The Grand Patchwork

Breaking the Sex-Harm Link in Pornography

 Pornography: To Be or Not To Be Harmful? Feb 17th 2011

Characters of the Dialogue:

Margaret Atwood

Murray Davis

Ann Garry

Sandra

Scene – A Television Talk Show discussion on the issue of Pornography.

 

Sandra: Hello and welcome to “WeVibe.” Today we will be discussing the controversial topic of pornography. With me today are two respected guests: Margaret Atwood, famous novelist and poet and Ann Garry, a professor specializing in feminist philosophy and ethics: Thank-you for joining us today. In my understanding, if we are going to discuss the topic of pornography, we must first know what operational definition each person has in mind when discussing the topic.

 

Margaret: I agree that defining terms is very important. I learned that the hard way when “I was in Finland a few years ago for an international writers’ conference” (A 1). They were thinking pornography was merely “naked bodies and sex” (A 1) and I was referring to pornography as “women getting their nipples snipped off with garden shears [and] having meat hoo[k]s stuck into their vaginas” (A 1). 

 

Sandra: Yikes, that definition was graphic and explicit!

 

Margaret: Pornography is graphic and explicit.

 

Sandra: Touché.

 

Ann: I will concede to the idea that contemporary pornography “sometimes violates the moral principle to respect persons” (G 314), but disagree that pornography is to be exclusively defined as violent and brutal. There are many different definitions of pornography including erotica, which appeals to both men and women.

 

Sandra: Yes, I agree that there are many ways to define pornography. In my opinion, Margaret’s definition more describes what is referred to as “Snuff” films rather than pornography. Snuff films are the minority and are already illegal in most countries because of its violent and brutal content. I agree that the type of pornography in which Margaret refers to, is not what most people have in mind when faced with the topic of pornography. What would be your definition Ann?

 

Ann: I would define pornography as “explicit sexual materials intended to arouse the reader or viewer sexually” (G 313). I would like to define it as mostly innocuous in that it is not entirely harmful in the way Margaret describes. The view that “sex is an evil to be controlled” (G 312) is a view I disagree with. What would be your definition then?

 

Sandra: (stammering and blushing). Well, I agree with your definition, but would have to broaden it to include anything that sexually arouses and/or initiates masturbation in a person. 

 

Ann: So a picture of young boys playing soccer could be considered porn if you were a pedophile.

 

Sandra: I suppose.

 

Ann: This would make everything and anything subject to censorship. Are you going to tell a mother she cannot have photos of her son up on the internet?

 

Sandra: Margaret’s definition targets one particular fetish out of thousands of fetishes, or should I say 6.6 billion different fetishes, the kind that “get off” on death and mutilation (the crowd gasps and boos). Hey, (turning to the audience) people are weird, what can I say. This is why deciding on an objective definition of pornography and the issue of censorship is so difficult. It means something a little different to everyone. My husband likes pretty hands, but what makes a hand pretty? Pornography is in “the eye of the beholder” and more of a subjective outlook, rather than a specific objective definition (lect.).Whatever it is that turns you on becomes pornography to you.

 

Margaret: But, I believe it is important to find an objective definition of pornography in order to keep it from going too far or crossing the line. The definition of violence and brutality is absolutely necessary to prevent violence and brutality against women.  

 

Ann: How so?                                                         

 

Margaret: Pornography is like an addiction. For the “hard core” users of pornography, they use it like a drug addict would use drugs. They soon build up a tolerance and thus require more and more. Not just more and more hours spent, but the content needs to get more and more kinky until nothing will satisfy the appetite of the user unless it involves harm, violence and brutality, like Marquis de Sade for example (A 4).

 

Sandra: Marquis de Sade was banned in many countries due to its graphic sex and violence and therefore, lack of censorship is not the issue here. It was recognized that the treatment of the characters in the book was dehumanizing. Mind you, the victims of the sex acts in 120 Days of Sodom, for example did not only target women, but also men. Why the focus on women over men?

 

Margaret: I do admit that sometimes men are the victims in the pornography I have defined (A 1). Women are the target here because pornography could be considered “hate literature” (A 3) to women as a group.

 

Ann: It is true that according to the Presidential Commission on Obscenity and Pornography, “41% of American males and 46% of the females believe that ‘sexual materials lead people to lose respect for women’” (as cited by G 312). But, that was in 1970 and contemporary research suggests it may not be true.

