Boyfriend watches Porn What Do I Do?

AngryBadger

metrovelvet wrote:

Ok. But is that dissatifaction because of her or because he has an excessive appetite? And if its the latter, does porn encourage an excessive appetite or satisfy it, or like addiction do both? I dont want to get into norms and what qualifies as an excessive appetite but a lot of the talk here is pointed to the woman not satisfying the man. Newsflash: some men are bottomless pits when it comes to this.

Whether he has an excessive appetite or not doesn't somehow make it his fault, or mean he's in the wrong, it just means he should probably find a woman with a sex drive closer to his own. I feel two things here, firstly when people are in a stable loving relationship I think their appetites are inclined to become in sync, and sex becomes less of an issue unless there starts to be a problem. Second I think the only peple who find their sex drives significantly altered by porn are teenagers for the most part. Not saying it can't happen with older people, but it's rarer.

metrovelvet wrote:

I havent quite worked this out yet in my head, but my feeling is the rise in popularity in porn and how normative its becoming is a product of new puritanism and further polarisation of mind and body. Yes porn has always been around, but its becoming more and more normative. Why?

I think this is a myth, and that maybe we're seein more of it because nowsdays we're acknowledging more and more things we've previously swept under the carpet.

metrovelvet

AB - it would seem at least from what Ive seen that it is mostly adolescent boys who are really really into porn. It seems to be more casual with men. I just remember it always around in high school and its presence seems to fade with each year.

But I still want to know - what is it about a dumb objectified woman who gets a man off? What is it about that? Someone tell me please!

Whether he has an excessive appetite or not doesn't somehow make it his fault, or mean he's in the wrong,

I think it would be more helpful if we let go of the blame model. No one is talking about fault and blame here. But he and she can get into a vicious circle with this if porn becomes a norm.

For example, with the OP - everyone got on her case. No one actually helped her work through what was making her insecure,which would have probably been far more productive.

it just means he should probably find a woman with a sex drive closer to his own.

Perhaps. But he may love the woman he is with. No one can tick off all your boxes so to speak. And libidos change in time also, they wax and wane. You need to adapt. It's not always as simple as finding someone new. Especially if your married and have kids. Your going to leave your kids because your not getting enough pussy? You'll just have the same problem eventually with the next person. If you cant get your woman hot, what do you expect?

AngryBadger

metrovelvet wrote:

But I still want to know - what is it about a dumb objectified woman who gets a man off? What is it about that? Someone tell me please!

I think you're painting with some fairly broad strokes there and I think to expect porn to be in any respect even-handed in its depiction of sexual relationships is foolish. I don't think you can say a "dumb objectified" woman is attractive to every man. As regards the dominant aspect of men in most porn, it's in a guys nature to be at least somewhat dominant, and in fairness I've met very few woman who were attracted to guys that weren't assertive in, or out of the bedroom, (btw when I say dominant I don't mean controlling or misogynistic) erego this is reflected in pornography. Even couples that are into more "hardcore" stuff have a similar dynamic outside of the bedroom even if the man tends to be submissive in the bedroom.

metrovelvet wrote:

I think it would be more helpful if we let go of the blame model. No one is talking about fault and blame here. But he and she can get into a vicious circle with this if porn becomes a norm.

Ok I think we can all agree that if one half of a relationship starts indulging in porn to satisf themselves for whatever reason that will end up damaging the relationship.

metrovelvet wrote:

Perhaps. But he may love the woman he is with. No one can tick off all your boxes so to speak.

See I completely disagree here, if someone doesn't tick all of my boxes then why would I waste a second of my time in a commited relationship with them?

metrovelvet wrote:

And libidos change in time also, they wax and wane. You need to adapt. It's not always as simple as finding someone new. Especially if your married and have kids. Your going to leave your kids because your not getting enough pussy? You'll just have the same problem eventually with the next person. If you cant get your woman hot, what do you expect?

I have a few problems with what you're saying here.

1) Yes people's libido will change, and yes there will be problems in relationships, that's as inevitable as the tides. What I'm saying is that rather than just villifying someone for watching porn, at least some effort should be made to address the underlying problem(s) with the relationship.

