Openly Anti-porn - reprint of letter

panda100

The Sweeper wrote: »

What the hell must that be doing to their expectations of their own experiences?

+1
I've watched online porn in the past just to see what all the fuss is about more than anything. Can't say I came across anything that turned me on, as most of it was men coming over womens faces, but it did make me feel a teeny bit insecure about my own performance in bed. I don't act anything like the women that I've seen on your typical online porn sites.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Eve_Dublin

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I wonder would grown women (i.e. most of us here) make a different choice? I'd love to see the line up of boobs to decide.....

Stheno

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I'd agree with this personally, I work in an office where there is constant traffic in and out and lo and behold my laptop faces towards the door, so a screen full of pretty much any naked body part would not be appreciated, full stop, and I certainly couldn't justify why I was looking at it in a work context

It's happened to me occasionally that I'm lunching at my desk and hit a pic that's not marked NSFW and have a heart attack, even if the picture is nothing out of the ordinary for the most part, it's not suitable to be on a work computer, particularly in a shared office Kinda like leaving page three's lying around in a sense?

K-9

Stheno wrote: »

I'd agree with this personally, I work in an office where there is constant traffic in and out and lo and behold my laptop faces towards the door, so a screen full of pretty much any naked body part would not be appreciated, full stop, and I certainly couldn't justify why I was looking at it in a work context

It's happened to me occasionally that I'm lunching at my desk and hit a pic that's not marked NSFW and have a heart attack, even if the picture is nothing out of the ordinary for the most part, it's not suitable to be on a work computer, particularly in a shared office Kinda like leaving page three's lying around in a sense?

They did a similar line up with the lads and penises so that would be NSFW too.

More disturbing was the lads seemed to take their ideas from the porn they've seen and the girls did seem pressured into thinking this was expected of them.

We can forget how gullible and easily led many 15/16 year olds are.

Stheno

K-9 wrote: »

They did a similar line up with the lads and penises so that would be NSFW too.

More disturbing was the lads seemed to take their ideas from the porn they've seen and the girls did seem pressured into thinking this was expected of them.

We can forget how gullible and easily led many 15/16 year olds are.

Actually I saw the lads programme, a lot of them were very embarrassed or seemed to be about it.

They did have very "idealistic" ideas of what the norms should be alright from what I remember.

K-9

Stheno wrote: »

Actually I saw the lads programme, a lot of them were very embarrassed or seemed to be about it.

They did have very "idealistic" ideas of what the norms should be alright from what I remember.

Just young lads being young lads I think.

A good few seemed to find it hard to distinguish that porn is fantasy and not the norm.

Blowfish

Ambersky wrote: »

I am really not arguing with the mods here in this post I just think what has happened with an earlier post of mine is really interesting in the context of what we are talking about here.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=72731819&postcount=75
I posted a link to Channell 4s Sex Education Vs Pornography programme saying it wasnt anti sex but against a lot of the mis informaiton created by Porn .... basically anyway

I included a link to an image I saw as displaying that very idea, where the presenter displays images of womens breasts and stands behind them.
From watching the programme I know she is asking an audience of young people which images they think are the best and is challenging them to think about what is normal.
Therefore I didnt even think about the images of womens breasts in any kind of Not Safe for Work or any kind of socially unacceptable way and posted the image itself up with my post.
http://media2.sexperience.mintdigital.com/files/media/0003/1185/s2_ep1_img_260x190.jpg?1278325793 NSFW

The image has been edited as NSFW.
I am not challenging this or asking for any criticism of the mods they are just doing what it says in the rules I suppose.

Im just saying isnt it amazing an image of our bodies, womens breasts, can not be seen as anything other than ......... what .
Is this because of the Porn Industry.
Has Porn done this to images of our own bodies that they can not be seen in any other way than as a reflection of porn or NSFW

The social conditioning on what is considered 'acceptable' to reveal in Western societies largely stems from Christianity and was pushed (especially from the 17th century on) by the idea that chastity and celibacy are forms of 'purity'. Essentially, it predates the 'porn industry' by several hundred years.

