Truth about Porn

The Corinthian

Dr. Zeus wrote: »

The internet had made porn widely accesible that is undeniable. Of course this is going to have an impact. Has the availabilty of music on the internet changed the way we consume music - yes it has. Somebody posting themselves on youtube can become an overnight sensation.

All of that I would agree with, including that it is likely to have had an impact.

The internet has faciliated wide access to child abuse imagery and connected tonnes of child abusers who file share etc.This would not be possible without the internet as these abuser would not necessarily have made contact with each other in the real world.

Hold on, now you jump to Child abuse imagery. Are you linking legal pornography with child porn now or simply citing an area where the Internet has had an impact?

You can access porn at the touch of a button, on a mobile phone etc. OF course this has impacts

And again, I've repeatedly said that it more than likely has had an impact. Just as the publication of Lady Chatterley's Lover did. Or the introduction of the contraceptive pill. Or (in Ireland) late opening times for pubs. Or AIDS.

What I am questioning is what that impact is, and whether one can really point the finger at pornography (on or off-line) for any perceived negative impact.

That is why your statement was ultimately meaningless. It jumped to so many conclusions to the point of hubris.

Dr. Zeus

[QUOTE=Hold on, now you jump to Child abuse imagery. Are you linking legal pornography with child porn now or simply citing an area where the Internet has had an impact?

I am talking about how the internet can impact not linking to porn
And again, I've repeatedly said that it more than likely has had an impact. Just as the publication of Lady Chatterley's Lover did. Or the introduction of the contraceptive pill. Or (in Ireland) late opening times for pubs. Or AIDS.

What I am questioning is what that impact is, and whether one can really point the finger at pornography (on or off-line) for any perceived negative impact.

My point is that the wide availability of all types of porn at the click of a button has to have impact

That is why your statement was ultimately meaningless. It jumped to so many conclusions to the point of hubris.[/QUOTE]

Hubris - seriously get a grip on yourself. I think you are losing the plot an if I think if anything you argue in a patronising and narcissitic manner.

The Corinthian

Dr. Zeus wrote: »

My point is that the wide availability of all types of porn at the click of a button has to have impact

I agree, but you've repeatedly gone further and expanded that point to say what that impact is, to what degree, whether it is positive or negative and, finally, excluded the impact of any other factor. This is what I have challenged as unsubstantiated.

Hubris - seriously get a grip on yourself. I think you are losing the plot an if I think if anything you argue in a patronising and narcissitic manner.

It would serve you better if you avoided ad hominem attacks.

Dr. Zeus

The Corinthian wrote: »

I agree, but you've repeatedly gone further and expanded that point to say what that impact is, to what degree, whether it is positive or negative and, finally, excluded the impact of any other factor. This is what I have challenged as unsubstantiated.

It would serve you better if you avoided ad hominem attacks.

Yes, indeed. I'll let you have the last word here. I'm out.

The Corinthian

Dr. Zeus wrote: »

Yes, indeed. I'll let you have the last word here. I'm out.

Hold on. You come here, claim that you "hope this doesn't turn into a for/against debate where there is no meaningful debate", I question your argument as being flawed and, in some areas, not making any sense, then you respond indignantly, make a number of personal attacks against me and now you're storming off.

What exactly were you looking for in terms of a meaningful debate? That no one would question your arguments?

Cyzrane

I would think one of the most dangerous aspects of an article such as this is the precedent it sets for a culture of sexual repression. This is not to say that a world without some of the more extreme genres of pornography is one that is oppressive...but it's certainly heading there.

Also, her association of pornography with inherent hatred is rather illogically reasoned. She leaps from "I find these images vile" to "these images are filled with hate and dehumanisation". Whether or not one finds the images repulsive is subjective, but to make a sweeping statement that (effectively) deems all pornography to be motivated by malice is just erroneous.

As has been mentioned before, she's really the one undermining the women of these videos/images. By swinging her accusations so broadly, she has not only tarred any man who has ever watched pornography with the brush of guilt, but also any women who would let herself be "subjugated" in such a manner.

To be fair, though, there might be something to her theory about an undertone of violence or domination in pornography. It does explore, perhaps, some aspects of the human psyche that we would prefer to ignore. I think that whatever reason somebody enjoys pornography is personal and to make grand, all-encompassing statements (as Gail Dines more or less does in her article) about its appeal is pure folly. The damning part of her argument, in my opinion, is the totalitarian manner in which she seeks to accomplish her objective and also her lack of objective evidence for many of her claims.

Ultimately, I would echo the sentiments of other posts in this thread and say that while pornography has certainly changed the scape of sexuality across the globe, this change is not necessarily good or bad in any absolute manner. Sure, new problems might arise from a culture in danger of being over-sexed, but is it really any better than the repression that existed before, which carried with it a different set of issues? Before hearkening back to those "halcyon" days, it might be worth reflecting on the dissatisfaction that was experienced then, too. Sexuality is a fundamental part of any human being's psyche, and how we should embrace it as a collective is a issue surrounded by thorns and pitfalls. Trying our best to ignore it, though, hardly seems like an effective answer.