2) In all your posts, maybe you don't realise it, but you take a very anti-men attitude. As if the woman is always the victim of whatever befalls a relationship. If a man is involved with someone and his needs are't being satisfied, for whatever reason, there is a problem there which needs to be addressed. You keep coming out with stuff like "cant get your woman hot" as if it's accepted that the problem is with men and their sickeningly high need for sex. The reality is that many men, (and I've been in this position), find their female partners woefully poor in the bedroom, very lacking in confidence, and just generally crap when it comes to sex. Obviously us men need to be patient in these cases, and supportive of our partners or else everyone loses, but it gets my blood up when women come along and start villifying guys because WE WANT SEX AND IF YOU AREN'T GIVING IT TO US WE WILL ****ING LEAVE YOU.

It's a natural thing, accept it, and stop making us out to be evil because we accept our own normal biological drives, and urges in ways that many women can't, or refuse to.

Muggy Dev

Wicknight wrote:

Most men have long given up hoping that their women will like porn (or even adventurous sex).

Then perhaps men give up too easily.

Wicknight wrote:

Them liking it isn't the issue. Them guilt tripping the guy into not looking at it because it makes the woman feel "unattractive" is.

Oh dear!:eek:

With regard to AngryBadger's persistant attempts to solicit the reasons why porn may be harmful,may I respectfully suggest that your questions are questions you should ask of yourself.Only you truly and honestly know whether it is harmful or not for YOU.Only YOU will know whether it is having an effect on your relationship,if indeed you have one at this time.Please pardon my presumptiousness(and my spelling).

AngryBadger

Muggy Dev wrote:

With regard to AngryBadger's persistant attempts to solicit the reasons why porn may be harmful,may I respectfully suggest that your questions are questions you should ask of yourself.Only you truly and honestly know whether it is harmful or not for YOU.Only YOU will know whether it is having an effect on your relationship,if indeed you have one at this time.Please pardon my presumptiousness(and my spelling).

Well if that's your take then every single argument you've made up to this point is redundant since you're now leaving it open to the floor to decide for themselves whether or not porn is harmful. Personally I think people should be the ones deciding for themselves, but I have to laugh at how quickly you abandon all of your earlier arguments.

Muggy Dev

AngryBadger wrote:

Ok I think we can all agree that if one half of a relationship starts indulging in porn to satisf themselves for whatever reason that will end up damaging the relationship.

Good.We agree on something.

AngryBadger wrote:

See I completely disagree here, if someone doesn't tick all of my boxes then why would I waste a second of my time in a commited relationship with them?

Ah! That is unfortunate since to tick off all one's boxes one would need to have either very few boxes to tick off in the first instance or die and go to heaven.

AngryBadger wrote:

In all your posts, maybe you don't realise it, but you take a very anti-men attitude.

Not true.A blatently sexist remark which speaks volumes about you.

Muggy Dev

AngryBadger wrote:

but I have to laugh at how quickly you abandon all of your earlier arguments.

My dear man,I have abandoned nothing in this particular thread except,at this late and tiresome stage,my will to live and breathe.

Good night,and may health and good fortune be yours.

AngryBadger

Muggy Dev wrote:

Ah! That is unfortunate since to tick off all one's boxes one would need to have either very few boxes to tick off in the first instance or die and go to heaven.

...or I just happen to think whatever goals one has are actually worth pursuing until achieved, I'm not about to settle for anything less than exactly what I want. i don't know where this notion that picking your number 2 is ok comes from, but in my view it's not ok, and endorsing it creates a culture of dissatisfaction.

Muggy Dev wrote:

Not true.A blatently sexist remark which speaks volumes about you.

Very true, and yes it does speak volumes about me, it says that I treat everyone the same and when I feel someone is in error I'll call them on it. I fail to see the sexism in me telling metrovelvet I find some of her comments anti-men. Sexist would be if I didn't tell her what I honestly felt because she was a woman and i didn't want to offend her tender sensibilities.

Muggy Dev wrote:

My dear man,I have abandoned nothing in this particular thread except,at this late and tiresome stage,my will to live and breathe.

I suppose that would be easy since you've contributed so little of substance :rolleyes:

The Corinthian

Muggy Dev wrote:

Then perhaps men give up too easily.