 

Margaret: What contemporary research? What are your sources?

 

Ann: Uh… (shrugs and changes topic). In my research I focus intently on three questions in my work Pornography and Censorship…

 

Sandra: (jokingly). Got to get that plug in! (She shows her work to the audience and the audience laughs). Hold on a second though, I wish to discuss this idea that pornography necessarily leads to violence against women.

 

Ann: (annoyed). Ok.

 

Sandra: Margaret, there is no evidence for your “slippery slope” argument that looking at breasts necessarily leads to violence and brutality (lect.). Pornography is not a “gateway drug for violence” (me). I have done extensive research in altered states of consciousness, including drugs, and evidence has shown that it is not the drug or the act that leads to an obsession, but rather the personality type of the user (Farthing 449-478). There is a certain personality type that makes that person more prone to addiction and obsession. It is this personality type that pushes through the gateway to other, more intense drugs or porn or what have you. What you are targeting is not pornography or men as a whole, but one specific fetish and one specific personality type (camera pans to Margaret).

 

Margaret: (she has a surprised look on her face. It looks like she wants to say something, but says nothing. The camera pans back to Sandra).

 

Sandra: Ok now, Ann, please tell us about your research.

 

Ann: In my work Pornography and Censorship I seek rather to study the content of pornography to find out if 1) pornography really does “degrade, exploit or dehumanize,” if so, “does it degrade women more so than men? and 3), if it possible for an “innocuous, non-sexist pornography’ to exist” (G 313).

 

Margaret: 1) Of course it dehumanizes people and 2) especially women. If the kinds of acts depicted were exclusively targeted at African Americans, pornography would be banned immediately (A 3). I agree with Brownmiller, that pornography is “anti-female propaganda” (G 312)

 

Ann: From my research, it does seem that yes, pornography is degrading, and yes, it degrades women more (lect.). The way women are viewed is that they are seen as “more pure and delicate” (G 315). There are two types of women, those put on a pedestal of respect, and those in the gutter (G 316; lect.). The problem is that even those placed on the pedestal are still less respected than men. There is still a caste system of respect when it comes to men and women, with men on top, then “good” women, then “bad” women at the bottom. The problem is that there is asymmetry when it comes to respect. It is easier to lose respect for a woman than to lose respect for a man. Since men take the active role and women, the passive (G 317), society is more likely to believe that then man will harm the women and not the other way around (A 317).

 

Margaret: Agreed, this “Double Standard” raises the concern of using pornography as an educational tool. The buck has been passed, so to speak from the parent, to the school and now is starting to be “phased out” of the schools (A 3). Therefore, young men are turning to pornography to answer their questions and their needs. The largest population viewing both hard core and soft core pornography has been found to be young men ages 16-21. Pornography is teaching these young men that rape is “normal” (A 3) or “cool” (lect.) and it is therefore a powerful “propaganda device” (A 3). It also creates conflicting expectations between men and women in regard to sex. In my opinion pornography is the culprit and should not be the role model or biggest influence of what young men expect when it comes to sex. They come to expect violence and brutality. It is a bad educational tool because people tend to follow a “monkey see, monkey do” mentality (see Figure 1: Atwood’s Illustration).

 

Ann: I agree that it is problematic to use pornography as an educational tool, but perhaps we can create a type of pornography that is not harmful. There are many different types of pornography and the male-oriented pornography would probably do the most damage.

 

Margaret: Yes, it portrays women as an “airhead” or “lollipop-licker” (A 2).

 

Sandra: Male-oriented pornography tends to put women in the sex object role and implies that the women’s duty in sex is the one who “services” the man, for his pleasure, and this is what in turn gives her pleasure (lect; G 320). For women as a whole that is not a good thing.

 

Ann: Exactly and nobody, not just women, wants to be treated or defined merely as a means to someone else’s end (lect.). For example “I would object to being treated only as a maker of chocolate chip cookies or only as a tennis partner, because only one of my talents is being valued” (g 317-318). “I would rather be a partner…than an object” (G 318).

 

Sandra: Nicely said! We all fulfill different roles at different times, but when it comes to sex; men and women have different perspectives. It reminds me of something my father said to me when I started high school. He said “men use love for sex and women use sex for love.”  (They pause, reflect and nod in agreement). It is the love element that I believe is missing in male-oriented porn.

