Friday, March 18, 2011

The Prison of Pornography

One aspect of Western (i.e. white) gay male culture that concerns me is the largely unquestioned prevalence of pornography. I think it's true to say that for many gay men the presence and use of pornography in their lives is simply a given. This should not be confused with what I believe is a certain gay male aesthetic, one that is drawn to highlight, affirm and create beauty in all manner of forms. I don't, for instance, consider the above image to be pornographic, although no doubt some might.

So what do I mean by pornography? Well, lately I’ve been re-reading Robert Jensen’s insightful book Getting Off: Pornography and the End of Masculinity. Regular visitors to The Wild Reed may recall that in December 2009 I shared excerpts from this book, here and here.

Jensen’s focus is on straight pornography, i.e., that type of pornography that “shows us how men who accept the conventional conception of masculinity see women.” He argues that this type of pornography accepts brutality and inequality. It has also become “normalized and mainstreamed,” which shouldn’t be surprising, he says, as pornography’s values “represent mainstream values: the logic of domination and subordination that is central to patriarchy, hyper-patriotic nationalism, white supremacy, and a predatory corporate capitalism.”

Now some may argue that this understanding of pornography (one that reflects a feminist critique of porn) has nothing to do with gay pornography; that gay porn is different. Yet the reality is that much of the pornography made by and for gay men, and indeed much of gay male culture in the West, has appropriated the wider (straight) culture's patriarchal notions of domination and subordination. I mean, think about it: terms and ideas such as top and bottom, butch and fem, top dog and bitch indicate a dynamic that assigns a gay man's position and value in a hierarchical power structure based on his physical position in the sexual act. In gay porn this is often exaggerated and reinforced by acts of body and speech that are cruel and degrading. Some see all of this as a manifestation of the misogyny at the core of patriarchal attitudes and structures. It's a contention that others – gay and straight, male and female – readily dismiss.

Perhaps less easily dismissed is the idea that gay porn often sets men up for disappointment and failure. It does so by setting standards of sexual prowess and physical appearance (from youthful looks to penis size) that are simply impossible for the vast majority of men to meet. For some men, though by no means all, this can bring about (once the thrill of the pornographic moment has passed) feelings of inadequacy, low self-esteem and despondency. Such feelings can, in turn, encourage some to forgo seeking and experiencing the “real thing” and to instead seek more porn and the fantasy and escape it provides. And that’s another problematic aspect of pornography: many men definitely experience it as addictive, or perhaps more accurately, as a compulsion that negatively impacts their relationships and lives. (See the article, "Is Pornography Addictive?")

Thus what Jenson says about straight porn applies, I believe, to gay porn: “Going through the pornographic door typically leads into a prison cell. . . . It is a dead end. It doesn’t give a way to expand our imaginations but a way to constrain them, handing us a sexual script that keeps us locked up and locked down.”

Because I think there’s definitely something of value for gay men in Robert Jensen’s critique of straight porn, I share today the first of three excerpts from Jenson’s book, Getting Off: Pornography and the End of Masculinity. I look forward to any and all comments my readers may care to share regarding Jenson's perspective.


When people ask me the last time I used pornography – not as a researcher but as a consumer – my answer is “yesterday.” By that, I don’t mean that I watched a pornographic film yesterday, but that for those of us with a history of “normal” pornography use as children and young adults, quitting pornography doesn’t necessarily mean we are pornography-free. My sexual imagination was in part shaped by the use of pornography. I still have in my head vivid recollections of specific scenes in pornographic films I saw 25 years ago. To the degree possible, I try to eliminate those images when I am engaging in sexual activity today (whether alone or with my partner), and I think I’m pretty successful at it. The longer I’m away from pornography, the easier it gets. But the term is “to the degree possible.”

. . . What goes on in my body sexually is the result of not just what I think and feel in the moment, but a lifetime of training and experience. I wish I could neatly segregate and eliminate not only the effects of my past pornography use but the effects of all the ugly sexist training I have received in my life about sexuality. I wish I could wall myself off from the sexist messages and images that are all around me today. I wish I could find a way to create a space untouched by those forces in which I could live.

But if I am to be honest, I have to admit something that is painful to face: I still struggle against those forces. I have to work to bracket out of my mind – to the degree possible – those images. I have to work to remember that I can deepen my own experience of intimacy and sexuality only when I let go of those years of training in how to dominate. It’s hard to be honest about these things, because so much of what lives within us is rooted in that domination/subordination dynamic. But it’s a good rule of thumb that the things that are difficult are the most important to confront. That’s easy to say but hard to practice.