(Ugh, my post is terribly disjointed. I'm sure I had about six different points in there, all of them poorly developed)

Dr. Zeus

The Corinthian wrote: »

Hold on. You come here, claim that you "hope this doesn't turn into a for/against debate where there is no meaningful debate", I question your argument as being flawed and, in some areas, not making any sense, then you respond indignantly, make a number of personal attacks against me and now you're storming off.

No am not storming off. I think I actually prefer talking about these issues rather than discussing them here. Things get misinterpreted, quoted out of context etc and for me it gets tedious trying to keep track of my original point. Yes, I did describe your style of debate as patronising and narcissistic which was personal and uncalled for. I think you got my shackles up when the word hubris was used as in reality I am really not like that. I think I an not really articulate enough to make my points clearly and concisely.
What exactly were you looking for in terms of a meaningful debate? That no one would question your arguments?

No, not at all. I think more frustration at not being articulate enough which is my problem at the end of day and something I need to address.

The Corinthian

Dr. Zeus wrote: »

No am not storming off. I think I actually prefer talking about these issues rather than discussing them here. Things get misinterpreted, quoted out of context etc and for me it gets tedious trying to keep track of my original point.

I understood what your original point was, I merely was pointing out that it you developed it beyond what was reasonable. Even if one concedes that Internet pornography has had an impact, it is an entirely different thing to presume what that impact is, to decide if it is good or bad or if alone it is responsible.

This, as Cyzrane pointed out, is one of the problems with Dines - she makes a number of observations then wildly extrapolates them to suit an ideological agenda. This is why I have little respect for someone like her.

Yes, I did describe your style of debate as patronising and narcissistic which was personal and uncalled for. I think you got my shackles up when the word hubris was used as in reality I am really not like that.

Hubris referred to your argument rather than you personally, in that its weakness was based upon the arrogance of the presumptions it made.

No, not at all. I think more frustration at not being articulate enough which is my problem at the end of day and something I need to address.

Not sure if articulateness is the issue. For example, I repeatedly pointed out that I accepted that Internet pornography has had an impact, yet you continued to underline this point, despite it not being questioned.

gbee

Cyzrane wrote: »

Also, her association of pornography with inherent hatred is rather illogically reasoned. .

I left at this part too, IMO it's her personal agenda ~ she can't possibly say men hate women because ...

I won't go any further, I think the point is made.

K-9

Results of a survey in Britain on porn and sexual activity in Britain.

Sexperience - Highlights from YouGov’s “Sex Education” survey

At this stage it really is a normal experience for teenagers:

• 58% of all 14-17 year-olds have viewed pornography online, on mobile phones, in magazines, movies or on TV
• 71% of sexually active teenagers have viewed pornography
• 42% of sexually active teenagers view pornography regularly
• More than a quarter of the boys surveyed use porn at least once a week (5% of them every day)

Watched the episode of the program on E4 last night. Young lads did seem to view facials etc. as normal and girls commented on it being expected of them.

It comes to back to education again. They are at an impressionable age and they need to be educated that porn is fantasy, similar to Hollywood.

SIMPLYTHE

There is a perception that someone who would be involved in this is somehow soulless or emotionally cold, but sex doesn't have to be linked to emotions of love and intimacy. For many (if not most) porn actors, it's a fun activity which they enjoy and see it as a bonus to be paid for it - exactly as if they were getting paid to play football or whatever.[/QUOTE]

Are you kidding me??? How do you know that “many (if not most) porn actors” see it that way??? Cause they say they enjoy it? Cause you want to believe they enjoy it???

I find it a sad reflection of the times that there is very little mention of the porn “stars” themselves in this forum. I am not so arrogant as to deny that there probably are porn stars that enjoy it, but let’s not be so arrogant as to assume that porn “stars” come bounding into porn flicks straight from Seventh Heaven. There is such a thing as being desensitived to something. How many of these “stars” were sexualised at a young age? How many were raped/are addicted/have low self esteem?

I used to watch porn sometimes when I was younger and I’ll admit I did get a bit of a thrill from it, but about a year and a half ago, after a comment from one of my friends in relation to same, I really did have to question the morality of it and moreover the morality of me supporting this industry.

And for those of you who think that this is prudish or outdated – ask yourself one question – How would you feel if your sister started doing it??? If you feel that you would be upset by her becoming a porn “star”, then somewhere in you you know that watching porn is not the right thing to do.

The Corinthian

SIMPLYTHE wrote: »

How many of these “stars” were sexualised at a young age? How many were raped/are addicted/have low self esteem?

Good questions. Do you know how many?

gbee

SIMPLYTHE wrote: »

Are you kidding me??? How do you know that “many (if not most) porn actors” see it that way??? ?

There are many levels, sure, many say they love it, more say they are nymphomaniacs and need it, others say it's to put their daughter though college so they don't have to do this, more again say it's to feed their drugs habit.

