Does Pornography Really Compare to Your Stories?

[RoperTrace]

I'm starting to have a big change of heart about pornography in recent months. As I've realized that what I have in my heart and soul and my ideas are better and more attractive to me personally a lot of the time than pornography is, I kind of stopped liking it so much. I went through a time period where I had really broad spectrum of tastes and explored a lot of different things, particularly around different arrangements and words and roles to take on and things to express. I could get really attracted to any woman I found attractive. Since then, it's narrowed down exclusively to the characters. They're just prettier than any pornstar or random woman online could ever be. I don't say this because they're exaggerated, I say this because for me that's just the way it is. I can't really get super into pornography anymore.

Do you think our literature is actually better than porn in terms of its attractiveness? I'm wondering if anyone else on here feels the same way or similarly. Did writing erotica ruin porn for you? Maybe this is just a part of getting older.

Same here, I can only take porn-videos in short spurts. Then I have to take frequent breaks.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

This is somewhat tangential, but it's also my pet peeve so I can't resist

Rape is about sex. For a rapist, it's the victim's struggle that's the source of sexual arousal. It's a recognized, distinct paraphilia.

This doesn't invalidate the power component, of course, but the extremely prevalent claim that the cause of most instances of rapes is something other than desire for sexual satisfaction (i.e. "it's about power, not sex") is false.

I think it's a bit of a semantic argument.
My point is that masturbating to porn isn't a substitute for what a rapist is looking for.

 

[Bramblethorn]

But consider this: in western countries that have legalized porn and prostitution, the frequency of rape has gone down. That tells me that men are using porn and legal sex to sublimate urges that formerly only had outlets in rape. Is that a bad thing?

I support legalisation of porn (usual "consenting adults" caveats) and decriminalisation* of sex work, but I'd want to see better evidence before assuming a causal link here. There are many, many things that can influence crime stats.

It's true that the incidence of rape has decreased in many countries, e.g. USA rates dropped from 2.4 per 1000 people per year in 1980 to 0.4 in 2003 per National Crime Victimization Survey. That's a huge decrease. But violent crime in general dropped over that period; for instance, homicide rates fell from 10.2 per 100,000 in 1980 to 5.7 per 100,000 in 2003. (Via this report which is based on FBI Uniform Crime Reports data**.)

There's considerable debate about the causes. Explanations that have been offered include economic factors, changes in law enforcement, easier access to abortion, changes in alcohol consumption, and removal of lead from petrol. On sexual assault specifically, there have been various campaigns of many kinds attempting to reduce the rates.

So any claims that $THING reduces the rate of violent crime (rape or otherwise) need stronger evidence than just "$THING happened and then the rates dropped"; lots of other things happened too.

*"Legalisation" of sex work means permitting it but under specific regulations - e.g. need a special permit, etc. etc. "Decriminalisation" means treating it like any other business with few or no sex-work-specific regulations - laws on consent, indecent exposure etc. still apply, but whether money changes hands isn't a consideration in what's permitted.

**In general, one should look to something like NCVS for more reliable crime data, rather than stats based on crimes known to police, because a lot of crime goes unreported. Homicide is an exception since you obviously can't survey people on whether they've been murdered, and homicides almost always do get reported.

 

[Bramblethorn]

They've not got graphic sex, though.

Indeed, though IIRC Pretty Woman at least has a certain amount of eye candy. My point is, clearly the modern understanding of "pornography" is not simply "depiction of prostitutes".

If you look at some of the main stream movies with fellatio or intercourse actually shown (some of Catherine Breillat's movies, for example, or going back to Realm of the Senses in the seventies), I think you wander into the same debate. Although it's called art house, in those cases.

Hmm. I agree that Breillat isn't generally considered porn, and she gets shown at arthouse cinemas rather than Club X, but I'm not sure she'd quite count as "mainstream"?

