Misogynistic lines/attitudes from porn does it bother you ?

Dragan

taconnol wrote: »

I suppose the other point to make is just because women want one thing in their sex lives, doesn't mean they want it in, say their work life. I'm sure some women love being ordered around the bedroom by their partner but that doesn't mean they want a controlling boss (be they male or female).

And guys who like being dominated in the bedroom, same thing.

Exactly. It's also important to remember that certain people look very differently at things in their sex lives than others would. I mean, without going into detail myself and my girlfriend would do things that it is rather obvious other people who posted in this thread simply would not enjoy.

The important aspect for us is that the reason we can do these things is because we are very comfortable with each other and are very, very respectful of each other. Things can be turn ons without being degrading or disrespectful for either person.

metrovelvet

Dragan wrote: »

This then begs the question of why the audience does not like to see strong female leads? .

Because American men want to be heroes. You can't do that, without someone to save.

Dragan

metrovelvet wrote: »

Because American men want to be heroes. You can't do that, without someone to save.

Or the vice versa could apply, that American women want their men to be hero's? I know men get accussed of being old fashioned but the vast majority of women, in my experience and from reading threads across various fora here, is that women still want the man to ask them out, to be the one to instigate contact, to be confident, assured and good looking and capable?

paperclip2

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Thus, they'll make what they know people want and will consume. Until demand changes, supply will remain the same.

Coming at this from the other side, no pun intended, but do the majority of people know enough or think enough about visual depictions of sex to actually change their demands. I think there is a bit of a Pavlovian repsonse thing in porn. We are expected to like it so we like it and respond to it. How many people beyond this forum actually sit down over lunch and really deconstruct pornography? And is it done on the scale required to really make producers change how they do things?

Galvasean

Dragan wrote: »

Or the vice versa could apply, that American women want their men to be hero's? I know men get accussed of being old fashioned but the vast majority of women, in my experience and from reading threads across various fora here, is that women still want the man to ask them out, to be the one to instigate contact, to be confident, assured and good looking and capable?

Plus the hero man is usually a hunk. How many girls in the past week have you heard saying they were looking forward to Quantum of Solace because Daniel Craig is so gorgeous (with me its about 20)?
It's true what they say, "Men want to be him, women want to be with him." And for the 90minute duration of the movie we can!
Bottom line: Hunky macho man saving the day = box office gold.

Anti

Chinafoot wrote: »

You'll be expecting a plot next...

Hate the slut and whore stuff. One thing I really can't watch is the gagging stuff. I find that incredibly degrading.

You cant get proper deep throat without the gagging.

solace

Clichéd sex phrases are hilarious. If I ever came out with something so ludicrously cheesy, my girlfriend would only laugh. Surely it's the same with most of ye, no? Obviously it'd be different in a one night stand situation but again... who says this **** with anything but a faux sleazy grin?

CDfm

anonymous_joe wrote: »

And actually that type of sex was mutual, but something we'd talked about previously (sometimes a bit of planning's fun ) and she'd suggested it.

Aha - so it was mutual and fun - sounds healthy and lots:eek:

CDfm

taconnol wrote: »

Are you serious?



Are you serious? So women, who already get paid less than men in Hollywood, need to take pay cuts to get the roles with "integrity" in them. As if the big-budget roles for men have any integrity? The whole point is that these big roles do not exist in Hollywood for women - so in a way, you've proved my point. Thanks. And I'm not really sure what Farrah Fawcett's personal life has to do with this.


Seriously, I can't even keep up with the random tangents you're taking this discussion. Camels in the Middle East..?? In my house, we watched all the sports, especially the diving and the gymnastics because of the sheer skill of it. I didn't find it pervy for my dad, boyfriend or brother to be watching, just as it wasn't pervy for me to be watching the 14-year old Tom Daley of the UK compete. Oh but wait, is it only men that can be pervy? Again, I think you're projecting your own opinion.



Er...so you say that mayo isn't a guy food and then complain about bad male stereotyping?? Really don't know what to say there.


I have had strange men walk up to me in bars and say things like "great tits", as if I would be honoured by the compliment. The effect is there, that some men think it's acceptable to speak to women as if they're in a porn movie.

There was a case in the news yesterday of a male construction worker being sexually harassed on a building site. Do you think this is acceptable? Or is it just OK to harass women because they happen to work in a male-dominated work environment? Your "put up or shut up" attitude is quite disgraceful. I really think your comments about women wanting to change the world totally for them are quite silly. You're really starting to show your sexist attitudes now.


