Page 30 - Layout 1
P. 30

FEATURE

                                         continued from page 29

  Fifth, pornography is a supranormal stimulus. Nicholas Tin-            by following Britain’s example in protecting children and youth on-
bergen, a Nobel Prize winning behavioral biologist coined the            line by blocking underage access to pornography.
term in the 1970s. He found that when he presented male but-
terflies with a choice between enhanced, but artificial cardboard          Our marvelous brains are designed to allow sexuality to be an
females and real female butterflies, the males chose the artificial      apex emotional and physical experience. Pornography is not only
females over the real females. Internet pornography is a supra-          hijacking human sexuality, it is destroying our empathetic core, our
normal stimulus as well, and young and old males are increasingly        very humanity. It was a Roman, Cicero, who said, “Yet more, if
choosing artificial electronic females over real females for a sub-      emotion be eliminated, what difference is there, I say not between
stitute, masturbatory, counterfeit form of mating. Virtual reality       a man and a brute, but between a man and a rock, or the trunk of
pornography with robotic, haptically filmed female performers            a tree, or any inanimate object?”
using telodildonics is making porn increasingly interactive and
even more supranormal. No wonder girls and women of all ages               We call upon responsible citizens from all nations and cultures,
are finding it is difficult to compete with porn; as Naomi Wolfe         from all perspectives, both secular and religious, and upon health
said, “Today real…women are just bad porn.”                              care professionals to defend and protect the physical and emotional
                                                                         health of our children. We invite them to educate themselves on
  And porn is not just targeting males, as females are increasingly      the harmful effects of pornography on the young minds of our
exposed. Thousands of teenage girls follow male performers such          children. We call upon lawmakers to refuse to protect the pornog-
as James Deen on social media sites, modeling him as the male sex-       raphy industry and to pass laws that will instead protect our children.
ual ideal. When asked about youth viewing his porn movies, he said,      We call upon parents to act responsibly in teaching their children
"If there was a 15-year-old … that is viewing a scene that I'm in or     the harmful effects of pornography. Children mirror what they see
any sort of porn…it's not necessarily a bad thing." Yet many fe-         and feel. Therefore parents must set an example and be cautious
male performers have accused him of violence on and off set, with        and thoughtful regarding their own media choices. Children are
one female performer saying, “James Deen ruthlessly attacked and         our best and brightest hope for the future. They are our only hope.
degraded me, leaving me with mental wounds that took years to            What kind of world will we leave them with? What will be our cul-
heal.” Countless youth are thus being programmed with this toxic         tural and emotional endowment to them? Tolkien made this pro-
“motivational state.” Deen and Margold continue the legacy of the        found statement, ““It is not our part to master all the tides of the
late Hugh Hefner: when asked about Playboy’s objectification of          world, but to do what is in us for the succor of those years wherein
women he famously said, “They are objects!” Sadly, some women            we are set, uprooting the evil in the fields that we know, so that
actually believe this lie that objectification in a world of toxic mas-  those who live after may have clean earth to till. What weather they
culinity is empowering to them. They exemplify Huxley’s “…pop-           shall have is not ours to rule.” Global culture is presently delivering
ulation of slaves who do not have to be coerced, because they love       toxic sexuality to the fertile soil of the minds of our youth. We
their servitude. To make them love it is the task assigned…”             must change that. May we do all we can to give children and emerg-
                                                                         ing adults clean earth to till, so they can better weather their storms,
  Some academic apologists seem to have no concern about youth           and have a chance to experience the full measure of human emotion
and emerging adults allowing these teachers of sexual violence           and love. Thank you.
and eroticized rage to infuse our children with toxic sexuality, and
destroying their ability to feel empathy. They voice no concern
about young female performers who are exposed to drug abuse,
sexual disease, and emotional, physical, and sexual violence on set.
One academic paper even suggests that society should encourage
the use of “…[pornography] at younger ages [to] broaden…”
their perspective.

  We must not allow pornographers and porn proponents to con-
trol the sexual education of our children, as they are now doing. It
is time for a public health approach. All now seem to agree we must
keep tobacco out of the lungs of our children; we must become as
serious about keeping pornography out of their minds. Let us begin

30 San Antonio Medicine • December 2017
   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35