Getting Off: Pornography and the End of Masculinity

by Robert Jensen

In our culture, porn makes the man. So argues Robert Jensen in Getting Pornography and the End of Masculinity . Jensen’s treatise begins with a simple “Be a man.” It ends with a defiant “I chose to struggle to be a human being.” The journey from masculinity to humanity is found in the candid and intelligent exploration of porn’s devastating role in defining masculinity. Getting Off seamlessly blends personal anecdotes from Jensen’s years as a feminist anti-pornography activist with scholarly research. In his trademark conversational style, he shows how mainstream pornography reinforces social definitions of manhood and influences men’s attitudes about women and how to treat them. Pornography is a thriving multi-billion-dollar industry; it drives the direction of emerging media technology. Pornography also makes for complicated politics. These days, anti-porn arguments are assumed to be “anti-sex” and thus a critical debate is silenced. This book breaks that silence. Alarming and thought-provoking, Getting Off asks tough, but crucial, questions about pornography, sex, manhood, and the way toward genuine social justice. Robert Jensen is an associate professor in the School of Journalism at the University of Texas at Austin. He is the author of The Heart of Confronting Race, Racism and White Privilege and Citizens of the The Struggle to Claim Our Humanity .

Genres: Feminism, Nonfiction, Sexuality, Sociology, Gender, Pornography, Psychology

200 pages, Paperback

First published September 1, 2007

About the author

Robert Jensen is an emeritus professor in the School of Journalism and Media at the University of Texas at Austin. He lives in northern New Mexico with his wife, Eliza Gilkyson, a two-time Grammy-nominated singer/songwriter.

Reviews

[Heron · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book destroyed me. Jensen does say that these ideas will hurt women - namely that mainstream heterosexual pornography facilitates American rape culture and misogyny. I cried the first night I began reading. But I kept reading because, as a radical feminist, I want to know - I want to know the arguments against porn, something which as a liberal I have often felt obligated to defend. No more. Mainstream heterosexual pornography is a visual, pervasive symbol of the patriarchal cancer that eats away at our society.

[Martha · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent. Thoughtful, provocative, sensitive. The only other male I've known who writes and speaks out on this issue with such thoroughness and sensitivity is John Stoltenberg. I find so few men who take on pornography, not to mention the whole idea of the need for an "end to masculinity," (in favor of "humanity") that it moves me to hear a man delving into this. It is encouraging. Robert Jensen also takes on the racism involved in pornography.

Jensen did a study of the type of pornography that is most commonly viewed. While I usually go through books rapidly, at least books that I like, this one took me awhile to read. It is emotionally difficult to contemplate the details of the effects of pornography, despite having already read quite a bit about about the pornography industry. But I think this is one of the most important books I've read because of the implications and the information it provides. I am among those who cannot stomach studying pornography in any depth because it infuriates me to know that this can go on to such an extent with so many defending it or being complicit. Therefore I am thankful that there are individuals who will take on this emotionally draining work. And not just any individuals, but pro-feminist men who are seeking greater justice and deeper connections between human beings.

There are plenty of women who study and write persuasively about pornography, such as Diana Russell, Andrea Dworkin, Gail Dines, Katharine MacKinnon, Laura Lederer and many more. But there are not as long a list of men, the gender that "consumes" most of the pornography. And there are certainly not many men who speak with the level of sensitivity as Robert Jensen. This is not his first book on pornography. He joined Gail Dines and Ann Russo in the 1998 published book "Pornography, The Production and Consumption of Inequality."

At the end of the book, Jensen seeks to find what characteristics are strictly "male" and not found in females. He draws us toward the idea of questioning the value of any characterizations as "masculine," versus "human" when he finds none that are absolute. This is another important issue worth exploring for its impact on human relations.

I highly recommend this book. Of all the over 600 books I've posted to goodreads, this is one of the most important because the issue is central to the lives and relationships of so many people. While it deals with heterosexuals, the issues it raises is pertinent to the intimate relationships of any two people. I hope that it is widely read and stimulates deeper, more caring relationships, as well as activism challenging the ever-growing, ever more violent pornography industry.

[Jennie · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book deeply disturbed me. In fact, it upset me so much I had to stop reading it and made my partner get rid of it. Because as much as I was horrified by it, I couldn't put it down. Ultimately, however, I didn't finish it. I couldn't. It was wrecking my ability to look at or talk to my man.

That being said, Jensen brought out a lot of things that I keep in a small closet in my brain. The things that I don't want to take out and look at. Jensen's analysis of porn is that it is violently anti-woman and that it is getting worse. And I don't mean that its anti-woman in the sense that women don't like porn or that its made and marketed for men. Its anti-woman in the sense that the messages it conveys about women are violent and horrible.

Jensen spends a lot of time breaking down differnt porn scenes. The things that he points out are the details. Like to woman who was on the verge of tears, or the women who have pained looks on their faces. Or the woman who was literally chocking on a dick. Or the women who scream in pain (not pleasure). Even worse than that this happens is that the editors choose to keep these things in the porn. Worse still are the movies where the commentary actually acknowledge those things and make a joke of it. Frankly, how the hell is it funny that some dude's sexual actions hurt a woman?

Now, I've seen plenty of porn in my life. I'm not one of those girls who is horrified by the idea of seeing sex. I don't find it threatening to my relationships or think that my man watching porn means that he loves me less. BUT, porn has changed in the last ten years. (I wasn't really old enough to watch much porn before then). I have been distinctly more and more uncomfortable with porn as the years have passed. I haven't been able to really put my finger on it. Or, more probably, I haven't wanted to look at why I am uncomfortable.

I'm uncomfortable because I can't imagine that anyone enjoys having a penis shoved down the back of their throat, or that its anything other than painful to have two penises in any orifice. I'm uncomfortable because most male-female porn shows things that I KNOW have to be physically uncomfortable at best, terribly painful at worst.

This book made me look at something I didn't want to see. I have a live and let live attitude, but Jensen did an excellent job of pointing out the anti-woman attitude of general porn. Its not just the "extreme" porn that has this attitude that women are just things to act on sexually, and that their pain is funny at best and a turn on at worse.

I feel that Jensen did a great job with his thesis, but I didn't like his voice. He came off like a sanctimonious asshole. No, really. He's so much more enlightened than everyone else. And he's a feminist. He feels it necessary to tell you that he's a feminist at least once a page. He also name drops every radical feminist from the past 25 years.

