Extreme radical "feminists" suffering sexual oppression unto them

Femme_Fatale · 21-01-2014 02:46AM

Nah, people go on about hardcore porn (which is NOT just about sex) as if it's the biz. They celebrate it. This was covered.

Whereas violence is still seen as negative.

poundapunnet · 21-01-2014 02:46AM

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Have to agree, there was a clip posted on FB a few months ago by someone on my friends list containing a video of 2 guys having their heads lobbed off with a chainsaw by Mexican drug cartel members, not sure if the clip was real but it looked like it was.

But I'd hazzard a guess if someone posted a sex clip there would be more outrage.

If it's the clip I'm thinking of, that happened the same day that facebook said that those clips were OK as long as the person posting them made it clear that they disapproved, they censored a fanpage for Tommy from Love/Hate's arse

Galwayguy35 · 21-01-2014 02:52AM

poundapunnet wrote: »

If it's the clip I'm thinking of, that happened the same day that facebook said that those clips were OK as long as the person posting them made it clear that they disapproved, they censored a fanpage for Tommy from Love/Hate's arse

Yeah that's the one I think.

poundapunnet · 21-01-2014 03:02AM

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Yeah that's the one I think.

Yeah that was pretty crazy. Although honestly I used to be mad about those gore videos when I was a teenager, don't know why and I can't stomach them anymore, also I'm a dirty vegetarian hippie dippie spacer person so I don't think they did me much lasting damage. So I wouldn't judge anyone just for being interested in them, the weird attitudes to different types of images is something I can't understand though.

SoupMonster · 21-01-2014 03:30AM

poundapunnet wrote: »

Yeah that was pretty crazy. Although honestly I used to be mad about those gore videos when I was a teenager, don't know why and I can't stomach them anymore, also I'm a dirty vegetarian hippie dippie spacer person so I don't think they did me much lasting damage. So I wouldn't judge anyone just for being interested in them, the weird attitudes to different types of images is something I can't understand though.

This GRAPEFRUIT pic was banned by Facebook. Presumably for resembling a vulva. Protect your eyes. pic.twitter.com/KRWBVJDheN

poundapunnet · 21-01-2014 03:53AM

SoupMonster wrote: »

This GRAPEFRUIT pic was banned by Facebook. Presumably for resembling a vulva. Protect your eyes. pic.twitter.com/KRWBVJDheN

Ha, slutty dirty grapefruit, how dare it! Breastfeeding pictures are banned too.

GalwayGuy2 · 21-01-2014 07:59AM

Do you see no difference between literary porn (featuring your imagination) and movie porn (featuring actual women and men)?

On what's being portrayed and the supposed social degeneration, no I don't.

On it involving living breathing people, yes I do. But, I have no right to tell people what to do with their own bodies.

Some people would say literary porn would be even more damaging than video porn. Instead of going for a few minutes masturbating to a video, you completely enter a world and spend hours reading about 'rape pornography'. Of course, I'd call those people silly if they do not have a coherent argument, and wrong if they had a coherent argument.

Lets be honest, if you flip the genders, wouldn't you be worried about men reading rape pornography for hours on end and being in heightened arousal before masturbating?

Hmmm, there seems to be an odd amount of slut shaminess going on in this thread. Sure, the actresses are 'damaged' and require help to stop their slutty ways.

You'd have to walk me through that connection because I'm genuinely missing how a link could be made between being terrified of assault and assuaging one's terror through the medium of violent porn.

Because of the similarities between adrenaline and orgasm? Because fear can lead to obsession and obsession can bleed into sexuality? Because it's taboo to a woman who is inundated with images of being attacked twenty four seven?

If you go to Reddit Sex then you will see plenty of cases of fear over something leading to strange sexuality. I was about to link it, but I couldn't find it, but there's one case of a man being afraid of premature ejaculation and this leading into a sub and dom relationship with a woman.

@FemmeFatale

Your actively trying to shame sexuality. Of course people are going to get defensive. As well as that, you are entirely viewing pornography through your own lens. Whether that bias is right or wrong is a whole other story, but you are actively trying to shame people into agreeing with you.

