Pornography in terms of evolutionary psychology

This topic was written in the wake of stormy discussions on Habré of a number of news related to porn in one way or another ( one , two , three , four ). In these and similar topics, the topic of censoring the Internet and prohibiting pornography in general or its individual genres is raised. Although the habrasoobshchestvo as a whole is quite liberal about porn, a discussion of its influence on the psyche - especially the nursery - usually results in serious dramas (the most serious, in my memory, was here ).

Meanwhile, there is no reliable data on the impact of pornography on public and personal health in these discussions; Moreover, my attempts to quickly find any imputed data on the Internet were unsuccessful. In search of answers to the questions, I had to dive quite deeply into scientific research, and I eventually found something. A brief synopsis of modern scientific views on pornography and its impact on people will be given under the cut after a small FAQ.

Question : pictures will be?
Answer : they will.
')
Question : what does this topic have to do with Habr?
Answer : it is interesting to Habr's readers.

Question : no, after all, what does the topic have to do with Habr's topic?
The answer is : no; I just think that Habr is, first of all, a certain audience, not a subject.

Question : why in the blog "Internet"?
Answer : because the Internet is for porn.

Introductory notes

To begin with, I would like to outline the ideas of evolutionary psychologists about human behavior and give some examples and analogies.

From the point of view of evolutionary psychology, this or that genetically determined human behavior manifests itself as follows:
(a) there must be some context in which the genetic “program” works;
(b) “programmatic” behavior in this context once increased the chances of our ancestors for survival and the transfer of genes to offspring.

Both parts are essential: the trigger of an action is always some context; the resulting behavior was supposed to give benefits precisely under the conditions in which homo sapiens lived tens and hundreds of thousands of years ago.

It should be noted here that “context” is a conditional concept; the trigger is always a very limited set of simple conditions, and the reaction is also simple. As an illustration, I picked up one wonderful example from the life of birds:

The turkey in the nest behaves extremely aggressively and attacks everything that moves - except for its own chickens. The question arises, how does it distinguish chickens from outsiders. The answer is: by squeaking. Chickens squeak, and therefore their mother does not attack. If the turkey is deaf - it will kill its own chickens immediately after they hatch from the eggs (see Konrad Lorenz, “Aggression” , chapter 7).

All genetically determined reactions are arranged in the same way - the genetic “program code” is formed under the influence of random mutations, therefore it can contain only the simplest conditions and the simplest reactions to them. It cannot cover all possible situations and extreme cases - it simply provides an organism response that provides better survival in certain conditions.

Moreover, by virtue of its simplicity, such a predetermined reaction often works even where it is inappropriate and brings negative results - the main thing is that the total amount of gain and loss (taking into account the frequency of situations) is positive.

In addition, the response often comes down to the release of certain hormones, i.e. often does not predetermine the behavior of the individual, but only provokes this or that behavior in the most general terms. Depending on the nature of the context, the emotional state of a person, his personal experience and many other factors, the same reaction can lead to different resulting actions - the behavior is variable. We can only talk about the likelihood that a person will behave one way or another.

Sex strategies of men and women

We now turn from abstract reasoning to concrete ones, namely, we will try to understand what causes the difference in the sexual behavior of men and women. Most of the reasoning below is drawn from Neil Malamut 's book Sexually Explicit Media, Gender Differences, and Evolutionary Theory . Although the evolutionary goals of a person of any gender are the same - to survive and leave offspring - the possibilities of this very “leaving offspring” are different for a man and a woman.

The number of potential descendants that a man can leave is virtually unlimited. His costs for the birth of a new life are very small. The living conditions of our ancestors did not include alimony.

But the number of children that can leave a woman is limited directly. 9-month pregnancy, subsequent feeding and upbringing taking into account infant mortality left a woman a few chances to pass on their genes by inheritance. It is obvious that in such conditions women are obliged to take a very critical approach to the choice of a sexual partner (there was no contraception either); a woman who does not show exceptional discrimination in sexual relations, most likely, will not pass on their genes to offspring.

This confronts both sexes with the problem of choosing the optimal breeding strategy - or rather, even to say, the optimal balance of breeding strategies.

