Misogynistic lines/attitudes from porn does it bother you ?

Dragan

panda100 wrote: »

I ,shock horror, actually agree with Dragan that Thaed's statement was a bit harsh.



Ok imagine that you had to look at that sort of image hundreds of time a day, that he had his penis on display (which he has got surgically enhanced), have him faking an orgasm and lust at the camera, and this is what us women see everyday, on the newstands, in papers, in advertisments, on tv......
There is no way you can suggest that male nudity is out there as much as female? [Cue the 'argument' about men being visual creatures and so Its okay to objectify and exploit womens bodys blah blah blah]

Watch those same music video's that people talk about Christina Aguwhatshername and Britney and their ilk dressing like strippers and talking dirty.

Whats the common theme in all of them? A large troup of male back up dancers, every move and pose designed to show how under the spell of the powerful female they are.

But, of course, we ignore that because we are told to think about the woman, and not the man, in the equation.

TV shows, magazines, films, advertising all happily take advantage of the stereotypes and rubbish the people will happily believe about males.

Even our "hero's" are damaged. Strong male leads have flaws, often an inability to keep a relationship going ( see John McClane, Jack Reacher even the X-Men ), to be a male and speak of your emotions means you are gay or soft, to not speak of them means you are closed off or cold.

These are there to be seen everyday, by millions of males all around the world.

Hell, even in this forum the most popular thread is one the judges men solely on their looks and physical attributes.

g'em

taconnol wrote: »

I have heard that as an one criticism of the "Female Chauvinist Pigs" book. ie that if a woman does choose to use her sexuality, she's somehow betraying her gender.

Now y'see, that to me is a pile of crapola akin to deriding someone for talking just because they have a mouth.

taconnol wrote:

Then again, the over use of overly sexualised images in our society does annoy me because it's just one type of body that we see and that has been proven to lead to lower self-esteem among young people. I suppose it wouldn't annoy me so much if Eva had a few more lumpy bits

I'd be in total agreement with you there - it's not the sexuality thing, it's the shape and health thing.

Macha

Yeah it's kinda like women staying at home to look after the family and all that. Hey, I might even end up doing that myself. What's great about it is that whatever choices I have to make in the future about my career won't be limited by the fact that I'm female-most probably the financial situation will be more important!

Dragan, great points - this thread is an education!! That "cold" male thing is so true.

Zulu

Thaedydal wrote: »

Yes the men did have it hard but at the end of the day they could go home and beat and rape thier wife
which was considered acceptable behaviour.

Nice attitude Thaedydillyde. :rolleyes:

I don't expect your misandrist sensibilities to accept this, but incredible as it may seem, to most people, beating and raping other people is/was never acceptable. The fact that you believe the opposite only highlights your sexist opinions.

Nevyn

Did you see the word could in there ?

This happened to both my grandmothers so it's that far long ago this happened,
my mother has told about how some of the neighbours on the street when she was a girl were known for this behaviour towards thier wives and nothing was done about it as it was not illegal at the time.

Thankfully times have changed and we do finally have laws and domsestic abuse and partner abuse of any kind should not be tolerated by or to anyone of any gender.

Dragan thanks for you input on this thread, I have a daughter but I also have a son and I do worry about them equally growing up with the society they will live in and the messages bombarded at both of them about how to look and how to be.

CDfm

taconnol wrote: »

CDfm, it looks like your argument boils down to this: "systematic oppression happened to lots of people and not all of them were women, therefore one cannot argue that women were systematically oppressed. Sorry that's just bad logic. And if I had a €1 for everytime someone says "oh it wasn't limited to women"

Women are not treated as equals, they are treated like objects. The testimony of a woman in SA is worth 1/3 of a man's. They are not allowed to drive. Their husband owns their passport and their children.

And let me tell you, I was there in the early 80s and things have only gotten more extreme. I could tell you stories about Saudi men having affairs with Filipino nurses and their bodies being found in dried up wadis outside of town when they become an inconvenience.


I'm certainly not arguing that war is harder on women than men but firstly, I think more women are left behind after war and supplies need to go to help the survivors - be they male or female. Women also need more medical care due to their reproductive health.


No you're not, you're also saying that systematic oppression of women, ie a patriarchy, does not exist on this earth.

Constitutionally in Ireland the woman has primacy..what? in everything?

