"rethinking Mormons And Porn"

[california boy]

Utah No. 1 in online porn subscriptions, report says by Elaine Jarvik

Thanks for the link Frank, but this link only goes to the commentary on this subject and not the study itself.  If you go to the actual study, you will find that the study has absolutely NOTHING to do with Mormons.  It was not done to embarrass Mormons.  The study was a nation wide study that because Utah is part of the nation was included in the study.  It does appear that Utah, Alaska and Mississippi had the highest rates of watching porn in the country.  But to claim that this is a "hit piece" on Mormons is completely disingenuous.  Read the study.  The professor was not going "after" Mormons at all.  This is what he says is the purpose of the study.

 

However, this paper focuses on the consumption side of adult online entertainment, and in particular on subscriber demographics and consumption patterns of those who subscribe to such websites.

 

Here is the link to the actual study and not a commentary on the study.

 

Who Buys Online Adult Entertainment

 

I can understand why Mormons take this study personally with the ranking that Utah got, but to claim it is just an anti-Mormon hit piece is ridiculous.  There is no evidence of that, and if you read the study, there are no conclusions of that.  It also talks about the fact that most porn is shot in Southern California.  Are the people in Southern California suppose to assume it is a hit piece on them?  It also shows that by far the biggest age group is mid twenties.

 

Some other interesting things from the study.

 

As of June 2008, 36 percent of Internet users visit at least one adult website each month, according to comScore (2008) (based on comScore’s monitoring of web browsing by users who agree to install comScore’s tracking software). An average visit lasts 11.6 minutes. Of users who visit at least one adult site per month, the average such user visits adult websites 7.7 times per month.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Controlling for broadband access, states show remarkable similarity in their subscription quantities, as shown in Table 2. Dividing state subscription counts by the FCC’s Broadband Deployment quantities, the most-subscribing state is Utah (where 5.47 of every 1,000 broadband households subscribed to the service at issue), while the least-subscribing state is Montana (1.92 per 1000 broadband households). The ratio of these extremes is just 2.85—relatively small in compare- son to states’ diversity in other respects. For extremes in overall population density (excluding Alaska), compare New Jersey (1,175 people per square mile) to Wyoming (5.25), a ratio of 223:1. In truck ownership, compare North Dakota (590 trucks per thousand people) to New York (0.15), a ratio of 3933:1. In proportion of the population over 65, compare Pennsylvania (15.2 percent) to Alaska (5.3 percent) and Utah (7.3 percent), ratios of 2.86:1 and 2.08:1.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you read the original study, it is virtually impossible to come to the conclusion that it is a hit piece on Mormons.  Now you can discuss the pros and cons of how the data was collected, but it seems like Mormons are claiming persecution when in reality they just don't like the results.  Am I wrong here?

[why me]

I can understand why Mormons take this study personally with the ranking that Utah got, but to claim it is just an anti-Mormon hit piece is ridiculous.  There is no evidence of that, and if you read the study, there are no conclusions of that.  It also talks about the fact that most porn is shot in Southern California.  Are the people in Southern California suppose to assume it is a hit piece on them?  It also shows that by far the biggest age group is mid twenties.

I think that the problem is with the assumption that it is Mormons who are watching porn. Where is the proof that the majority are Mormons? It is also online subscription which would make it difficult for any married Mormon to do. It would not matter if the credit card bill had an innocent payment name on it, the spouse would still want to know what exactly it was for. So, the problem is with who is watching it and not the ranking of Utah.

[Bikeemikey]

Utah No. 1 in online porn subscriptions, report says by Elaine Jarvik

That is the same 2009 article referred to in the blog linked to in the OP.

They must have also had access to the raw data as they are referring to information not covered in the original publication.

[mormonnewb]

Interestingly, this study doesn't seem to be just cited by critics of the Church but by supporters as well. I found several articles and blog posts by faithful saints who took the 2009 study as a call to arms to stomp out this "epidemic" in our midst.

Now, that it appears that we're not ALL watching porn, does anyone think that we'll be able to remove the "evils of porn" space from our GC bingo cards?

[Kenngo1969]

Interestingly, this study doesn't seem to be just cited by critics of the Church but by supporters as well. I found several articles and blog posts by faithful saints who took the 2009 study as a call to arms to stomp out this "epidemic" in our midst.

Now, that it appears that we're not ALL watching porn, does anyone think that we'll be able to remove the "evils of porn" space from our GC bingo cards?

No.

 

If it's a problem for a sizeable minority in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, those talks will continue to be directed to that sizeable minority.

 

If it's a problem for a less-sizeable minority in the Church of Jesus Christ, those talks will continue to be directed to that less-sizeable minority.

 

If it's a problem for a minority in the Church of Jesus Christ, those talks will be continue to be directed to that minority.