Now hang on, a while ago you were saying that women run the porn industry (but have yet to provide any proof of this NWO of the porn world) and now you're suggesting people say that women aren't involved in porn or benefit financially-no one here has said that.

Of course I am serious - go into any chemists and see the rows and rows of stuff for women -and the odd token shelf for men. I would be hard pressed to get male skincare products anywhere other than Boots and then they are stocked only if there is a demand.

On Farrah Fawcett - it is fine and dandy for her to act as a battered wife - however in real life she was the wan doing the battering. My point being that in real life what female actresses describe as meaty roles is where they are the heroine or the sex symbol. Whereas in real life that is not so.Female roles depict all junkies are pretty, all female welders are slightly built , all mothers are capable and struggling. That is not real life. In movies I want my junkies to be junkies - my welders muscular and dirty - my killers evil and my crack addicted ho mamas to look like crack addicted ho mamas.

Again, here with movies - women are paid in accordance with box office draws. The key market for women is women. I am not saying its wrong -big name actresses wont take roles that does not focus on their looks. Or where they are portrayed as the irredeemable baddie - Cruella DeVille being the exception. MY crack addicted ho mama is - cosmetically enhanced body sculptured with perfect skin and teeth.

That was not a random comment on camel racing jockeys. I made the comment of making kids ride camels to training for Olympics for gymnastics. It is cruel. Its my view - the intensive training is not a proper regimen for a child. The same way putting young kids on a camel they cant control as it must have a jockey is abuse. There is no doubt in my mind.I find it odd as a spectacle.

I dont think sexual harrassment is acceptable and am not aware of the case- but I would not expect if I went to work in an all female environment that everyone would stop doing all there girlie stuff just for me.I am not sexist I am a realist and work with women in senior and junior roles.I think diversity in the work place is a good thing.

What is acceptable in a bar etc is part of courtship behaviour - if you go to a bar full of drunken blokes you will get comments. If you had a few pints yourself your behaviour might change. Some women are into that and it goes with a type of person and venue.

AS to women in porn from a marxist view of economics - with on-line webcams etc - women own the means of production and its output and dont say it aint so cos it is. Very entrepeneurial. That you doubt womens ability to own and manage businesses is very old fashioned- I have no doubts with womens abilities.

anonymous_joe

Dragan wrote: »

Or the vice versa could apply, that American women want their men to be hero's? I know men get accussed of being old fashioned but the vast majority of women, in my experience and from reading threads across various fora here, is that women still want the man to ask them out, to be the one to instigate contact, to be confident, assured and good looking and capable?

Very good point. My last (proper) girlfriend was very much of the independant type, etc, but she still wanted her boyfriend to be the big old fashioned protective knight in slightly scruffy and raffish armour.

paperclip2 wrote: »

Coming at this from the other side, no pun intended, but do the majority of people know enough or think enough about visual depictions of sex to actually change their demands. I think there is a bit of a Pavlovian repsonse thing in porn. We are expected to like it so we like it and respond to it. How many people beyond this forum actually sit down over lunch and really deconstruct pornography? And is it done on the scale required to really make producers change how they do things?

It's certainly a factor. Lot's of people I know watch porn, the only ones who talk about it a lot are the ones who seem to be big into the whole degradation part. (I just copped this now, but of my social circle it seems the norm.) I don't think I've ever had a serious discussion of the merits (or lack thereof) of some porn I or someoen else watched. It's still perceived as slightly beyond the pale. (Not sure that's bad per sé. ^^)

CDfm wrote: »

Aha - so it was mutual and fun - sounds healthy and lots:eek:

*shrugs* Just two people with dirty minds having fun. We had a policy of being honest about what we wanted/were into. Avoided embarrassment. Seems the most sensible way of doing things. :pac:

metrovelvet

I think what we are leaving out of this discussion is control. The original issue of this thread came from a line in after hours, which was used [later discovered or argued to be parody] to subjugate, and that's where the problem lies.

When you have women in real life, asking to be subjugated, they are still in control of the subjugation, whether it comes down to spanking, hitting, rape fantasies, language, whatever, and once it crosses the line out of her control then it becomes demeaning and derogatory, because it is neglectiful of, if not a direct violation of her wishes and subjectivity.

GirlInterrupted

metrovelvet wrote: »

I think what we are leaving out of this discussion is control. The original issue of this thread came from a line in after hours, which was used [later discovered or argued to be parody] to subjugate, and that's where the problem lies.