Recommended Off-site Links:
A Review of Robert Jensen’s Getting Off: Pornography and the End of Masculinity
– Terry Ornelas (Austin Chronicle, December 7, 2007).
Male Gay Porn: Coming to Terms – Richard Dyer (Jump Cut, March 1985).
The Price of Pleasure: Talking with a Vocal Critic of the Porn Industry – Shawn Alff (The Daily Loaf, January 24, 2011).
Porn Addiction Destroys Relationships, Lives – Regan McMahon (San Francisco Chronicle, February 22, 2010).
Is Pornography Addictive? – Martin F. Downs (
The Porn Myth: Why Pornography Turns Men Off the Real Thing
– Naomi Wolf (New York Magazine, October 29, 2003).
The Gay Male Quest for Democratic, Mutual, Reciprocal Sex (Part 1)
The Leveret (August 7, 2008).
The Gay Male Quest for Democratic, Mutual, Reciprocal Sex (Part 2)
The Leveret (August 17, 2008).

See also the previous Wild Reed posts:
Sex as Mystery, Sex as Light (Part 1)
Sex as Mystery, Sex as Light (Part 2)
Relationship: The Crucial Factor in Sexual Morality
Human Sex: Weird and Silly, Messy and Sublime
Making Love, Giving Life
The Holy Pleasure of Intimacy
The Non-Negotiables of Human Sex
A Wise and Thoughtful Study of Sexual Ethics
What Is It That Ails You?
The Allure of St. Sebastian
The Trouble with the Male Dancer (Part 1)
The Trouble with the Male Dancer (Part 2)
The Trouble with the Male Dancer (Part 3)
Thoughts on Mallorca's "Naked Easter" Calendar
A Fresh Take on Masculinity
Learning from the East
Jesus Was a Sissy


Mareczku said...

Lots of food for thought here. I remember as a teen how I thought girlie magazines were terrible and degrading. I was like a junior member of the legion of decency. Couldn't figure out what guys saw in those dirty magazines. I thought it was because I was a good Catholic boy.

Fran said...

Wow - what a powerful post. I had missed your earlier posts on the topic, so this was new for me.

Honestly, I don't know where to begin with this... What an important topic.

My response comes not only from being a woman, but as a woman who was abused and exposed to pornography at a very young age. It has impacted me and it impacts me still, in various ways. (I am 53, so this is from many, many years ago.)

In any case, gay porn is seen through a "no big thing" lens but it does matter.

From body types to performance issues and every type of intimacy problem, porn poses a problem no matter who or what the orientation.

Thank you for this.

brian gerard said...

I had read this book some time ago and found the author's analysis limited by a world view with little footing in reality. He borrows a "feminist" critique of masculinity then applies it to case after case of specific types of sex scenes to further his point. It really is unconvincing. Really, anyone who watches a lot of porn for an "academic" purpose has some personal issues that would be better addressed with a therapist.

What is more interesting is that you titled this post "The PRISON of Pornography". Are you trying to warn readers away from porn based on some experience - or just using this as a vehicle to make the point that sometimes sex contributes to intimacy, and it may be that some folks are missing out on this? I can't tell.

Mareczku said...

I think the dehumanizing aspects are the most troubling. I don't know if this is just as harmful for men involved as it is for the women. I think it is important that all people be respected and treated with respect. People want to be treated with respect and not objectified.

Michael J. Bayly said...

Hi Brian,

Thanks for your sharing your thoughts on this subject.

The title of this post is drawn from Jenson's contention that porn “typically leads into a prison cell." He believes that pornography "doesn’t give a way to expand our imaginations but a way to constrain them, handing us a sexual script that keeps us locked up and locked down.”

I think a key word here is "typically." I don't believe everyone who watches or looks at porn becomes "addicted" or "imprisoned." I've actually found aspects of gay porn quite instructive in terms of the mechanics of sex. Yet I've discovered other aspects of porn to be problematic. I don't think I'm alone in this. What I do find interesting, and what in part prompted this series of posts, is how the prevalence of porn in gay male culture is largely unquestioned and unexamined.