This is just so wrong. You mean by the fact that women exist in these cultures, they are perpetuating the culture, by the fact that they have children? If you can argue that, you can argue that all women, all through history have been complicit in their own oppression, which is just plain nonsense.




Here, you're using a simple anecdote of one friend you happen to have, to argue that boys grow up to respect women in the Middle East?? That's just totally insane.
>_>
<_<

I lived in Saudi too- horrible place. A hole.I dont think all men should be judged by it.The justice system is barbaric and like it or not women are complicit in perpetrating it. I would not like my daughter to live there or have an Arab husband. A generalisation I know.

Its barbaric justice system is not limited to women. Its a feudal system.No one has a vote.How I can be responsible for and influence the place is beyond me.

Im with the great statesman and lawyer Willie O'Dea - men in the family law courts are treated like a different species.

I know two lovely guys who have found themselves in the arranged marriage situation. To say it is stressful is to belittle it.

All I am saying is that in Ireland we have adopted a gender based model and this is promoted by the womens movement and its most powerful constituent Womens Aid. Common sense tells us that gender based is wrong - Saudi is wrong and what happened in the past was wrong- so why do we repeat it all over and just change the gender. Pure stupid whoever came up with that.

Just so you know - if you post that my real name is Sheik CD - I will be very offended and it will show you up as a specieist.

panda100

Dragan wrote: »

i have dealt with my own body issues my whole life. I know countless men and women who have done the same.
.

This is the sad thing, why do you think so many young Irish people have massive body image problems?
Is it generic, genetic, just human nature to be obsessed with your body? I dont think it is, I think its because we are constantly told in society that to we have to look a certain way to feel good about ourselves and for the opposite sex to be attracted to us.
Does looking at that picture of David Beckham make you feel really good about yourself? I doubt it does.
It makes me sad, Dragan to think you have had to deal with body issues. You are a cool dude who is very attractive and you have no reason to be feeling these feelings

g'em wrote: »

I'm confused now though (admittedly with regard to most of the rest of the thread tl;dr) - is a woman using her sexuality (something I'd personally consider a wonderful gift to have tbh) something to be frowned upon, or only frowned upon when used for financial/ corporate/ commercial gain such as in the case of advertising.

And if a woman chooses to use what she has for gains (which, imo she has every right to do, her body, her decision) are we saying that this then has negative connotations for how other women will be seen?
.

Women and men of course should express their sexuality, but the view of sexuality that is out there is a fake view, which has harmful and serious societal consequences.

Men start to think that to be a real man they have to conform to this uber masculine stereotype put out there by corporations. Women start to hate the way their bodies look and start a cycle of dieting,spending literally billions of euro each year on potions and lotions to make themselves feel better about themselves. The perpetual representation of women as sex objects is dangerous, as it represents womens bodies as just dehuminised, sexualised play-things.

Sex has been manipulated to make all of us feel bad about ourselves, beacuse society wants to make us unhappy so we can buy things to feel better about ourslves, wether this is a gym membership and diet pills for some, or fake tan and expensive underwear for others. At the end of the day do these thing really make us feel more sexually confident about ourselves? And If they do what does that say about our attitudes to sex?

I recently saw a poster advertising a play in Dublin, a very simple image of a women with her back and bum facing the camera lying down on a couch. The women was completly nude, but It was such a refreshing picture to see. The women was commpletly relaxed, with lovely soft bumps and curves. There was no fake arching of the back, ass thrust out, pouty mouth opened wide, wet lips,touching herself. It actually showed a women, as a women. I would have no objection to these real sort of images.


* Im sorry for waffeling!But tis an intresting topic to discuss

Zulu

Thaedydal wrote: »

Did you see the word could in there ?

I did see the word "could", but you meant is as serious rebuttal, and I'd suggest that if you believe it to be an exception you wouldn't have bothered suggesting it. The fact is you believe that it was more commonly widespread than not. And I find that offensive. I also believe it's a sexist opinion, that's based on heresay and opinion with nothing to back it up, except prejudice venom.

This happened to both my grandmothers so it's that far long ago this happened,

And it happened to none of my grandparents. Or my great-grand parents. The same is true of my OH's parents, grand parents, and great grand parents. But of course I, like you can say whatever we want, we can't prove it.

my mother has told about how some of the neighbours on the street when she was a girl were known for this behaviour towards thier wives and nothing was done about it as it was not illegal at the time.