 

Ann: Agreed, this brings us to my third question, can “innocuous, non-sexist pornography’ exist” (G 313)? As I have said before, there are many different types of pornography and erotica does not seem as “bad” as male-oriented porn.

 

Margaret: “Is there a clear line between erotica and violent pornography, or are they on an escalating continuum?” (A 4).

 

Ann: Good question. I believe that there are variations on a continuum, and if there is no violence, brutality, or degrading acts against women in the content, then perhaps no harm can come from it and it would not teach young boys to expect male-domination in the bedroom.

 

Sandra: Do you have an example of non-harmful pornography?

 

Ann: Yes, as a matter of fact I do have some ideas. It would not be male dominated and could show “women and men in roles equally valued by society” (G 322). For example it could depict women in a role that men usually are associated with, such as a respected female doctor who fools around with all the other doctors. There would be no mention of harm and would also show her in her role, treating her patients with respect.

 

Margaret: It doesn’t matter what the content of the pornography is as the damage to the audience’s mindset has already been done.

 

Ann: Yes, this is true. It is hard to accept any pornography as being good, no matter the content, when the majority link sex to harm; what I call the “sex harm connection” (G 321). Perhaps the only way to make pornography innocuous is to change the mindset of the people. The link between “sex and harm” must be broken (G 321)! (See Figure 2: Garry’s Illustration).

 

Sandra: Ok, let’s say the causality is clear, and that people follow a “monkey see, monkey do” attitude. This means that the type and content of the pornography is important and therefore, if we introduced harmless, non-degrading porn to the population and they viewed it, it could eventually change the attitude and break the “sex-harm connection.”

 

Ann: Yes, but I think it is more complicated than that because, erotica is the minority in the pornography world and even if we showed innocuous porn to the world right now, it would be interpreted in the wrong way. The attitude is still there.

 

Margaret: This gets at one of the questions in my article. It is difficult to break the “sex-harm connection” mindset because it is unclear whether pornography is “an expression of the sexual confusion of this age or an active contributor to it” (A 4).

 

Ann: Hold on, let me wrap my brain around this. So, Sandra, you are saying that if pornography is an active contributor to the current mind set, then, if innocuous pornography became the majority, it could be used to change the mind-set of the audience. Ok, interesting, then I am on the right track. So, Margaret, if it were true that pornography is the expression of the sexual confusion of this day and age, then it is more important to change the mindset. Can people’s mindset or world views be changed directly? I do not think it is possible.

 

Sandra: The procedure for changing the mindset in a person involves the conscious will and effort of the person. They would have to watch for cues (Devine, 2005). For example while a person is watching pornography and they get the urge to bite, pull hair, hit or be violent, they need to recognize this feeling, counteract it, or stop it (or at least stop it from escalating to harm and violence). After a while of doing this new neural pathways are created that remember the boundaries of this compulsion. Much lik kinaesthetic memory? You throw basketballs at a hoop over and over again, your body remembers the motion and it gets stored in the cells. If you practice enough, you can eventually do it with your eyes closed: But, like I said, it takes a lot of time and effort and the person has to be willing to make the change.

 

Margaret: If the person is not making a conscious effort, I believe that seeing something affects the person subconsciously and does not necessarily entail conscious effort. It just happens.

 

Ann: Yes, this is the problem, when they view the pornography it triggers the “sex-harm connection.” But, who is going to try to consciously change their mindset?

 

Sandra: That’s the real question, but on the off chance that someone may want to do this, I have some more suggestions. There was a massage therapist that noticed that sometimes people broke out into tears when she messaged their shoulders. The research of Wilhelm Reich explains that we have pathways of energy (orgone) that go up and down the body, very much like the Qi or chi of Acupuncture, that get blocked when full of stress. For example, let’s take the old saying of “boys don’t cry.” What happens is, every time the boy starts to well up with tears, he clenches his fists or jaw to prevent it. After a while the tension builds up in the muscles creating knots in his shoulders (or protrusions in the jaw). He then, as an adult, goes to a massage therapist and bursts out into tears because he has been repressing it for so long. Reich believed, in his book, The Function of the Orgasm that in order to recalibrate the energy lines and relieve built up tension was to have an orgasm.