Or perhaps not - see, we can all come out with meaningless clichés.

Not true.A blatently sexist remark which speaks volumes about you.

How so?

With regard to AngryBadger's persistant attempts to solicit the reasons why porn may be harmful,may I respectfully suggest that your questions are questions you should ask of yourself.Only you truly and honestly know whether it is harmful or not for YOU.Only YOU will know whether it is having an effect on your relationship,if indeed you have one at this time.Please pardon my presumptiousness(and my spelling).

That is without a doubt the greatest bullshìt argument I’ve heard here or anywhere else in quite a while. Rather than bother to give an argument that points to pornography being harmful you attempt to sidestep the issue by suggesting we do so for you.

How about you come up with an argument rather than this continued obfuscation?

Jonny Saviour

The Corinthian wrote:

Or perhaps not - see, we can all come out with meaningless clichés.

How so?

That is without a doubt the greatest bullshìt argument I’ve heard here or anywhere else in quite a while. Rather than bother to give an argument that points to pornography being harmful you attempt to sidestep the issue by suggesting we do so for you.

How about you come up with an argument rather than this continued obfuscation?

I was just wondering.

Based on your arguments do you like to play with youself? And if so why do you do that?

I only ask so as to clarify where you are coming from?

If you don't play with yourself then equal answers apply.

Fetish? Drought? etc. It's an open forum.

The Corinthian

Jonny Saviour wrote:

Based on your arguments do you like to play with youself? And if so why do you do that?

Which particular argument are you referring to?

And would you like to answer with your more regular account while we're at it?

Zulu

metrovelvet wrote:

When you decide to stop talking to me in that condescending tone I will respond to you.

Take your abuse elsewhere. Im not interested.

Point out the abuse and I'll apologise. In the meantime, if you are having difficulties arguing your point - might I suggest you reconsider your standing.

metrovelvet

AngryBadger wrote:

See I completely disagree here, if someone doesn't tick all of my boxes then why would I waste a second of my time in a commited relationship with them? .

Because your boxes will change. And so will hers/his. So will those things that ticked them. And vice versa.

AngryBadger wrote:

I have a few problems with what you're saying here.

1) Yes people's libido will change, and yes there will be problems in relationships, that's as inevitable as the tides. What I'm saying is that rather than just villifying someone for watching porn, at least some effort should be made to address the underlying problem(s) with the relationship..

Whose getting villified? And is watching porn automatically a sign that "something is wrong" in the relationship. Do we need to pathologise it? Maybe its just a dumb hobby.

AngryBadger wrote:

2) In all your posts, maybe you don't realise it, but you take a very anti-men attitude. As if the woman is always the victim of whatever befalls a relationship. ..

Not true. You choose to read it that way for whatever reason. Arguably a pro-porn stance is is itself anti-woman. Many would read it that way.

AngryBadger wrote:

You keep coming out with stuff like "cant get your woman hot" as if it's accepted that the problem is with men and their sickeningly high need for sex. ..

I said it ONCE. I never called it sickengly either. Now your projecting. Please stop.

AngryBadger wrote:

The reality is that many men, (and I've been in this position), find their female partners woefully poor in the bedroom, very lacking in confidence, and just generally crap when it comes to sex. ..

What are you comparing it to? Where do you get your measuring stick from? Are you comparing it to good lovers you've had or what youve seen on tv? Its quite a judgemental stance your taking, and not a great start to disinhibiting a woman. Many women have the same experience. Whats your point?

AngryBadger wrote:

Obviously us men need to be patient in these cases, and supportive of our partners or else everyone loses, but it gets my blood up when women come along and start villifying guys because WE WANT SEX AND IF YOU AREN'T GIVING IT TO US WE WILL ****ING LEAVE YOU...

You know that sounds a little patronising. And defensive. You are also making this a gender thing far more than I have.

Additionally, I havent taken a pro or con stance on porn. What I have been trying to do is redress some of the imbalances.

AngryBadger wrote:

It's a natural thing, accept it, and stop making us out to be evil because we accept our own normal biological drives, and urges in ways that many women can't, or refuse to.

No one is moralising here. But at least admit its biological, dont try to call it rational while villifying women for being irrational. Just not fair.