 

[ElectricBlue]

Indeed, though IIRC Pretty Woman at least has a certain amount of eye candy. My point is, clearly the modern understanding of "pornography" is not simply "depiction of prostitutes".

True, the definition was overly simple, but at least there was an attempt at something more than, "I recognise porn when I see it."

Hmm. I agree that Breillat isn't generally considered porn, and she gets shown at arthouse cinemas rather than Club X, but I'm not sure she'd quite count as "mainstream"?

True again, but I can walk into a Hoyts and see a Breillat movie, buy a ticket and a bag of Maltesers, and see all of the teenagers go see the latest Marvel movie in the Xtreme cinema. So mainstream in that sense.

It's probably much the same as Club X in the old days - when I went to see Baby Girl I was the only one in the little cinema - no more than fifty seats - which felt a little bit odd. But at least the carpets weren't sticky.

 

[GrushaVashnadze]

I think it’s related to whether or not porn is an art form. I think the difference has to do with artistic aspects of the things. Erotica is definitely an art form, but is porn?

I suggest that any attempt to define a hard-and-fast line between "erotica" and "porn" is doomed to fail, because these words, as much as anyone agrees upon what they mean at all, suggest not objectively different things but at best different regions on a spectrum, indeed, on several spectra simultaneously. This thread has flirted with several of these spectra already:
"art" vs. "wank fodder",
"quality" vs. "cliched",
"slow build" vs. down-and-dirty,
plot & characterisation vs. absence thereof,
lots of sex vs. not very much sex,
really dirty sex vs. more gentle sex,
"gonzo" vs. "couples",
"cunt" vs. "pussy"
etc.

Make any statement about the erotica/porn distinction and there will be many good counter-examples. There is porn that makes you think, and there is art that makes you wank. Where would we put, e.g. the friezes of Sigiriya, or the reliefs at Khajuraho?

Here are some definitions (taken, for convenience’s sake, from the Merriam-Webster Dictionary):
pornography – 1: the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement; 2: material (such as books or a photograph) that depicts erotic behavior and is intended to cause sexual excitement
erotica – 1: literary or artistic works having an erotic theme or quality; 2: depictions of things erotic

And in case we are not clear what “erotic” means, Merriam-Webster is helpful:
erotic – 1: of, devoted to, or tending to arouse sexual love or desire; 2: strongly marked or affected by sexual desire

Conclusion: there is no denotative difference between “porn” and “erotica”. There may be stylistic tendencies to be noticed, but both in film and in print (or even performed live), “erotica” and “porn” form a continuum. I suggest we can rejoice in that continuum, rather than trying to finding hard-and-fast distinctions which may, at best, be unreliable.

 

[SimonDoom]

The etymology is interesting, but it doesn't have anything to do with the way I think of or use the terms.

I think of "erotica" as a big umbrella term. Everything at Literotica is erotica. Playboy, Hustler, Deep Throat, Kink.com videos, Anais Nin, much of OnlyFans -- these are erotica. Anything that appeals to the erotic taste or desire in any way is erotica.

I see "porn" as having a narrower focus, more narrowly focused on sexual stimulation and as an aid to achieving orgasm. I see it as a subset of erotica, but its boundaries are almost completely impossible to define, because what is "porn" for one person (a foot fetish video) would seem completely non-pornographic to another person.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Conclusion: there is no denotative difference between “porn” and “erotica”. There may be stylistic tendencies to be noticed, but both in film and in print (or even performed live), “erotica” and “porn” form a continuum. I suggest we can rejoice in that continuum, rather than trying to finding hard-and-fast distinctions which may, at best, be unreliable.

I agree with this, but:




People love creating hierarchies, and "erotica vs. porn" is one way to do that, so we're not likely to see the end of it any time soon. Where that tendency gets dangerous is when we start playing pick-me: "I don't care if porn is outlawed, because what I do is LITERATURE and so much better than those grubby pornographers and actually it's a good thing if that's banned."

