Porn, the Erototoxin
Mark Pilkington writes in the Guardian (via Pagan Prattle):
Erototoxins aren’t about pleasure, they’re a “fear-sex-shame-and-anger stimulant”. Reisman’s paper on the subject The Psychopharmacology of Pictorial Pornography Restructuring Brain, Mind & Memory & Subverting Freedom of Speech has helped make her the darling of the anti-pornography crusade, and in November last year she presented her erototoxin theory to the US senate.
Under the auspices of Utah’s Lighted Candle Society (LCS), Reisman and Victor Cline, a clinical psychologist at the University of Utah, began raising money from American conservative and religious organisations. They hope to raise at least $3m to conduct MRI scans on victims under the influence of porn and so prove their theories correct.
What’s their goal? First, if they can prove their “theory” (and I suspect that they’ll “prove” it just like creationism has been “proven”), then they can initiate lawsuits against pornographers just like the lawsuits against tobacco companies. Second, pornographers can be shut down because they are causing the release of toxic substances in people’s brains (that would diverge from the “Big Tobacco” model, but I don’t think they realize this yet). Third, people who have had their minds subverted by erototoxins may have to have their free speech restricted as well — after all, they can’t be described as being entirely “free” anymore.
But there’s a catch. Much of Reisman’s research in developing her theory has necessitated examining hundreds, perhaps thousands, of pornographic magazines and films. By her own reasoning her brain ought, by now, to be a seething mass of toxic smutmulch ...
Indeed, so I think that in order to be consistent, if Reisman’s “theories” are proven, then she’ll have to voluntarily surrender her free speech rights immediately in order to set a good example for the rest of us. Do you think she’ll do it? Of course not — it’s always been a basic premise of morality crusaders like this that they, the elite, can handle dealing with these vices but it’s the rest of the population which must be protected.
Morality crusades — whether against alcohol, drugs, pornography, or anything else — almost always have a strong element of class bias inherent in them. This one isn’t any different and that’s why people like Reisman think that it’s acceptable for them to consume massive amounts of porn in their research because they, being special, won’t be affected like everyone else.
Read More:
Comments
How can, in good conscience, this “author” publish such a destructive article. If the research of Dr. Reisman were to be examined closely, it would be proven that her research is accurate. This “author” is clearly supporting the desensitization of America’s youth, and the future leaders of our country. The “author” may even be described as supporting the use of drugs, which have been proven to damage the brain, and other necessary bodily organs, alcohol, which can cause sever brain damage and kidney failure, and tobacco, which does damage the lungs and mouth. If we have people writing for a major website that follow this belief, then our society is clearly going to the pits.
Please support this claim.