No abstract

Summary The effects of pornography have received increased scrutiny in the digital age. Several U.S. states have recently passed resolutions declaring pornography a public health crisis, and clients are increasingly seeking help for related concerns. Given the pornography debate encompasses micro and macro arenas, social workers have reason to be engaged. But there is a dearth of literature examining social workers' views on these issues. Given values play an integral role in informing attitudes about sexuality, we sought to better understand the role of religiosity in shaping social work students’ views on pornography via a web-based survey ( n = 136). Findings Results from a path analysis suggest highly religious students are more likely to believe pornography is a serious public health issue, and this relationship is mediated through their perception of pornography’s addictiveness. Applications That highly religious social work students are more likely to pathologize pornography has implications for policy advocacy and clinical social work practice. If highly religious social workers are more likely to rate pornography as addictive, they may be more likely to pathologize their clients' use of it. This is significant in that addiction is a heavy label that may harm clients. Our findings further speak to the importance of educating social work students and practitioners about reflexivity, not only in the context of individual practice but also in the macro practice arena. We argue that staying cognizant of their biases and utilizing a biopsychosocial perspective, social workers can bring a valuable perspective to the pornography debate.

Pornography has become an increasingly salient topic in public discourse. We sought to better understand the role of religiosity in shaping people's support of policy stances against pornography, in the form of censorship, using nationally representative data from the 2014 General Social Survey (n = 1676). Results from logistic regression indicate that high religiosity significantly increases odds of supporting censorship. Holding control variables at their sample means, the least religious persons had a predicted probability of 0.09 of supporting censorship, compared to 0.57 for the most religious respondents. We discuss these findings within the context of the current public health debate.

No abstract

No abstract