Robin Herne, who runs the religious studies and ethics degree at the University of Suffolk at West Suffolk College, solves your dilemas.

Dear Robin,

My teenage brother recently left his tablet unattended and I had intended to post some messages on social media for a joke. Unfortunately I looked at his browser history, and he has been looking at some very misogynistic, violent 'adult' websites. Given that I wasn't meant to be using his tablet to start with, I feel awkward about saying anything – but I'm very worried about how he must view women if he likes looking at those sites. Should I say anything?

Karen

Dear Karen,

I'm not sure if this quite counts as eavesdropping, but it is always rather awkward when you come across information by doing something which you should probably not have been.

Pornography is available now in a way that was simply unheard of a few decades ago and much of it is easily accessible by youngsters who normally need do no more than click a button declaring themselves to be old enough to view images without needing to prove their age in any way.

You haven't stated exactly how old your brother is so technically he might be legally old enough to view such images if he is a late teen. However, I can quite understand that a lot of adult websites can be particularly concerning because of their real or implied violence – usually directed towards women.

That many teenage lads want to look at pictures of naked ladies (or naked gents, as the case may be) is hardly news to anyone and in itself is not – I think – particularly concerning.

Some people would disagree with me and regard any kind of sexualised or explicit imagery as deeply immoral, and we'll come back to some of those objections shortly.

However, a great deal more concerning is imagery that fetishizes violence, enslavement, or even rape.

Looking at such imagery does not turn a person into a rapist any more than looking at pictures of cocaine turns someone into a drug dealer.

However, the concern of many psychologists, social commentators and philosophers is that constant exposure to violence can normalise it to the point where it ceases to be shocking.

American psychologist Craig Anderson researches into the impact of playing violent computer games.

He suggests there is no direct link between playing such games and committing real violence, however he has suggested that people become desensitised to actual brutality and less shocked when witnessing it.

Pornography is different to gaming, in as much as most people tend to assume viewers actively seek out tastes that appeal to them – in other words, the sadistic streak needs to already be there for a person to be aroused by violence.

Someone just looking at random images will not somehow 'contract' a taste for violence just because they happen to have seen a dodgy picture or two.

Such an assumption rather assumes that sexual predilections are shaped by more powerful forces than imagery – whether biology, childhood experiences, or something else.

Without engaging in some highly unethical experiments, it is very difficult to prove exactly what influences a preference for one quirk (if we can call them that) or other – be that a preference for brunettes, passionate clinches in the great outdoors, or something potentially illegal or dangerous. Many feminist writers have suggested that constant exposure to images of battered, submissive, or murdered women has a drip-drip effect, subtly leaving a mark on the mind of the viewer.

I loved all those old Hammer Horror films from my childhood, though thinking back almost all the victims of leering vampires and werewolves were scantily dressed young ladies.

I haven't turned into an abusive thug, and am not suggesting that Christopher Lee's Dracula might have inadvertently warped the minds of generations (though I'm pretty sure TV campaigners like Mary Whitehouse used to declare that such films would lead to all sorts of social problems).

Modern horror films are much more visceral and graphic in their violence (too much so for me), but still most of the victims are attractive females – from a feminist perspective they still tend to just reinforce the notion that women are (or perhaps deserve to be) victims.

Will frequent viewing of pretend sexual violence give your brother a taste for such things, or does he view it because he already has such a leaning?

It's impossible for me to say, but I suspect these are the questions you are asking yourself. Even though you were intruding on his privacy, I feel it would be worth trying to help ensure he develops a healthy, positive view of women and leaves this stage behind. However, whether you are best placed to intervene is not something I can say without knowing your relationship. If it's antagonistic, he might get embarrassed. Perhaps another relative or family friend might be better positioned to discuss issues with him? Or maybe you could initiate a general discussion with the whole family about relationships, dating, how women and men prefer to be treated etc?

If he is under the impression that women in general like aggressive men, or maybe he feels too bland or ineffectual to attract a woman, then this might be elicited without needing to ask graphic questions that reduce him to squirming silence.

All of this said, some feminist researchers such as Teresa Hornsby have suggested that what might be considered abusive sexual scenarios by many women can be consensual so possibly not every woman would find your brother's viewing material objectionable or anti-female.

Hopefully nothing untoward will develop from the situation in the long run!