I think people's deepest longing is for intimacy. That's not to say that sexual release without intimacy is wrong or should be avoided at all times. I just question if we really want to support an entire industry that's all about exploiting that very human need in ways that often keep people stuck there and/or reinforce limiting patriarchal notions concerning gender and sexuality.

As you can probably tell, I have no problem with a feminist perspective and critique of porn. It's simply one of no doubt many ways of looking at this issue. I sense you reject this particular perspective. Do you have another that you could recommend for consideration and discussion?



Michael J. Bayly said...

Hi Mark and Fran,

Thanks for your comments.

Fran, I particularly appreciate the honest sharing of your journey and perspective.

And, Mark, I agree with you that we should always endeavor to treat people with respect and not objectify them.



Fran said...

I love what Mareczku said in his second comment.

Michael thank you for your always thoughtful treatment of issues and of those of us who read and comment here.

brian gerard said...

Hi Michael,

First, about feminism and pornography. I do believe a women's point of view on the subject has great worth. I pointed up "feminist" in my comment because I think Jensen's book purports to be but it is not. I don't believe that Jensen finds a broad, or even useful feminist frame for his thesis. He takes Dworkin's over-worn "porn = violence" critique and finds it in a narrow view of selected vignettes. I think a useful, current view can be found in Jan Juffer's "At Home with Pornography".

To the larger point of your post, I think pointing at pornography is a bit of a straw man and distracts from the underlying issue of men in relationships. It is really not that big of a deal by itself. People use porn to enhance their fantasy lives. So? The more useful question is why do so many people, men and women, find the need to fantasize instead of engaging in "real" relationships. I think it is because we have been trying for centuries to enforce an unnatural form of monogamy on human beings that are not built to manage it. We lack intimacy in relationships because we expect that any deep love cannot include any physical part except for ONE person who must somehow meet all are various needs.

If the goal is more intimate relationships, then porn is not the problem. Enforced monogamy is a prison of much greater proportion.

Mick said...

Pornography is an arousal and masturbatory aid. The exploration of its cultural impact is worthy, but questioning its very existence (or supposed prevalence today in gay culture - hah!) seems a bit prescriptive.

Michael J. Bayly said...

Great discussion taking place here. I appreciate the different perspectives being shared.

Brian, thanks for highlighting Juffer's book. For those interested, information about it can be found here.

Mick, what you say about pornography may well be true for those viewing porn. Yet what about those involved in its making? I'd say it's considerably more than an "arousal and masturbatory aid" for them. How does this fact figure into the discussion?



Fr. Robert W. Caruso said...

Interesting subject! I think "gay porn" or "porn" in general does engage in promoting unrealistic aspects to the so-called "gay culture". I can also understand that porn can indeed imprison closeted homosexuals who are already lacking in an authentic erotic awareness of one's self in relation to others. I use the word "erotic" in a broader sense (not just mere genital arousal), which encompasses one's whole sexual being. As humans, we are sexual beings by nature. That is, we crave intimacy with others as well as with ourselves. We must seek a deeper and more spiritual understanding of being gay and lesbian apart from superficial stimulants like porn.

Porn is very superficial; it can be fun, but in the end it is meaningless, esp. when it comes to fostering a more authentic gay spirituality and identity. Porn is not by itself though; here, I also include other such superficialities that have infiltrated the "gay lifestyle" in a negative way like materialism, negative forms of narcissism, ageism, and overwhelming idolization of youth.

Porn can and does lead to addictive behaviors which does imprison one's eroticism: one's entire being body and soul. I am not advocating that porn be abolished, but I think it is something that I could live without quite easily. My "gayness" nor my erotic lifestyle is not dependent on porn...I can indeed have intimacy without porn.

Of course, one should realize my own prejudice in that I am influenced by a particular Christian gay ethic of eroticism. I work within a particular model of ethics. I do not share an "anything goes" morality that some advocate for in the "gay community." Meaning, I take into account that the most authentic and intimate gay relationship is one fostered in a committed and loving relationship between two persons.

Thank you for the post Michael! ~Bob

brian gerard said...

Thanks, Michael,

Regarding people who making porn, there is no compelling evidence that folks in the legitimate adult entertainment industry are being forced to do anything. They just have jobs.

brian gerard said...


I have to disagree that the most "authentic" relationship can only occur between two people. My authentic and intimate relationships have not been built on the false scaffold of monogamy. Nor, does a polymorphous sexuality disregard ethical regard for one's lovers.