The book is interesting, he does an excellent job proving his theory. But this book is VERY hard to read. You have to be really ready to look at gender relations in order to read this. I imagine this is just as hard to look at as a man (or at least a man who likes to think of himself as someone who likes and respects women) as it was to look at as a woman. However, I think its a conversation that is worth having and is important to examine how society reinforces sexual violence.

[Rachele Hayward · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was at times deeply, deeply disturbing to me - parts of it were so sick I could barely get through it - but also oddly funny sometimes and certainly very interesting overall. I would recommend it only to people who are prepared to think very hard about feminism and gender equality ... you can't just skim it and go back to your happy flirting-with-drunk-strangers-at-the-bar life. Jensen's thesis is essentially that the conception of masculinity in our culture is one of dominance and aggression, usually expressed on/over women - he goes so far as to call it "rape culture"... one where sexual violence has been normalized. In the first part of the book, he uses content analyses of mainstream heterosexual pornography to illustrate just how deeply ingrained and extreme this misogynistic paradigm is in our culture. The rest of the book is spent on arguments proving that this paradigm of masculinity is harmful to men, women, and a healthy society at large, and discussion of how we can combat it. While the format is at times inconsistent (Jensen alternately repeats himself, gets too philosophical and academic, and gets too personal and caught up in his own life), the straight-up descriptions of the pornography in the middle of the book is something that EVERYONE - man, women, transgender, porno fan, whomever - should read. Everyone could use a wakeup call to the fact that this shit exists out there, is wildly popular in fact, and, as Jensen points out, happens to REAL women in the REAL world. Yes, the stuff is supposed to be "fantasy" and yes, the women are paid to do it, but it is still a deeply disturbing experience to read about in graphic detail and realize what it really means: that the patriarchy is alive and we have a whole lot more striving for womens rights and equality to do.

[Brad keil · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you like porn, read this and see why it is that you shouldn't

[Rebekka Steg · Rating 4 out of 5]

I've read Getting Off: Pornography and the End of Masculinity by Robert Jensen over the past couple of weeks. The book isn't long (just under 200 pages), but it isn't easy reading and I couldn't really stomach reading more than 15-25 pages at a time.

*Trigger Warning* This post will discuss issues of pornography and violence, questions that are important, but might be difficult to handle.

From the back cover:

"Pornography is a big business, a multi-billion dollar industry. It also makes for complicated politics. Anti-pornography arguments are frequently dismissed as patiently "anti-sex" - and ultimately "anti-feminist" - silencing at the gate a critical discussion of pornography's relationship to violence against women and even what it means to be a "real man."

In his most personal and difficult book to date, Robert Jensen launches a powerful critique of mainstream pornography that promises to reignite one of the fiercest debates in contemporary feminism. At once alarming and thought-provoking, Getting Off asks tough but crucial questions about pornography, manhood, and paths toward genuine social justice."

My Thoughts on Pornography and Prostitution

I've always found the issue of pornography and, taking things a step further, prostitution very difficult. I grew up in a very religious (Christian) setting, and as a child and teenager I was against both, purely based on religious grounds. As I began questioning religion, I also began questioning the ethics, values and belief that I had previously accepted without consideration.

As many other feminists and liberals I have had a long period of thinking and believing, that whatever you do, as long as it doesn't hurt or harm someone else, that is your own business. Consequently, if someone made the choice to participate in pornography or engage in prostitution, I didn't feel I had the right to judge that choice or tell other people how to live their lives.

However, over the past couple of years I've come to realize that it isn't that simple (nothing ever is). No choice is ever made in a vacuum. There's a vast difference between the choice made by a middle class, educated woman to become an escort, and a lower-class, single-mum to become a prostitute. More often than not, the women who talk about their right to choose to do sex work belong to the first category, with a natural interest in justifying their choice.

But of course pornography isn't the same as prostitution, but the two definitely intersect and that is where Getting Off: Pornography and the End of Masculinity by Robert Jensen comes in. I don't agree with everything in this book, but it definitely raises some very powerful questions that deserve consideration.



Masculinity and Pornography

The main focus of Getting Off: Pornography and the End of Masculinity is the intersection between our culture's understanding of masculinity and pornography.

Jensen sees masculinity as highly problematic and toxic:

Be a man, then, typically translates as: Surrender your humanity.
To be a man, then, is a bad trade. When we become men - when we accept the idea that there is something called masculinity to which we should conform - we exchange those aspects of ourselves that make life worth living for an endless struggle for power that, in the end, is illusory and destructive not only to others but to ourselves.
One response to this toxic masculinity has been to attempt to redefine what it means to be a man, to craft a kinder-and-gentler masculinity that might pose less of a threat to women and children and be more livable for men. But such a step is inadequate; our goal should not be to reshape masculinity but to eliminate it. The goal is liberation from the masculinity trap.

Why do men often get incredibly hostile when people question the concept of masculinity?

The first step is simply to ask why men feel such a deep investment in the notion of masculinity, no matter how the term is defined. What are we afraid of losing? I think the answer is simple enough. Masculinity - any notion of masculinity - provides men with a way to be assured that they are not, and never will be, a woman. Masculinity guarantees a man that no matter what happens to him in the world, he is not-woman. In any culture that hates women, such a guarantee is bound to feel good, even for pro-feminist men who wouldn't ever dare say such a thing out loud. That guarantee is also bound to keep us from fully confronting that woman-hating and experiencing our full humanity.

Some men speak in defence of masculinity and patriarchy, saying women and children need to be protected by men:

All this talk is a cover for a simple, ugly fact: Women and children don't need to be protected by men - they need to be protected from men. This talk of protection should be seen for what it is: A protection racket. One man or group of men promises to protect women and children from other men. And to do that, these good men must have the power to protect, which means the power to control.

Being a man, and as such, being a part of the oppressing group, doesn't mean that the system is always to the advantage of every single man, but that doesn't change the nature of patriarchy.

Pornography and Objectification

Furthermore he questions the way pornography reduces women to objects, and in a very real sense dehumanizes them:

It hurts to know that no matter who you are as a woman, you can be reduced to a thing to be penetrated, and that men will buy movies about that, and that in many of those movies your humiliation will be the central theme. It hurts to know that so much of the pornography that men are buying fuses sexual desire with cruelty.
It hurts women, and men like it, and it hurts just to know that.
...
People routinely assume that pornography is such a difficult and divisive issue because it's about sex. In fact, this culture struggles unsuccessfully with pornography because it is about men's cruelty to women, and the pleasure men sometimes take in that cruelty. And that is much more difficult for people - men and women - to face.

