What's the moral problem with pornography? As far as I can understand it, it hinges on the concept of 'objectification', which seems to mean treating someone else as a means to your own ends rather than as an end in themselves. But if I go to the corner shop to buy a pint of milk, aren't I treating the guy behind the counter as a means to my own ends (buying a pint of milk) rather than as an end in himself? Does buying milk have the same ethical status as pornography?

You allude to the Kantian view that we should never treat humanityas a means only, but always as an end in itself (see Robert Johnson'sexplanation in the wonderful Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-moral/#8 ). Kant didn't think that we should never rely on people as means to our ends at all ,but just not at the expense of regarding their humanity as an end initself. Slavery is presumably a clear case on one side, and on theother might be a trade wherein both parties aim for mutual (not merelyselfish) benefit. Whether, and in what cases, a user of pornographymight be said to treat the model as an end in herself, is obviouslycomplicated, but these considerations might well be relevant: Is the user aiming at benefitting the model? Is headequately keeping in mind the effects on the model, on himself, and onthe women with whom he will interact, as well as the effects on peoplegenerally of a culture in which pornography is prevalent? The latter...