And there are female porn producers, who started their own business to inject a few touches, better photography, nicer looking women, better make-up, health check-ups, fees and percentages of sales and so on.

Pornography is a vast sphere ~ so, we'd need to put a few definitions and limits for the 'general' discussion.

What are we referring to for Porn in this thread ~ male and female in all poses and acts? Bestiality? Gay? Bondage? Child? and the more degraded ones right through to the snuff kind.

Dr. Zeus

SIMPLYTHE wrote: »

And for those of you who think that this is prudish or outdated – ask yourself one question – How would you feel if your sister started doing it??? If you feel that you would be upset by her becoming a porn “star”, then somewhere in you you know that watching porn is not the right thing to do.

I think a lot of men get over this by splitting women into the virgin/whore categories. They will sleep with certain girls but wouldn't marry them or being them home to meet mammy.

I think the same goes for someone's sister doing porn/ being a prostitute. As long as its not my sister its okay mentality.

With regard to damaged people being in porn which I imagine is not true for all but for a lot I would say it is the case.. Nobody wants to think about that too much (porn stars included). it's interesting that once people have left the porn industry only then they start to talk about negative impacts on their lives.

It ruins the moment, kills the fantasy, takes the varnish off and may kills profit. Porn is a multi billion dollar industry and the industry is going to do all it can to keep it that way.

Too much a reality check for many. Hence why so many people get so defensive when the side effects of porn are noted. It's like the whole drinking culture mentality. If you're not out getting wasted sure you're no craic - don't know what you're missing etc.

SIMPLYTHE

Of course I don't know how many, but I have more than a sneaking suspicion that it would amount to a fair number. I know I was sexualised at far too young an age and it took me a long time to come close to discovering what was "normal" sexual behaviour. I have friends who would say the same. Two in particular. Exposure (esp at a young age) = huge risk for desensitivisation. The thing is - it happens - far more often than ppl may think...

SIMPLYTHE

Dr. Zeus wrote: »

I think a lot of men get over this by splitting women into the virgin/whore categories. They will sleep with certain girls but wouldn't marry them or being them home to meet mammy.

I think the same goes for someone's sister doing porn/ being a prostitute. As long as its not my sister its okay mentality.

With regard to damaged people being in porn which I imagine is not true for all but for a lot I would say it is the case.. Nobody wants to think about that too much (porn stars included). it's interesting that once people have left the porn industry only then they start to talk about negative impacts on their lives.


Too much a reality check for many. Hence why so many people get so defensive when the side effects of porn are noted. It's like the whole drinking culture mentality. If you're not out getting wasted sure you're no craic - don't know what you're missing etc.

Completely agree with everything in this post. It's horrible!!!

SIMPLYTHE

The Corinthian wrote: »

Good questions. Do you know how many?

Of course I don't know how many, but I have more than a sneaking suspicion that it would amount to a fair number. I know I was sexualised at far too young an age and it took me a long time to come close to discovering what was "normal" sexual behaviour. I have friends who would say the same. Two in particular. Exposure (esp at a young age) = huge risk for desensitivisation. The thing is - it happens - far more often than ppl may think...

Virgil°

SIMPLYTHE wrote: »

Of course I don't know how many, but I have more than a sneaking suspicion that it would amount to a fair number.

That is to say you've no idea how many. Simply put.

I know I was sexualised at far too young an age and it took me a long time to come close to discovering what was "normal" sexual behaviour. I have friends who would say the same. Two in particular. Exposure (esp at a young age) = huge risk for desensitivisation. The thing is - it happens - far more often than ppl may think...

There is no such thing as "normal" sexual behaviour. One trait i've noticed in this thread is that those who vehemently oppose or make baseless attacks against porn seem incapable of understanding that their idea of "normal" is not everyones idea of "normal".

I think a lot of men get over this by splitting women into the virgin/whore categories. They will sleep with certain girls but wouldn't marry them or being them home to meet mammy.

I think the same goes for someone's sister doing porn/ being a prostitute. As long as its not my sister its okay mentality.

With regard to damaged people being in porn which I imagine is not true for all but for a lot I would say it is the case.. Nobody wants to think about that too much (porn stars included). it's interesting that once people have left the porn industry only then they start to talk about negative impacts on their lives.

It ruins the moment, kills the fantasy, takes the varnish off and may kills profit. Porn is a multi billion dollar industry and the industry is going to do all it can to keep it that way.

What a load of baseless opinionated nonsense.

The Corinthian

Dr. Zeus wrote: »

I think a lot of men get over this by splitting women into the virgin/whore categories.

TBH, I'd get creeped out by the idea of my sister having sex, regardless of it being in or outside of porn.

Too much a reality check for many. Hence why so many people get so defensive when the side effects of porn are noted. It's like the whole drinking culture mentality. If you're not out getting wasted sure you're no craic - don't know what you're missing etc.

TBH, you were pretty defensive not so long ago in this thread, so it might be a bit presumptuous to make such pronouncements of others, with all due respect.

SIMPLYTHE wrote: »

Of course I don't know how many, but I have more than a sneaking suspicion that it would amount to a fair number.