 

If it's a problem for a comparatively miniscule minority in the Church of Jesus Christ, those talks will continue to be directed to that miniscule minority.

 

If the shoe fits, take the counsel to heart and wear the shoe; if it doesn't, don't.  But one of the very raisons d'etre of prophets and apostles in our day is to warn against sin, whether that sin is prevalent enough that a sizeable minority partake of it or whether only a  comparatively-miniscule minority does.  You're not suggesting that if one of the lost sheep is mired in the morass of pornography, that that single sheep isn't significant enough in The Shepherd's eyes that he shouldn't leave the ninety-and-nine in search of The One, are you?

[Duncan]

Didn't read the whole thread. Am I allowed to star in porn films now or do I have to stick to being an extra?

 

 

you should ask Joey from Friends

[Stargazer]

I find it funny that when the original stats came out people were defending with the idea "That doesn't reflect Mormons! Not all in Utah are Mormon" and the like.

 

Of course, now, that the stats are in the other direction. We have headlines stating that because it is Utah, it does reflect Mormons.

 

Ya can't lose for winning, can you?  LOL.  Or is that you can't win for losing?  I'm confused.

[canard78]

No.

If it's a problem for a sizeable minority in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, those talks will continue to be directed to that sizeable minority.

If it's a problem for a less-sizeable minority in the Church of Jesus Christ, those talks will continue to be directed to that less-sizeable minority.

If it's a problem for a minority in the Church of Jesus Christ, those talks will be continue to be directed to that minority.

If it's a problem for a comparatively miniscule minority in the Church of Jesus Christ, those talks will continue to be directed to that miniscule minority.

If the shoe fits, take the counsel to heart and wear the shoe; if it doesn't, don't. But one of the very raisons d'etre of prophets and apostles in our day is to warn against sin, whether that sin is prevalent enough that a sizeable minority partake of it or whether only a comparatively-miniscule minority does. You're not suggesting that if one of the lost sheep is mired in the morass of pornography, that that single sheep isn't significant enough in The Shepherd's eyes that he shouldn't leave the ninety-and-nine in search of The One, are you?

Why don't we have the twice annual talk on drinking alcohol then?

Or...

Or...

It does seem that porn gets an over-average treatment from among all the sins and vices that could be singled out.

[thatjimguy]

Didn't read the whole thread. Am I allowed to star in porn films now or do I have to stick to being an extra?

 

Kind of a weird take off of the question "Can I raise barley as a farmer and sell it to beer companies"

[Kenngo1969]

Why don't we have the twice annual talk on drinking alcohol then?

Or...

Or...

It does seem that porn gets an over-average treatment from among all the sins and vices that could be singled out.

If you've never been ensnared in its clutches, congratulations.  (And I mean that sincerely.)  The effects of porn are more insidious and devastating, while in the case of alcohol, that is only the case for an addict.  While I'm certainly not suggesting that there are no alcoholics in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (recovering or otherwise), alcohol doesn't portend the grave potential consequences for as large a proportion of the membership as porn does.

[changed]

Why don't we have the twice annual talk on drinking alcohol then?

Or...

Or...

It does seem that porn gets an over-average treatment from among all the sins and vices that could be singled out.

I think it's because porn is one of the more debatable sins - most people agree that being a drunk is bad, not so many are against porn.  

[canard78]

If you've never been ensnared in its clutches, congratulations.  (And I mean that sincerely.)  The effects of porn are more insidious and devastating, while in the case of alcohol, that is only the case for an addict.  While I'm certainly not suggesting that there are no alcoholics in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (recovering or otherwise), alcohol doesn't portend the grave potential consequences for as large a proportion of the membership as porn does.

 

 

I think it's because porn is one of the more debatable sins - most people agree that being a drunk is bad, not so many are against porn.  

 

Both good points.

 

I'm glad the church is in the minority on this. I agree that porn is never a good thing. I think many people can comfortably and healthily drink alcohol in moderation. An occasional glass of wine with dinner, for example, is probably not that bad (I'm talking in a non-Mormon setting here). I don't think 'porn in moderation' is ever a good thing. 

 

On that basis, I'd agree with you that an absolute line of 'never' being repeated is a good thing. My kids are still young enough to have no interest at all in porn. As they approach their teens I'm very aware of the barage of filth that awaits them at school and friends' houses. I'm terrified and hope DW and I can teach positive messages about respect for their body and other peoples' bodies.

[why me]

Why don't we have the twice annual talk on drinking alcohol then?

Or...

Or...

It does seem that porn gets an over-average treatment from among all the sins and vices that could be singled out.

