I think if we socially reframed pornography as mainly psychological (as you described it), not visual, then we would progress. Because then pornography as a definition could encompass many more things. And we already do say porn in other fields. Food porn, house porn etc., meaning things that look good to consume but that don’t account for the implicit costs (food porn burgers look great on tv but make you fat and bloated for example, which feels gross).
Porn, the visual and story types, don’t account for the jealousy felt at landing someone so above your status. That woman would live with insecurity with such a hero and so would that man with the porn model. Porn doesn’t account for the gross smells, the stds, etc.
It’s especially sad when men and women live with these fantasies even further into middle age and may indicate they are just as “crazy” as the purveyors of porn themselves. Usually experience and maturity wash away any silly fantasies but not always.
Again, porn is sold in different flavors now. You have success porn (buy this course and be successful fast) and popularity porn (a la Kim K, with no skill, but meteoric popularity).
I enjoyed this article, but I think in the last part you're completely discounting instincts clashing with cultural norms.
You're basically telling people to go forth and have sex with attainable partners and multiply, but is this even possible for the majority of consumers? It seems to me that you're addressing single (probably young) people, but when I look at numbers in say SEXUS
(doesn't include romance novels, but still) these do not make up the majority of consumers.
If we look at the numbers in that report, replacing erotic consumption with acting on the instincts for the majority probably requires polygamy or forced copulation.
This is not to say that the erotic media couldn't be improved. But it seems to me that it band-aids a much deeper, extremely widespread problem, that cultural norms do not match actual instincts.
I'll also note that if you look at the data in that report, it suggests that women, and especially women above say 35 years with average (low) female libido at that age with partners with average (high) male libido will be unsympathetic to erotic media (and probably also prostitution) since they will probably have no problem achieving all the copulations they desire from their partner.
Also I guess you can make an evolutionary argument regarding everyone being uncomfortable with partner sexuality not directed toward themselves (mating competition).
Please don't take this personal. As I said, I enjoyed the article. :)
"For that reason I felt a sense of relief when I got to think of an entirely secular reason to dislike pornography: Because it builds on an instinct to search for and use psychologically abnormal behavior among opposite-sex individuals to one's own advantage".
You still need some kind of morality or religion. Else, if you're left with that, it also holds for psychologists, drug companies, medical professionals, and any other making money off treating "psychologically abnormal behavior".
There'a also the matter of proving that the desire to jerk off is "psychologically abnormal behavior". It surely is normal in evolutionary terms (in the sense that it developed through evolution, not that it helps spread genes better). The description seems to be begging the question.
re your PS. consider Richard Walter Wrangham and his suggestion that we became human (ie emergence of Homo sapiens) when coalitions of beta males began to coalesce to depose an alpha male. Maybe coincides with reduction in brow ridges (that function to protect the eyes during inter-male combat). ie if such coalitions reduced the frequency of inter-male combat the presence of pronounced brows would be less selected for.
Compare women's affective response to 'chinless' males relative to males with pronounced brows as a test for this.
Seems as though no young women would want to read this blog, since one of you is female and the other is already married. Perhaps you need to find a handsome young magnate and ghost-write some articles for him -- writing on women's issues is a beta activity, so the signal will be very strong.
Great article! My wife and I have a model for young women (our daughters) we call the mastermind model (thanks to Taylor Swift). Basically, the work a woman does in finding a mate needs to be invisible so the man can feel like he is pursuing her on his own with just the right amount of resistance and opportunity. She needs to make him feel like he is the hero of the story. After obtaining a commitment, she needs to guide him toward making choices that benefit the family. In other words, her ‘investment’ might look very different from her husband’s investment, and would border on being manipulative if it were not in good faith.
That porn exploits psychological weakness is a good observation. But I have to disagree that women who have no-strings-attached sex are always crazy. I would agree that many, or even most, women who do it frequently are, or over time become, crazy.
Here's a few "rational" reasons why women have no-cost (to the man) sex. These are only a few, there are others:
1. It feels good. Sex is pleasurable. Really good sex can be as good as, and possibly better than, any drug. Some women seem to experience something on the level of a mind-blowing, life-altering emotional trip after a powerful orgasm. Even Betas can learn to be good in bed. In fact, Betas are more likely to bother learning how to please women.
2. Jealousy strategy. A woman in a relationship with a man who is not fully committed might use a stalking-horse tactic. The woman is demonstrating that she is valued by other men. She is threatening to replace her non-committal partner, warning him that he better put a ring on it now, or she’s moving on to her next option. Now, you might wonder why the woman wouldn’t just pretend to have an affair. I can’t answer that. You could ask a woman who has done this, but my guess is that she doesn’t know the reason herself. So maybe these women go in the crazy bucket in your model? Still, it is a logical, rational tactic, and seems to work in many cases.