 

Ann: Perhaps this is a contributor to the sex-harm connection because the orgasm, which is associated with sex and thus vicariously associated with women, is being used as an outlet for misplaced rage. Since pornography is also associated with the orgasm it remains in the equation.

 

Sandra: If the outlet for the rage was not taken out in the bedroom, then perhaps the rage could be associated with something else instead. Like hitting pillows, playing drums, writing or communicating more about etc.

 

Margaret: All this is well and good, but it is still unclear which variable is causing what.

 

Sandra: Yes, this leaves one more option to debate. Let’s say, that this is now a correlational relationship and therefore the causation cannot be determined. Therefore, the interaction between the two is symbiotic and the one in turn affect the other. What would happen if we introduce innocuous pornography into this equation? Well, since the one affects the other and so forth, we could see a slow change in the mindset of the audience. It would probably be easier to change the pornography as opposed to the mindset.

 

Ann: So, if the relationship was correlational, adding innocuous pornography to the equation could be beneficial in changing the overall mindset.

 

Sandra: Well it couldn’t hurt to try. The change would be slow if it were to work. However, the problem is that the target of change is not just within the “sex-harm connection,” but rather in a deeper issue of inequality between men and women. This is where the true problem lies. In order to change this mindset, true balance between the sexes is needed. Pornography is not the culprit here, but the socialization of gender stereotypes. Let your boys play with dolls, let your girls play with cars, use gender neutral colours, and teach your children tolerance and egalitarianism. This is how to solve the problem. It is necessary to balance the male and female principles on an intrapersonal, interpersonal and societal level (see Figure 3: My Illustration).

 

Ann: Since the innocuous-type of pornography has not been completely ruled out by any of these definitions, it is therefore necessary to discuss how to make respectful pornography.

 

Margaret: Discussing this is quite uncomfortable for me, but I agree that a balance may be necessary. For instance, “[n]obody wants to go back to the age of official repression, when even piano legs were referred to as ‘limbs’ and had to wear pantaloons to be decent. Neither do we want to end up in George Orwell’s 1984…where sex itself is considered dirty and the approved practise it only for reproduction” (A 4).

 

Ann: Margaret. You believe that people replicate what they see in pornography right?

 

Margaret: Yes.

 

Ann: So then do you also believe that pornography is an accurate reflection of what happens in reality, or displays verisimilitude?

 

Margaret: No absolutely not. The problem is that it is moulding young minds to think it represents reality.

 

Davis: I do. I believe that pornography is very similar to reality and provides a non-distorted view of what happens behind closed doors (lect.).

 

Sandra: Where did you come from?

 

Davis: Sorry (walks off stage).

 

Ann: I disagree. From a phenomenological point of view sex does not unfold like male-oriented fantasy pornography. Perhaps more like erotica, but it too is exaggerated.

 

Sandra: What if that is the problem.

 

Ann: What do you mean?

 

Sandra: Well, what if we make pornography even more representative of real life.

 

Ann: This is exactly what my ideas suggest in my work, but you’re saying perhaps less like the sexy doctor, but more like the couple that skies together, sails together and watches “old romantic movies on TV” (G 320-321).

 

Sandra: Yes. The everyday reality meets the erotic reality (D 46). We could fade the everyday reality into the erotic reality to make it more representative.

 

Margaret: Sounds boring.

 

Sandra: Not if you do it right.

 

Ann: And how might that be?

 

Sandra: It is important for the couple to be on the same frequency or “try to harmonize his or her personal sexual rhythm with the partner’s” (D 15). Since the orgasmic rhythms pulsate at 0.08 seconds (lect.), we could bring them in and out of reality at whatever the equivalent to this would be. So, you would see the everyday reality, with flashes of the erotic interspersed. The delay between the two realities would start out longer, and then get closer and closer together until “pop” their sex scene is played out in full.

 

Ann: Sounds like an interesting idea. We would have to make sure that the characters are relatable if we want to create a porno that is more closely related to reality.

 

Davis: If you want the story to reflect reality, then writing it from a phenomenological approach would be best. I would also suggest using all the space, time, social, and physical cues discussed in my book Smut (he displays his book to the audience, the audience laughs).

 

Sandra: You again!?

 

Davis: Carry on. But, I’m not going to leave this time, this is too interesting.

