A few days ago, Tim Challies wrote a post on "50 Shades of Porn."
I didn't respond before comments were closed, but I wanted to address a few things.
First, I tend to not use the word "porn" - it limits the impact of what is really going on. People hear "porn" and think "pics." If we use the term "erotic material" - we open up a variety of genres...and we eliminate a double standard.
"50 Shades" is not "porn" in the way we normally think of it. It's "erotic material."
Second...Tim Challies wrote:
Women, you need to be aware because the pornographers are coming after you. Yes, you.
Using the term "erotic material" - "historical romance" has been around for a long time. You know the sort, pirates, bad guys, villains...all who steal the tender virgin, ravage her and then steal her heart...and lose their heart to her as well. And, for some women's libraries...you can tell where the "juicy parts" are by the worn spots in the books.
Why do women get hooked on soap operas? Yeah.
Third: the double standard.
A while ago, Tim posted a poem written by a woman whose husband was a regular (and addicted) user of erotic material. This woman was going back to her very wedding night, imposing what she knows now onto that night and declared everything RUINED! And that notion of years (YEARS) of ruined marriage was not only supported, those who objected to that sort of retroactive grudge were scolded for it.
Can you even imagine what the response would be to a man who caught his wife re-reading for the 20th time the "juicy parts" of that novel, then declaring their wedding night a hurtful thing, because he believed that her thoughts were really on Fabio (or whoever the male model was) when he was making love to her?
THE DOUBLE STANDARD:
When men use erotic material, they're evil, mean, unfaithful and pretty much the scum of the earth.
When women use erotic material, they're victims of a marketing ploy.