Regarding your view on porn, I think that along with Michael you are making a mountain out of a molehill. If anyone is "imprisoned" by porn this is not something caused by pornography. They have deeper issues that contribute to keeping themselves from intimacy or full expression of their sexual selves.

brian gerard said...

sorry, polymorphous should read polyamorous.

Michael J. Bayly said...

Richard Dyer is a gay socialist who's written an interesting piece on this issue. The full text of his article, "Male Gay Porn: Coming to Terms," can be viewed here. Following are some excerpts.


Gay porn, like much of the gay male ghetto, has developed partly out of the opening up of social spaces achieved by the gay liberation movements. But porn and the ghetto have overwhelmingly developed within the terms of masculinity. The knowledge that gay porn (re)produces must be put together with the fact that gay men (like straight men but unlike women) do have this mode of public sexual expression available to them, however debased it may be. Like male homosexuality itself, gay porn is always in this very ambiguous relationship to male power and privilege, neither fully within it nor fully outside it. But that ambiguity is a contradiction that can be exploited. In so far as porn is part of the experimental education of the body, it has contributed to and legitimized the masculine model of gay sexuality, a model that always implies the subordination of women. But rather than just allowing it to carry on doing so, it should be our concern to work against this pornography by working with/ within pornography to change it — either by interventions within pornographic film-making itself. We might do this by the development of porn within the counter cinemas (always remembering that the distinction between porn in the usual commercial sense and sexual underground/ alternative/ independent cinema has always been blurry when you come to look at the films themselves). Or we may develop a criticism that involves audiences reflecting on their experience of pornography (rather than by closing down on reflection by straight condemnation or celebration of it).

. . . Porn (all porn) is, for good or ill (and currently mainly for ill), part of how we live our sexuality. How we represent sexuality to ourselves is part of how we will live it, and porn has rather cornered the market on the representation of sexuality. . . . Criticism of porn should be opening up reflection on the education we are receiving in order to change it.

Michael J. Bayly said...

Here's the perspective of Dr. Chyng Sun, maker of the documentary film The Price of Pleasure: Pornography, Sexuality and Relationships. She's responding to a question that reflects Brian's comments on monogamy: "Do you think our culture’s emphasis on lifelong monogamy as the normative relationship has created a need for unsatisfied partners to seek sexual satisfaction through porn?"

Here's her response:

"In a society where half of marriages fail, I don’t think most people really take 'lifelong monogamy' that seriously. I also don’t think most people find 'sexual satisfaction' through pornography. Pornography is very much like McDonald’s: it’s everywhere, it’s cheap, the taste is predictable, and it does the job quickly but also temporarily. For some people, there is no risk involved in watching porn and masturbating, because they think they don’t know how to get better sex, or they can’t afford it (insecurity, lack of opportunity, lack of social and communicative skills, etc.). Or it has become a routine, a habit, or even a compulsion — particularly if the watchers started doing it when they were young.

"We need more discussion about and understanding of sexuality, intimacy, and relationships. And I don’t think that merely watching images of people having sex, regardless of whether the images are violent or degrading, can help advance too much of that discussion. When I discuss with female friends their love/sex lives, the complaints are mostly about the difficulty of finding someone to connect with intellectually and emotionally, but not about the lack of good porn to masturbate to. Is sex really so hard if the involved people are open, secure, communicative, creative, playful, and kind? Is it so hard that we have to look at on-screen menus in order to know what to do, or even how to get aroused? So the issues are more fundamental. How do we become open, secure, communicative, creative, playful, and kind individuals? What could impair our ability to do so?"

The full interview with Chyng Sun can be found here.

David said...

I bet there is a a market for "fair trade" porn. The question is who would certify and what would the standards include? It seems the issue is not a value judgment on individuals uses of pornography or erotic materials but a nod to the fact that much of the production end leaves open ethical questions which should be the concern of the consumer of the product just as more and more people are concerned about "fair trade", "eco-conscious", and other ethical issues.

So the issue is not what people like to view or not as part of meeting their personal sexual needs but rather when is the industry exploitative. Just as with prostitution, I think the questions here are more touchy and difficult and not as simple as they may first appear.

David said...

It's interesting that gay porn can be purchased for view in even the most conservative towns and (at least until very, very recently) has been more readily available to gay and bi men in this country than any other affirming view of gay/bi experience.

