Finding control subjects for research can be difficult...

[beagle]

I was shocked.

[Sibling Zono (anon1mat0)]

"Pornography hasn't changed their perception of women or their relationship, which they all want to be as harmonious and fulfilling as possible," he added.

I can tell a good number of people will deeply dislike those findings. 

[beagle]

Maybe. That sounds to me like one of those answers you always give to surveys though, along with never driving more than 30MPH in a built-up area and always recycling.  You're hardly going to say you're now only turned on by whip-bearing huge breasted women in French maids outfits and flying helmets.

Or whatever.

[Sibling Zono (anon1mat0)]

You're hardly going to say you're now only turned on by whip-bearing huge breasted women in French maids outfits and flying helmets.

Do you?

[beagle]

You're hardly going to say you're now only turned on by whip-bearing huge breasted women in French maids outfits and flying helmets.

Do you?

Well they're planning sexual preference questions on the next census. I'm not sure how many possibilities they're planning to canvas, and in what detail.  There may have to be a special supplement for the Cambridge area.

[Griffin NoName]

"Pornography hasn't changed their perception of women or their relationship, which they all want to be as harmonious and fulfilling as possible," he added.

So, if it didn't change their perception of women, one can assume they all regarded women as objects both before and after viewing porn.

I doubt they'd have been much more successful finding women who''d never seen porn. Most of us have fallen over it somewhere or other. But I suppose fewer may have consumed it.

[Sibling Zono (anon1mat0)]

The whole argument lends it self for debate. As you point out it is plausible that women were objectified before they watched porn, but it also avoids a more pertinent question, while porn may not change the perception of the women in the life of the interviewed, it is quite likely that it changes the perception of the women involved in the pornographic material.

IMO pornography is indeed a form of objectification of ALL of the involved (men and women) albeit a voluntary one; pornographic sex feed instinctive pulsions and has nothing to do with pair bonding, therefore you could argue that it portrays an animal behavior for the animal inside its audience.

[Aggie]

I was surprised at the frequency, actually moreso the fact that it's a regular occurrence.

The fact that all men have at least taken a peek at porn does not surprise me whatsoever.

[Swatopluk]

Well, since almost everyone owns or has access to a TV machine and their are these things called 'ads' trying to sell stuff to people using scantily clad human females as lure and there are also billboards and newspaper and magazine selling facilities, it is near impossible to not see images that are at least borderline poronographic. Not to forget printed ads mixed in your mail for female underwear of the (often) translucent kind.
We have not (yet) come as far as the dystopian The Year of the Sex Olympics* but shockingly close. I doubt though that TV will go as far as having only two programmes left: Sports Sex and Art Sex (and be it just for the Art Sex being 'too cultural' and therefore unprofitable).

*should the opportunity arise, I recommed a view. There is a Region 2 DVD edition from the bfi that some obscure videotheque might offer for rental.