There is absolutely no way that say 100 years ago, female breasts in any context would have been 'safe for work'

flutterflye

On the breast sexual or not sexual point.

Quite simply, we all know they are.
But they are also equally not.

Breasts however are not on par with genitalia.

When in a non-sexual, and non-provocative light, they are no different to an arm or leg.

If your boss looked over your shoulder and saw something like an image of a topless woman on a medical website, they most likely wouldn't think anything more of it than if you were looking up anything else that isn't work related.

I just wanted to let Ambersky know that someone gets what she was saying!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

K-9

flutterflye wrote: »

On the breast sexual or not sexual point.

Quite simply, we all know they are.
But they are also equally not.

Breasts however are not on par with genitalia.

When in a non-sexual, and non-provocative light, they are no different to an arm or leg.

If your boss looked over your shoulder and saw something like an image of a topless woman on a medical website, they most likely wouldn't think anything more of it than if you were looking up anything else that isn't work related.

I just wanted to let Ambersky know that someone gets what she was saying!

Yes, if the boss knew it was a medical site or in this case, a sex educational site.

Their primary function is breast feeding, we all know that.

To try and put perspective on it, if we'd 5 different images comparing Matthew McConnaughey and the usual male midriff, it might be deemed NSFW.

PS. This is probably a topic worthy of its' own thread.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Wibbs

K-9 wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Actually I'd argue that, or I'd argue that focus on breasts beyond that function is not necessarily or entirely cultural. Humans are the only females among the great apes with permanently full breasts. Other great apes breasts only swell up when they're suckling. There's a reason for that. Either hiding oestrus or sexual display or reproductive fitness display or all of the above*. I would say different cultures attach more or less importance to one of those. Ours goes for the sexual display part the most. I'd reckon beyond suckling they're a reproductive fitness display. Or were back in the distant past. Younger more fertile women tend to have perter fuller breasts in general. As they age and/or have children/no bras a toll would be taken on the breasts. The one thing against that is the huge variability in breast size, even among sisters. I can't think of a functional and signalling body part that comes even close to breast size variability.

Permabear wrote:

This post has been deleted.

+1. I've always considered Irish Catholicism to be the most "Puritan" in Europe. Funny it wasn't always so. Even in religion. The early Irish church rattled the cages of the vatican with how permissive and open it was. We defo have a puritan streak. Worse, today we have a confused puritan streak.




*another thought I had is maybe as a cushion for babies and human babies have both very soft and huge heads?

Eve_Dublin

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I would have chosen the pair on the left hand side of the fake pair and I would've chosen the fake pair as second best. I think the guys and girls were looking at the overall look of the bodies they were attached to as well. To me it seems obvious that very young people will be more attracted to perky breasts on a tanned, flawless, slim body than a pair of breasts of an older woman that have been used for the purpose regardless of whether they're fake or not. Boobs droop as you get older. To me it's a no-brainer that young people will be attracted to younger looking breasts. It's very hard to look at them out of context like that. I think this was a set up. They chose the fake breasts of a slim, tanned woman and most of the rest were breasts of older women with a bit more weight on their bodies and less toned. They knew the answers they wanted to hear and they purposely chose very contrasting breasts so they could get those answers for the sake of TV. Perhaps I'm conditioned as well though?

parker kent

Eve_Dublin wrote: »

To me it's a no-brainer that young people will be attracted to younger looking breasts.

+1 They pretty much guaranteed that they would pick the fake boobs. It would be better had they a number of different women for each age range. If they saw a number of breasts in each age range, it would be a better method (and more educational).

metrovelvet

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

The paradox is what while deeply puritanical we also have a huge porn industry, something tells me this bifurcation is linked, that the porn comes straight out of repression, much like Joyce's dirtier words came out of the repression that shaped him.