And if that shame can lead to a hatred of sexuality that turns to a hatred of the object of your sexuality? Do you not see how shamed sexuality can cause violent sexual acts?

clairefontaine · 21-01-2014 08:00AM

The Corinthian wrote: »

I take it you're talking about Fifty Shades of Grey? Vintage Books apparently.

Didn't know that it had that much of an effect on men's psyches - learn something new every day.

No. I have no idea what that books is. I haven't read one paragraph of it. When I first heard the title I thought it was about a menopausal book club or something, like Steal Magnolias. Ladies with grey hair hanging out at the hairdresser type of book.

I don't think men read it either, wasn't it more a women's market? So I don't think it had any effect on mens psyches- don't know where you came to that conclusion.

GalwayGuy2 · 21-01-2014 08:26AM

Hmmm, I seem to have been defending my opinion and ended up defending rape pornography.

The above will probably be the last I'll mention about it, but i'd just like to add two things.

1) I do not watch/read any pornography. I honestly can't be bothered taking the time to masturbate. just thought I'd mention that before people invalidate my opinion my thinking of me 'as someone who watches rape pornography'.

2) I wanted to mention the possible shaming effect. There is a link between self-loathing and extreme violent acts, so it stands to reason that a minority of people might commit violent acts because of shamed sexuality.

No. I have no idea what that books is. I haven't read one paragraph of it. When I first heard the title I thought it was about a menopausal book club or something, like Steal Magnolias. Ladies with grey hair hanging out at the hairdresser type of book.[/QUOTE

Hmmm, some people have called it a sadomasochistic fantasy and some people have called it abuse.

It's a badly written book, but it's only the tip of the ice-berg of erotica.

21-01-2014 09:06AM

GalwayGuy2 wrote: »

On what's being portrayed and the supposed social degeneration, no I don't.

On it involving living breathing people, yes I do. But, I have no right to tell people what to do with their own bodies.

Well neither am I. As you know.

But since we're going down the road of putting words in peoples mouths, does that mean you wouldn't tell someone not to take heroin or ingest fatal drugs?

Some people would say literary porn would be even more damaging than video porn. Instead of going for a few minutes masturbating to a video, you completely enter a world and spend hours reading about 'rape pornography'. Of course, I'd call those people silly if they do not have a coherent argument, and wrong if they had a coherent argument.

I'm sure some people would, but I wouldn't be one of them. I wouldn't be so dismissive of the difference between employing imagination to realise a fantasy, and watching a woman be abused, consenting or not.

Lets be honest, if you flip the genders, wouldn't you be worried about men reading rape pornography for hours on end and being in heightened arousal before masturbating?

No, maybe I'm naive but I find men watching a flesh and blood person being abused (even consensually) more disturbing than reading depictions of such. Women too, if we're going to flip genders like pancakes.

Hmmm, there seems to be an odd amount of slut shaminess going on in this thread. Sure, the actresses are 'damaged' and require help to stop their slutty ways.

I said nothing of the sort. Do not put words in my mouth.

Because of the similarities between adrenaline and orgasm? Because fear can lead to obsession and obsession can bleed into sexuality? Because it's taboo to a woman who is inundated with images of being attacked twenty four seven?

If you go to Reddit Sex then you will see plenty of cases of fear over something leading to strange sexuality. I was about to link it, but I couldn't find it, but there's one case of a man being afraid of premature ejaculation and this leading into a sub and dom relationship with a woman.

It's an interesting theory, is there any serious study into this or are we still looking for a reddit link?

@FemmeFatale

Your actively trying to shame sexuality. Of course people are going to get defensive. As well as that, you are entirely viewing pornography through your own lens. Whether that bias is right or wrong is a whole other story, but you are actively trying to shame people into agreeing with you.

And if that shame can lead to a hatred of sexuality that turns to a hatred of the object of your sexuality? Do you not see how shamed sexuality can cause violent sexual acts?

That's only your perception and quite the accusation to fling on the basis of it, especially since that poster has clarified again and again. I certainly didn't see any such implication and I'm quite willing to take a posters word for it if they say otherwise.

GalwayGuy2 · 21-01-2014 09:18AM

That's only your perception and quite the accusation to fling on the basis of it, especially since that poster has clarified again and again. I certainly didn't see any such implication and I'm quite willing to take a posters word for it if they say otherwise.