Zulu

Metrovelvet, are you going to bother explaining why porn is irrational?

PS: biological and rational aren't mutually exclusive.

TerrorFirmer

Whose getting villified? And is watching porn automatically a sign that "something is wrong" in the relationship. Do we need to pathologise it? Maybe its just a dumb hobby.

This argument isn't getting an even balance. I've been reading this entire thread - for ages I might add, god its long - and I have to agree with Zulu and Wicknight generally. Some people, not naming names here, seem to be almost arguing on what almost seem to be the merits of their own personal experience - believe me, nearly every man watches porn, for a sole reason, and at the end of the day, I can honestly say when I watch porn, the second I turn it off, its out of my mind and has absolutely no bearing on the imtimate relationship I share with my girlfriend in the slightest, mentally or physically regarding sex.

It certainly does not reflect on the status of my relationship nor does it reflect any sort of gap that needs bridging in it either. It's just porn for god sake, while I'm sure the odd man, as with every argument on earth, DOES use it for reasons mentioned like escapism, I'm pretty positive thats in the very slight minority. Get over it!

If my girlfriend uses sex toys I don't see it as a threat nor as a sign of instability or lacking in our relationship. I see it the same way as porn is on this thread - just a means to and end. Doesn't mean anything other then that, and is pretty much just a supplement to a healthy relationship.

eddyc

Yeah seriously its nothing, I mean you can watch a funny film and you'll laugh at it, a scary one you get scared, a porn movie you get horny and have a ****, its not a big deal, women dont seem to like porno movies as much as blokes do, but blokes dont usually like romantic movies and chicks dont generally dig sci-fi,
Its just fantasy, saying it has an adverse effect on people would be like saying if you watch a thriller you're more likely to become a detective or something.

Sleepy

metrovelvet, can I ask you a question on this topic: do you see the solution to misogynistic porn that objectifies women being no porn or simply better porn? From what I've seen most porn objectifies both the men and women 'starring' in it so you'll have to forgive me if I find the argument that porn is 'anti-women' a little absurd. Yes the depiction of women in porn is rarely more than that of a nymphomaniac but in the realms of fantasy, that turns on a lot of guys. We're not alone in having fantasies that we'd never actually enjoy in real life, as the popularity of the 'rape' fantasy amongst women would testify to. It could also be argued that men in porn are rarely depicted as anything more than a transport device for a large penis.

Personally, the stereotypical notion of pneumatic chested, peroxide blonde, overly tanned, tattooed and pierced porn stars does nothing for me. However, were I to watch it, I'd still get aroused as it's still the naked female form and I'm biologically wired to be aroused by that.

For me, it would seem that your problem with porn is that most of it is crap rather than an ideological opposition to porn itself. Am I wrong?

AngryBadger

metrovelvet wrote:

Because your boxes will change. And so will hers/his. So will those things that ticked them. And vice versa.

By your logic then no-one should hae any standards or expectations entering into a relationship because the whole scenario is in flux. My point is that from the word go I have expectations form a perspective partner, if those are not being met initially then it's a sign to bail. If those are not being met in the longer term then it's a sign that something is wrong. Certainly as a relationship progresses and partners grow older some things will change, but those changs occur for the two as a couple, or at least they should and if they don't there's a problem.

metrovelvet wrote:

Whose getting villified? And is watching porn automatically a sign that "something is wrong" in the relationship. Do we need to pathologise it? Maybe its just a dumb hobby.

Isn't your whole argument that porn is bad?

metrovelvet wrote:

Arguably a pro-porn stance is is itself anti-woman.[/QUOTE}

How exactly is a pro-porn stance anti-woman?

metrovelvet wrote:

and not a great start to disinhibiting a woman. Many women have the same experience. Whats your point?

See this is where I find you anti-men, you assume that of course it's about dealing with a woman's problem regarding sex, but you give no thought to a man's. Why do you feel that men should pick up the slack for insecure women? And my point is that it's almost expected women will have problems with men's skill in the bedroom, but when the opposite is highlighted the response is scorn and a resistance to accepting that reality.

metrovelvet wrote:

No one is moralising here. But at least admit its biological, dont try to call it rational while villifying women for being irrational. Just not fair.