When you have women in real life, asking to be subjugated, they are still in control of the subjugation, whether it comes down to spanking, hitting, rape fantasies, language, whatever, and once it crosses the line out of her control then it becomes demeaning and derogatory, because it is neglectiful of, if not a direct violation of her wishes and subjectivity.

Succintly put.

CDfm

metrovelvet wrote: »

When you have women in real life, asking to be subjugated, they are still in control of the subjugation, whether it comes down to spanking, hitting, rape fantasies, language, whatever, and once it crosses the line out of her control then it becomes demeaning and derogatory, because it is neglectiful of, if not a direct violation of her wishes and subjectivity.

but metrovelvet -its a two way street - you assume that its always the guy who instigates this. when in reality or so ive been told its almost equal and that the figures are quite shocking in female same sex relationshops.

i am not saying that as a wind up- but its important to realise that women are not just victims but also instigators.

its great that its the minority in both sexes are like this - so by definition its not my bag

this is a fascinating thread - its so thoughtful

metrovelvet

CDfm wrote: »

but metrovelvet -its a two way street - you assume that its always the guy who instigates this. when in reality or so ive been told its almost equal and that the figures are quite shocking in female same sex relationshops.

i am not saying that as a wind up- but its important to realise that women are not just victims but also instigators.

its great that its the minority in both sexes are like this - so by definition its not my bag

this is a fascinating thread - its so thoughtful

Where did I assume that? Not at all. I think you missed my point.

CDfm

metrovelvet wrote: »

Where did I assume that? Not at all. I think you missed my point.

sorry if i misunderstood - it must be a guy thing:D

Zulu

metrovelvet wrote: »

I think what we are leaving out of this discussion is control. The original issue of this thread came from a line in after hours, which was used [later discovered or argued to be parody] to subjugate, and that's where the problem lies.

so would I be right in thinking that you are suggesting that porn somehow encourages people to loose control? (Sorry, I'm not too clear on what your exact point is)

metrovelvet wrote: »

Where did I assume that? Not at all. I think you missed my point.

You can't blame people for interpreting your post that way - you implied it. You could have used "him" instead of "her", or "people" instead of "women", but you didn't. People aren't mind readers. Your post was referring to women being subjugated, and the possibility of them loosing control of the situation. So unless you are discussing homosexual encounters - which wasn't alluded at, the implication is that the man is over stepping the boundaries and the women is in harms way.

Dragan

metrovelvet wrote: »

I think what we are leaving out of this discussion is control. The original issue of this thread came from a line in after hours, which was used [later discovered or argued to be parody] to subjugate, and that's where the problem lies.

When you have women in real life, asking to be subjugated, they are still in control of the subjugation, whether it comes down to spanking, hitting, rape fantasies, language, whatever, and once it crosses the line out of her control then it becomes demeaning and derogatory, because it is neglectiful of, if not a direct violation of her wishes and subjectivity.

Thats where the trust issue comes in and possible the biggest strength for the argument that sex in a meaningful relationship is better than one night stands, the simple trust and comfort two people share allows them to explore, in comfort, a lot more than they would with a stranger.

Nevyn

What is said between two consenting adults in private as part of a sexual encounter is one thing, addressing a stranger or group of strangers in that manner who has not consented in a public setting is another entirely.

Dragan

Thaedydal wrote: »

What is said between two consenting adults in private as part of a sexual encounter is one thing, addressing a stranger or group of strangers in that manner who has not consented in a public setting is another entirely.

Hang on, what part of the convo have i missed?

Nevyn

What makes you think there is a bit missing.

Dragan

Thaedydal wrote: »

What makes you think there is a bit missing.

Just struggling to find the relevance of the strangers thing to be honest.:o

Zulu

Thaedydal wrote: »

What is said between two consenting adults in private as part of a sexual encounter is one thing, addressing a stranger or group of strangers in that manner who has not consented in a public setting is another entirely.

Is our gripe about how people address each other on an internet discussion board?

Nevyn

We are seeing a change in how people behave in public, it's like good manners, being considerate of others are no longer valued and that people think they can behave in public like they would in private. How a person addresses or converses with thier friends is not the same as how they address or converse with strangers or at least to a point imho should not be the same.

This was not something I had considered that much when I started the thread but am now.

Yes I have had my coffee this morning
Really Dragan this thread isn't that convoluted you should try a long and intresting conversation about stuff some time, it would be fun seeing you trying to keep up with the twists and turns of my brain.

Zulu

Thaedydal wrote: »

We are seeing a change in how people behave in public, it's like good manners, being considerate of others are no longer valued and that people think they can behave in public like they would in private. How a person addresses or converses with thier friends is not the same as how they address or converse with strangers or at least to a point imho should not be the same.