I think that we need to expand our minds and see porn outside the individual who is watching it. For example, for the most part, porn films put together people who are not married. Thus, they are basically sinning big time since they are fornicating. So when church members watch porn they are basically supporting two people who are ruining their life spirit. And not only are these people sinning who are doing porn, but they do have multiple partners throughout their career.

 

Also, lets just say that I am a young woman from the Czech Republic. I am good looking especially with makeup and my options are limited. I contact a reputable and rather classy porn company who hires me to do porn. I make money and I am treated like a princess. Now this happens to countless women from east europe especially from the Czech Republic. Now what is wrong with this? Nothing.

 

Or I am  struggling college student who needs to make money to pay my tuition. So, I begin to do porn and make the newspapers and get my 15 minutes of fame. What is wrong with that? I  am making money and paying off my college bill.

 

But in both cases I am basically sinning and so how can the church support porn and the ability to watch it?

[why me]

Both good points.

 

I'm glad the church is in the minority on this. I agree that porn is never a good thing. I think many people can comfortably and healthily drink alcohol in moderation. An occasional glass of wine with dinner, for example, is probably not that bad (I'm talking in a non-Mormon setting here). I don't think 'porn in moderation' is ever a good thing. 

 

On that basis, I'd agree with you that an absolute line of 'never' being repeated is a good thing. My kids are still young enough to have no interest at all in porn. As they approach their teens I'm very aware of the barage of filth that awaits them at school and friends' houses. I'm terrified and hope DW and I can teach positive messages about respect for their body and other peoples' bodies.

We humans are rather strangely programmed. We seem to like to watch sex. It is programmed into us. I suppose that it is apart of our DNA, especially if it is geared to our fantasies which porn is. The women are well made up...they look great and many are beautiful in their makeup...etc. But the truth is if one sees these women without their movie makeup, they are nothing special. Most are average looking human beings with their own life stories and personalities.  The best way to cure porn addiction is to watch a film being made. It is boring with cuts and stops and start agains with the director giving directions. No different than a regular movie. With a lot of good or bad acting. The problem is with what it does to their human spirit when they are making a movie. And of course, the exploitative porn companies do not treat the women nicely and require them to do things no normal human being would do. One male porn actor said that after such scenes, he can throw up and the women do not fare much better.

 

Such is the business people support when they watch it. Real life is not a movie and this is the kind of discussion that one needs to have with teenagers. It is exploits not just for the women but also for the men who do it.

Edited April 21, 2014 by why me

[mormonnewb]

I think that we need to expand our minds and see porn outside the individual who is watching it. For example, for the most part, porn films put together people who are not married. Thus, they are basically sinning big time since they are fornicating. So when church members watch porn they are basically supporting two people who are ruining their life spirit. And not only are these people sinning who are doing porn, but they do have multiple partners throughout their career.

 

Also, lets just say that I am a young woman from the Czech Republic. I am good looking especially with makeup and my options are limited. I contact a reputable and rather classy porn company who hires me to do porn. I make money and I am treated like a princess. Now this happens to countless women from east europe especially from the Czech Republic. Now what is wrong with this? Nothing.

 

Or I am  struggling college student who needs to make money to pay my tuition. So, I begin to do porn and make the newspapers and get my 15 minutes of fame. What is wrong with that? I  am making money and paying off my college bill.

 

But in both cases I am basically sinning and so how can the church support porn and the ability to watch it?

 

Agreed on all points.  Porn is yucky!  Yuck!

 

My question is that if the newest data shows that porn viewing isn't really a problem within the Church, should we continue to spend so much time speaking about it?  Sex trafficking is absolutely horrific.  Yet, I can't remember the last time that a church leader has admonished us against selling our children into sexual bondage.  Perhaps, that's because just about no one in the Church is doing this kind of thing, so to bring it up would be just weird.

 

So, notwithstanding the latest study, I strongly SUSPECT that members must be watching porn with sufficient frequency to warrant the constant teachings against it.

[Scott Lloyd]

Agreed on all points. Porn is yucky! Yuck!

My question is that if the newest data shows that porn viewing isn't really a problem within the Church, should we continue to spend so much time speaking about it? Sex trafficking is absolutely horrific. Yet, I can't remember the last time that a church leader has admonished us against selling our children into sexual bondage. Perhaps, that's because just about no one in the Church is doing this kind of thing, so to bring it up would be just weird.

So, notwithstanding the latest study, I strongly SUSPECT that members must be watching porn with sufficient frequency to warrant the constant teachings against it.

No one here has made the suggestion that it isn't a problem that deserves attention or that Church leaders no longer need to warn and teach against.

What <is> in question is the idea that Utahns (and, by extension, Mormons) lead the nation in porn use. Some use that assumption to attack the Church, even going so far as to claim that the Church's teachings with regard to chastity actually contribute to the problem. One individual even voiced that wacky notion on this very thread.