Jensen brings up the fact that many of the liberal defenders of pornography, often defend indie erotica instead of looking at the mainstream pornography that make up the vast majority of what men watch.

There are obvious differences in the type of sexual activity and the level of overt denigration of women, but in both features and gonzo the same three rules apply: All women always want sex from all men, and the sexual acts they want are the ones that men demand, and any woman who doesn't immediately recognize her true sexual nature will understand as soon as sex is forced on her. At the most basic level, contemporary mass-marketed heterosexual pornography - feature or gonzo - is the presentation of the objectified female body for the sexual satisfaction of men.

The book also points out how porn has become increasingly crude, denigrating and violent - they have to keep pushing boundaries in order to keep the porn "exciting" and "stimulating". In the words of John "Buttman" Stagliano, aka the "father of gonzo":

The psychology is that some people like to abuse other people, in real life, in real situations. And I worry that we're creating art that feeds on that, that kind of reinforces that and says it's a good thing, and makes people a little more comfortable with certain psychological things that I think they should be uncomfortable with because they're bad.

In the words of one pornography industry executive, as to why anal sex is appealing:

Essentially, it comes from every man who's unhappily married, and he looks at his wife who just nagged at him about this or that or whatnot, and he says, "I'd like to fuck you in the ass." He's angry at her, right? And he can't, so he would rather watch some girl taking it up the ass and fantasize at that point he's doing whatever girl happened to be mean to him that particular day, and that is the attraction, because when people watch anal, nobody wants to watch a girl enjoying anal.

To a certain degree, some pornography use pain and denigration as a way to sexually excite men:

Part of the sexual charge of some pornography is that the women are being denigrated and the men watching know that the women don't like it. Part of the appeal of images of women being hurt in a sexual context is that the men watching know it really does hurt the women. But at the same time, the ideology of pornography is that women actually like things that may appear to be denigrating or hurtful, again because it is their nature. So men's enjoyment of pornography is sometimes based in knowing the woman is in pain, but at the same time being told that it's not really pain because this is how women find their true sexual selves.

Free Choice

Defenders of pornography often maintain that the performers have made a free choice to participate, but is that true?

A meaningful discussion of choice can't be restricted to the single moment when a woman decides to perform in a specific pornographic film but must include all the existing background conditions that affect not only the objective choices she faces but her subjective assessment of those choices. There is not much systematic research specifically on the women who perform in pornography. But from the research and the testimony of women who have been prostituted - some of whom also are used in pornography - we know that childhood sexual assault (which often leads victims to see their value in the world primarily as the ability to provide sexual pleasure for men) and economic hardship (a lack of meaningful employment choices at a livable wage) are key factors in many women's decisions to enter the sex industry. We know how women in the sex industry - not all, but many - routinely dissociate to cope with what they do; in one study of 130 street prostitutes, 68 percent met the diagnostic criteria for post-traumatic stress disorder. We also know that pimps often use coercion and violence to keep women working as prostitutes. In the words of one team that reviewed research from nine countries, prostitution is "multitraumatic."
...
For the sake of argument, let's assume that a specific woman in the sex industry has made a completely free and meaningful choice to participate, with absolutely no constraints or limitations on her, as woman in the industry often assert. That could be the case, but it does not change the patterns described above, and the unavoidable conclusion that some number of women in the industry - likely a majority, and quite possibly a significant majority - choose under conditions that make choice complicated. And in most cases, the consumer has no reliable way to judge which women are participating in the industry as a result of a meaningfully free choice. When a consumer plays a DVD at home, he has no information that could help him make such a judgment. Therefore, he most likely is using a woman whose choice to perform was not meaningfully free.

So what about the women who maintain that this is their own, free choice?

While we should listen to and respect those voices, we also know from the testimony of women who leave the sex industry that often they are desperate and unhappy in prostitution and pornography but feel the need to validate it as their choice to avoid thinking of themselves as victims. In a survey of 130 people working as prostitutes, 68 percent were identified as meeting the psychological criteria for a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder, and 88 percent stated that they wanted to leave prostitution and described what they needed in order to escape. As I argued already, the question of choices, and the measure of freedom women have in their choices, is complicated. Respecting the decisions women make does not mean we should ignore the pattern of women speaking quite differently about those decisions later. In a complex world, the way we make sense of our lives is, not surprisingly, full of paradoxes and contradictions.

Overstepping Women's Boundaries

Another scary consequence of pornography is the way it teaches men to continuously push and overstep the boundaries of women, to a degree where the boundaries of consent becomes muddled:

Rape is defined legally as penetration without consent. In reading the section on rape in the Texas Penal Code, I am reasonably sure I have never violated that law. But I also realize that much of my sexual training as a man was about gaining women's consent to sex in whatever way one could. It's illegal to compel a woman "to submit or participate by the use of physical force or violence" to sex, but as a young man I was taught that sometimes you have to push a little harder when she at first says no, because she really wants it. It's illegal to impair a woman's judgment "by administering any substance without the other person's knowledge," but as a young man I was taught that sometimes you have to spike a woman's drink with extra liquor or encourage her to drink one more beer, just to get her in the mood. Like many young men, I was taught that a woman's "no" to sex could mean "no," or it could mean "maybe," or it could mean "yes, but you have to come get me." The only way to know if "no means no" was to push. Men push, and women either push back or give in. Even if I never played it particularly well, that's the game I was taught to play.

Pornography's Affect on Relationships

According to Psychologist Ana Bridges, who specializes in the impact of pornography on romantic relationships:

Studies on compulsive pornography use suggest that viewers habituate (become used to) certain images and sex acts, and thus require more and more deviant materials to achieve sexual arousal. My own research suggests that the harm created in relationships when one person uses pornography while the other does not can be substantial and devastating. ... Still others were disturbed that their partners were asking them to participate in sexual acts seen in explicit videos, without regard to whether or not she would find these acts unpleasant or degrading. On the whole, these women reported a strong decline in intimacy and connection with their partners, leaving many to consider breaking off the relationship altogether.

In conclusion:

I am against pornography in part because I believe that the rewards of domination, which are seductive, are in the end illusory. I believe that love (based on a commitment to equality articulated in our core philosophies and theologies), compassion (based on our common humanity), and solidarity (based on our need to survive together) can anchor our lives at every level, from the intimate to the global. I believe those things in part because of my necessary faith in "the better angels of our nature," as Abraham Lincoln put it, but also because of my experience. In my life, weighed down as it is sometimes in struggle and failure, I have experienced that intimacy. Once experienced, it's difficult to return to the illusory.
...
Pornography claims to take us on a path to a door that will open into more creative erotic space, into imagination, into a garden of sexual delight. Just open this door, pornography tells us, and you will step into a more expansive world. But it turns out that going through the pornographic door typically leads into a prison cell, with four thick walls and no window. 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. The pornographers walk away with the money; and we are left with the illusion of pleasure that comes at the expense of joy.