And ftr I think the Irish are way more puritanical than the US. I would have grown up seeing tampax ads on the tv whereas my Irish counterparts would not have. And my uncle got thrown out of the house for saying the word bra by my grandfather. Seriously pathological prudery.

Re breast exposure: Im with Ickle on the boobs, their functions are about more than breast feeding, they are erotic, they are errogenous zones, they are markers of attraction. However, cultures, seem to differ on how much of your sexuality you can include in your every day dress. Cleavage is not really de riguer in NYC for example. You'd see a lot more if it in Ireland, but maybe thats because the men are less aggressive so the women can be a bit more exposing. And as for the continent, yeah you can go topless on the beach, but its no more acceptable to walk around topless in the street than it is in Ireland or the US.

Ambersky

Eve Dublin origionally said
They chose the fake breasts of a slim, tanned woman and most of the rest were breasts of older women with a bit more weight on their bodies and less toned. They knew the answers they wanted to hear and they purposely chose very contrasting breasts so they could get those answers for the sake of TV. Perhaps I'm conditioned as well though?

Parker Kent says
It would be better had they a number of different women for each age range. If they saw a number of breasts in each age range, it would be a better method (and more educational).

I wonder how many of us have an accurate mental image of the variety in womens breasts that are normal at any age, having had children or not.

It seems perhaps given the huge variety in womens breasts that would make the perfectly symetrical fake breasts statistically abnormal and yet they are the breast I would argue many women measure the likeability of their own breasts up to.
In fact as the image of these symetrical pert smallish breast, fake or not, are probably the image we see portrayed the most people seem think that this is normal for a young woman.

For some of that variety that is NSFW (Im not arguing that decision)

http://www.007b.com/breast_gallery.php

Quote from 007b website and you should see this young womans perfectly normal looking breasts

"I am a 21 year old woman. Up until about three hours ago when I discovered this web site I had never seen a real breast in my entire life. I was introduced to porn star breasts when I was about 13 and I have been insecure about mine ever since. I developed into a size B cup when I was 10, and by the time I was 13, I was a full C. During Jr. High I suffered severe criticism and torment from other students, both male and female, for having significantly larger breasts than most. I began duct taping my breasts down from 13 to 15 years old. I have not allowed another person to see my breasts until very recently, and I'm still uncomfortable with them, to a "relationship ruining" degree. I don't know how I developed such severe stretch marks (from my areola to my armpit) and sagging, but it greatly hinders my self esteem. I don't feel any better about my appearence, but I do think this website is extremely important and I hope I can help."

The Sweeper

I would like to see the equivalent experiment conducted with pictures of penises.

I saw boys looking at breasts, and choosing the perfect breasts, and being told they needed to accept that those weren't real, and then I saw boys with expressions that suggested they were not pleased that they could not have what they wanted. Then I saw girls being told all breasts are different, and reacting in a way that suggested to me that they were unimpressed that they had to make do with breasts that they feel the boys don't want.

I think the dawning realisation when faced with the sane realities in the form of penis pictures would be very interesting...

coffee_cake

The Sweeper wrote: »

I would like to see the equivalent experiment conducted with pictures of penises.
.

k9 said it had been, it might be on that c4 link somewhere as well

Ambersky

Let me put it another way.
From the 10 pairs of breasts on display in the Channel 4 clip and from the photo I put up, showing only breast and shoulders, no head or lower body, what makes posters believe that they can tell that
"most of the rest were breasts of older women with a bit more weight on their bodies and less toned."
Or that
"It would be better had they a number of different women for each age range. If they saw a number of breasts in each age range, it would be a better method"

We werent told the ages of the women whos breasts were on display, or if they had had any children or not or what weight they were.

As we can see from this link which shows us photos but also tells us more about the person in the photo
http://www.007b.com/breast_gallery.php NSFW
It is very difficult to tell age, average body weight, or whether someone has had a child or not simply from looking at a photo of breasts.