....if we agree that it's a response to a biological drive how can you dispute it being rational? Are eating and sleeping also irrational since they're in response to hunger and tiredness? And if I'm villifying women for being irrational, (and I actualy think I'm just obgserving the reality here), maybe it's because I find female insecurity repeatedly transferred onto men's sexual averice compeltely irrational. Once again you're making it a male's job to address all of a females insecurities, while failing to even acknowledge that she is not addressing any of his issues. That's about as one-sided as it gets.

Zombrex

metrovelvet wrote:

Of course. But what people are arguing is that you can masturbate without porn.

You can, but it is quite hard to masturbate without some form of visual add.

As I said, what is the difference between masturbating to porn and masturbating to the girl on the Special K box?

metrovelvet wrote:

Yeah I dont know. Why do men have to see women depicted as stupid objects to get off?

They don't ... ?

All they have to see if women having hot sex. If someone wants to watch a woman being pissed on, or humilated to get off, well to each there own I suppose, but I certainly don't get off by that stuff, and neither do any of my mates.

I watch good old fashion straight porn, two (or more) people having really hot sex.

metrovelvet wrote:

It caters to an irrational side. Biological urges are not part of our reasoning functions.

They can be. Or do you not think about what you are having for dinner today and how you will cook it? Do you just grab the nearest food and start munching it down?

metrovelvet wrote:

But I do have a problem with people who indulge in it labelling and demoting ANYONE else as irrational for not liking it.

Groan....

For the last time, no one is asking or expecting anyone, girl or boy, to "like" watching porn.

But it is irrational to object to your partner watching porn based on ones own insecurities about body image. Yes the girls are going to be hotter in the porn that you, the guys are going to be hotter than me.

That isn't the point of porn, and it is irrational to get upset to your partner by this aspect alone. As I said, it is the girls issues with her own body, that guys issue with porn. If she is feeling unattractive she should talk to her partner, see if they can do something together. As i said, most guys turn to porn because they have already been turned away from their partner, they would much rather be having sex with her. Demanding that he doesn't watch porn anymore is silly and irrational.

Zombrex

Muggy Dev wrote:

Then perhaps men give up too easily.

If you want to nagg your girlfriend into watching porn in the hope that eventually she will learn to like it ... well... good luck with that :rolleyes:

Muggy Dev wrote:

With regard to AngryBadger's persistant attempts to solicit the reasons why porn may be harmful,may I respectfully suggest that your questions are questions you should ask of yourself.

I think most people here have and come to the conclusion that it isn't harmful to watch porn.

So do you accept that since it is up to us to decide, and we have decided it isn't harmful, that porn is in fact not harmful. Great, lets move on ...

metrovelvet

Sleepy wrote:

metrovelvet, can I ask you a question on this topic: do you see the solution to misogynistic porn that objectifies women being no porn or simply better porn? From what I've seen most porn objectifies both the men and women 'starring' in it so you'll have to forgive me if I find the argument that porn is 'anti-women' a little absurd. Yes the depiction of women in porn is rarely more than that of a nymphomaniac but in the realms of fantasy, that turns on a lot of guys. We're not alone in having fantasies that we'd never actually enjoy in real life, as the popularity of the 'rape' fantasy amongst women would testify to. It could also be argued that men in porn are rarely depicted as anything more than a transport device for a large penis.

Personally, the stereotypical notion of pneumatic chested, peroxide blonde, overly tanned, tattooed and pierced porn stars does nothing for me. However, were I to watch it, I'd still get aroused as it's still the naked female form and I'm biologically wired to be aroused by that.

For me, it would seem that your problem with porn is that most of it is crap rather than an ideological opposition to porn itself. Am I wrong?

Yes. Good god. Someone gets it. My main objections criticisms are aesthetic and sometimes that can cross into the ideological, like any other representation, but I can barely get offended by most porn I see because I cant take it seriously and the studio quality is all too obvious to me. Like ive said, if someone wants to have a **** to that crap, let them.

Wicknight wrote:

As I said, what is the difference between masturbating to porn and masturbating to the girl on the Special K box??

Ive already addressed the differences in the effects of print and film media.