Your mother could be lieing. They could be lieing. Or, you could be lieing.

Dragan

panda100 wrote: »

Does looking at that picture of David Beckham make you feel really good about yourself? I doubt it does.

To be honest? Yes it does. In work and with my friends i am famous for being able to see the big picture. I look at David Beckham and i see a man who has had a nation turn on him, who has been torn through the media, who's every step and action and word is watched or heard by someone.

I can honestly express opinions that he must keep quiet for fear of public outcry, i can walk down the street and be invisible.

So yes, i do actually feel pretty good when i look at that picture.:)

If i were to say otherwise, simply to outline my issues with how men are presented in the media, then I would be lying.

I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who would trade places with him in terms of looks, and fame, and money.

Not me. I've learned to be happy with my lot, to appreciate it and am confident enough that any issues i have now, i will not have in the future.

*grins* It's getting deep for a Friday morning!

Nevyn

Zulu welcome to my ignore list as your best response is to spousal abuse is that I, my mother, my grand mothers and persumable other women are lying.

CDfm

Thaedydal wrote: »

Zulu welcome to my ignore list as your best response is to spousal abuse is that I, my mother, my grand mothers and persumable other women are lying.

But you should say that spousal abuse is not a single gender issue -there are women perpetrators too and people should not ignore that for a balanced view

You also have reciprocal violence in relationships as well.

www.amen.ie is an Irish charity for male victims and survivors of such abuse.

BTW -I accept what you say on your mum and grandmother- domestic violence in any form is awful. .

Zulu

panda100 wrote: »

This is the sad thing, why do you think so many young Irish people have massive body image problems?
Is it generic, genetic, just human nature to be obsessed with your body? I dont think it is, I think its because we are constantly told in society that to we have to look a certain way to feel good about ourselves and for the opposite sex to be attracted to us.
Does looking at that picture of David Beckham make you feel really good about yourself? I doubt it does.
It makes me sad, Dragan to think you have had to deal with body issues.

Everyone does. It's only there are little to no male groups to speak out against it. They'd have to be either sissys or puffs to get all emotional about something as silly as that - thats for women to worry about.

Fact is we are all human. Some of us grow up watching big muscles kicking ass, getting the woman, while never showing emotion. Some of us don't. I've a friend that suffers from eating disorder, and drink problems. Why? Because he was called fatty in school, and spent he's early adult life trying to out do his "friends" who could drink "like men". The sad thing is, there's little to no support for him.
...and people wonder, in shock, why suicide is so high amongst males in this country.

It's all too easy to overlook other people when we worry about our own problems.

g'em

panda100 wrote: »

Men start to think that to be a real man they have to conform to this uber masculine stereotype put out there by corporations. Women start to hate the way their bodies look and start a cycle of dieting,spending literally billions of euro each year on potions and lotions to make themselves feel better about themselves.

Do they? Do they really though? I can't argue that this doesn't happen, but I would be of the view that it happens in the minority. Perhaps I'm willing to give the intelligence of the general public more credit but I really don't see people being brain washed by this by and large. Take a look around you in the streets of Irealnd and what you'll see is a whole shmorgazboard of individuals - our men don't dress to impress (that's not a slur lads, that's a good thing!) and they're by and large comfortable in their skin. The same is to be said for women. I don't see queues of women waiting to get lipo or labia tucks or whatever is in vogue in cosmetic surgery at any time.

Meh, I dunno, but I just don't see hoards of folk walking around with the heavy burden of over-sexed advertising-influenced skewed sexual morality when I look around me.

Zulu

Thaedydal wrote: »

Zulu welcome to my ignore list as your best response is to spousal abuse is that I, my mother, my grand mothers and persumable other women are lying.

Couldn't give a tupenny fuck tbh.
You can't see the point I was trying to make? or you won't?

Nevyn

CDfm wrote: »

But you should say that spousal abuse is not a single gender issue -there are women perpetrators too and people should not ignore that for a balanced view

You also have reciprocal violence in relationships as well.

www.amen.ie is an Irish charity for male victims and survivors of such abuse.

BTW -I accept what you say on your mum and grandmother- domestic violence in any form is awful. .

I don't think it is, hence I used the term spousal abuse.
And even then I think the person who is perpetrating that abuse has been failed as there has not been better eduction or support or intervention.