Eve_Dublin

Ambersky wrote: »

Let me put it another way.
From the 10 pairs of breasts on display in the Channel 4 clip and from the photo I put up, showing only breast and shoulders, no head or lower body, what makes posters believe that they can tell that
"most of the rest were breasts of older women with a bit more weight on their bodies and less toned."

Well I guess you have to use your imagination on this one. From what I saw, the fake boobed lady had flawless skin, a tan and looked more toned than the others. The photo looked digitally manipulated and because I'm sceptical about the show anyway, I believe they did that on purpose. Have a look again yourself....you can see enough of the stomach and shoulders to let your imagination tends to do the rest (whether it's right or wrong is irrelevant...these are teenage boys were talking about here and teenage girls who see themselves through the eyes of boys). The presenter also mentioned that one of them were breasts from a woman who had given birth to 2 children, so I'm presuming the woman wasn't a teenager and she seemed to mock disingenuous shock when the teenagers didn't find them as appealing as the pert fake ones.

I suppose I didn't see a huge amount of breasts at that age but drooping boobs generally happens after 20 years (if not older). I went skinny dipping with my female friends when I was about 18 and none of us had drooping boobs at that stage...even those of us who had a larger bust. However, at the age of 31, I'm surprised sometimes when I see a woman's breasts of my own age and older in real life. None of them resemble pornstars or page 3 models and I'm generally taken aback by how varied they are. Still, the most of photos of breasts in that clip were not the breasts of teenage girls.Correct me if you think I'm wrong. I think it was a set up. There'd be no show if they chose a natural pair of boobs. They'd a point to prove and they set it up so their point could be proven.

gargleblaster

pajunior wrote: »

As a guy I simply have to ask, are there many women who feel this way? For me this was by far the most disturbing aspect of a somewhat disturbing letter.

It only just occurred to me to ask you this, but why is it disturbing? Are you of the opinion that sex work is a bad thing and women shouldn't do it?


Also thanks to Ambersky for the link showing 'real boobs' (for want of a better term). Quite enlightening.

parker kent

The Sweeper wrote: »

I would like to see the equivalent experiment conducted with pictures of penises.

I saw boys looking at breasts, and choosing the perfect breasts, and being told they needed to accept that those weren't real, and then I saw boys with expressions that suggested they were not pleased that they could not have what they wanted. Then I saw girls being told all breasts are different, and reacting in a way that suggested to me that they were unimpressed that they had to make do with breasts that they feel the boys don't want.

I think the dawning realisation when faced with the sane realities in the form of penis pictures would be very interesting...

I have seen them do exactly those experiments on Channel 4 as well. They had about 15-20 examples of penises. I *think* it was on Embarrassing Bodies. I say they probably had something similar on The Sex Education Show too.

Although speaking from a male perspective, I think we are generally happy with most breasts. I imagine most unhappiness with breasts and penises come from the people who actually have them. Although changing rooms in football, gym etc were a pretty good insight for me into the massively wide range of penis sizes. From previous TLL threads, I'm not sure if girls get similar experience.

parker kent

Ambersky wrote: »

We werent told the ages of the women whos breasts were on display, or if they had had any children or not or what weight they were.

Surely it is reasonable to say that the younger pair of breasts were obvious? Given many teenagers will only have seen "nice" or relatively young breasts before and usually from porn/movies/magazines etc, you could say that they picked what they are familiar with.

I think my suggestion above which you quoted is still valid. Show a range of say 5 breasts from each age-group in order to show how varied they can be at any stage.

Wibbs

parker kent wrote: »

Although changing rooms in football, gym etc were a pretty good insight for me into the massively wide range of penis sizes.