 

Sandra: Yes Ann I agree that it is important that the characters are relatable and have average relatable conversation and are not impossibly gorgeous, but are not ugly either. They should be average looking. Their bodies not too fat, nor too thin, but each has their exquisite features. For example, she could have a pretty smile and he could have beautiful eyes, speaking to Davis’s “erons”, since he wants to join the conversation. Since the characters are supposed to be relatable, and the average penis size in North America is 6 inches (lect; MANswers), his penis should be a good solid 6 inches. Oh, and they have to have had acting lessons!

Ann: Definitely! The acting is always so horrible. Then what do we do for the ending?

 

Margaret: Yes, what about the “money shot” it is always portrayed as a sexist male fantasy. The reason men “get off” on it is because it is degrading to the woman. I still do not think it is possible to make pornography innocuous because of this.

 

Ann: Why not omit the “money shot” altogether or just a wide shot of the two of them and it is assumed that he has finished.

 

Sandra: No, if we take it out, (no pun intended) men will not watch it. We have to meet them in the middle, like the YouTube video “Boobies and Kittens” the boobies are for the men and the kittens are for the women. (Then, of course the men are pleased because they’ve just made their partner to look at “sweater kittens”). But, anyway, men enjoy watching the “money shot,” they enjoy it phenomenologically because they relate to that moment. They like to see that the man has finished. Women can get pleasure at all different times throughout, so perhaps we do not quite relate to this moment. They will already be not thrilled with the idea that there is a plot.

 

Ann: Then how do we the “money shot” non-degrading?

 

Sandra:  Ever heard of “Cream Pies.”

 

Margaret: No, already sounds degrading.

 

Sandra: Uh (stammering, and very uncomfortable) I am not sure how appropriate it is to explain this. But, we are all adults here. If you must know it is a close up – but not to close up (looks at Davis. He smiles) shot of the genitals just as they are reaching the climax. He pulls out but you see it cream all over her vagina. He then lingers and does a little rubbing around, even puts it back in. We want it to look like he really loves her. Therefore, it could be possible to invent an innocuous porno at the same time providing a better educational tool. (She is looking down because the topic is so uncomfortable. She looks up to find Davis, Ann and Margaret all “making out” on the couch.

 

Sandra: (turning back to the audience) Ok, that was unexpected. That’s all we have time for today on WeVibe. Thanks for coming. Uh I mean. Thanks for coming out. Err until next time.

 

Figure 1: “This is not a pipe.” Retrieved February 8, 2011 from http://74.125.67.100/images?q=this+is+not+a+pipe&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=univ&ei=sOhRTaz7CI7GswaMtYDzBg&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=3&ved=0CEAQsAQwAg&biw=1271&bih=623

 

Atwood’s Illustration

This picture by Michel Foucault (1968) was chosen as it speaks to the idea of verisimilitude and the issue of pornography being used as an educational tool. This indeed is not a pipe; it is merely an image of a pipe. Much like how pornography is merely an image of what sex is like. Most pornography, especially male-oriented pornography, does not even portray an accurate image of the true phenomenological experience of sex. Most women do not act like objectified sex slaves, there to only pleasure the man.

Using pornography as an educational tool is problematic because as Atwood believes, people follow a “monkey see monkey do” attitude and will thus portray the images seen. It will also perpetuate a mindset that women are merely sex objects and nothing more.

Pornography, as related to this picture, reminds me of Plato’s Analogy of the Cave because the image that they are seeing on the wall of the cave is only an image or reflection and not the true thing itself. Their shackles could represent the mindset that has been deeply seeded into their world view of what to expect from women. The reason they cannot turn their heads or move in any way is because they are only seeing pornography from one point of view (the male perspective). In this example, the fire lighting up the images on the cave wall represents lust as opposed to the real sun, which would represent love. Therefore, the reality that they think is the true reality is not the true reality at all. Therefore, I agree with Atwood that pornography should not be used as an educational tool and also disagree with Davis that pornography displays verisimilitude. Unfortunately, most men conform to the world view accepted by their own gender class and the mindset that women are inferior and should be treated as sex objects should be changed.  Follow this link to hear a song inspired by Plato’s Analogy of the Cave. http://forum.bandamp.com/Audio_Review/2625.html

 