Actually yes, I would like to apologize for the 'viewing through your own lens comment'. That was useless snarkiness on my part.

tritium · 21-01-2014 09:22AM

Just curious on the distinction between erotic literature and video porn. Where do folks draw the line? Is anime or virtual reality porn ok if it violent? What about video games with a strong sex/ porn element?

FWIW I personally think 'erotica' is just as damaging in terms of creating unrealistic expectations (Tbh I could probably extend that charge to a lot of the romantic media that gets peddled predominantly to women)

Fukuyama · 21-01-2014 10:18AM

I can't believe that after several pages of the people repeating the importance of openness about sex, how porn is okay and there's no need for it to be censored, and discussions on "normal sex", that people think there's slut shaming going on here. FFS...

Porn is fine when it contains sex that in some way resembles real life. At the very least, mainstream porn should get you horny so you can knock one out.

However, it doesn't. It has taken a turn down a darker route. High speed broadband allowed people to watch a ridiculous amount of porn. Porn Hub themselves know of user habits. Most people will click around between a dozen videos, searching within each one for the best shots and scene. As users become more used to porn, they need more extreme stuff to shock them.

GalwayGuy2 mentioned a kind of "oh well, the actresses are damaged, so what" kind of idea. I can't even... He says people have a right to do what they wish with their own bodies so 'not his problem'... Well, bad news. People don't have a right to just do as they please. Yes, you can have sex with who you wish, whenever, wherever, etc... And obviously, nobody wants that stopped! However, employers have a duty of care and we as a society have to care about other human beings because they're somebody's daughter/son. The porn industry destroys the lives of actresses. You can close your eyes to it all you want - but go on PornHub and look for those "Breaking Points" videos to see hundreds of porn actresses breaking down on set. And the ****ed up part is, in the comments of those videos, you'll see people actually enjoying the fact that these girls (average age of first porn shoot is 19) are destroyed.

Another poster mentioned how sex is the reason people have an issue with porn - well, duh. Sex is one of the most important parts of a persons mental health and for a lot of people it's being warped in dangerous way. They drew similarities with internet gore videos. We've all heard of such videos and I've actually sought out a few out of a morbid "can I stomach this" kind of way. Each time I did this, I was sickened and regretted it instantly. Now, if I were to be spending a couple of hours each week, locked alone in my bedroom watching these videos, I'm pretty sure you'd say I had problems. No? Am I Psycho Shaming here? :rolleyes:

Fukuyama · 21-01-2014 10:25AM

tritium wrote: »

Just curious on the distinction between erotic literature and video porn. Where do folks draw the line? Is anime or virtual reality porn ok if it violent? What about video games with a strong sex/ porn element?

From what I've seen of this genre (in particular that virtual reality stuff - I assume that means the ads that show videos which look like a game of The Sims), I think it should be tightly controlled. A lot of the "simulated characters" sure as hell aren't intended to simulate adults over the age of 18. Anyone that watches it should be on a ****ing register somewhere.

I can think of few video games with strong sex elements. Even the most recent GTA which was set in a fictional California, contained a mission involving a porn shoot on a yacht, had no nudity or even a porn-like sex scene. The only sex scene in the game resembled one that would be in a move and was hilarious.

tritium · 21-01-2014 10:37AM

Dean0088 wrote: »

From what I've seen of this genre (in particular that virtual reality stuff - I assume that means the ads that show videos which look like a game of The Sims), I think it should be tightly controlled. A lot of the "simulated characters" sure as hell aren't intended to simulate adults over the age of 18. Anyone that watches it should be on a ****ing register somewhere.

I can think of few video games with strong sex elements. Even the most recent GTA which was set in a fictional California, contained a mission involving a porn shoot on a yacht, had no nudity or even a porn-like sex scene. The only sex scene in the game resembled one that would be in a move and was hilarious.

So if you watch this stuff you should be on a register somewhere but if you're into reading twilight saga spinoff bad erotica thats ok.

Just so we're clear by anime I'm talking about the cartoon fantasy porn stuff.I ask in the context of a previous post that made a distinction between a movie where actors are exploited and a book. No real people are hurt in the filming of anime porn. Given we've addressed that issue why would it be wrong to have fantasy sexual content (predominantly aimed at men) in that context but ok to have fantasy sexual content (predominantly aimed at women)in the other.

