Why porn gets boring

[Darren Dirt]

I consider this article as containing some amazingly insightful observations... Seriously.

Even "scientific", one could argue...

"Why does porn got to hurt so bad?"
http://armedndangerous.blogspot.com/2002_06_02_armedndangerous_archive.html#77482059

Don't get me wrong, here. I'm a functioning heterosexual male; I enjoy looking at naked women. It's most pictures of naked women I can't stand. I've found by experience that most of the vast amounts of pornography available on the Internet leave me feeling more repelled than aroused. And not out of puritanism either; I have no intrinsic moral objection to porn, and I judge that the consequentialist arguments against it don't stand the reality test.

No, the truth is that I find most porn subtly and deeply ugly.

Like any good scientist, I proceeded to do some research. I surfed to a well-known porn index site and random-sampled the content, sticking to pictures of single unclad women in order to control some obvious variables. Using my own hypothalamus as a calibration instrument, I graded the samples into "excellent" (I want to keep a copy) "good" (pleasant to look at) "mediocre" (mechanically arousing but unpleasant) and "bad" (just plain unpleasant). There were very, very few "excellents"

...once I corrected for my autonomic biases, a clear pattern emerged, especially in the "bad" category. Many images contained elements that were, at least to me, anti-arousing. Over-styled hair -- especially over-styled blonde hair. Fake pearls. Strappy high heels being worn by otherwise naked women. Feather boas and tacky hooker lingerie. Bloated silicone breasts. Excessive makeup; excessive makeup was, in fact a rule even in most otherwise uncompromised images.

The pattern was not surprising; I had had some insight about this before without thinking it through completely. Bad porn is full of the fetish signifiers of sexual allure, to the point where they crowd out the reality of sexual allure.

...

Defining the objects of their desire as sluts to be used but not related to any emotional way, is a kind of equalizing move in the sexual-power game.

This theory differs sharply from conventional feminist critiques pf porn, in which porn seen as a ratification of existing power relationships that privilege males. The difference is testable. If the conventional theory is correct, porn should be becoming more and more irrelevant as women become more independent -- or, at least, assume the nostalgic character of references to a golden age of male privilege that has already passed.

On the other hand, if bad porn is a compensation for male feelings of powerlessness, we should expect it to become steadily tackier, uglier, more strident, and more popular in direct proportion to the degree that female power in the real world increases.

I think it's pretty clear which of those worlds we are living in. The gloomy conclusion is that porn is likely to get worse before it gets better. If it ever does.

NOTE: The article is articulate and thought-provoking, but the 560 comments are (in some cases -- i.e. the non-autospammer ones) even more thoughtful...