One of my dearest wishes would be that we would no longer have to fight for
gender/women's/lgb/trans/disabilty/fathers/ect rights that these things would be seen as just basic human rights but too many people live in their own worlds of "I'm alright Jack" so we are left with passionate people who can only lobby and support a range of things.

Zulu

Thaedydal wrote: »

...so we are left with passionate people who can only lobby and support a range of things.

Or, more accurately, we are left with people who only lobby for one thing.

One of my dearest wishes would be that we would no longer have to fight for gender/women's/lgb/trans/disabilty/fathers/ect rights that these things would be seen as just basic human rights

It is my dearest wish that people would unite and fight for that one thing - the same rights for all humans. As opposed to what we have now, a disproportionate elite groups fighting for the rights of their own concerned interest, whilst wholly neglecting the rest of society.

Macha

Zulu wrote: »

I've a friend that suffers from eating disorder, and drink problems. Why? Because he was called fatty in school, and spent he's early adult life trying to out do his "friends" who could drink "like men". The sad thing is, there's little to no support for him.

As a sufferer of an eating disorder myself, I can tell you that the eating disorder help in this country is completely non-gender biased. Fact is though, that around 90% of people with eating disorders are women. I can tell you that no one came running to help me with my eating disorder - I had to go out there and get it myself. Nobody picked up the phone and rang Bodywhys for me-the same applies for your friend.

Your friend didn't develop a eating disorder because someone called him fat-he developed it because he has control issues and projects feelings of helplessness in other parts of his life onto his body. Try and educate yourself a bit Zulu, you're really showing up how ignorant you are, especially with posts like this:

Zulu wrote: »

Couldn't give a tupenny fuck tbh.
You can't see the point I was trying to make? or you won't?

g'em wrote: »

Meh, I dunno, but I just don't see hoards of folk walking around with the heavy burden of over-sexed advertising-influenced skewed sexual morality when I look around me.

Well..I do see it some young impressionable people (god I sound old).

Dragan

taconnol wrote: »

Well..I do see it some young impressionable people (god I sound old).

But here is the rub, do we really want to protect people that much, or assume that we are protecting them from the right things or even that they need it?

We were all young and impressionale once, chances are the majority of us have had some harsh lessons about things.

I would rather have learnt them than not. But that is just me.

Macha

Well if it was just learning not to touch an iron or getting your heart broken or that sometimes people who aren't as good as you will get the job because they know the right people, then I'd be fine with it.But some emotional scars run deeper:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6376421.stm

"The media's portrayal of young women as sex objects harms girls' mental and physical health, US experts warn. Magazines, television, video games and music videos all have a detrimental effect, a task force from the American Psychological Association reported.

Sexualisation can lead to a lack of confidence with their bodies as well as depression and eating disorders. Such images also have a negative effect on healthy sexual development in girls, the researchers said. The task force was set up after mounting "public concern" about the sexualisation of young girls. Research on the content and effects of television, music videos, music lyrics, magazines, films, video games and the internet was analysed. Recent advertising campaigns and merchandising of products aimed at girls was also scrutinised.

Sexualisation was defined as occurring when a person's value comes only from her or his sexual appeal or behaviour, to the exclusion of other characteristics, and when a person is portrayed purely as a sex object.They gave examples of a trainer advert that featured pop star Christina Aguilera dressed as a schoolgirl with her shirt unbuttoned, licking a lollipop. According to the research identified by the task force, such images and promotion of girls as sexual objects negatively affects young girls in many ways.


We need to replace all of these sexualised images with ones showing girls in positive settings - ones that show the uniqueness and competence of girls. "The consequences of the sexualisation of girls in media today are very real," said Dr Eileen Zurbriggen, chair of the group and associate professor of psychology at the University of California, Santa Cruz. "We have ample evidence to conclude that sexualisation has negative effects in a variety of domains, including cognitive functioning, physical and mental health, and healthy sexual development."

The task force called on parents, school officials, and health professionals to be alert for the potential impact on girls and young women. And it advised that schools should teach pupils media literacy skills and should include information on the negative effects of images portraying girls as sex objects in sex education programmes. Governments also had a responsibility to reduce the use of sexualised images in the media and advertising, they said.



Dr Zurbriggen added: "As a society, we need to replace all of these sexualised images with ones showing girls in positive settings - ones that show the uniqueness and competence of girls.

"The goal should be to deliver messages to all adolescents - boys and girls - that lead to healthy sexual development."