AngryBadger wrote:

Isn't your whole argument that porn is bad?

No. Im redressing some of the assumptions posters are making.

AngryBadger wrote:

Why do you feel that men should pick up the slack for insecure women? And my point is that it's almost expected women will have problems with men's skill in the bedroom, but when the opposite is highlighted the response is scorn and a resistance to accepting that reality.

First of all, let me say that I have been talking about porn and YOU have been talking about gender issues. Lets make that clear. Why is it expected that women will have problems with mens skill in the bedroom? I've never ever heard that before.

You're talking about the mans experience and not the woman's. Do I label you anti- woman? No. Be fair. Whats picking up the slack? What does that mean?

AngryBadger wrote:

Once again you're making it a male's job to address all of a females insecurities, while failing to even acknowledge that she is not addressing any of his issues.

Not at all. Now your making stuff up. We havent talked about responsibility here.

AngryBadger

hmmmm....In all this the idea of "discussing" porn as an institution on its own seems redundant to me. Porn is a reaction to an available market, so discussing it in terms of whether its a good/bad thing is academic since it's always going to exist in some form. People enjoy sex, and so will consume products of a sexual nature.

I fail to see the ambiguity or difficulty there, so what're the two sides to this discussion.

Since the post began with someone troubled by their boyfriend watching porn several people have made the assertion that the OP is reacting more to her own insecurities about sex than her boyfriend actualy watching porn. She feels on some level that he is dissatisfied with her, and is troubled by that. She made that point in her original posts. Personally, I think she needs to address the problems in her sexual relationship with her boyfriend, rather than just getting angry with him for watching porn. She can be angry and hurt about it as well, but that's only one side of the argument, surely her boyfriend's frustrations are equally valid?

Madge

On a related note, did anyone see the programme 'natural porn killers' on channel 4 last night? It was about Ted Bundy, the serial rapist and murderer.
The programme was based around a face-to-face interview he gave (while in prison), where he alleges that hard core pornography drove him to commit those assaults and murders. He said he started reading 'adult material' at a young age aswell. He also said that, like him, fellow inmates were also addicted to hard core and violent pornography.
The programme interviewed people who were agreeing with his theory and others who said it was baloney. It was a very interesting, non-biased and well made programme.

metrovelvet

AB

Perhaps. But we dont have his voice here so we cant really discuss if he has frustrations or not and if so what they are. It seems futile to me to have a discussion around our fantasies of what his situation is.

Sure, we can talk about her insecurities, since we have some knowlege of that and since she has come forth about them. We can discuss why the presence of pornography makes women nervous in a more abstract sense also [which I think is what we have been doing.]

We can also talk about the various reasons men use porn [we have been doing that also] but as of now we have no inkling as to why OPs boyfriend uses it other than to masturbate. That is really not enough to go on to delve into a dialogue about him specifically.

In order to sustain or develop this investigation it would be bound that some of the off shoots and bi products of this dialogue will of course be about the medium itself, its production, its process and the product itself.

The Corinthian

Madge wrote:

The programme was based around a face-to-face interview he gave (while in prison), where he alleges that hard core pornography drove him to commit those assaults and murders. He said he started reading 'adult material' at a young age aswell. He also said that, like him, fellow inmates were also addicted to hard core and violent pornography.

The thing to remember with serial killers is that typically there are two disorders or influences at work, of which the principle one is almost always sociopathy. As such Bundy may well have been motivated by pornography, but ultimately that is not what allowed him to commit those crimes - that he was a sociopath and thus lacked any remorse, conscience or empathy did.

As a parallel, greed is a common motivator for murder, however in the vast majority of cases we’ll still not do so, even with that motivation, because we do not lack that ‘little voice’ in our heads that tell us that it’s wrong.

So if we assume that Bundy was indeed ‘driven’ to commit crimes by pornography, then would eliminating pornography have eliminated his motivation? Possibly, although what we do know of serial killers is that while they may all have sociopathy in common, their ‘drivers’ are often wildly diverse, so he may simply have found another such ‘driver’ for his urges.