Fukuyama · 21-01-2014 10:47AM

tritium wrote: »

So if you watch this stuff you should be on a register somewhere but if you're into reading twilight saga spinoff bad erotica thats ok.

Just so we're clear by anime I'm talking about the cartoon fantasy porn stuff.I ask in the context of a previous post that made a distinction between a movie where actors are exploited and a book. No real people are hurt in the filming of anime porn. Given we've addressed that issue why would it be wrong to have fantasy sexual content (predominantly aimed at men) in that context but ok to have fantasy sexual content (predominantly aimed at women)in the other.

I've never watched anime as porn but I've seen it out of curiosity; I'm familiar with what it is (that Japanese carttony stuff, right?). Yes, if you watch pornography (cartoon or otherwise) which contains characters below the age of 18, then I think it should be documented that you're a threat. I'm sorry, it's in no way healthy to find that stuff arousing. If anime you watch is adults, then fine. Whatever floats your boat. But I've checked it out and a lot of the cartoon stuff very obviously has young teenagers in it. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's my experience of that genre.

Just like real porn, it'd depend on the content and the reason you're watching it. If it's two people having sex, being dirty feckers etc... etc... then fine.

If it's a character being violently raped and beaten, then I'd say whoever gets off to it has an issue. I'm not saying it should be banned (you won't find a bigger supporter of net freedome than me), I'm saying that anyone who watches it has issues.

I'll reiterate, my problem isn't with porn (video or literature). My problem is with violent porn or porn which is extremely degrading to women, which acts as the main reason people watch it.

To get, well, graphic...

Cuming on a girls face might be something people are into. Fine. Nothing particulalry unhealthy about it I guess although I'm not aware of many real world women being a fan.

However, is aggressively holding a woman's face while shes on her knees, with mascara running, and then forcing her to allow the actor to cum on her face, healthy? You tell me. Does it resemble anything that would constitute normal sex? I'm pretty sure if I forced someone to do that it'd be considered sexual assault. That's a pretty normal occurance in mainstream porn, as far as I can tell.

If two consenting adults are comfortable with such acts, then fine. But I'm no idiot - porn directors are not going for a BDSM theme here.

Femme_Fatale · 21-01-2014 10:50AM

GalwayGuy2 wrote: »

@FemmeFatale

Your actively trying to shame sexuality.

Condemnation of hardcore porn featuring depictions of gang-rape = "actively trying to shame sexuality"... Are you having a ****ing laugh?

The defence of the indefensible here, just to sock it to teh feministz, is spectacular.

There isn't even anything feminist about finding such material loathsome. Anyone would.

tritium · 21-01-2014 11:18AM

Dean0088 wrote: »

I've never watched anime as porn but I've seen it out of curiosity; I'm familiar with what it is (that Japanese carttony stuff, right?). Yes, if you watch pornography (cartoon or otherwise) which contains characters below the age of 18, then I think it should be documented that you're a threat. I'm sorry, it's in no way healthy to find that stuff arousing. If anime you watch is adults, then fine. Whatever floats your boat. But I've checked it out and a lot of the cartoon stuff very obviously has young teenagers in it. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's my experience of that genre.

Just like real porn, it'd depend on the content and the reason you're watching it. If it's two people having sex, being dirty feckers etc... etc... then fine.

If it's a character being violently raped and beaten, then I'd say whoever gets off to it has an issue. I'm not saying it should be banned (you won't find a bigger supporter of net freedome than me), I'm saying that anyone who watches it has issues.

I'll reiterate, my problem isn't with porn (video or literature). My problem is with violent porn or porn which is extremely degrading to women, which acts as the main reason people watch it.

To get, well, graphic...

Cuming on a girls face might be something people are into. Fine. Nothing particulalry unhealthy about it I guess although I'm not aware of many real world women being a fan.

However, is aggressively holding a woman's face while shes on her knees, with mascara running, and then forcing her to allow the actor to cum on her face, healthy? You tell me. Does it resemble anything that would constitute normal sex? I'm pretty sure if I forced someone to do that it'd be considered sexual assault. That's a pretty normal occurance in mainstream porn, as far as I can tell.