Only in a non erect state PK. The penis is remarkably narrow in size range when erect. Smaller than 4 inch(in old money) and bigger than 8 is rare. Males average 5-6. Sure some men look smaller and others look bigger when "not in play" but defo average out*. Compared to breasts penis size if very narrow. You can have a woman with AA bewbs, barely bumps on her chest wall and her mate, even her sister could have EE or bigger on nigh on the same frame. Women also sexually select penis size less than men select breast size. Well they select around the average on, well average. However it seems there was selection pressure on penis size, just as there was breast size in our history as human males have by far the largest willies among the great apes. Gorillas make do with an inch, maybe two. One theory is down to promiscuity of human females compared to other apes, but I would say it's that plus women selected for size as part of outward aesthetic and function as well.

Breasts are odd though. Like I said they combine function in both nursing and sexual ways, yet unlike the male penis show huge differences in size which impacts on both. Compared to other apes they're mostly fat, yet even large chested women can have difficulty breast feeding. I wonder do other apes have this? Do others need wet nurses? If not that may suggest that fully inflated breasts may be so important that their function can be compromised. Like the Peacock's large tail that limits his movement on the ground. Indeed large breasted women may find that they can't run as fast as their smaller breasted sisters because of discomfort. In which case it's likely a sexual trigger more than it's not. Women also have permanently inflated bums too.

parker kent wrote: »

Surely it is reasonable to say that the younger pair of breasts were obvious? Given many teenagers will only have seen "nice" or relatively young breasts before and usually from porn/movies/magazines etc, you could say that they picked what they are familiar with.

That's a point alright. It would be hard to take out cultural exposure from the equation. Though I would suspect young males are likely to select for equally young females. Older males may do similar because of the diffs in reproductive strength over time. This is all very reductive however. Individuals are usually sexually selecting on more subtle lines. IE I've never gone for large breasts. At any age. For me any more than a C cup at a push D is too much of a good thing. Yet I should be following the culture. I wouldn't be alone in that(though I would say Irish men tend to be large breast men IME).








* I recall reading about a study into straight men who went for penile enhancements and what they found was they were concerned at the length of their flaccid state, not the erect. Which is interesting. Indeed the operation in question only affected the flaccid length. Flaccid is of little use sexually, so it seems the display of the locker/changing room is more in play. They wanted bigger penises to feel better around/impress other men.

pajunior

gargleblaster wrote: »

It only just occurred to me to ask you this, but why is it disturbing? Are you of the opinion that sex work is a bad thing and women shouldn't do it?

No I don't think it is a terrible thing or that women shouldn't do it.

I do find it strange (maybe disturbing is too strong a word), that an educated woman thinks that her body is still her best asset and not her personality/intelligence or any other aspect of her as a person.
I suppose I've just always been told that my intelligence is my biggest asset. I worked as a laborer as a teenager and was always told to get my degree to get a 'better' job (didn't listen too hard on the degree end :P)
Seems to me like she thinks that society believes women are only worth as much as they are good looking.

parker kent

Wibbs wrote: »

Only in a non erect state PK. The penis is remarkably narrow in size range when erect. Smaller than 4 inch(in old money) and bigger than 8 is rare. Males average 5-6. Sure some men look smaller and others look bigger when "not in play" but defo average out*. Compared to breasts penis size if very narrow. You can have a woman with AA bewbs, barely bumps on her chest wall and her mate, even her sister could have EE or bigger on nigh on the same frame. Women also sexually select penis size less than men select breast size. Well they select around the average on, well average. However it seems there was selection pressure on penis size, just as there was breast size in our history as human males have by far the largest willies among the great apes. Gorillas make do with an inch, maybe two. One theory is down to promiscuity of human females compared to other apes, but I would say it's that plus women selected for size as part of outward aesthetic and function as well.

How do you know what happens in our changing room? :pac: No I take that as a fair point, but I just meant that it is an insight into the average. Obviously there are differences with erect and flaccid penises, but it is still a decent insight. In other words, you realise they can be all shapes and sizes. I agree women select based on penis size which is where this point came in:

I imagine most unhappiness with breasts and penises come from the people who actually have them.