Professor Andrew Hill, professor of medical psychology at the University of Leeds, said it was hard to disagree with any of the reports conclusions. "If you look at teenage magazines, it's all about sex. "We are a visually absorbed society - our views of people are dominated by how they look."

He added that the use of women as sex objects in the media and advertising was a difficult issue to deal with. "Only 18% of children's television viewing is in their designated viewing time and legislation can't be the answer for everything.

"One of the key things here is social responsibility - advertisers and other media need to be aware that the products they produce and images associated with them have an impact and it's not always a good impact," he said. "

g'em

taconnol wrote: »

Your friend didn't develop a eating disorder because someone called him fat-he developed it because he has control issues and projects feelings of helplessness in other parts of his life onto his body.

Werd. Eating disorders are less about body image, more about control.

taconnol wrote:

Well..I do see it some young impressionable people (god I sound old).

lol, I know the feeling. And yes, naturally it will be seen in some young people. But young people are going to be full of angst no matter what the advertisers do. Hormones raging, everything changing, it's been happening for centuries and will continue to do so. Every generation has its shocking tales of the sexualisation in younger folk - the introduction of rock music, mini-skirts, etc. But let's turn this on its head too - younger people are also becoming more aware of important sexual issues because the information is so much more freely available. Likewise the reporting of these issues is more freely available. Has this sexualisation only started happening recently? Or are we simply being made aware of it more?

Puberty creates sexual interest and awareness - this is natural and normal. The difficulty is wheedling out natural puberty-induced discomfort and the influence of 'external' pressures I guess?

Macha

g'em wrote: »

lol, I know the feeling. And yes, naturally it will be seen in some young people. But young people are going to be full of angst no matter what the advertisers do. Hormones raging, everything changing, it's been happening for centuries and will continue to do so.

LOL I have the mental image of an angst-ridden neolithic teenager, refusing to help clean the cave and making awful music with his friends - rock n roll hwah hwah.

But I don't know - do teenagers in other cultures really go through the same angst as they do in Western cultures? I know that in many, many cultures it's seen as a time of transition into adulthood but I don't know if it's made into such a big deal in other cultures. I agree with what you say about liberation and being able to discuss these issues more nowadays and that being a good thing. But I don't think it's a clear choice between
a) Christian-derived virgin/slut theories and resulting Victorian censorhip
b) All-out sexual imagery all over the place.

I just think it has it's place and I don't think that place is around children.

Zulu

taconnol wrote: »

As a sufferer of an eating disorder myself, I can tell you that the eating disorder help in this country is completely non-gender biased.

I don't doubt that for one second. Perhaps I was clear in the point I was trying to point. Apologies for that.

Fact is though, that around 90% of people with eating disorders are women.

I don't doubt that either. The point I was eluding at - clearly poorly, was that there are expectations on people. In men, in our society, these expectations include emotional control for one, self sufficiency is another. It is particularly "bad" for a "man" to need help. As such, I think it can be next to impossible for men to reach out.
Perhaps this is why 90% are women, and only 10% are men? (Although I'm not suggesting 50/50 is an accurate reflection)

I can tell you that no one came running to help me with my eating disorder - I had to go out there and get it myself. Nobody picked up the phone and rang Bodywhys for me-the same applies for your friend.

And my point it that my friend, and other male suffers are less likely to "go out there and get it themselves". Why? Because that would be week. They are "men" and can handle it themselves. Of course - they can't.

Your friend didn't develop a eating disorder because someone called him fat-he developed it because he has control issues and projects feelings of helplessness in other parts of his life onto his body.

That's probably completely true, maybe it's not, I don't know. He doesn't talk about it.

Try and educate yourself a bit Zulu, you're really showing up how ignorant you are

There is no need to get insulting. I'm sorry you missed my original point, but I've corrected that now. Perhaps you could correct your manners?

especially with posts like this:

It's a valid point, and I stand by it. Stating that you "know" of instances on an internet discussion board is hardly proof. However I was seeking proof. I'd take her word for it, but I don't believe that even that which was offered, excuses her original sexist comment. To suggest that our (that's yours aswell) grand fathers, great grand fathers etc. had no problem beating and raping their wives/women is appalling.
If you want a suggestion to attack - attack that one.

shellyboo

g'em wrote: »

Do they? Do they really though? I can't argue that this doesn't happen, but I would be of the view that it happens in the minority. Perhaps I'm willing to give the intelligence of the general public more credit but I really don't see people being brain washed by this by and large. Take a look around you in the streets of Irealnd and what you'll see is a whole shmorgazboard of individuals - our men don't dress to impress (that's not a slur lads, that's a good thing!) and they're by and large comfortable in their skin. The same is to be said for women. I don't see queues of women waiting to get lipo or labia tucks or whatever is in vogue in cosmetic surgery at any time.