Let's start with the men. In the case of a successful set of circumstances, the man leaves the offspring without paying anything for it; it is natural that those men who in every possible way strive for casual sex, other things being equal, will leave more offspring than sexually less active relatives. The prize is the free transfer of genes by inheritance - in this case it is so great (in fact, the maximum possible) that the selection pressure on men is unprecedented. A man should be ready for sex always and everywhere and constantly look for casual connections - otherwise, he will most likely be uncompetitive.

However, this is not the only possible strategy; casual sex is worth nothing and does not guarantee anything. Under certain conditions, it may be more profitable to directly invest resources in guaranteed breeding of offspring (and, therefore, in a partner or partners during pregnancy). Here, however, there is some problem - it is impossible to reliably determine whether it is your child; men have to show possessive instincts and shield their partners from the attention of other men - all other things being equal, a more jealous husband will leave more offspring.

The first strategy is short-term, the second is long-term; guess which of them will be more promising - it is impossible. Therefore, in most situations, it is optimal for a man to combine these two strategies: on the one hand, it is possible to have one or more permanent partners and invest in them and in their offspring as many resources as possible; on the other hand, actively seek and use opportunities for casual sex, preferably with healthy and young women (since healthy and young women are much more likely to successfully raise offspring without the support of their father).

Re-read carefully the previous paragraph. Very accurate picture turned out, is not it?

We now turn to the strategy of women. Due to the exceptional severity of raising offspring alone, it is critical for a woman to have a number of men (men) ready to invest in them and in their offspring resources. In the absence of alimony and even money in general, the only link between a man and a woman is emotional attachment (lyrical digression: emotional attachment is characteristic not only of people, but also of many other animals, see Lorentz for more details), and in this context it is important for women to make sure that the feelings of men are mutual (including by checking the strength of feelings, as well as the requirement of a long period of courtship). That is why it is extremely important for a woman in a relationship to establish emotional contact before physical contact.

Malamut here notes that there are also situations where promise is the optimal strategy for women, as well as for men; such situations are rare, but a certain - although much less than a man's - desire for casual sex is also part of the female strategy. For example, the burden of responsibility for the genetic diversity of a population rests primarily with a woman, which, in conditions of small closed communities, where all relatives of each other, makes them look for sex with “random passers-by” and simply low-ranking men.

We would venture to add Malamute here and point out two more variations of the female breeding strategy, which in certain situations may be reasonable. First, although the presence of a loving and generous man is critically important, but because of the impossibility of determining paternity, there is a certain sense to deceive a man, forcing him to raise other people's children; Indeed, such a “perfect” prince on a white horse implements a far from ideal breeding strategy (neglects other women) - therefore, is a good candidate for the role of a husband, but not a father; Ideal candidates for fathers will be just “macho”, implementing more successful strategies. This fact, on the one hand, stimulates the tendency to adultery in women, and, on the other hand, tightens control (jealousy) on the part of men. Moreover, we note that men’s jealousy and suspicion do not correlate with his own marital fidelity - it is evolutionally beneficial to be jealous at the same time and change your wife to the right and left!

In addition, there is another female strategy, which, however, cannot be combined with the standard one - to neglect to a certain extent the qualities of sexual partners and any romantic feelings, focusing on getting resources and investing them in their own offspring. This model of behavior is actually prostitution.

So, using only the apparatus of evolutionary psychology, we built strategies for the behavior of men and women, which should have been optimal a couple of tens of thousands of years ago. As we can see, the programs that were once established for a long time continue to affect us in the most direct way, when the context and meaning of their existence have long since changed to unrecognizability.

Indeed, in the modern world, strategies that were formed tens of thousands of years ago are simply ineffective, if not directly harmful. However, the genes do not know about it :) and continue to cause the release of the "necessary" hormones at the "right" moments.

It should be noted that breeding strategies are not the only factor that influences a person’s sexual behavior. In the hierarchical systems of primates and humans, sex also plays the role of a tool for determining social status. In chimpanzees bonobos, in particular, sex is almost the main element of social relations.

However, in humans, public sex is almost everywhere taboo (for many reasons, including those mentioned above, it is strategically beneficial for both men and women to hide their adventures; besides, due to a number of circumstances that I will not mention here, sex is associated with submission), and therefore, “social” sex in a person is usually symbolic and thus does not have a serious impact on the processes we study.