What Can Men Do?

Robert Jensen has 6 things that every man can do:

Most obviously, we must never use or threaten to use violence against a partner or child. Beyond that, we must examine our behavior for more subtle attempts at controlling the behavior for more subtle attempts at controlling the behavior of a partner, such as insulting a partner in a way designed to undermine self-esteem, withholding affection to gain a desired result, or demanding sexual activity in the face of resistance.
We must stop supporting men who batter, rape, and abuse. Often men talk fairly openly about their abusive behavior. When that happens, we must make it clear that the friendship or work relationship will not be business as usual until the abuse ends and steps are taken to prevent it in the future.
If we ever have reason to suspect someone is being abused, we must offer support and assistance in whatever way the person can accept.
We must stop telling or laughing at misogynistic jokes.
We must stop using pornography, patronizing strip clubs, or using prostituted women.
We must remove ourselves from relationships of domination that institutionalize the subordination of women. When men in our lives talk of such activity, we must challenge them to think and act differently
Concluding Thoughts

I'm still not entirely certain how I feel about these things, but I think Jensen raises a lot of very important points, topics that are being ignored instead of discussed.

What do you think? How do you view pornography? Prostitution? Society's view on masculinity?

[Jasmine · Rating 1 out of 5]

I really, really want to give this book a second star but there is no justification.

The author says that men in the feminist movement (by the way you only have to call yourself a feminist once I got it the first time, I don't need to be reminded three times a page how you are with the ladies, and the multiple reminders that you are bi, while interesting are not terribly relevant to the content) try to be white knights and shouldn't. You know what is highly victimizing to women never mentioning the fact that men are harmed as much by the types of pornography that he is against as women (these are fairly specific types).

I also find it difficult to connect with the fact that he is talking about the majority of the porn industry, yet I have never heard of a porn remotely similar to any of those he is critiquing. I mean except the ones mike use to download to my computer as a joke when we lived together. And while I haven't ever watched a porn, I am relatively aware of porn and the fact that most if not all of my male friends watch it and several of the females, but none of them are watching gang bang 15. People I know just have more class than watching the 15th sequel of the same movie. If I am wrong please correct me, but this is the impression that I am under.

This boo was a personal rant. I mean we have gone over with dawkins I don't like when personal rants pretend that they have significant meaning outside their rantiness. The sad thing is I am sure there are good arguments against pornography, but claiming that pornography proves that our culture hates women is not that argument. Also if I don't believe video games are necessarily related to columbine will I really believe that porn is necessarily related to rape? doesn't sound like the kind of inductive leap I want to be known for.

[Cole J. Banning · Rating 2 out of 5]

Jensen has written a wonderful 1970's-style second-wave feminist tract . . . in 2007. One might think some type of grappling with third-wave feminism (and I have to add my standard disclaimer whenever I use the wave metaphor that feminist theorizing and activism is a constant process that can't really be cut up into discreet waves as if nothing happened in between them) might be called for. Indeed, the back of the book even manages to promise something of the sort (and the same text appears on the Amazon page) when it notes that "Anti-pornography arguments are frequently dismissed as patently 'anti-sex'--and ultimately 'anti-feminist'." As someone who argues the anti-porn-->anti-sex-->anti-woman position, this intrigues me. But I don't think he's really interested in arguing with me, or any other feminist. (The things he doesn't seem to be interested in arguing about are legion, probably.) That's okay; the people who write book copy frequently miss the point. (Just look at the back of Heinlein's Time Enough for Love.) At the end of the day, people on both sides of that discussion can be united at being against bad porn.

But who in his (since I think we're assuming it'd be a he) right mind would be for bad porn? Okay, I'm probably being naive, but I find it hard to believe than any of those people are going to actually bother to read Jensen's book. So what's the point?

Part of the disconnect might be that Jensen and I simply different understandings of the relationship between theory and activism, and how (and even if) apologetics should be done. For Jensen, all the side roads of definitions and such are distractions from his main project of showing men the damage of pornography. But my mind doesn't work that way. I could engage in a theoretical debate with another femnist, for example exposing heteronormative assumptions in their work, because I know there's a set of shared assumptions. But to argue against Jensen's quintessential porn user? For me, that would require showing all one's work, not less of it. I know I'm not up to the task. (I've been wanting to make a post in my journal for years at this point on the "anti-sex is anti-woman" thing. There are objections I don't know how to answer.) The most I could possibly do right now (and probably ever) is try to sketch out my worldview with the hope that an interlocutor could at least understand if not adopt it: "this is what I believe, and why I believe it" but not "this is why you should believe this."

But at the end of the day, Jensen's book is only secondarily about porn or the porn industry. First and foremost, it's about masculinity, and I think recognizing that explains why he doesn't address some of the things he doesn't. If the fundamental question he is answering is, "How can a heterosexual man in a patriarchal culture mediate his sexual desires, experiences, and understandings through text and/or images?" then--well, I still don't think he's done a very good job of presenting a coherent vision, but he has at least put forth some do's and don't's, even if they're ones that might seem obvious to you or me.

I've seen a lot I like, too. His insistence that what is needed is an abolition of masculinity, and not just redefine it (144-145). (I'm not sure whether he thinks an end of masculinity would usher in an end to maleness, or not.) That men must join women in women-led causes as their primary mode of activism (147). And so forth.

I do think it's possible to step outside my maleness without stepping outside my heterosexuality--a project that, yes, I think would end up looking a lot like Jensen's. Indeed, it almost seems to me that any reconstruction of masculinity which starts on Dworkinist premises is going to end up in this trap, which is ironic because of course Dworkin was a lesbian, and her partner (and eventual husband) John Stoltenberg, who is someone I have read and is the main person I'm thinking of here other than Jensen, was a gay man. (And I see that Jensen's not a Kinsey zero either.) I'm not quite sure why I should even feel this should be so. Is it that they are just so deeply seeped in a 1970's second-wave aesthetic? Is it a result of positioning this reconceptualization as a primarily feminist move--which is to say making the moral criterion an essentially gynocentric one? Or is it even that any constructive project is by its nature opposed to the very project of critical, and thus queer, theory?