[Storm Rider]

I wonder whether Brooks and others who highlighted the 2009 study will now revisit the subject. Or are they going to ignore it because it doesn't suit their agenda?

 

Do you really have any doubts?  When have you seen this type of critic be responsible enough to set aside their agendas in the face of truth, facts, or anything that debunks their desired outcomes. It would be better if we wished for the sun to raise in the west.  

[Storm Rider]

I think it's because porn is one of the more debatable sins - most people agree that being a drunk is bad, not so many are against porn.  

 

Where are all those stalwart supporters that believe it is an activity that builds moral fiber and good character?

[why me]

Agreed on all points.  Porn is yucky!  Yuck!

 

My question is that if the newest data shows that porn viewing isn't really a problem within the Church, should we continue to spend so much time speaking about it?  Sex trafficking is absolutely horrific.  Yet, I can't remember the last time that a church leader has admonished us against selling our children into sexual bondage.  Perhaps, that's because just about no one in the Church is doing this kind of thing, so to bring it up would be just weird.

 

So, notwithstanding the latest study, I strongly SUSPECT that members must be watching porn with sufficient frequency to warrant the constant teachings against it.

Porn is a multi-billion dollar business and so it should get attention. Also, it is all about chasity and asexual morality and the willingness of many people to get paid to have sex and those who would pay to watch it. It is all about sin and individual choice or free agency. Sex trafficking is not about choice except for the john's who go to sex trafficked prostitutes.

[frank_jessop]

I wonder whether Brooks and others who highlighted the 2009 study will now revisit the subject. Or are they going to ignore it because it doesn't suit their agenda?

What about the Stringham would compel a a revisit of the Harvard publication?

Will Elaine Jarvik of Deseret News revisit the subject? (maybe she has and I am not aware of it) Or will anyone from Deseret News revisit the subject (maybe someone at Deseret News has and I am not aware of it) based on some random blog and page visits from a pornographic website; page visits being apples to the oranges of subscriptions.

Edited April 22, 2014 by frank_jessop

[Scott Lloyd]

What about the Stringham would compel a a revisit of the Harvard publication?

Will Elaine Jarvik of Deseret News revisit the subject? (maybe she has and I am not aware of it) Or will anyone from Deseret News revisit the subject (maybe someone at Deseret News has and I am not aware of it) based on some random blog and page visits from a pornographic website; page visits being apples to the oranges of subscriptions.

It won't be Elaine. She has been retired for several years.

 

But that's a good question. I think the Harvard study got a lot more visibility just by virtue of it being out of Harvard. A lot depends on whether something gets picked up by the wire services, even today with the ubiquitous Internet and a plethora of blogs.

 

If this is an apples-to-oranges comparison, it just goes to show the folly of relying too much on one metric. And I do think there was excessive eagerness to jump to conclusions with the earlier study.

Edited April 22, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[mormonnewb]

No one here has made the suggestion that it isn't a problem that deserves attention or that Church leaders no longer need to warn and teach against.

What <is> in question is the idea that Utahns (and, by extension, Mormons) lead the nation in porn use. Some use that assumption to attack the Church, even going so far as to claim that the Church's teachings with regard to chastity actually contribute to the problem. One individual even voiced that wacky notion on this very thread.

I'm simply saying that we might want to resist the urge to raise our fists in triumph and shout, "We're #40! We're #40!" While the latest study SEEMS to indicate that porn viewership is less in the "Motherland," I suspect that Church leaders are privy to information that porn is still a SIGNIFICANT issue amongst the saints. On the other hand, it's possible that they are simply striving for excellence so that we can one day proudly say, "We're #50!"

[Scott Lloyd]

I'm simply saying that we might want to resist the urge to raise our fists in triumph and shout, "We're #40! We're #40!"

 

Who here is doing that?

 

Sheesh!

[Avatar4321]

The previous study had problems from the beginning iirc, been awhile since I examine what it was actually measuring. This one identifies what it is doing in a much better format plus the author applied some worth while further analysis tools and while there should still be reservations, this is a much better constructed study and therefore will likely have higher reliability.

At the very least, it should stop people from making the unquestioning claim about porn use for the past 5 years.

 

It should if they are honest. Unfortunately, not everyone is bound to be honest.

[Calm]

Avatar,

It would appear my memory is not as good as it should be in the amount I elevated this study above the other. However, I still think my conclusion that people should at least become much more cautious in jumping on the conclusion still stands. We need a lot more expansive and detailed study before conclusions should even be hinted at.

And I don't think it will only be an issue of honesty. Unfortunate strong impressions as have been made by the previous study have a way of sticking around even when presented with contradicting evidences...the brain is very good at filtering or altering new information to conform to old ideas.

Edited April 22, 2014 by calmoriah