Figure 2: “The Garden of Eden” retrieved February 8, 2011 from http://universalheretic.wordpress.com/2010/06/09/modern-christian-mythology-the-garden-of-eden/  Also; see one of my personal sites https://theunifiedfield.webs.com

 

 

 Garry’s Illustration

 

This illustration was chosen because it seems to depict Garry’s position in regard to sex and harm. The “sex-harm connection” (321) has been so deeply entrenched that I will argue goes back to “The Fall.” The fruit is actually an analogy for sex. Sex was the forbidden fruit and when they participated in the act, they were punished. Thus introducing the association of harm and violence with sex, much like how puking after eating hot dogs creates an aversion to hot dogs.

Another example of the sex-harm connection comes from a story in the Gnostic Gospels (the Book of Baruch) featuring Elohim and Eden, who represent the male and female sides of God respectively. They created the world with their love, He donated the spirit and she donated the soul (Meyer, 2005). After they had finished creating the earth, Elohim wished to go back up to heaven to see if there was anything lacking in creation and when he arose, he saw a light brighter than his own and became curious. He thought he was God so he approached the light. There he met with the God of foresight. Elohim then wished to destroy the earth because his spirit was trapped inside, but the God of foresight said he could do no evil while with hymn. It was there Elohim stayed and never returned to his bride, with whom he made a loving contract. When Eden realized she had been abandoned she sought revenge so that Elohim would feel her pain. She began to torment the spirit within all humans to get back at him. This is how it stands today. Elohim did realize if she knew that he was with the Good, she would not have sought revenge. His abandonment created a cycle of divorce and resentment between the sexes that repeats to this day. But, in this example it was the female perpetuated who displayed the violence. Perhaps the reason why there is a high divorce rate is because all of humanity itself has come from a broken home and we are thus repeating or following the cycle. Hence “monkey see monkey do” and why it is hard to break the link.

 

 

Figure 3: “Vesica Pisces” retrieved from whitehawkstudio.com February 8, 2011. Labels and outer

ring created by Sandra Kroeker. This symbol was picked not only for demonstrative

purposes, but because it looks like a naked women lying down. Also; see one of my personal sites https://theunifiedfield.webs.com/.

 

              

 

My Illustration

Changing the Sex-Harm Mindset: On an Inner, Personal Level

Each person has within themselves a male and female aspect or side (Jung termed them the Animus and the Anima respectively). Polarization of these two sides is important for changing the mindset that women are inferior. In order to polarize the inner self, one must recognize that each side is important in their own right, and in their own time. For the purposes of this exercise, a particular stereotype of the sexes will be used (and then should be ignored and not taken as truth). Male tendencies are assumed to be more rational, whereas female tendencies more emotional. These labels can be inserted into the Venn diagram above. Therefore, on a personal level, balance is achieved when one can recognize the importance of both rational (male) and emotional (female) tendencies and in what situations it is best to use more of one than the other or a balance of both. Sometimes it is best to listen more to your reason and sometimes it is best to listen more to your instinct or emotion, especially when it warns of a situation that might put you in danger. The balance of when to use which and how much can be learned by getting to know yourself and paying attention to the consequences of the actions you make.

There is a difference between what is known as “sex” and what is known as “gender.” In Psychology, sex represents the biological category and gender represents a cognitive or social category. Gender stereotypes are false because these characteristics will appear in many degrees in either sex and in all areas in between. Androgyny has been shown to be the healthiest for the individual. A condition called Male Normative Alexithymia has been seen in men who were raised to control their emotions (Levant, 2007). Lexi means without, and thymia means emotions. This is when emotions get pushed inside and can build up and come out in inappropriate ways and at inappropriate times. For example “Rubber Band Syndrome” is when unrecognized emotions build up until they erupt in an explosion of anger, and excessive strength and aggression. This creates concern for relationships, not only because the woman can be on the wrong end of the aggression, but women tend to see expressed aggression as a temporary loss of control whereas men see it as a way of establishing control. This is probably a large contributor to the “sex-harm connection” (G 321). If the emotional side was expressed more often, or felt it could be, then it would not build up and turn to anger and/or aggression. Other ways to correct mindsets and reduce gender stereotypes were already discussed in the main essay. If ways of changing the mindset in a relationship setting and on a societal level is of interest, let me know.