If two consenting adults are comfortable with such acts, then fine. But I'm no idiot - porn directors are not going for a BDSM theme here.

With respect Dean, that's not the point I'm making. Given that I haven't alluded to violent depictions of sex I would have assumed that was obvious.

Put simply, erotica (aimed primarily at women) has frequent depictions of sex that could at best be described as extreme ( I think someone earlier used the term rape fantasy and its difficult to disagree in some cases). One poster posited that no one was hurt making it therefore it wasn't equivalent to equally extreme video porn. My point is, if this distinction is true, then surely if I remove the real actor element then porn of this kind (aimed primarily at men) must also be ok. Or both are unacceptable. Which is it is the real question.

Tbh I've been bothered for a while at the whole "porn is evil now excuse me while I finish fifty shades of grey" nonsense spouted by certain groups who would consider themselves feminist (yes I know many feminists are against fifty shades also). We can talk all day about how porn sets unrealistic expectations of women, how porn can be demeaning to women etc-and by the way in many instances we'd likely be in violent agreement. However we have a raft of socially acceptable constructs that equally set unrealistic expectations for men-,financially, emotionally, physically. Its the whole "strippers are distasteful, but the Chippendale's are hunky" nonsense. And frankly it stinks of hypocrisy. So my question I guess reduces to, is there a distinction between the two or is it an artificial construct borne of our own biases.

Btw, its interesting that you immediately honed in on the kiddie aspect when anime was mentioned. I realise that's been your experience of it, however you jumped there without any cue from my post- this is the kind of social conditioning I'm trying to understand

SuperGrover · 21-01-2014 11:19AM

I had to google PIV.

Particle Image Velocimetry, apparently.

Now I'm really confused.

Fukuyama · 21-01-2014 11:34AM

tritium wrote: »

With respect Dean, that's not the point I'm making. Given that I haven't alluded to violent depictions of sex I would have assumed that was obvious.

Put simply, erotica (aimed primarily at women) has frequent depictions of sex that could at best be described as extreme ( I think someone earlier used the term rape fantasy and its difficult to disagree in some cases). One poster posited that no one was hurt making it therefore it wasn't equivalent to equally extreme video porn. My point is, if this distinction is true, then surely if I remove the real actor element then porn of this kind (aimed primarily at men) must also be ok. Or both are unacceptable. Which is it is the real question.

As I've mentioned before, I wasn't aware of Fifty Shades of ****e featuring actual rape. My understanding was that it was degrading rough sex, but from a BDSM standpoint. Which, in my opinion, is fine as both people consent to being degraded or whatever. If it contains rape, not just "rape fantasy", then yes, I think anyone who gets off to rape is messed up.

Tbh I've been bothered for a while at the whole "porn is evil now excuse me while I finish fifty shades of grey" nonsense spouted by certain groups who would consider themselves feminist (yes I know many feminists are against fifty shades also). We can talk all day about how porn sets unrealistic expectations of women, how porn can be demeaning to women etc-and by the way in many instances we'd likely be in violent agreement. However we have a raft of socially acceptable constructs that equally set unrealistic expectations for men-,financially, emotionally, physically. Its the whole "strippers are distasteful, but the Chippendale's are hunky" nonsense. And frankly it stinks of hypocrisy. So my question I guess reduces to, is there a distinction between the two or is it an artificial construct borne of our own biases.

People like sex. Can't say I'd go to a strip club myself, but in this day and age, I don't see much wrong with it. AFAIK, the women are done up in the typical 2000 pornstar atire/make-up etc... maybe it does set unrealistic image expectations for girls. Oh well. So does every bill board / perfume ad / movie...

My problem is with porn that came about after high speed broadband. Women were no longer portrayed at "hot" with big boobs, "blowjob lips" and bleach blond hair. They are portrayed as defenseless objects with which you can do whatever depraved **** you like with. This sets not only unrealistic standards for young men and girls (the men in porn are just as unrealistic), but it sets certain sex acts as normal or expected of as women. And, for young impressionable men, it doesn't exactly put women as human being to be respected in the same way they'd like to be respected.

If a girl thought it was okay to grab my hair and force me to go down on her, and hold my head there, I don't think I'd feel too good about it.