3. Curiosity and adventure. These seem like normal, natural human instincts and not necessarily easily tossed into the crazy bucket. For example, a virgin woman might have no-strings-attached sex just to see what all the fuss is about, possibly with a Beta male friend. A woman on an exotic vacation might have no-strings-attached sex to make the experience more of an adventure. She wants to do this with an Alpha, but will settle for a Beta.
4. Ambition/profit. Some women sleep their way to the top. This doesn’t seem crazy. Although this might not fall into the no-strings-attached category, it often feels that way for the men involved, who are often Betas.
5. Seeking better genes (particularly when already in a long-term relationship). This is the classic PUA explanation, but Betas generally don’t get this option.
6. Loneliness. Sometimes people are just lonely, and sex can relieve that. For example, a woman in a long-distance relationship might occasionally have no-strings-attached sex while waiting for her committed partner to return. Again, she will prefer an Alpha, but will often settle for a Beta.
This is a phenomenal article. I have often wondered about romance novels and their appeal to women. I see how these works play into the “alpha” for a “plain Jane” without effort fantasy. A component that I think might be interesting to explore is Alpha men who were previously betas growing up and how that impacts their life strategies. Many top men were raised by negligent or dismissive parents, so they don’t realize they’re Alphas or discount their true level. I believe many of these men later are snagged from their stable marriages by seductive women who rightly see them as Alphas while the men see themselves actually more like Betas. Another feature is how the romance books will poison even the woman who snags an Alpha (in some capacity like looks, charisma, earning etc. while not others). When he can’t deliver everything all at once like Christian Grey due to natural limitations or maybe he is rather young still then the woman is upset as she’s been coached by these romance books or films. Lastly, the only book that I know of that tries to address this issue in girls and how they are better served finding a traditional stable life with a solid man is by the reformed PUA writer Roosh in his book “Lady” (https://www.amazon.com/Lady-Meet-Keep-Good-Marriage/dp/1732865426/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?crid=1W8GXAPJ8LTKG&keywords=roosh+lady&qid=1680972105&sprefix=roosh+lady%2Caps%2C152&sr=8-1). You might like to take a look for his arguments.
I'm a man reading this and agreeing with the male perspective. Also how this aligns with your earlier post on how men might combine the feminist narrative & the porn narrative to expect women to behave much more like a man in potential sexual situations. Neither source tells a young man to expect a young woman to have a substantially different outlook/expectations/needs from his, agreed.
I'm curious to hear if women also feel this post resonates.
>An alpha to the price of a beta
I think this would make more sense phrased as -
>An alpha for the price of a beta
"to the price" isn't really an expression in english
I think if we socially reframed pornography as mainly psychological (as you described it), not visual, then we would progress. Because then pornography as a definition could encompass many more things. And we already do say porn in other fields. Food porn, house porn etc., meaning things that look good to consume but that don’t account for the implicit costs (food porn burgers look great on tv but make you fat and bloated for example, which feels gross).
Porn, the visual and story types, don’t account for the jealousy felt at landing someone so above your status. That woman would live with insecurity with such a hero and so would that man with the porn model. Porn doesn’t account for the gross smells, the stds, etc.
It’s especially sad when men and women live with these fantasies even further into middle age and may indicate they are just as “crazy” as the purveyors of porn themselves. Usually experience and maturity wash away any silly fantasies but not always.
Again, porn is sold in different flavors now. You have success porn (buy this course and be successful fast) and popularity porn (a la Kim K, with no skill, but meteoric popularity).
I enjoyed this article, but I think in the last part you're completely discounting instincts clashing with cultural norms.
You're basically telling people to go forth and have sex with attainable partners and multiply, but is this even possible for the majority of consumers? It seems to me that you're addressing single (probably young) people, but when I look at numbers in say SEXUS
https://files.projektsexus.dk/2019-10-26_SEXUS-rapport_2017-2018.pdf
(doesn't include romance novels, but still) these do not make up the majority of consumers.
If we look at the numbers in that report, replacing erotic consumption with acting on the instincts for the majority probably requires polygamy or forced copulation.
This is not to say that the erotic media couldn't be improved. But it seems to me that it band-aids a much deeper, extremely widespread problem, that cultural norms do not match actual instincts.
I'll also note that if you look at the data in that report, it suggests that women, and especially women above say 35 years with average (low) female libido at that age with partners with average (high) male libido will be unsympathetic to erotic media (and probably also prostitution) since they will probably have no problem achieving all the copulations they desire from their partner.
Also I guess you can make an evolutionary argument regarding everyone being uncomfortable with partner sexuality not directed toward themselves (mating competition).
Please don't take this personal. As I said, I enjoyed the article. :)
"For that reason I felt a sense of relief when I got to think of an entirely secular reason to dislike pornography: Because it builds on an instinct to search for and use psychologically abnormal behavior among opposite-sex individuals to one's own advantage".
You still need some kind of morality or religion. Else, if you're left with that, it also holds for psychologists, drug companies, medical professionals, and any other making money off treating "psychologically abnormal behavior".