As Virgil correctly pointed out, you don't actually know - you just have a "sneaking suspicion".

I know I was sexualised at far too young an age and it took me a long time to come close to discovering what was "normal" sexual behaviour.

What is "normal" sexual behavior out of curiosity? Or is this something else you have a "sneaking suspicion" about?

The thing is - it happens - far more often than ppl may think...

Or not. I think we've established that you don't actually know - call that a "sneaking suspicion" of mine

SIMPLYTHE

Virgil° wrote: »

That is to say you've no idea how many. Simply put.

Believe me I have a deep understanding of sexual abuse esp towards women.

There is no such thing as "normal" sexual behaviour. One trait i've noticed in this thread is that those who vehemently oppose or make baseless attacks against porn seem incapable of understanding that their idea of "normal" is not everyones idea of "normal".

Let's put normal as fully-informed, consensual and an adult of full legal capacity who has not been abnormally sexualised in some form. I am very liberal sexually, but IMO there are far too many people in porn that I would deem not to fulfil the above criteria and for me, that is enough to abstain from viewing for moral reasons. Let's not forget that a 50 year old man having oral sex with a 12 year old may feel "normal" for him, but even you must admit that it's not right. There have to be basic standards of humanity.


What a load of baseless opinionated nonsense.

It's a forum. The point of a forum is to air opinions. If you don't want to see other's opinions, just stick to writing in your diary!!!! :-)

Virgil°

SIMPLYTHE wrote: »

It's a forum. The point of a forum is to air opinions. If you don't want to see other's opinions, just stick to writing in your diary!!!! :-)

This is a "Discussion forum". Humanities in particular is a discussion forum whereby if you continue to "air opinions" which make sweeping statements with little to no attempt to back it up then you wont be taken seriously.

This is not a place to advertise your opinions.So don't get upset when they get challenged.

SIMPLYTHE

The Corinthian wrote: »

TBH, I'd get creeped out by the idea of my sister having sex, regardless of it being in or outside of porn.

But - be honest - your reaction to her having sex and becoming a "porn star" would be very very different. You're completely missing the point if you can't get that!

As Virgil correctly pointed out, you don't actually know - you just have a "sneaking suspicion".

I am simply saying "sneaking suspicion" as I don't have exact figures - obviously - who does?? answer=noone. I was at a Rape Crisis Centre seminar about six months ago and they estimate that rape is hugely underreported. Go figure.
Also, I happen to have friends who, if you met them, you would think they've the most lovely lives ever, nice families, clever, professionals, but they have struggled hugely with massive over-exposure to sex at a young age.

Just cause you've never experienced it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It does. I've first hand experience.

What is "normal" sexual behavior out of curiosity? Or is this something else you have a "sneaking suspicion" about? Please read reply below.

You can live your life as you want to and watch what you want but you are a very close-minded kind of person if you cannot even imagine the scenarios out there. Did you see Jenna Jameson bawling about it on Oprah?? Open your eyes and think about others in the world your living in.

The Corinthian

SIMPLYTHE wrote: »

It's a forum. The point of a forum is to air opinions. If you don't want to see other's opinions, just stick to writing in your diary!!!! :-)

The point of this forumis best explained by the forum charter:

"Humanities was created for the purpose of having rational, thoughtful, calm, civil debate about issues. It was created as an alternative to After Hours, as a place for intellectual discourse."

You will note that it referred to "intellectual discourse" as opposed to unsubstantiated opinions. If you'd like to express those, you can do so on After Hours.

The Corinthian

SIMPLYTHE wrote: »

You can live your life as you want to and watch what you want but you are a very close-minded kind of person if you cannot even imagine the scenarios out there. Did you see Jenna Jameson bawling about it on Oprah?? Open your eyes and think about others in the world your living in.

So you educated yourself on the subject using Oprah... Ah, I see.

K-9

The Corinthian wrote: »

The point of this forumis best explained by the forum charter:

"Humanities was created for the purpose of having rational, thoughtful, calm, civil debate about issues. It was created as an alternative to After Hours, as a place for intellectual discourse."

You will note that it referred to "intellectual discourse" as opposed to unsubstantiated opinions. If you'd like to express those, you can do so on After Hours.

Some evidence has been provided, it just gets dismissed as feminista type stuff.

The Corinthian

K-9 wrote: »

Some evidence has been provided, it just gets dismissed as feminista type stuff.

Where was this? A few pages back, I presume as I've not seem much evidence for a while.

As to the article that kicked off this thread, this has been dismissed as 'feminista type stuff', but this dismissal was backed up with evidence, if you care to look back.

That article aside, the question of whether porn is harmful or not is still open, IMO.

Unless you watch Oprah, that is.

SIMPLYTHE

Virgil° wrote: »

This is a "Discussion forum". Humanities in particular is a discussion forum whereby if you continue to "air opinions" which make sweeping statements with little to no attempt to back it up then you wont be taken seriously.