Gay porn moved off the center point of gay and bi male culture in this country as we now have more and more lgbt images and stories outside the realm of the pornographic. Of course, simply to mention same-sex sexual attraction at some points in our culture's history and in some places was enough to get a work labeled pornographic till relatively recently, so I think the place of the pornographic in the gay/bi man's life is bound to change with equality and liberation in ways many would have never imagined, including our own community calling for us to be responsible in our consumption.

Mark said...

Trying to write more objectively than I usually do here:

1. Michael, I find your critique of porn is spot-on accurate for all persuasions - gay, straight, whathaveyou.

2. The assertion that monogamy is an unattainable ideal is a real problem.

First, it suggests that GLBT folks are not interested in monogamy, which is not true. Some are, some aren't, some don't care to say.

Second, I suggest that issues with monogamy cut across sexual orientation and marriage rights. Some people are monogamous, some are not. Some people are married, some are not.

Third, a REAL show-stopper for self-identified traditionalists, like me, is the bald-faced statement that "we have been trying for centuries to enforce an unnatural form of monogamy on human beings that are not built to manage it."

There are people who are monogamous. Some are inclined that way. Some choose it. Some find that inclination & choice positively reinforce each other. It can be an important part of relational stability in pair-bonding, and this stability, in turn, is good for one's children & family.

To the extend that homosexuality is perceived as a "monogamy optional" orientation makes the effort to secure marriage rights that much ore difficult, wouldn't you say?

This results in two, tough questions:

- to straight people: you claim monogamy is important but you don't act like it. Whether its open marriage, sneaking around or serial monogamy, you publicly assert a standard you don't remotely adhere to. Why?

- to glbt folks: do you realize the damage that this idea - "we have been trying for centuries to enforce an unnatural form of monogamy on human beings that are not built to manage it" - is doing to your cause for acceptance? Shouldn't there be a frank discussion about this?

Fr. Robert W. Caruso said...

i Brian,

Yes, I am aware of the so-called "polyamorous" relationships, and they may well be healthy alternatives for some gay and lesbian persons. I do not place judgment on relationships like this. As I stated above, I come from a very specific ethic and it is a Christian/Old Catholic one, which upholds the idea of monogamous relationships between two persons (same-sex and/or hetero), and this is the model I work and advocate out of.

Polygamous relationships are still outside the normal boundaries for most Americans, whether this be hetero or homo b/c both groups (albeit they are of a minority status within their respective groups) support this kind of relationship lifestyle. For me, this is not so much a "gay issue" as it is a relational issue that both heterosexuals and homosexuals grapple with. It is difficult enough to get society to buy into two person gay and lesbian relationships as being meaningful, and this is where I place my social justice activities for gay and lesbian issues.

As for porn...the main thrust of my argument was not that porn imprisons people so much as it adds nothing significant to a relationship. It is very superficial at best when discussing the intricate relational details among same-sex relationships. Again I work out a Christian gay relational model, and the persons I work with pastorally are not so much concerned about civil non-religious issues, but rather gay Christian spirituality and sexuality.

Porn can and does, however, imprison people. To believe otherwise is just not looking at the whole reality of the situation. All porn is not bad, but it is also not all good! I do not buy your argument that it's not the porn it's the person who imprisons him or herself when the porn industry feeds and preys on addictive and fetish behaviors. Porn is not some objective innocent bystander of addictive behavior, but rather preys on and is a by-product of addictive behaviors. To put it bluntly, porn is a most insidious instrument to addiction. I have seen it ruin peoples lives to the point of breaking a person down and making them feel very lost. Much of the porn industry depends on sexual addicts and sexually suppressed hetero and homosexuals for their livelihood. I do not believe that all porn should be banned (some of it indeed expresses the beauty of the human body), but much of this industries behavior towards addicts needs curbing.

Fr. Robert W. Caruso said...

Mark, my comment below is concerning your question:

" glbt folks: do you realize the damage that this idea - "we have been trying for centuries to enforce an unnatural form of monogamy on human beings that are not built to manage it" - is doing to your cause for acceptance? Shouldn't there be a frank discussion about this?"

I, and many other gay and lesbian persons, do not necessarily abide by the "GLBT...XYQZ, et al" acronym. It groups and limits gay and lesbian issues in a manner that is too categorical and superficial. That is, the so-called GLBT community does not speak for all (and I would even go so far as to state for the majority) of gay and lesbian persons. Also, I am uncomfortable with combining gay and lesbian social justice issues with transgender issues. Not because I am against transgender persons, but because the issues are wholly different, e.g. I as a gay man cannot relate to a transgender issue with the same depth that I can with my lesbian and gay sisters and brothers.