In other words, it tends to be girls getting worried about breast sizes, not boys. Sure if you stop a teenage boy and ask him would he prefer a girl with bigger breasts, he'll probably say yes. But teenage boys (and men) tend to like ALL breasts. I would say the same about penises and men/women. Men may get unhappy about the size, but the girls rarely really care. Sure they may have individual preferences, but within reason they will be happy with any size.

Wibbs wrote: »

That's a point alright. It would be hard to take out cultural exposure from the equation. Though I would suspect young males are likely to select for equally young females. Older males may do similar because of the diffs in reproductive strength over time. This is all very reductive however. Individuals are usually sexually selecting on more subtle lines. IE I've never gone for large breasts. At any age. For me any more than a C cup at a push D is too much of a good thing. Yet I should be following the culture. I wouldn't be alone in that(though I would say Irish men tend to be large breast men IME).

I'd agree they are likely to pick other young females and it is relatively easy for them to spot younger breasts.

As for breast size and personal preference, I notice I tend to find the size of whatever girl I currently find attractive as my favourite. If I have a crush on a small boobed girl, I tend to notice them more often. Ditto bigger boobs, although I'd say my preference would be for B/C cups.

Wibbs wrote: »

* I recall reading about a study into straight men who went for penile enhancements and what they found was they were concerned at the length of their flaccid state, not the erect. Which is interesting. Indeed the operation in question only affected the flaccid length. Flaccid is of little use sexually, so it seems the display of the locker/changing room is more in play. They wanted bigger penises to feel better around/impress other men.

I definitely agree with that. There's one guy on my old football team who was nicknamed Ron Jeremy due to his freakishly massive flaccid penis. Yet when erect, it probably doesn't increase in size. I think our own sex plays a huge role in how we view ourselves. The old adage about girls dressing to impress other girls for example.

Eve_Dublin

pajunior wrote: »

No I don't think it is a terrible thing or that women shouldn't do it.

I do find it strange (maybe disturbing is too strong a word), that an educated woman thinks that her body is still her best asset and not her personality/intelligence or any other aspect of her as a person.
I suppose I've just always been told that my intelligence is my biggest asset. I worked as a laborer as a teenager and was always told to get my degree to get a 'better' job (didn't listen too hard on the degree end :P)
Seems to me like she thinks that society believes women are only worth as much as they are good looking.

Considering how many women have issues with their naked body, I doubt many women would say it was their best asset. I doubt many women would believe they could make a living by getting naked. I know I certainly wouldn't feel confident enough anywho.

Eve_Dublin

parker kent wrote: »

In other words, it tends to be girls getting worried about breast sizes, not boys. Sure if you stop a teenage boy and ask him would he prefer a girl with bigger breasts, he'll probably say yes. But teenage boys (and men) tend to like ALL breasts. I would say the same about penises and men/women. Men may get unhappy about the size, but the girls rarely really care. Sure they may have individual preferences, but within reason they will be happy with any size.

Eh, I'd have to disagree with you there Wibbs. I certainly wouldn't be and haven't been happy with ANY size penis and I know plenty of women who feel the same but wouldn't say it out loud for fear of hurting the feelinsgs of men. I think it's one of the biggest sexual fallacys (excuse the pun ) out there. That women don't care about the size of a man's penis. It's certainly something I take into account when sleeping with a man and particularly now as things are not as, eh, tight down there as before.

Count Duckula

I do think that porn and its prevalence amongst young males who are sexually developing is leading to a belief and a desire for larger-chested women that would not have happened say thirty years ago. Young men, who are now learning what sex is about almost exclusively from porn are seeing nothing but larger-chested women, and this is influencing their desire in the long run. They come to expect and find themselves attracted to women with larger chests, and they simply don't find women with "average" chests or smaller as attractive. They're so used to seeing these women that they come to expect it as normal, and anything else is disappointingly small. Having grown up seeing only one shape of woman (that of a large bust) influencing their development, everything else is seen as abnormal and not as good.