Pornography

Now we are ready to answer the question why a person is attracted to pornography.

Why do men turn on the kind of sex-ready woman? Yes, simply because those men who were NOT excited by the appearance of a woman who was ready for sex became extinct long ago, leaving no posterity.

Why do men excite images of women ready for sex? Because instincts do not know how to distinguish images from reality. Why do men excite sexual fantasies? For the same reason - instinct does not distinguish fantasy from reality. Instinct simply throws the necessary substances into the blood when performing some simple conditions.

So, in general terms, it is clear why viewing pornography causes strong excitement in men - because (a) it is a realistic image that concentrates all the “triggers” of sexual instincts and (b) it provokes sexual fantasy. The effect of pornography on women is about the same, adjusted for the lesser power of the sexual instincts of a woman. For women, unlike men, the broader context of sexual activities is essential, so pornography in its pure form can also cause negative emotions. Women's behavior in this regard is more variable and much more dependent on the emotional state, rather than masculine.

Let us now try to explain why men purposefully look for pornography and are willing to spend valuable resources on its acquisition, although this looks completely senseless from an evolutionary point of view. As it became clear from the previous section, there is an extremely strong selection pressure, forcing men (and, to a lesser extent, women) always and everywhere to look for opportunities for sex. This desire is so great that in real conditions it simply cannot be satisfied. Men are actually in a state of permanent stress due to the incompatibility of the level of desires with the level of opportunities.

Consequently, a man is forced to either suppress his emotions, or look for substitutes for real sexual relations - and usually finds them in the form of erotic fantasies and masturbation. Let me remind you that a certain gene can predetermine behavior that is frankly harmful in certain situations, but this does not prevent it from gaining a foothold in the gene pool if the total amount of gain and loss is greater than zero. In this case, we are dealing with such genes: it is evolutionally more profitable to maintain a high level of sexual desire and put up with the inevitable stress and unproductive ways of its (desire) realization than to have a consistently low level of sexual instincts or adjust them to the real situation.

In this context, pornography is an extremely convenient mechanism, because together with fantasy it allows you to successfully “circle your finger” your own instincts; It creates the illusion of a successful sexual strategy - the appearance of sex with many young and sexually attractive women.

Here we should also note the following point: since the genetically predetermined reactions are very simple, they “do not know” about these or other deviations in the mechanism of their triggering. If for some reason a person is interested in sexual objects and practices that exclude sexual reproduction, this in no way affects the work of all other instincts; genes will continue to provoke the individual to the implementation of the optimal strategy, even if it deliberately fails.

The impact of pornography on people and society

Finally, we can turn to the question that was asked at the beginning of the article - can we reasonably talk about some harm (or some benefit) of pornography for an individual and society as a whole.

The vast majority of materials on the Internet on this issue affect only one topic here - the impact of pornography on rape statistics. Unfortunately, most studies of this issue and limited. I will not retell the whole history of this problem here - whoever is interested, can start digging even from Wikipedia . I will mention briefly that there are no reliable statistical data on this issue - some researchers conclude that the number of violent crimes of a sexual nature has decreased as a result of the spread of pornography, some - on the contrary, report an increase in the number of rapes. This topic is so controversial that adherents of different points of view make diametrically opposite conclusions from the same facts.

I found the most adequate and complete study of the impact of pornography on society in the works of Susan Dwyer , in particular, in the article “Constructing the 'Problem' of Pornography”.

Dwyer identifies three main key approaches to the impact of pornography:
a) traditional - pornography is immoral, therefore it should be prohibited;
b) forensic science mentioned above - pornography leads to a decrease / increase in the number of violent crimes, and therefore must be allowed / prohibited;
c) feminist - pornography imposes behaviors that are unacceptable in a free society.

As for option a), it is vulnerable from several sides at once: first, we can talk about the variability of moral norms and argue that pornography in modern society is no longer viewed as something uniquely amoral, and the norms need to be reconsidered; and secondly, one can simply deny the very principle that any immoral phenomenon should be prosecuted - in the modern legal society there is a clear rejection of the concept of “crime without a victim” .

Option b) is most often used in discussions about the problems of pornography and, as mentioned above, at the moment is not clearly supported by any exact data. By and large, this discussion is simply closed before the appearance of some scientific results that do not allow ambiguous interpretations.