This stated, your question assumes that all gay and lesbian people agree and support the so-called polyamorous relationships; this is a fallacy because not all gays and lesbians agree on this issue internally. Your assumption that all gays and lesbians agree on this issue in your question, and I do not mean this in a pejorative way, is actually quite natural and is a form of heterosexism. For example, when a group of heterosexuals agree to polyamorous relationships (and there are many who do) there is no ipso facto assumption by most people that all heterosexuals agree on this issue.

Your statement can be interpreted as offensive to gay and lesbian persons because it assumes we need to prove to the general public how much we are like the rest of the hetero community. The reality is that we are not like the heterosexuals, we are different in how we express our sexual being. This should not be a divisive issue, but one that acknowledges and celebrates the complexity of human nature in general.

Although I am not one who believes in the value of poly relationships, I do believe that heterosexism needs to be eradicated in all its insidious and stealth-like forms, and the only way to do this is to call it out when it rears its ugly face.

Your question, re-worded, is a good one for gays and lesbians to consider internally as we continue to seek equal rights as human beings.

Shalom, ~B

brian gerard said...

"to glbt folks: do you realize the damage that this idea - "we have been trying for centuries to enforce an unnatural form of monogamy on human beings that are not built to manage it" - is doing to your cause for acceptance? Shouldn't there be a frank discussion about this?"

Many people have been having all sorts of discussions about, acceptance, tolerance, plurality, freedom ... the list goes on, within and outside of the glbt community for years. So, I am not sure where this comment comes from other than a generalized fear of offending the sensibilities of a christian majority.

brian gerard said...

From Richard Dyer "...masculine model of gay sexuality, a model that always implies the subordination of women. " This is just an unsupported assertion. A common belief, sure, but not true.

brian gerard said...

Bob, this molehill has become a real mountain indeed! I do appreciate your clearly expressed view of the specific christian ethic you live out. I take exception to the notion of pornography being addictive. Actual addiction is applicable to consumable drugs; alcohol, opiates, etc. While it has become a commonplace to apply the frame of addiction to all manner of things, in fact what is true is that some folks have bad habits. Habits are not addictions. Do people watch porn instead of having sex with others? Sure. So what?

Mark said...

Fr. Bob, Shalom back at ya.

You do a better job of expressing my point than I did. I am gladly receive your corrective comments.

When you say "Your question, re-worded, is a good one for gays and lesbians to consider internally as we continue to seek equal rights as human beings" - this is what I was trying to get at, the "...question, re-worded...for consider[ation] internally. I would rather see that question discussed at large, rather than internally, but I understand why its an "internal" issue at this time.

In the mean time, there is PLENTY of discussion straight folks should be having about this same topic. I am less concerned about things like folks who come from other cultures, cultures that continue to practice polygamy (to say nothing of the rare practice polyandry), and, in a certain sense, the home-grown practice of polygamy.

I say "certain sense" because I'm referring to a somewhat academic look at polygamy by groups like LDS splinter groups. Given the real trauma inflicted on women & children by this practice, any academic interest I have takes last place to a immediate & robust application of the law, and action by law enforcement, to protect people at any risk of harm.

I think there can be a real point-of-connection between what (for lack of better labels, and I take your point about how limiting & constricting labels can be with respect to the actual, wide array of human behavior) I'll call "progressive" and "traditional" folk re/separation, divorce and re-marriage, and the prevalence of serial monogamy in our society. I take a dim view of it.

Granted there can be good reasons for all three things - separation, divorce and re-marriage. But I would have them rare events. Too often there are people who have had a succession of partners under the cover of marriage, or something like marriage, and I wonder how it affects all concerned? Once, I don't like it but I'll put up with it. But two, three, even four marriages? WTF?

With respect for all the confidences you must keep in your priestly ministry, what do you see "in the field?"

Mareczku said...

You make very good points, Father Bob. I have learned from what you have written here. This gives me a lot of food for thought. Do you think that male erotica or porn is a part of the lives of most gay men? To me it seems that in a way male erotica is directed more at men than at women.

brian gerard said...

Well written, scientific description of actual addiction VS "dependence" or habits