This is not a place to advertise your opinions.So don't get upset when they get challenged.

I haven't been challenged. Yourself and Corinth are posting ridiculous replies. Writing re definition of "humanities" as opposed to understanding the point in relation to having "humanity". Relating my point with regard to "your sister" entering porn simply to your sister having sex. (Corinth, I know, but ur replies are similarly stunted) I can see that you two have no understanding and clearly do not even wish to challenge your perceptions of porn. Keep watching it. Keep enjoying it. Turn a blind eye to (at the extreme least) distinct possbilities. Latch onto words, but miss sentences and sentiment. Believe what you want to believe. Live in a compartment. It's ur life. The end.

K-9

The Corinthian wrote: »

Where was this? A few pages back, I presume as I've not seem much evidence for a while.

As to the article that kicked off this thread, this has been dismissed as 'feminista type stuff', but this dismissal was backed up with evidence, if you care to look back.

That article aside, the question of whether porn is harmful or not is still open, IMO.

Unless you watch Oprah, that is.

Experiences have been posted from ex porn stars but some just dismiss them.

I agree the discussion is still open. I wouldn't dismiss any evidence out of hand on either side of the debate. Personally my view is porn is fine but it can become highly addictive if misused.

SIMPLYTHE

SIMPLYTHE wrote: »

I know I was sexualised at far too young an age and it took me a long time to come close to discovering what was "normal" sexual behaviour.

I still haven't figured out what "normal" sexual behavior is. I'm rather conservative in my sexual tastes, and yet its usually my partners that are encouraging me to try the more "adventurous" side of things. I'm a guy btw.

I think there's a lot of crap floating around this thread about what men and women get up to, and the reasons for those desires. There appears to almost be a trend where its assumed that men are the ones encouraging different sexual adventures based on their watching of porn, and yet from my own experience its been my partners that have pushed for it.

I have friends who would say the same. Two in particular. Exposure (esp at a young age) = huge risk for desensitivisation. The thing is - it happens - far more often than ppl may think...

Of course it does. Its the way our society is. And its not limited to porn. Its attached to just about every part of our society.

I look at this thread and it reminds of of the attacks the music industry received about teenagers becoming anti-social because of the lyrics. Its a cop out. Attach blame to something in particular and everything else (the real reasons) fall into the background.

Dr. Zeus

Dr. Zeus wrote: »

I think a lot of men get over this by splitting women into the virgin/whore categories. They will sleep with certain girls but wouldn't marry them or being them home to meet mammy.

The fact that you focus on men in this is rather suggestive. Do you believe that women are different in this matter?

I think the same goes for someone's sister doing porn/ being a prostitute. As long as its not my sister its okay mentality.

TBH, If she's happy doing it, has thought out the practical side of things, and can explain her reasoning for doing so, then its not going to bother me that much. But then my family tends to be very liberal towards what people want to do versus what they're supposed to do.

With regard to damaged people being in porn which I imagine is not true for all but for a lot I would say it is the case..

There are "damaged" people everywhere. Why should Porn be any different?

Nobody wants to think about that too much (porn stars included). it's interesting that once people have left the porn industry only then they start to talk about negative impacts on their lives.

And thats also true about most industries. People tend to glorify their jobs (regardless of what it is) while they're doing it, and then rip it apart when they move on. The same can be said about priests, police officers, nurses, etc. Its part of human nature.

It ruins the moment, kills the fantasy, takes the varnish off and may kills profit. Porn is a multi billion dollar industry and the industry is going to do all it can to keep it that way.

Of course, that's logical. Why they do anything else? But lets face it... its the customer that creates the fantasy an maintains it. With the exception of special events, customers rarely interact with the actors/actresses of the porn movies. And as for the amateur movies out there, which accounts for a rather large part of internet porn, customers/viewers never meet the participants. So the reality isn't going to bother them very much. Webcams being the possible exception considering the interactive aspect of it.

Too much a reality check for many. Hence why so many people get so defensive when the side effects of porn are noted. It's like the whole drinking culture mentality. If you're not out getting wasted sure you're no craic - don't know what you're missing etc.

I think you're mixing up being defensive with disagreeing with you. There is a tendency to pass off opposing opinions as the person being defensive. I'd prefer to hear some realistic and logical points of view..

Virgil°

SIMPLYTHE wrote: »

I haven't been challenged. Yourself and Corinth are posting ridiculous replies. Writing re definition of "humanities" as opposed to understanding the point in relation to having "humanity".

Thus far your point of view has been challenged several times with rather well constructed criticisms. Corinthian has made several good points and pointed out several gaping holes in your logic and all you can do is blather on. No sources or even well defined reasoning to back up your points.

Relating my point with regard to "your sister" entering porn simply to your sister having sex. (Corinth, I know, but ur replies are similarly stunted) I can see that you two have no understanding and clearly do not even wish to challenge your perceptions of porn.

In fact quite the opposite is occuring here. As far as i can tell most of the people here supposedly "defending porn" are simply asking people who oppose it "why they oppose it?".
If i was given good evidence that porn is severely damaging from a reliable resource i'd look at it and then decide for myself whether i agree with it or not.
Unfortunately youve been unable to do this instead relying on anecdotes and Oprah :rolleyes: .
To put it simply we aren't trying to convince you porn is good, unlike you trying to convince us its bad, we just asking questions and discussing. So i'd say its you who needs your perceptions challenged.
So heres one, how would you like it if your sister said to you she wanted to pursue a career in hamburger flipping?

Keep watching it. Keep enjoying it. Turn a blind eye to (at the extreme least) distinct possbilities. Latch onto words, but miss sentences and sentiment. Believe what you want to believe. Live in a compartment. It's ur life. The end.

Okay, seriously , what the hell are you talking about?

gbee

Deleted User wrote: »

There appears to almost be a trend where its assumed that men are the ones encouraging different sexual adventures based on their watching of porn, and yet from my own experience its been my partners that have pushed for it.

The Missionary position is allowed in a Catholic or some Christian faiths. I [a male] married a Catholic girl. We had a great relationship and anything missing for me was satisfied by porn.

But, to add credence to you point above, it was my wife, who never watched porn, instigated more adventurous routines ...

As men we serve our women, those not satisfied .... seemingly complain!

The Corinthian

K-9 wrote: »

Experiences have been posted from ex porn stars but some just dismiss them.

I cannot speak for others, but I rebutted rather than dismissed such arguments.

Experiences have been posted from ex porn stars have been posted and should not be dismissed. However, neither should they be accepted blindly either and this was pointed out. Some, such as Linda Lovelace have been accused of having lied about many of their experiences as a means of abdicating responsibility for their own choices and reemerge whiter than white upon retirement from the industry. Other such experiences, such as Michelle Anne Sinclair (a.k.a. Belladonna) subsequently came out repudiating things that they had allegedly said as having manipulated by a media with a moralistic agenda.

Even then, it is still more than likely that true horror stories come from the industry, but one needs to ask if they are representative of that industry - after all you'll get horror stories of abuse and exploitation in every industry.

Now raising those points in response to the experiences of ex porn stars is not a dismissal, because it counters with both argument and evidence - it is a rebuttal.

I agree the discussion is still open. I wouldn't dismiss any evidence out of hand on either side of the debate. Personally my view is porn is fine but it can become highly addictive if misused.

I agree that it's an open debate and that it is more than likely that some of the negative aspects are being glossed over by the pro-porn side.

However, this debate has been intellectually one sided from what I can see, and it is difficult to argue with the majority of anti-porn side who seem only capable of sweeping generalizations based on little more than opinion, day-time television and limited anecdotal evidence, relying almost entirely on appeals to emotion rather than reason and then getting upset when their opinions are not treated as Gospel.

When someone starts creating parallels between 'humanities' and 'humanity' with a straight face, you know that you're not going to get a very cerebral or reasoned discussion. At that stage, all you can really do is smile, nod your head and wait until they go back to watching Oprah.

joseph brand

Dolorous wrote: »

Excellent article, for me sums up my problems with the pornography industry much more eloquently than I could. It is extremely uncool to say that you dislike porn or have a fundamental problem with it. God forbid, if you do you are obviously a prude who has hangups about sex :rolleyes:



When I was a teenager some of the lads thought it would be funny to put on a porn movie in a room full of unsuspecting girls. What disturbed me most was the undertone of violence and humiliation, that this 'wh*re' being f*cked as hard as possible and reduced to a collection of orifices was apparently what men were supposed to get off on.

Some of my single female friends have been surprised by sexual expectations from guys they have been seeing, that can probably be attributed to the increasing exposure to porn. One girl told me that the first time she gave him oral, he had ejaculated into her face without warning her. When she got upset, he was surprised, as it's 'always done in porn'. How many (younger) men nowadays 'expect' anal, or nothing less than a total and complete wax downstairs, or think that a 'cumshot' is normal? Yes, men have always liked to look at titillating images, but I would say that the blurring of lines between porn and real-life expectations have really increased over the last 10 years or so.

So a girl feels ok to give the guy oral, but some semen on her face is shocking, so much so that she gets upset? She needs to grow up. No wonder these women are single. Maybe they need to be a bit more mature and get some confidence.
She must have known what was cumming! (My wife's words) Classic. Surprised me. btw, my wife is not into this either, but she would not get upset. She would/ has let me know, not again.

I reckon a lot of women would prefer not to 'get it' on the face, but it doesn't mean that it would 'upset' them.

joseph brand

Too much a reality check for many. Hence why so many people get so defensive when the side effects of porn are noted. It's like the whole drinking culture mentality. If you're not out getting wasted sure you're no craic - don't know what you're missing etc.

What a retarded statement. Really annoys me. It's the waffle of a person not willing to listen to the other side. When someone disagrees, you call them defensive?

I'm still wondering about the poor male pornstars. :rolleyes:

The Corinthian

joseph brand wrote: »

So a girl feels ok to give the guy oral, but some semen on her face is shocking, so much so that she gets upset?