Meh, I dunno, but I just don't see hoards of folk walking around with the heavy burden of over-sexed advertising-influenced skewed sexual morality when I look around me.

Really? Are you sure? Body issues don't have to drive you to cosmetic surgery for them to be valid. In fact, if cosmetic surgery were free I bet you'd see the queue form pretty sharpish. Look here and here and here for perfect examples of people who have been brainwashed by advertising, society, their peers, anyone, to believe that what they are when they wake up in the morning isn't good enough.

By saying they've been brainwashed is not to imply that they're stupid or gullible... it's just that there's no way you could grow up in today's society without being affected by the influence of advertising unless you were deaf, dumb and blind. Absolutely everyone feels this kind of pressure, some more than others - but we're all affected by it. I entirely disagree that 'by and large' Irish women are comfortable in their skin. I've never met an Irish woman who didn't think there was something wrong with her body, myself included.

Reku

Zulu wrote: »

I don't doubt that for one second. Perhaps I was clear in the point I was trying to point. Apologies for that.
I don't doubt that either. The point I was eluding at - clearly poorly, was that there are expectations on people. In men, in our society, these expectations include emotional control for one, self sufficiency is another. It is particularly "bad" for a "man" to need help. As such, I think it can be next to impossible for men to reach out.

And probably why the 2 problems of male suicide levels and male aggression, women can vent with a good 'auld bitch, guys are told they just have to bottle it.
I've known girls who would cry at the drop of a hat just because of hormones at certain points in their cycle, yet when is it ok for a lad to cry? Crying is a release mechanism, without it you're just left with more pressure to deal with.

As for the sexualisation that applies to both genders, even when I was in secondary school if you'd not kissed a girl by 2nd year and not slept with one by 5th you had to be gay in most of the lads eyes.:rolleyes:
Unfortunately kids are both being encouraged to develop far faster and pressurised to do so, this is unlikely to make for stable and healthy adults.

As much as humans are meant to be social creatures it is that socialisation that seems to bring out the worst in us.

AARRRGH

g'em wrote: »

is a woman using her sexuality (something I'd personally consider a wonderful gift to have tbh) something to be frowned upon, or only frowned upon when used for financial/ corporate/ commercial gain such as in the case of advertising

It should never be frowned upon. It is her decision to show or not show her body, and there is nothing wrong with nudity and sex.

People don't get upset when a footballer cashes in on his footballing skills, but for some sad reason people get upset when a woman cashes in on her fit body or sexuality.

It makes no sense, unless you're some kind of catholic/conservative person.

Macha

farohar wrote: »

As much as humans are meant to be social creatures it is that socialisation that seems to bring out the worst in us.

Great line farohar

Edit: Aarrrgh, I don't think you can just saw sweepingly that there's nothing wrong with nudity and sex. There's a time and a place.

AARRRGH

taconnol wrote: »

I'm not turning this thread into a discussion on prostitution but a career in footballing and prostitution are largely poles apart (pun intended)

In your opinion, because you think there is something wrong with prostitution. My point has gone way over your head.

Just because you wouldn't do it and don't like it, doesn't mean it's wrong. Sex is not dirty.

CDfm

taconnol wrote: »

LOL I have the mental image of an angst-ridden neolithic teenager, refusing to help clean the cave and making awful music with his friends - rock n roll hwah hwah.

Thats soo typical of someone of your generation always telling us kids what to do.

You sound like your Mum:pac:

Macha

AARRRGH wrote: »

In your opinion, because you think there is something wrong with prostitution. My point has gone way over your head.

Just because you wouldn't do it and don't like it, doesn't mean it's wrong. Sex is not dirty.

Doh sorry yeah, that's why I took it off. I just saw your name & the link went off in my head.

Macha

CDfm wrote: »

Thats soo typical of someone of your generation always telling us kids what to do.

You sound like your Mum:pac:

As my friends and I say, we'res just happy to be at the age where we can stop pretending we liked it :pac: