudes toward sex.”

I think violent porn’s not necessarily promoting something good, but it still serves a purpose. Porn’s been around since way back. It seems it must serve some necessary purpose in this world beyond promoting misogyny. I think part of the appeal is to show ourselves the darkness of human nature.

Images that unsettle a faction of society will prevail as long as evil itself exists. As I said previously, porn doesn’t create evil, but merely reflects the nefarious nature of humanity. As Nietzsche says of other types of audio and visuals, it “forces us to gaze into the horror of individual existence, yet without being turned to stone by the vision.” Good and evil together are present in media because they are present in us. Nietzsche, and later on Freud, asserted that instincts that do not discharge themselves outwardly turn inward and eventually erupt in harmful ways. This implies that guiding malevolent ideas into media or artistic expression may prevent harm being directly inflicted on citizens. It’s different from catharsis theory in which watching violence reduces violence. This idea suggests that the violent urge is better vented into writing, painting, acting, producing, etc., than elsewhere. Evil will always be present and will find its way to expression creatively or destructively.

Even if porn is offensive, you can’t argue that it gets pretty creative.

I commented somewhere that porn is enticing not just in an erotic sense, but also as a freak show curiosity. We’re drawn to unsettling images out of a deep familiarity with the theme, possibly enticed by the representations that have privately festered in our own sub-conscious. The type of offense expressed in a particular medium might be significantly different over generations, yet some form of evil is still present. Public agitation is caused by subjective ideas of evil particular to the time. Often what a group feels is evil, was formerly determined to be good or the reverse.

As a teenager, shortly after recovering from a yeast infection, I got a sore throat that just wouldn’t go away. I asked my doctor if it’s possible that I got the yeast infection in my throat through oral sex. She snapped, “WHAT have your been DOING?” Now oral sex is perfectly acceptable. So the porn industry looks for the next big deal, the new shocker. Regardless of specific concepts, visual illuminations of our darker side help us to accept that hidden, timeless part of ourselves and others.

To a certain extent, societies create morality. Morals aren’t constant, universal; they shift from place to place and over time. Objectionable visuals can help to define morality in specific communities. Porn pushes on societal boundaries, but society pushes back to hold firm to the limits that are truly necessary. Boundaries that move indicate actions that are not evil in essence, but merely by interpretation. I remember being shocked the first time I heard the word “dumbass” used on prime-time TV in That 70s Show. Now it’s part of the acceptable lexicon in many places. Profanity that was once shocking on the airwaves is now prosaic.

As we become desensitized to perceived evils, they become less offensive and are no longer perceived as evil. Hence, the amount of evil with which we must contend is actually lessened. But I trust that our society will hold fast to certain actions as universal evils. I hear swearing on TV and find myself swearing in class (just “shit”). But I see a murder on TV, I don’t become a killer. Even if an acted scene of torture doesn’t bother me, I still am upset to read about real tortures happening in the world right now. Torture, murder, and abuse are all essential evils.

I think boycotting porn or songs or movies is an erroneous struggle to deny the disagreeable aspects of individuals. Genuine acts of malice cause sorrow and rage in their victims. These strong emotions seek an outlet, and the true torturer, whether a private abuser or a public corporation, is rarely an easy target. The mere fact of porn can remind victims of their pain, triggering anger and resentment, and motivating action against the producers or actors. This vigorous altercation establishes a satisfying illusion of control over evil. But it’s just an illusion.

After Paul Bernardo murdered Kirsten French, her mother rallied to boycott all songs with violent content including Neil Young’s “Down By the River” because of a perceived harm to the community. The song’s crime was merely reminding Ms. French of a tragedy caused by Bernardo. Old Neil didn’t turn Bernardo bad.

I tend to prefer art that’s provocative. I want to see things that make me think or rile me up from time to time. We can surround ourselves with non-violent beauty, pretty pictures, but will they take us to the depth of understanding of anything? The depiction of a wrong in a piece of media ideally provokes a reaction to the violation; the visual or audio itself is without blame. Attacking the actors is a misdirection of anger towards evil in general, an evil which must be accepted as part of society and of ourselves.

One benefit of objectionable porn is that it starts arguments. It opens up issues, making difficult topics an acceptable part of our conversations, and therefore can help end a repressive society’s tactics of hiding abuses and corruption and of forcing people in pain to suffer in silence. Recently it has become much more acceptable to openly discuss abuses and violence and addictions that have existed for eons, but have been kept hidden. The act of making evils visible is difficult for many, but it is our only path to solace.

We should certainly do all we can to stop people who cause serious harm to others (and to ourselves), I’m a letter-writer myself, but we must accept that our capacity to control the evilness inherent to human nature is illusory. However, what we are capable of doing is offering fearless openness, compassion, empathy and kindness to those of us who have been harmed by evil forces in society. We cannot offer compassion if we refuse to acknowledge the quiet suffering present in our own communities. Controversial images can act as a stepping stone to open a forum for discussion, support and recovery. This free creative expression of evil allows each of us also to accept this part of ourselves without shame and thereby further connect with an authentic humanity.