In fairness doing something like that without any warning is pretty unacceptable. One should never assume someone is into a particular sexual practice and even when they are they can often need some form of preparation first.

Indeed, how would you feel if after having sex (with the girl on top) she decided to take a pee on you, without warning, because she's into watersports?

Please don't answer "aroused" :rolleyes:

joseph brand

Lol.

If she was Kelly Brook she could take a 'pee' on me any time of the day, and I'm not even into that stuff.

@The Corinthian
Besides pee is not the same as semen. What if you went down on a girl and she came, would you be upset? Would you cry? I hope not. :P



I'm just wondering if Gail is on some sort of crusade, causing hysteria among women, bashing men, and the porn industry. It's not like she's getting publicity or gonna make any money out of all this. :rolleyes:

Plus, before googling her, I had an image of what she might look like, and I was pretty close. Is it any surprise that it's never a pretty woman complaining about men and porn, only the fuglies. Or is it pug-fugly?

I'm pretty sure there are some real stories we could hear from wives or gf's, but I don't wanna just listen to Gail.

The Corinthian

joseph brand wrote: »

Besides pee is not the same as semen.

No, but for some it's a big deal and others it's not - just as semen is for some a big deal and others not. Just as you cannot accuse the anti-porn side of being dogmatic about what is acceptable or not, neither can you do the same.

Certain sexual practices have become more commonplace, while others have become rarer, nonetheless one should never make assumptions on what is or is not acceptable in the bedroom just because something is in vogue.

Now this may lead one to decide that someone is incompatible with you on the basis of what they will or will not try, but that's life.

What if you went down on a girl and she came, would you be upset? Would you cry? I hope not. :P

I think you're confusing an involuntary action with a very much deliberate one.

I'm just wondering if Gail is on some sort of crusade, causing hysteria among women, bashing men, and the porn industry. It's not like she's getting publicity or gonna make any money out of all this. :rolleyes:

Plus, before googling her, I had an image of what she might look like, and I was pretty close. Is it any surprise that it's never a pretty woman complaining about men and porn, only the fuglies. Or is it pug-fugly?

I'm pretty sure there are some real stories we could hear from wives or gf's, but I don't wanna just listen to Gail.

After that, I think I may reconsider my previous observation on the intellectual one-sidedness of this discussion.

The Corinthian

The Corinthian wrote: »

In fairness doing something like that without any warning is pretty unacceptable. One should never assume someone is into a particular sexual practice and even when they are they can often need some form of preparation first.

Indeed, how would you feel if after having sex (with the girl on top) she decided to take a pee on you, without warning, because she's into watersports?

Please don't answer "aroused" :rolleyes:

But at the same time I've had women bite, scratch, and slap me during sex even though I've never introduced such a notion before.. Its one thing to nibble, but when you're missing skin in your back or have scratch marks on the side of your neck, I kinda get annoyed.

I always thought I was fairly worldly wise (after spending so long on the net and traveling quite a bit), and yet when it comes to sex, I've been introduced to something in a rather straightforward manner by women. I can still remember quite clearly the shock I felt when this extremely innocent looking (and rather sexy) woman put my hands around her neck and asked her to choke her during sex.

Maybe I've just had a strange history with women.

The Corinthian

Deleted User wrote: »

But at the same time I've had women bite, scratch, and slap me during sex even though I've never introduced such a notion before.. Its one thing to nibble, but when you're missing skin in your back or have scratch marks on the side of your neck, I kinda get annoyed.

Yeah, came across that on more than one occasion and called a stop to things.

Typically the response has been that they "lose control" - if a guy used that line he'd be doing time in the Joy for rape :rolleyes:

I can still remember quite clearly the shock I felt when this extremely innocent looking (and rather sexy) woman put my hands around her neck and asked her to choke her during sex.

I remember, I was about 21 at the time being asked to "hurt" one women in the throws of passion, as it were. A combination of the heat of the moment and confusion and I just blurted out "you've put on weight". Didn't go down well.

Maybe I've just had a strange history with women.

If I had a penny...

The Corinthian

The Corinthian wrote: »

Yeah, came across that on more than one occasion and called a stop to things.

Ditto

Typically the response has been that they "lose control" - if a guy used that line he'd be doing time in the Joy for rape :rolleyes:

Maybe I'm belaboring the point but this thread seems to take it for granted that men are porn driven maniacs experimenting with women at will, whereas women are innocent little victims always on the receiving end of some sick and twisted perversion.

Something I find particularly unrealistic.

I remember, I was about 21 at the time being asked to "hurt" one women in the throws of passion, as it were. A combination of the heat of the moment and confusion and I just blurted out "you've put on weight". Didn't go down well.

Thanks, thats going to keep me smiling all day now. Very funny.

goose2005

It's odd that the article says

The backlash against Dines and her work is well-documented. Various pro-porn activists post accusations about her on websites, suggesting she is motivated by money, hates sex, and victimises women to support her supposed anti-male ideology.