Now, as noted above, Jensen discusses the move to abolish masculinity versus the move to redefine it, arguing for, as would I, the former. This puts forward a possibility: any attempt to reconstruct masculinity is essentially an attempt to keep it intact, to re-inscribe separate gender roles, and since all sexism is ultimately heterosexist (and vice versa), this is heteronormative. I don't think this is the whole story, though--especially since the premise of my original question assumed the project was being (or at least, could be) heteronormative while still being feminist (which would presumably be to say, not sexist). It does raise the question, though: the two male feminists I know of who think that masculinity is something worthy of being discussed (instead of simply stipulating it as undesirable and then getting on with the feminist projects of radical critique and liberal activism) are both Dworkinists. Is this significant?

Similarly I think it is possible to step outside of one's heterosexuality without examining one's maleness. But these are probably unstable positions, and once one is used to the theoretical move of examining one's privilege, it does get easier with time.

One of the fundamental issues is whether (sexual) desire is, and/or has to be, transitive, with desirers and desireds--whether desire implies objectification--or whether an intransitive form can be hypothesized; if the former, then objectification would need to be in some way reclaimed and revalued, as giving up desire doesn't seem a viable option. I think the question needs to be asked whether specific instances of sexual objectification can be broken off from its support of gendered patterns of oppression. That at least some such instances can be such seems clear--it can be used to satirize, to deconstruct, or expose those patterns, for example. But writ large? Objectification would need to be something that people do to each other--like kiss or make love--but which (like kissing and making love) they don't do all the time, something which can be turned off instead of being embedded in a persistent gaze of one gender towards the other.

The best treatment I really know which is fair to both sides of this debate is Joanna Russ's Pornography and the Doubleness of Sex for Women, as linked in the on-line essay That Classic Combination: Sex and Violence, which I found helpful in its treatment of Russ' essay.

[M. · Rating 4 out of 5]

In some ways, this book is very reminiscent of Gail Dines' Pornland. And I'm very grateful to have deepened my knowledge of Andrea Dworkin and Audre Lorde before reading this, because they're a reference in the book. Mostly, even though I'm part of one of the groups Jensen criticizes as not being 'enough' (the Catholic Church, for he argues that we just want to reshape what should be abolished: masculinity and femininity as cultural practices only), I agree with this book.

Sex has a procreative function and an unitive one, and both are challenged by modern culture by its two arms, sexual liberation and pornography. The sex industry is unacceptable. Years of reading feminist theory and finding my way to God convinced me so (though I have never advocated for licentiousness).

Like most radical feminist friendly discourse, he sees no problem in masturbation and homosexuality, which for the church are as self-centered behaviors as the 'need' for pornography. That is another thing I can't accept. But I am very much grateful to Jensen for his rejection of evo-psych and the biological determinism surrounding the horrid excuses by which women are supposed to accept men's failings as DESTINY.

Suppose, for one second, that pornography never was a thing and that men still are inherently more violent, sex focused, couldn't we modify the cultural repercussions, especially when they have shown not to lead to a healthy sense of sexuality and humanity for everyone involved? Stop denying agency to men to systematically deny agency to women as well. Women are ontologically valuable in themselves and not as a fragment of men.

Despite its repetitions, the book is powerful and so I would hand copies of the conclusion perhaps in a philosophical introductory course for reflection. What is sex for is the question no one is making. I think it could provide some answers, and Jensen's answer is once again, consistent with Catholic teaching: it opens us to human mystery, it gives us 'light' as it helps us to know others better, and it teaches us about the fragility of life (procreation included).

The other thing worth pondering is whether we haven't culturally analyzed distinctive man-woman traits in such shallow manner to allow the transgender rise, which obviously denies many of the woman-specific suffering told in this book. If we're not able to see masculinity and femininity as a way of being in the world physically rather than the presence of beard, wearing a skirt or just "not being" someone of the other sex, then I think we are undermining our purpose.

I also loved the ending where he said that before discussing the law, which pornographers have been so keen to distort, seriously, let's discuss: why is any of it free speech (especially double penetration), but could be applied to any of it.

I will extend it. Seriously, what are we saying exactly about men and women when just having women scantily clad as an entertainment and disembodied resource is considered free speech?

Jensen has valiantly gone for pornography, I will take the challenge and go for all the sex industry.

[Jennifer · Rating 4 out of 5]

It was a little repetive at points, and I could do without so much graphic details but I guess for someone just starting to think about this type of thing it makes it's point. I also hate that he would put the actual websites and website names in the book, it's like advertising for those companies and for some people can be a trigger. I guess the point was mostly just to prove that this isn't stuff he is making up, this is the norm and it's out there everywhere. In general I liked the book and the subject matter is very important to me. Especially since he is talking to men, instead of yet again leaving the responsibility for change on women's shoulders.

[G · Rating 1 out of 5]

I found "Getting Off" profoundly unconvincing. I went into this book with an open mind, but the author makes his argument with huge logical leaps, a lot of gender stereotypes (!), and a general lack of information. He totally ignores gay pornography, which I think would provide some interesting insights with its own treatment of masculinity and femininity. I still have high hopes for an interesting book club discussion out of it, but Jensen didn't make the case to me.

I also found Jensen's work, at times, needlessly graphic. Not content to describe offensive sexual language in a roundabout way that we can all imagine without much trouble, he busts out with it in the middle of paragraphs, like so:

"Perhaps directing some of that anger and resentment at those people--the immediate, front-line face of the oppressive system--is unavoidable, though we should always be channeling that anger into action to change the system as well. But too often men react to women in positions of power with misogyny, often in sexualized terms. I have heard men in such situations talk about how 'I'd like to f--- that b---- and teacher her a lesson,' for example." (censorship mine)

Some other excerpts of statements that annoyed me as I read them:

"But pornography doesn't [draw on emotion like traditional cinema:], because films that exist to provide sexual stimulation for men in this culture wouldn't work if the sex were presented in the context of loving and affectionate relationships. Men typically consume pornography specifically to avoid love and affection."

"[Andrea Dworkin:] was a woman I had been told hated men, and yet running through her talk was a profound compassion for men, and by extension, for me. Here's what shje told those men in 1983: 'I don't believe rape is inevitable or natural. If I did, I would have no reason to be here. If I did, my political practice would be different than it is. Have you ever wondered why we [women:] are not just in armed combat against you? It's not because there's a shortage of kitchen knives in this country. It's becasue we believe in your humanity, against all the evidence.'"

"One response to this toxic masculinity has been to attempt to redefine what it means to be a man, to craft a kinder-and-gentler masculinity that might pose less of a threat to women and children and be more livable for men. But such a step is inadequate, our goal should not be to reshape masculinity but to eliminate it."

