JUMP TO COMMENTS
Previous
Next

Pamela Anderson pens Op-ed About How You Shouldn’t Watch Porn

kHMCYAR[1]

Do not adjust your computer screens: Former Playboy model and ’90s sex symbol Pamela Anderson has written an editorial for The Wall Street Journal about the dangers of pornography.

Co-authored by celebrity rabbi Shmuley Boteach (who, among other things, is a surrogate for Donald Trump), the paywalled editorial — which may or not be missing a word from its headline — uses the curious peg of Anthony Weiner’s sexting scandal to talk about the evils of pornography. It’s a remarkably thorough catalog of arguments the morality police have been making since the first caveman scratched a picture of a naked lady on a wall, not limited to but including:

Porn is a threat to marriage and fatherhood. (Only men watch porn.)

Via BroBible:

“From our respective positions of rabbi-counselor and former Playboy model and actress, we have often warned about pornography’s corrosive effects on a man’s soul and on his ability to function as husband and, by extension, as father.”

“Sorry I missed your baseball game, son. I was busy beating off to Sasha Grey.”

Porn is new and scary.

“This is a public hazard of unprecedented seriousness given how freely available, anonymously accessible and easily disseminated pornography is nowadays.”

It’s nothing like the old days, when men enjoyed Pamela Anderson’s “Playboy” pictorials for strictly above-the-waist reasons.

pamelaanderson[1]

Porn will tie you to a chair and force you to watch it, “Clockwork Orange” style.

“Put another way, we are a guinea-pig generation for an experiment in mass debasement that few of us would have ever consented to, and whose full nefarious impact may not be known for years.”

In addition to ruining your life, porn will creep into your children’s bedrooms and molest them where they sleep.

“How many families will suffer? How many marriages will implode? How many talented men will scrap their most important relationships and careers for a brief onanistic thrill? How many children will propel, warp-speed, into the dark side of adult sexuality by forced exposure to their fathers’ profanations?”

Next, Pammy and Shmuley hold up Anthony Weiner — whose transgressions had nothing to do with porn and everything to do with his kink for cheesy banter followed by public humiliation — as an indicative example of modern men who, despite having seemingly everything in life, are bored with their wives and girlfriends…because they’re able to watch strangers have sex on the internet.

[His] behavior squares with what we have observed with all too many men, especially in the U.S. or other Western countries that enjoy liberal values and material prosperity. These are men who, by any objective measure, have succeeded yet regard themselves as failures. These are men who feel marooned in lassitude because they enjoy physical security, who feel bereft and bored even if they are blessed to have the committed love of a wife or girlfriend. These are men who believe that cruising the internet for explicit footage of other women or sharing such images of themselves over the remote communication offered by smartphones are risqué but risk-free distractions from the tedium.

Why make love to a human woman when you could spend five minutes jerkin’ it into a gym sock?

While they realize it’s impossible to ban porn, they believe the solution is “an honest dialogue” about how fuck movies are the cause of all existential malaise under late capitalism.

Via Breitbart:

“The march of technology is irreversible and we aren’t so naive as to believe that any kind of imposed regulation could ever reseal the Pandora’s box of pornography. What is required is an honest dialogue about what we are witnessing—the true nature and danger of porn—and an honor code to tamp it down in the collective interests of our well-being as individuals, as families and as communities.”

They also suggest a return to IRL “sensuality,” which implicitly exists within the bounds of holy matrimony, hetero-monogamy, and vanilla, procreative sex.

Via BroBible:

“Now is the time for an epochal shift in our private and public lives. Call it a ‘sensual revolution.’ The sensual revolution would replace pornography with eroticism—the alloying of sex with love, of physicality with personality, of the body’s mechanics with imagination, of orgasmic release with binding relationships.

Simply put, we must educate ourselves and our children to understand that porn is for losers—a boring, wasteful and dead-end outlet for people too lazy to reap the ample rewards of healthy sexuality.”

1400761938991.cached[1]

Whenever I read a screed like this, I’m struck by the amount of power these people ascribe to a thing that is, for most people, little more than a trivial amusement you enjoy in the 10 minutes between when your head hits the pillow and you pass out. (That Pamela Anderson’s career is built on her willing participation in softcore porn adds a tasty layer of hypocrisy.) It doesn’t seem to bother them that most of their arguments are long discredited; scientists are not convinced porn addiction even exists.

That said, I would treasure a chance to look at porn through their hysterical eyes, if only for the brvtal Boschian fantasy that awaits.

If you’re looking to go down a fascinating rabbit hole, read this Tablet article on Boteach’s insane life and career. Fun fact: His cousin is one of the arms dealers the movie “War Dogs” was based on.

SOURCE

JUMP TO COMMENTS
Previous
Next
Please wait...

And Now... A Few Links From Our Sponsors

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!