From the point of view of evolutionary psychology, there is not even a single understanding of what sexual abuse is all about. Some researchers believe that violence is also one of the possible sexual strategies of a man, which works in the absence of other options for continuation of the race - people (a) are lonely and (b) of low social status - that is, resort to sexual violence. from an evolutionary point of view, losers. In this regard, pornography as an alternative to reducing the pressure of sexual instincts should lead to a decrease in the level of violence. However, other researchers reasonably object to the concept of "violence - a type of sexual strategy."

As Dwyer rightly points out, even the recognition of potential danger by pornography in itself cannot, from the point of view of liberalism, serve as a basis for its prohibition, since pornography falls under the laws on freedom of expression and expression; in fact, a pornographic film is the same as an ordinary work of authorship. Freedom of speech is a fundamental value in itself, therefore a total ban on pornography, generally speaking, is unconstitutional in most countries of the world.

Finally, option c), oddly enough, is the most holistic and interesting concept in our study. Initially, these arguments were put forward by feminists (in particular, Andrea Dvorkin) and are briefly summarized as follows:

(a) pornography depicts sexual relations in a form that generally submits a subordinate role to women (we will not touch on certain genres where this statement is false, if only because of their extremely low weight in the porn industry);

(b) thus pornography fixes behavioral patterns in consciousness that are undesirable in modern society;

(c) and this is especially true in the context of the availability of pornography to children who are still in the process of socialization;

(d) in particular, pornographic films in this context are no different from porn with live actors and should also be banned.

In general, it is impossible not to recognize a certain logical and factual harmony behind this argument. Indeed, the model of the relationship to a woman in porn films in real life is sometimes simply unacceptable; besides, due to the exceptional emotional impact on a person, pornography is really quite capable of fixing such behaviors in consciousness. To accept or not to accept such a concept is your own business,% username%.

In contrast to this concept, the following arguments can be made:

(a) as Dwyer rightly points out, undesirable behaviors are in no way related to the actual pornographic depiction of sexual relations. There is a so-called. "Female friendly" pornography, which is devoid of these shortcomings. Thus, on the basis of Dworkin’s reasoning, one can demand a ban on specific porn films, but not pornography as such.

(b) pornographers portray a similar model of gender relations precisely because it is perceived by men as “default”; from the fact that porn will change the format, the genetic model of behavior will not change.

(c) Let us assume that in modern society it is worth banning to propagandize the "default" male behavior strategy as inappropriate to the requirements of the time. What then can be said about the "default" female strategy described in the previous sections? Does it meet the requirements of time? From the point of view of feminists - no more than men! Is the so-called. romance novels promote the idea of ​​complete gender equality? Nothing of the kind - they are just as exploiting the genetically inherent desire of a woman to have a strong and loving man next to him, to whom you can shift the care of obtaining resources for the family. What now, to prohibit women's novels (feminists, yes, they demand to ban them :-))? , — , , — , ! — ?

, , :

() , — , ; , , , ; () , .

(b) the behavioral component is an image of a behavior model that is ideal from a male point of view, but is unacceptable in the conditions of gender equality; By itself, the behavioral component of pornographic content brings the same benefit / harm as the behavioral component of, say, love stories. She can not create a strategy of behavior out of nothing, but simply actualizes the genetic program.

(c) social component - the image of a model of behavior, clearly and undoubtedly connected with the relations of subordination and the struggle for status. Here, in principle, it would be possible to talk about some kind of negative influence on the psyche in general (and the children's psyche, in particular), if not for one “but”: a person participates in the status struggle WITH BIRTHDAY. The struggle for the social status of children, even in kindergarten, is already extremely intense. What negative impact can pornography have here? No, most likely - porn is still far from action movies, talk shows (!) And other visual images of the struggle for status.

Conclusion

This article does not pretend to any exhaustive coverage of the problems of pornography in modern society. I simply stated the facts and concepts that I managed to find, and the conclusions I reached. You may disagree with them.

I stipulate in advance that I can use some terms (behavior, instinct, etc.) not quite (or completely) correctly from the point of view of a professional ethologist, but at least I try to avoid factual inaccuracies.