Nguyen 1

Vinh Nguyen
Devin Patten
ENG 1010
7/14/14
Improving the Question of Pornography
In a The Utah Statesman opinion, Questioning Pornography Stereotypes, Liz
Emery attempts to explain her stance on the positives of viewing pornography and the
benefit it creates. With the internet, the increase in viewership and a new generation
that is starting to accept the viewing of porn, Emery attempts to explain not only is
pornography not a negative, it is beneficial to society.
Emery starts out by disclaiming that pornography objectifies therefore degrades
women. She uses Jerry Butler as a source to show women make upwards of $450,000
a year which is six times of men. She also reference Ron Jeremy, stating female
actresses in porn films were happy with their jobs and if they werent producers would
watch for them and let them go.
Emerys next point is debunking the myth that porn decreases mens sexual
desire in real life. She implies that porn stars are not all beautiful and men can
differentiate between illusions from reality. She goes on to show the true culprit in
creating illusions, romance novels. Romance novels create unrealistic men that women
desire and search for.
Nguyen 2

Her last point was refuting porn addiction. Anything can be addictive, its not the
activity that is the problem but the compulsive behavior. Watching porn does not make a
person more violent towards women or create a deviant behavior.
Emery concludes with stating that porn has positive effects on people using a
study from Denmark and AskMen as references. The positive she notes is an increase
in sexual desire, knowledge and basic life qualities.
Although I agree with part of her premise; her lack of credible sources, flawed
logic and reasoning, and the inability to admit the negatives about porn makes her
argument lose credibility.
Emerys first misuse of sources was Jerry Butler and Ron Jeremy. They have
both been in the porn industry but they are both male so their opinions of women being
objectify is not as fair as a survey of all female porn stars opinion about being treated
as objects. Emerys point to defend the objectification of women in porn falls short. The
truth of the matter is both men and women are treated as sex objects in porn. In a study
shown by the Huffington Post, women are objectified by both men and women. As a
society and at a very young age, everyone is conditioned to view women in a certain
way by the media and by our peers. The better question should be, Does porn increase
the way men treat women as objects? According to the 2013 Pornography Statistic,
men who watch porn more frequent than those who dont have a higher infidelity rate,
more likely to engage in paid sex and have a 31% of developing sexually deviant
tendencies. This was from 46 studies published from 1962 to 1995. Overall there has
been a decline in sex crimes per capita against adult females but an increase in child
Nguyen 3

sex crimes. The most popular search category was youth. Emery uses the study from
the University of Hawaii to show that pornography viewing has no increase in violence
toward women. If she showed more details on important claims of study it would have
given her more credibility. Also, people can pick and choose which statistic they choose
to support their claims. Because of the lack of details and the limited studies it makes
Emery lose ethos. Emerys next misstep of defending watching porn is using no source
but her opinion about porn stars looks. The illogical reasoning is simple, if men did not
think porn stars are appealing, then why would they be watching them. If she took a
more logical approach like comparing the sexual lives of couples watching porn vs not
watching porn she would make a stronger argument.
To further strengthen Emerys stance, she uses ad hominem to discredit Jill
Manning. The problem with her discrediting Jill is making claims without evidence to
substantiate it. First, the U.S. senate would not ask Jill to give a presentation if she had
no merit. Secondly, Jill has many sources she cited from and worked with many
agencies to gather her information. To discredit a persons entire work without any
specific detail or facts to debunk it makes Emerys claim weak. Emery also uses a study
from Denmark and AskMen to show her point that watching porn increase sexual drive.
According to the Journal of Adolescent Health, prolonged exposure to pornography
leads to diminished trust between intimate couples.

In Emerys conclusion, she says the bottom line is viewing pornography is not a
bad thing and child porn is bad; again she compares two unrelated subject. If she used
Nguyen 4

better logical arguments that was related to her topic; she would have shown that
although pornography has negative effects, the positive outweighs the negative. Her
inability to acknowledge any negatives like saying those who make negative claims
about pornography have almost entirely no research to back them does her a
disservice.
To conclude, Emery makes some bold statement but uses few credible sources
that are related to her statements. She uses illogical reasoning to substantiate the
claims and goes off topic too often. She does have good points that can be
strengthened with statistics and research.

Nguyen 5

Works Cited
Emery, Liz. Questioning Pornography Stereotypes. The Utah Statesman 5 October
2011: Web.
David A. Fahrenthold Statistic Show Drop In U.S. Rape Cases The Washington Post
www.linkedin.com/pub/jill-c-manning/6/345/852
http://blog.clinicalcareconsultants.com/wp-
content/uploads/2013/12/porn_stats_2013_covenant_eyes.pdf