What we (in Dublin/larger towns in Ireland) are seeing is the same thing every other large city sees. As the population increases, you begin to loose the knowledge of your neighbours. People appear to be ruder, and less caring because everyone's a stranger.
This isn't something that is caused by people looking at pornography.

Internet discussion boards have been plagued by trolls and the like since conception. Why? Because, for one, its anonymous; two, it contains immature people who can gleefully take the piss out of whoever with little fear of repercussion. If this happened in "reality", they'd end up with a broken noise.

However, people within their own social circles, by and larger hold onto the same social rules. People behave.

Really this thread isn't that convulted you should try a long and intresting converstaion about stuff some time, it would be fun seeing you trying to keep up with the twists and turns.

Wtf?
Well the "long interesting conversations" I have, tend not to be with people you could describe as "random". Generally speaking, throwing in random one liners with little connection to either the point being discussed or the original topic can be really annoying, so I tend to avoid talking to people like that.

Macha

Zulu wrote: »

What we (in Dublin/larger towns in Ireland) are seeing is the same thing every other large city sees. As the population increases, you begin to loose the knowledge of your neighbours. People appear to be ruder, and less caring because everyone's a stranger. This isn't something that is caused by people looking at pornography.

Well cities have existed for thousands of years and yet the phenomenon that Thaedydal is referring to is quite a recent one.

Zulu wrote: »

Internet discussion boards have been plagued by trolls and the like since conception. Why? Because, for one, its anonymous; two, it contains immature people who can gleefully take the piss out of whoever with little fear of repercussion. If this happened in "reality", they'd end up with a broken noise.

However, people within their own social circles, by and larger hold onto the same social rules. People behave.

Yes, I would agree with you that it's a something particular to electronic communication - maybe you'd disagree Thaedydal? Anonymity plus an audience is a dangerous thing:

Zulu

taconnol wrote: »

Well cities have existed for thousands of years and yet the phenomenon that Thaedydal is referring to is quite a recent one.

Which phenomenon? That people in large populations loose the community feel and become rude? Ah now taconnol, come off it! Are you serious? I couldn't disagree more - it's a common problem with all cities. New York and London aren't famous for they're caring communities!

Macha

Zulu wrote: »

Which phenomenon? That people in large populations loose the community feel and become rude? Ah now taconnol, come off it! Are you serious? I couldn't disagree more - it's a common problem with all cities. New York and London aren't famous for they're caring communities!

No no, I'm not just talking about people being rude. God I'd be a bit naive if I thought people weren't rude all down the ages.

But I would say the level of rudeness has increased and maybe comments etc have been influenced by the prevalence of porn, which would again tie into your idea about the internet - isn't something like 50% of the internet porn websites?

So add together the easy availability of porn, some of the attitudes in porn filtering down into the mainstream and an easy audience for an anonymous poster..I dunno, just throwing things out here.

Dragan

taconnol wrote: »

No no, I'm not just talking about people being rude. God I'd be a bit naive if I thought people weren't rude all down the ages.

But I would say the level of rudeness has increased and maybe comments etc have been influenced by the prevalence of porn, which would again tie into your idea about the internet - isn't something like 50% of the internet porn websites?

So add together the easy availability of porn, some of the attitudes in porn filtering down into the mainstream and an easy audience for an anonymous poster..I dunno, just throwing things out here.

Porn has **** all to do with it. People are now walking around with a ridiculous sense of entitlment, that they can do what they like when they like and don't you dare tell them otherwise.

Thats about it. People, on a whole, are just bigger **** now when they were and that would be due to a multitude of reasons.

Zulu

taconnol wrote: »

But I would say the level of rudeness has increased and maybe comments etc have been influenced by the prevalence of porn, which would again tie into your idea about the internet - isn't something like 50% of the internet porn websites?

Yea, I dunno. I can't agree with that. People are going to be rude to each for a number of reasons, and I don't believe porn is a reason.
However, people watching porn will increase their vocabulary (sic) as such, but a sound person isn't going to tell you to "shut up and swallow" because they watched a porno, however a jerk will. But I need to be clear - the jerk will say a variety of other things to you regardless of porn.

It's not the porn making the jerk a jerk. (s)he's just a jerk.

Macha

Yeah fair enough, I take both your points. I suppose the common factor is the jerk, not the porn.

As a person involved in the environmental sector, I can tell you that sense of entitlement is just off the charts, at least from what I've experiences.