[Gilek · Rating 1 out of 5]

I picked up this book, because I was hoping it might deliver some insights I had not considered (or logic I was ignorant of) regarding pornography.

I remember at times thinking..."why are you throwing all this filler at me?...just get to the worthwhile points already". Unfortunately those points never came; only a few small yet decent points came.

Apart from getting people to think more deeply about this issue...this book is disappointing, and definitely not worth your time...unless you have little knowledge and perspective of this arena and are looking for better understanding of it...however be warned that this author's theories are, in mine, and I suspect many sane psychologists', opinions; incorrect.
However I do agree that pornography can be harmful; to both the individual, and society.

It seemed like the author was showing the explicit paragraphs of porno descriptions just to make his book more racy and draw more attention.

I disagree with their premise: men hate women; that's why they like porn and angry sex.

I disagree with the author's desire to: eliminate masculinity.
If they wanted to eliminate femininity as well, it might have at least made more sense.

I wish he'd been more decisive with his facts too, instead of taking the politically cautious "umm..in my humble opinion, I could be wrong but..." route.

It's obvious that this was written by a journalist that didn't bother to do research into anything beyond the superficial.

Whatever, I'll keep looking for books with more solid reasoning, but attention-seeker books like this that waste time, are...gross; in the essence of what they are; jobs done to just enough quality to sell.

[Bart · Rating 2 out of 5]

Robert Jensen recycles arguments from anti-porn feminists against mainstream heterosexual porn with a few twists. Jensen argues for male self-censorship of porn rather than making it illegal. He also argues that deconstructing and ridding culture of masculinity will help in this process (while taking in account the reality of masculinity). Getting Off was refreshing in that Jensen admits to uses of male privilige and challenges male feminists (who decry other males for using male privilige but are unable to recognize their own uses of this or their misogynistic behaviors) to be self-critical.
Even though Jensen admits to leaving queer porn out of the discussion on purpose to address the largest portion of porn users, heterosexual men, this is in fact problematic. Jensen also admits that gay males aren't really on board with the anti-porn movement. Duh, Jensen and the other anti-porns don't include critiques on gay porn that would compel gay dudes to join them. Maybe that's because there are few or no reasons for gays to be anti-porn.

[Lisajean · Rating 2 out of 5]

I had been hoping for a nuanced analysis of the impacts of pornography based on research and data. However, on the very first page, Jensen states his belief that “our goal should not be to reshape masculinity but to eliminate it” and this radical position guides the rest of the book. It seems that he is picking data to support his strong anti-porn, anti-masculinity stance rather than weighing both sides before coming to a conclusion. I haven’t made up my mind on the issue and I was hoping this book would help, but I just can’t trust something that’s so one-sided. That’s not to say that it doesn’t have its merits: Jensen supports his position with a rich grounding in feminist theory, his passion is clear, and I do find myself agreeing with him a fair amount... but this certainly isn’t the final word on porn or on masculinity. Not to mention that it feels very dated, as his analysis is based primarily off of DVDs. His analysis of the content and messages of porn is painful already, but I’m afraid that a similar approach to internet pornography would be even more damning...

[Meg · Rating 2 out of 5]

There is a really interesting premise to this book. There is a glimmer of potential that makes it an eye-catching book. It made me think "Gee, I really wanna read that."

So why would I want to read this book? And why would you? I would encourage asking yourself that question before you embark on this journey. I can't answer for you, so I'll tell you my reasons for wanting to read this book.

What if you were a human being who happened to be a woman in a culture of rape and in a culture that grades and values women based on their appearance and usability by men and in a culture where the only doctrine working against your habitual discrimination, feminism, was a dirty word that diffuses and dismisses any argument before its even begun?

Well if you were such a human being, like I am, you would start to find yourself rabidly curious about why you are considered a disposable commodity with limited potential just because your genitals go in instead of out. And you would be genuinely perplexed at how the world at large just rolls on day after day without being appalled and horrified while women are discriminated to death.
You'd read books on all manner of subjects and kick it around in your brain while you search for the best way to intellectually and emotionally adapt to such a world while you simultaneously look for the best way to improve the situation for yourself and others as well.

Is pornography a problem? Before reading this I would have answered: Yes. Now I'd change my opinion somewhat. Pornography is a symptom of a larger and more complex problem. Much of what Jenson discusses I intuitively think is most likely true. I don't overall disagree with Jenson anywhere that I can readily think of.

What I disagree with are his methods. I found this book to be an utter waste of time. It's not even soft science - it's rampant speculation. And most of Jensen's speculation makes sense to me. But he never took the time to develop any scientific studies to give any heft to his speculations. I get that there have been very few studies done in the realm of pornography, its effects on participants or spectators - but as a scholar, that should have enticed him to get in there, roll up his sleeves and organize some studies and then write a book.

If you're looking to read a book that condemns pornography and waxes poetic about what a great sensitive guy the author is for taking up this stance - this is your book. However, if you're looking to find any scientific basis for that argument or even critical reflections on the matter. You won't find that here. I don't really feel that books like this do feminists any favors. Jensen's unfocused, self-centered, and idealistic approach leaves this collection as little more than a very long editorial essay that is useless to anyone who didn't already agree to begin with.

Furthermore, Jensen spends so much of the book covering pornographic practices that by the conclusion he very weakly tacks on his "end of masculinity" theory, it just doesn't conclude into a very convincing argument. Not that the argument isn't there to be made, but it would require a more skillful rhetorician than Jenson to coherently accomplish the task.

[Keely Hyslop · Rating 2 out of 5]

This was a very difficult book for me to get through, particularly the section that described how men in heterosexual relationships use pornography as a tool for coercion and abuse. If you're a rape survivor or have a similar personal stake in the issue, I would approach this book with extreme caution because it's graphic depictions of painful and degrading sex acts can be very triggering. That said, the main reason I wasn't terribly crazy about this book was that it made little or no attempt at a balanced discussion of the subject matter. While it did an excellent job of highlighting instances where porn actresses were abused and degraded, an issue that should be more openly addressed by sex positive feminists and the media community at large, it outright dismissed any accounts of actresses who stated that they felt that they had chosen their profession freely. While it might seem improbable for most of us not working in the sex industry to fathom, I think it's important to give these women the benefit of the doubt when they recount their stories. Women in the adult film industry such as Tristan Taraomino or Nina Hartley who espouse a feminist ideology and attempt to reform the abuses of the porn industry by creating adult images of mutual pleasure are not above censor from the anti porn feminist communities, but their experiences and testimonies should not be erased. I felt that in spite of the author's continual proclamations that he was guarding himself against the practice, I felt that there was an excessive amount of emphasis on women as victims and little or no recognition of women as active consenting participants in sexual encounters either on or off the screen. That said I can admire what Jensen was trying to do even if I don't think it was wholly successful and greatly appreciate his whole hearted attempt to communicate to men that domestic violence and rape are crimes rather than acts of seduction.