When just a little but above she said:

"To think that so many men hate women to the degree that they can get aroused by such vile images is quite profound," says Dines. "Pornography is the perfect propaganda piece for patriarchy. In nothing else is their hatred of us quite as clear."

Dr. Zeus

joseph brand wrote: »

Lol.


Plus, before googling her, I had an image of what she might look like, and I was pretty close. Is it any surprise that it's never a pretty woman complaining about men and porn, only the fuglies. Or is it pug-fugly?
That quote speaks volumes! So you decided in advance that this woman would be pug-ugly? So, am curious to know what you would have thought if you had found her attractive?

What difference would that have made? Do you also google males whose opinions you disagree with and rate their looks? If a man makes a misognistic comment is he usually pug-ugly?

It's ironic that some of this thread is alluding to the fact the porn objectifies women etc

metrovelvet

I haven't read the whole thread nor do I watch porn, but I read the article and I went to college in the US, where exposure to porn is inevitable.

I find the article a little partial, in that, we are becoming more violent as a culture in general so why would porn be exempt from this. I can't turn in the tv without seeing an autopsy or a head being sliced off, so I would assume that porn too would also have to up its anti in terms of the sensation its audience seeks.

Maybe men do hate women. Maybe its love/hate. Maybe its the kind of hate that comes with dependency. Who knows? But I think this aspect is a far more interesting avenue to explore than the puritanical positing of the article's subject.

Isnt it also a case of Rome all over again? The wealthier the nation the more sensation it seeks?

As for the influence on expectations in relationships, well life does seek to imitate art, and media does tend to 'normalise' expectations, but this is a danger in any art form, from the beauty of perfection in renaissance art to romantic film to porn. And that's the tricky part.

Zombrex

metrovelvet wrote: »

I find the article a little partial, in that, we are becoming more violent as a culture in general so why would porn be exempt from this.

How are we becoming a more violent culture? We live in the most peaceful society in the history of the world.

I think the biggest issue is that before everything was behind closed doors. We are becoming a much more open culture and we now see stuff that was always there but no visible all the time.

There is nothing in porn that people were not doing 50,100, 1000 years ago.

Dr. Zeus

metrovelvet wrote: »

I
Maybe men do hate women. Maybe its love/hate. Maybe its the kind of hate that comes with dependency. Who knows? But I think this aspect is a far more interesting avenue to explore than the puritanical positing of the article's subject..

Great post and you raise some interesting questions which I too would be interested in exploring. I am not anti-porn by any stretch but I have come to question what underlying messages are being transmitted sub-consiously or otherwise. For some on this thread those questions seem to associated with being anti-porn in some way.

metrovelvet

Wicknight wrote: »

How are we becoming a more violent culture? We live in the most peaceful society in the history of the world.

I think the biggest issue is that before everything was behind closed doors. We are becoming a much more open culture and we now see stuff that was always there but no visible all the time.

There is nothing in porn that people were not doing 50,100, 1000 years ago.

Im not a criminologist and I do not have historical crime stats but you have to admit that the publics appetite for violent imagery has gotten bigger and is being fed.

metrovelvet

Dr. Zeus wrote: »

Great post and you raise some interesting questions which I too would be interested in exploring. I am not anti-porn by any stretch but I have come to question what underlying messages are being transmitted sub-consiously or otherwise. For some on this thread those questions seem to associated with being anti-porn in some way.

People can get defensive about their hobbies.

I think you're in trouble once an art form/genre becomes so sacrosanct it's beyond criticism.

Of course its going to influence life, that's what art does. The example of Goethe's The Sorrowsof Young Werther is a prime example. After the book was published there was an explosion of young male suicides. It's just plain stupid to underestimate the human capacity for mimicry. But that is not Goethe's fault is it? Or is it?

To me, this is not the interesting part of the debate. Its a question done to death and gets nowhere.

What is interesting to me is what necessity does porn plug into? What role does degradation have? Why have we pushed it outof our sanitised lives into a corner, which is ever widening, and slowly moving out of the corner to take up the whole room.

Are we just bored looking for more and more stimulation, growing more and more desensitited?

How do you compete in a world where there are live beheadings online?

The Corinthian

metrovelvet wrote: »

What is interesting to me is what necessity does porn plug into? What role does degradation have? Why have we pushed it outof our sanitised lives into a corner, which is ever widening, and slowly moving out of the corner to take up the whole room.

Are you essentially suggesting that porn imitates life (or more correctly is adhering to a demand) rather than the other way around?

Wicknight

Wicknight wrote: »

How are we becoming a more violent culture? We live in the most peaceful society in the history of the world.

I think the biggest issue is that before everything was behind closed doors. We are becoming a much more open culture and we now see stuff that was always there but no visible all the time.

There is nothing in porn that people were not doing 50,100, 1000 years ago.

Actually, I think we were a very open society and now were reverting back to the closed society setup. Regulations, and other restrictions seem to be the norm now with just about everything coming under scrutiny. There also seems to be a lot less tolerance towards ideas and practices compared with ten years ago.