It also goes into the entire debate on freedom versus security in the State. While we could eliminate every influence that may drive someone with already abnormal psychology over the edge, we would soon find ourselves banning everything - Pornography, heavy metal music, video or role-playing games or alcohol to name just a few of the popular suspects. And that is before we consider the possible benefits of any of those to that same Society.

Zombrex

metrovelvet wrote:

Ive already addressed the differences in the effects of print and film media.

You missed the point of the question (porn can be both print and film)

The point is saying that a man should not use porn to masturbate as the OP seems to be doing is rather nonsensical when he will just use something else.

What the OP really wants is the boyfriend not to us any image of a woman who is not her to arouse himself. He should only be aroused by her, as the thought of him being aroused by other women makes her feel insecure.

Whether he uses hard core porn or the woman on the Special K box it doesn't really matter, though it is much less obvious if he is using something that is not so obviously arousing.

The issue her isn't the guy looking at porn, it is the girlfriends body image issues. She would probably be as upset if she knew he was being sexually aroused by the weather lady

rockbeer

An hour and a half gone, and I've finally finished trawling through this thread...
and what seems clear to me is that lots of people can't help but see porn in the context of their expectations of how relationships 'should' be.

Porn is entertainment, just like any other. Some is fantastic, some is OK and most is utter garbage. Mature adults should hopefully be able to tell the difference and exercise some kind of quality discrimination when deciding what to watch. This is made harder by the fact that it's bound up with issues of evasion, guilt and shame, and by the fact that lots of wealthy people are going out of their way and spending a lot of money trying to pursuade you to buy rubbish. But it's no different to anything else really in that regard. Just don't take it too seriously. Same with the portrayal of women in porn - and men, for that matter. Sure it's disturbing, but personally I find the way people are portrayed in most other media fairly objectionable too. I can't see the difference. Don't watch porn if it bothers you, but why stop there or single it out for special criticism?

Any problems that people have with porn (other than the aforementioned quality issues) are manifestly because it's sexual entertainment. Ergo, to understand their problems with porn people need to forget all about the porn and look at their attitudes to sex, and their expectations of other people regarding sex.

To argue that it's inherently harmful, as some people have here, is just plain bizarre - unless you feel that sex is inherently harmful or bad, in which case there's probably no help for you. Porn isn't inherently anything... it's just watching people have sex. No big deal - sex is right up there with eating and pissing as the most natural thing you'll ever do. If our society wasn't so messed up and repressed we'd all be watching each other have sex all the time, it would be totally normal, it wouldn't be loaded with suspicion, and this whole discussion would be redundant.

And as for the Ted Bundy thing... spare me. Bundy was clutching at the straw that he might literally get away with his life if he spouted off an anti-porn diatribe. If he'd have thought blaming cornflakes might have saved his lousy neck you can be sure it would all have been Kelloggs' fault. Marcia Pally has some interesting comments on Bundy's (rather late and expedient) decision to blame porn for his dreadful acts of violence: http://www.marciapally.com/Pages/sxsn.html

** edited to add a link and correct a couple of typos - but I couldn't resist a minor rewrite while I was at it **

Catsmokinpot

Pervert1199 wrote:

Every male alive watches porn. Get over it.

its true

hobochris

WATCH IT WITH HIM???

you boyfriend has a high sex drive... so ****ing what... its not like he's gone out and killed someone...

and please dont give me that degradng to women crap because in porn theres also men involved...

and while im on a rant im sick of women saying that giving oral sex is degrading... yet have absolutly no ****ing problem what so ever with a man going down on them... Talk about double ****ing standards...

its not like you get the worst of flavours, i mean compare salt to **** rotten fish...
and two mintues of that flavour and thats it (the man shooting his load bit only takes that at max) and its over for yous.. we gotta taste that **** for anything between 5 minutees to an hour ...
anyway that rant finished...

its not like hes cheating on you by sleeping with the people in the porn...

you boyfriend has a healthy ****ing sex drive... con-gradua-****ing-lations... deal with it!

metrovelvet

hobochris wrote:

its not like you get the worst of flavours, i mean compare salt to **** rotten fish...
and two mintues of that flavour and thats it (the man shooting his load bit only takes that at max) and its over for yous.. we gotta taste that **** for anything between 5 minutees to an hour ...

Why dont you stick with cock since you seem to like that better than pussy.