[Stuart · Rating 4 out of 5]

One of the most horrifying books I have ever read.

Jensen argues that pornography is not an industry that promotes sexual freedom, but it is instead one that promotes the objectification and marginalization of women, so that men can feel superior and retain a feeling of dominance. While his arguments often appeal to feeling and his personal experience, any reader who uses this as an easy escape from the horrifying portraits of reality that he paints is in denial.

Jensen begs men to examine themselves, to see how pornography is affecting them. He uses the idea of porn as a mirror, or 'we are what we masturbate to.' (97). His descriptions of the realities of the porn industry are as heartbreaking as they are horrifying. Tears are an absolutely appropriate response to this book. It is not for the faint of heart, and I would not recommend it to those who don't think they could handle it. He demonstrates devastatingly that pornography is a terror that is harming women and men alike. He leaves no doubt.

The fault of the book comes in his solution. He advances a blanket feminist agenda as almost a gospel proclamation. He seems to think that abolishing the concept of masculinity (in favor of humanity) is the solution to the problem of pornography. In reality, he just needs Jesus. The authority of God would shore up the shakiness of his arguments, and the gospel contained in the Word of God is the answer to this mess. His solution, while it may seem like it at first glance, is actually not so far from the Christian one.

Overall, a good primer on understanding pornography. I found it to be heartbreaking and horrifying. I would encourage men to read this book, and avoid it if you do not think you could take knowing the realities of the pornography industry and its effects on men.

[Ari · Rating 3 out of 5]

Disclaimer: I'm pro porn. Keep in mind, folks, there are exceptions to every cause (general) you support. This world is a rainbow - there are no issues of black in white (at least not in my book) - and here's some inception for you: there are even exceptions to THAT rule of mine. How about that.
This being said, I do support porn, for various reasons that I'm not going to bore you with. Buy me a drink and we'll have a conversation about it in person. As for my Goodreads discussion, all I will say regarding Getting Off is that it was an interesting insight to the anti porn argument that brought my attention to many aspects of porn that I was previously unaware of. I also greatly appreciated the tie in to an argument on masculinity, because everything in society/the world is gendered. It would be incorrect to argue on porn and ignore gender.
Overall, Jensen made some interesting points and they were fairly well stated. At the least, I now feel compelled to pick up a pro porn book to see the other side of the coin, or simply start investigating to contest Jensen's arguments on my own. What I do agree with, without question, is that porn needs to be addressed, just as gender needs to be addressed, because the shame around sex, sexuality, and gender need to be deconstructed and swept away. Quit spelling out S-E-X and let's get comfortable with discussing that, let's face it, everyone is doing. And if they're not doing it, chances are they're watching it, thinking about it, or wishing they were doing it.

[Charity · Rating 3 out of 5]

I've done a lot of research on porn, but this was an interesting perspective since it came from a feminist man with no religious background. He digs into the subject with a lot of graphic detail... More than I felt comfortable with in certain moments, so I would use plenty of caution while reading. While many believe pornography is a form of sexual liberation, he argues that at its core, mainstream pornography and it's obvious cruelty and attitudes of insensitivity towards women, is a patriarchal problem. He focuses on mainstream versus fringe to make a point that it's a society problem at large. Men gravitate to pornography because there is a deeper mental attitude towards women in our society that is at work, a general desire to dominate, control, and humiliate women. The quotes he shared from interviews with porn producers themselves admit to this fact. It's a money game, and men are demanding and consuming these fantasy products because men in our society disrespect women at the core and they want to live that fantasy out sexually. You cannot be pro-woman and pro-pornography at the same time.

[Tahleen · Rating 3 out of 5]

So far all I can say is this book is... unsettling. It makes me depressed and sad and wishing we didn't live in the society we live in. I am realizing a lot of things not only about pornography, but about how men treat women and each other. I just wish I could figure out an effective way to deal with it. Jensen really does a great job at pointing out a lot of things people don't really think about, mostly because they can't without feeling awful (man or woman alike). My problems with this book are that he doesn't really give a great game plan for men besides stop using pornography and intervene when women and children are being treated badly, and he doesn't give one at all for women. I want to know a good way to deal with the men in my life who will probably scoff at these ideas; I only wish I could get them to understand and I don't feel like I've been equipped to do that. But kudos to Jensen for getting this out there; it's a vital observation about our culture and how oppressive it still is despite the advances women have made.

[Todd · Rating 3 out of 5]

An uncomfortable topic for most folks. It's not a threat. It's a requirement for anyone who loves their children and sees the effects, countless angles and perhaps the "backbone" to do what's right. Eliminate it for our children's , daughters and schools ---because we can.

Get informed. This PHD spells it out and has the data to back it.
Game changer must read.

Problem that I still wrestle on this subject...

In a world where freedom is our National "claim" and God is with us?
Why must I be subjected to so much garbage on my own TV, Computer, Search Engines and internet? Wouldn't it be swell to have an option that just "RAID"(the bug spray) for my house...and what Verizon, TWC sends at my family, sons ...if I don't care to have it.

What if exterminated all the trash so I don't have to fear my 4yr old "visual" burned into his mind before he's "prepared"?
Not on My Watch.

-T

[Vanessa]

Interesting. Kind of a spiritual sibling to Gail Dines' Pornland--often using her conclusions by name, using the same quotes--but without the weird anti-Sex and the City tangents, without the robust examination of racism, and with an extra manifesto for and from the male perspective.

The pornographers are not a deviation from the norm. Their presence in the mainstream shouldn't be surprising, because they represent mainstream values: the logic of domination and subordination that is central to patriarchy, hyper-patriotic nationalism, white supremacy, and a predatory corporate capitalism.

Jensen writes about the conception of "man" as gender and how we've tried to redefine it (ie. changing toxic masculinity into a more positive masculinity). And as exhausting as the whole thing seems to me (how sad to practically beg the audience to see themselves as humans with personalities first and pawns in a grand social scheme second), we know how men as a whole seem desperately attached to being told how to be a man, and when they don't know how to be a man, they go fucking berserk. The whole situation is at a fever pitch currently, and people are getting slaughtered for it. Literally.