Because there are an awful lot of people in the world who don't acknowledge that distinction, and would love to get rid of all of it. No point in making it easier for those folk by doing our own divide-and-be-conquered.

 

[SimonDoom]

I agree with this, but:


View attachment 2521083

People love creating hierarchies, and "erotica vs. porn" is one way to do that, so we're not likely to see the end of it any time soon. Where that tendency gets dangerous is when we start playing pick-me: "I don't care if porn is outlawed, because what I do is LITERATURE and so much better than those grubby pornographers and actually it's a good thing if that's banned."

Because there are an awful lot of people in the world who don't acknowledge that distinction, and would love to get rid of all of it. No point in making it easier for those folk by doing our own divide-and-be-conquered.

It surprises me at times how much that sort of thinking is evident in this forum. "I like erotica. You like porn. What you like is trash."

 

[StillStunned]

It surprises me at times how much that sort of thinking is evident in this forum. "I like erotica. You like porn. What you like is trash."

To misquote Yes, Minister: "It's another of those irregular verbs. I craft erotica, you write smut, he wanks off to porn."

 

[SimonDoom]

I agree with this, but:


View attachment 2521083

People love creating hierarchies, and "erotica vs. porn" is one way to do that, so we're not likely to see the end of it any time soon. Where that tendency gets dangerous is when we start playing pick-me: "I don't care if porn is outlawed, because what I do is LITERATURE and so much better than those grubby pornographers and actually it's a good thing if that's banned."

Because there are an awful lot of people in the world who don't acknowledge that distinction, and would love to get rid of all of it. No point in making it easier for those folk by doing our own divide-and-be-conquered.

You raise an important point that applies to free speech generally, and not just porn/erotica/sexual art/entertainment-work. We all have a vested interest in others' freedom to say what we don't like because once we put a speech regulation in place we cannot be confident that it will not be turned against what we want to say in the future. It's better to be inclusive and open-minded concerning erotica than to go to pains to create hierarchies of quality or acceptability.

 

[GrushaVashnadze]

"I like erotica. You like porn. What you like is trash."

For the record, I like porn. And I like erotica. And sometimes, I like trash. That the above often overlap is just fine with me.

 

[SimonDoom]

For the record, I like porn. And I like erotica. And sometimes, I like trash. That the above often overlap is just fine with me.

My personal feelings, as well.

 

[jehoram]

So any claims that $THING reduces the rate of violent crime (rape or otherwise) need stronger evidence than just "$THING happened and then the rates dropped"; lots of other things happened too.

Which actually supports my point. Just because more people use Viagra after porn became more popular doesn't mean that the pornography caused more people to use Viagra. It's the old "Post hoc, ergo propter hoc" fallacy. But does exposure to nudity cause de-sensitivity to nudity? I think it does. And that's not a bad thing.

 

[ssssh89]

I definitely enjoy (my) stories more than actual pornography by virtue that the characters I make are kinda written for me, in which I found them more attractive than real life pornstars. And my description of my characters's sex appeal is always exaggerated which we can't realistically see in real people/pornstars

 

[Nynah]

I think affinity for porn vs. erotica might have a large part to do with how visual a person you happen to be. I know several people who prefer porn to erotica because they enjoy the visual stimulus and the "thrill" of watching one or more real-life person(s) have sex in some fashion. Not quite "voyeurism" in the traditional sense but I feel like it's true for at least some people who consume pornography, especially the types that are available today (through OF and other amateur avenues vs. more "traditional" films).

Written erotica has the benefit of taking place in the theater of the reader's mind so the only limitation is how imaginative the consumer is. It's not restricted by IRL bodies and settings so that means so many other weird/taboo/fantastical things can happen (and often do). And you don't have to be in the porn industry to participate in creating this content (as this site is a great example of).

I think both have their place and while they can be compared to one another, I don't think that they should necessarily be put into direct competition as they both fulfill certain niches within the adult entertainment ecosystem. I know I enjoy both in fairly equal measure, depending on where my mood is.