There'a also the matter of proving that the desire to jerk off is "psychologically abnormal behavior". It surely is normal in evolutionary terms (in the sense that it developed through evolution, not that it helps spread genes better). The description seems to be begging the question.
re your PS. consider Richard Walter Wrangham and his suggestion that we became human (ie emergence of Homo sapiens) when coalitions of beta males began to coalesce to depose an alpha male. Maybe coincides with reduction in brow ridges (that function to protect the eyes during inter-male combat). ie if such coalitions reduced the frequency of inter-male combat the presence of pronounced brows would be less selected for.
Compare women's affective response to 'chinless' males relative to males with pronounced brows as a test for this.
Seems as though no young women would want to read this blog, since one of you is female and the other is already married. Perhaps you need to find a handsome young magnate and ghost-write some articles for him -- writing on women's issues is a beta activity, so the signal will be very strong.
Great article! My wife and I have a model for young women (our daughters) we call the mastermind model (thanks to Taylor Swift). Basically, the work a woman does in finding a mate needs to be invisible so the man can feel like he is pursuing her on his own with just the right amount of resistance and opportunity. She needs to make him feel like he is the hero of the story. After obtaining a commitment, she needs to guide him toward making choices that benefit the family. In other words, her ‘investment’ might look very different from her husband’s investment, and would border on being manipulative if it were not in good faith.
I’m not really sure where I found your Substack, but I’m happy I did. Really interesting essays! Thanks!
That porn exploits psychological weakness is a good observation. But I have to disagree that women who have no-strings-attached sex are always crazy. I would agree that many, or even most, women who do it frequently are, or over time become, crazy.
Here's a few "rational" reasons why women have no-cost (to the man) sex. These are only a few, there are others:
1. It feels good. Sex is pleasurable. Really good sex can be as good as, and possibly better than, any drug. Some women seem to experience something on the level of a mind-blowing, life-altering emotional trip after a powerful orgasm. Even Betas can learn to be good in bed. In fact, Betas are more likely to bother learning how to please women.
2. Jealousy strategy. A woman in a relationship with a man who is not fully committed might use a stalking-horse tactic. The woman is demonstrating that she is valued by other men. She is threatening to replace her non-committal partner, warning him that he better put a ring on it now, or she’s moving on to her next option. Now, you might wonder why the woman wouldn’t just pretend to have an affair. I can’t answer that. You could ask a woman who has done this, but my guess is that she doesn’t know the reason herself. So maybe these women go in the crazy bucket in your model? Still, it is a logical, rational tactic, and seems to work in many cases.
3. Curiosity and adventure. These seem like normal, natural human instincts and not necessarily easily tossed into the crazy bucket. For example, a virgin woman might have no-strings-attached sex just to see what all the fuss is about, possibly with a Beta male friend. A woman on an exotic vacation might have no-strings-attached sex to make the experience more of an adventure. She wants to do this with an Alpha, but will settle for a Beta.
4. Ambition/profit. Some women sleep their way to the top. This doesn’t seem crazy. Although this might not fall into the no-strings-attached category, it often feels that way for the men involved, who are often Betas.
5. Seeking better genes (particularly when already in a long-term relationship). This is the classic PUA explanation, but Betas generally don’t get this option.
6. Loneliness. Sometimes people are just lonely, and sex can relieve that. For example, a woman in a long-distance relationship might occasionally have no-strings-attached sex while waiting for her committed partner to return. Again, she will prefer an Alpha, but will often settle for a Beta.
This is a phenomenal article. I have often wondered about romance novels and their appeal to women. I see how these works play into the “alpha” for a “plain Jane” without effort fantasy. A component that I think might be interesting to explore is Alpha men who were previously betas growing up and how that impacts their life strategies. Many top men were raised by negligent or dismissive parents, so they don’t realize they’re Alphas or discount their true level. I believe many of these men later are snagged from their stable marriages by seductive women who rightly see them as Alphas while the men see themselves actually more like Betas. Another feature is how the romance books will poison even the woman who snags an Alpha (in some capacity like looks, charisma, earning etc. while not others). When he can’t deliver everything all at once like Christian Grey due to natural limitations or maybe he is rather young still then the woman is upset as she’s been coached by these romance books or films. Lastly, the only book that I know of that tries to address this issue in girls and how they are better served finding a traditional stable life with a solid man is by the reformed PUA writer Roosh in his book “Lady” (https://www.amazon.com/Lady-Meet-Keep-Good-Marriage/dp/1732865426/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?crid=1W8GXAPJ8LTKG&keywords=roosh+lady&qid=1680972105&sprefix=roosh+lady%2Caps%2C152&sr=8-1). You might like to take a look for his arguments.
I'm a man reading this and agreeing with the male perspective. Also how this aligns with your earlier post on how men might combine the feminist narrative & the porn narrative to expect women to behave much more like a man in potential sexual situations. Neither source tells a young man to expect a young woman to have a substantially different outlook/expectations/needs from his, agreed.
I'm curious to hear if women also feel this post resonates.