A tale as old as time: how to change masculinity from Fight Club to Lord of the Rings?--to be a real man is not to be domineering, aggressive, and violent, but to be loyal, heroic, generous, and earnest. Jensen brings up that since all gendered definitions require men to be one thing and women to be the opposite, no matter how we define masculinity, we'll still be creating a binary with femininity at the other end. I'm not sure how much I agree with that (the "real masculinity is a gentle masculinity uwu" crowd are not the "so women are nasty evil shrews" crowd), but it tracks logically.

I agree more with his assertion that this still creates an "out-group." The problem for men is half that traditional masculinity demands they be destructive, but also half that defining it at all requires for some men to not fit in.

Jensen instead goes for gender abolition, the concept that there are men, there are women, but there is no "gender" in terms of roles, expectations, preferred/required personality traits or abilities or desires or needs. To be a man is whatever a man, himself, uniquely, is. This is how I personally move through the world, and it permits me a kind of freedom that makes me sad to see other people not allow themselves because they're wrapped up in what "girls do" and what "boys do." (Though I'm lucky, I think, to have never had an instinctual need to fit in that way, to be a "woman." Now, to be a "functioning human being who isn't a total embarrassment to her family and herself"...that's a whole other thing.)

This also fascinates me because this was written back in the early 2000s, and the conversation Jensen's having continued all the way up to today. The tact western society, in general, ended up taking was to create more categories beyond the binary "man" and "woman," to increasingly specific and nuanced degrees. However, these categories are still entirely defined by how they operate in relation to traditional gender as we've always been taught it (barring any discussion about dysphoria, which is a whole other thing). I think if anything, this proves that people like labels, they like "this is that and that is this," and psychologically we aren't comfortable with discarding them.

Anyways. I would have really appreciated Jensen talk to the men involved in porn production (more chats with producers, any chats at all with actors), and I think it would have helped his thesis a lot to go into the viewer comments/discussion boards like Dines did. I wonder why no one--pro or anti porn, as simplistic as those terms are--interviews male actors. Would their answers be inconvenient?

As well, I am begging some commentator to do the obvious thing. After describing endless porn scenarios as these analyses often do, just beg the question, "Have you ever seen a man ordered to act this way?" In porn, in Hollywood, in video games, in anything. If you imagine a man doing it, does it gross you out? Does it feel unnatural? Does it feel stilted, fake? Does it feel degrading and fucked up? Simple answer. If it's degrading for a man to do it, it's degrading for a woman to do it, we just think women are meant to be degraded.

It might be easier or more comforting to pretend that the pornography industry isn't churning out thousands of overtly misogynistic films each year. But it's not clear why we would want to ignore that reality if we are trying to understand the real world.
We should approach the study of pornography as we would any product of the mass media--by studying what messages it contains, how it is produced, and how it is used by people in everyday life.

My frustration always come back to this: why do I see, on a daily basis, more feminists critiquing fucking Disney movies, or the Barbie movie, or, I dunno, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, than I see them critiquing porn? As many people watch porn as they watch those movies. Why not? Why are we attempting to normalize and de-fang porn, but we also frame it as so fucking sacred? Why do so many of the current-day feminism books I read, no matter how cutting they are on other subjects, breathlessly tell the reader they love porn porn is awesome yay sex work yay sexual freedom porn is so so so so great. I know patriarchy is misogynistic. Big whoop. It's the hypocrisy I can't understand, that drives me so crazy.

[Devon · Rating 3 out of 5]

pretty good look at the main-stream porno industry. easy to understand, well thought out arguments against pornography and the very concept of masculinity. not exactly super-duper sex-positive, but definitely engages in an important conversation that doesn't happen much. the theoretical chapters are the highlights, the data (a lot of graphic description of porno) gets the point across.

is it better to masturbate to fantasies about people you know rather than porno? discuss amongst yer-selves... (not addressed in the book)

[Bethtub · Rating 5 out of 5]

What I like about Jensen is that he doesn't rely on smarty pants jargon AND he employs the rigor of an academic analysis. Though I think the conclusion (and starting point)of rejecting masculinity in favor of being a human being needs a stronger alternative ('human being' is vague and has a history that doesn't ring of the level of self-analysis and social critique he intimates) the reasoning and arguments are helpful not only to look at issues of pornography and patriarchy/mysogeny, but at any oppressive dyad (white/people of color, middle and upper class/poor, etc)

[Get X Serious · Rating 4 out of 5]

Is violent pornography responsible for violence towards women or is our violent (especially towards women) culture responsible for creating pornography that glorifies violence towards women? Or are both true and only further exacerbate both themselves and each other?

I think the latter. Jensen goes into detail analyzing both violence towards women in our culture and in pornography and how they correlate. It is both deeply disturbing and deeply important to not look away in disgust, even though that might seem like the only way to keep your sanity intact.

[Steev Hise · Rating 4 out of 5]

Every male should read this book, or at least every straight one. Some might think this is typical man-hating "feminazi" stuff ala Andrea Dworkin, and/or if you're already a veteran of Women's Studies courses maybe you won't see this as useful, but I think it's a valuable addition to the debate about sexism, masculinity, and porn. What's unique and new, for me, is Jensen's personal perspective and history that he thoughtfully includes, along with the more academic reasoning.

[Sherry Lee · Rating 5 out of 5]

Articulate, and at times eloquent, analysis of pornography and masculinity. It provides a good overview of the radical feminist perspective that has been articulated by women for some time, but adds a personal, introspective reflection on masculinity that adds empathetic insights into men's interaction with porn--while not offering any excuses for men's ongoing abuse/use of women for any personal pleasure or gain. I am glad that Jensen is writing on this issue.

[Roxani]

Disturbing, enlightening, horrifying read on pornography and its effect on men. As a woman and a feminist, this was a difficult read and it is hard to award it any star rating that suggests I really liked it. It was a book I needed to read and I am glad I did, but I turned the pages with a heavy heart.

[Rainer · Rating 5 out of 5]

HUGELY RELEVANT. This book should be required reading for all young men during their formative years. The one thing that stood out to me as sad is that this book was written while porn was still mostly distributed through DVD's, before the explosion of high speed internet porn. Things have gotten much darker and much more widespread since Jensen published this book.

[Ana · Rating 5 out of 5]

Not water-tight but good introduction to most of the concepts covered and easy to read. I wish every man would read this. Content warning for (perhaps) gratuitous inclusion of many detailed descriptions of popular (basically synonymous for violent and degrading) porn scenes.