The porn industry itself has gone full circle to actively insulting the women who enter the porn industry. The "Casting Couch" series fakes a porn audition so a male can take advantage of the dumb and innocent candidates.... Christ. And when a picture was posted of the couch to Facebook a year ago, it went viral because every man could recognise the couch. Funny, maybe. But it illustrates my point of how many people watch porn which has the sole theme of humiliating and taking advantage of women.

Btw, its interesting that you immediately honed in on the kiddie aspect when anime was mentioned. I realise that's been your experience of it, however you jumped there without any cue from my post- this is the kind of social conditioning I'm trying to understand

I thought for a second I was over reacting to it. My experience was limited and outdated by a couple of years. So I just went on PornHub and typed in "Anime". Around one third of the videos' titles contain phrases such as "teen girl", "girl" and "young girl" and make reference to loosing virginity, first time having sex and so on. The girls are portrayed in clothing and hairstyles that'd be suited to children/young teens. Their body shapes are almost universally what you'd expect a 13/14 year olds body shape to be - not a 22 or 23 year old woman.

So, my opinion of that stuff remains the same, I'm afraid.

The Corinthian · 21-01-2014 12:20PM

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

If people aren't willing to admit the obvious issues with porn depicting gang-bangs/beatings, and even get snarky about these being pointed out, then it's highly likely because they are uncomfortable with these truths, as viewers of it.

You have a fair point, but you shouldn't also forget that in discussions on topics like porn, many will see attacks on it as the 'thin edge of the wedge' of censorship. Not saying that is true, but some people do get quite passionate about such things without necessarily having a personal stake in it.

However, some people do get terribly uncomfortable with such truths because they do have a personal stake. Marriage is a good example of this; criticize marriage and you're guaranteed to have an onslaught of 'happily married' or 'wannabe married' people attack you for daring to put into question their marriage or their wish to be married.

Nonetheless, if not meant as an ad hominem, your observation does look like one as it distracts from your opponent's argument and instead you focus on their character. He could also quite rightly reciprocate and imply that your opposition to porn may be due to your blaming it for the failure of one of your past, or present, relationships.

So even if either of you did have a point, raising such observations are not a nice thing to do in such a discussion.

Dean0088 wrote: »

Firstly, you'll have to excuse my ignorance on that Fifty Shades crap. It's my understanding that it focuses more on BDSM instead of actual rape. As far as I'm concerned, BDSM is two consenting adults exploring boundaries. Rape is something else entirely.

Indeed it is, and neither does it occur in pornography, what is depicted is simulated rape, just as couples who enact rape fantasies are enacting simulated rape.

So your fist point doesn't stand up to much scrutiny, because what you're essentially saying is that having rape fantasies is fine as long as it's only written about. If you can get off on the idea of raping or being raped through a nasty piece of literature, then apparantly no problem.

If Fifty Shades of Grey featured a scene where a female character was crying, pleading to be let go while being beaten and forced upon (100% against her will, not in a BDSM way) then I'll concede that it's on par with rape porn. And anyone who enjoyed reading it needs help. At the very least, nobody was harmed in the making of it. This cannot be said for porn.

You know the actresses are consenting to shooting such scenes. They're not actually being raped. They're not actually real rapes. It's called make-believe and exists outside of pornography; actors consensually simulate murder, torture, rape or worse, and not necessarily with any moral message attached; telling people how such acts are 'wrong'.

Also the dragon in the Hobbit isn't real.

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Nah, people go on about hardcore porn (which is NOT just about sex) as if it's the biz. They celebrate it. This was covered.

Whereas violence is still seen as negative.

Not sure about that; in the US, for example, you are far more likely to get an 'R' rating from the censors for sexual content in your movie, than deceptions of violence.

clairefontaine wrote: »

I don't think men read it either, wasn't it more a women's market? So I don't think it had any effect on mens psyches- don't know where you came to that conclusion.

That was my point. You started coming out with some remarkably judgemental nonsense about men's psyche in relation to what we watch, read or whatever, yet it seems that women, and their psyche, are just as prone to such media. It wasn't a man who wrote A History of 'O', after all.

Dean0088 wrote: »

Porn is fine when it contains sex that in some way resembles real life.

Are you an authority on this? I ask because, if there's one thing I've learned is that sex in 'real life' is a lot weirder than many of us would be comfortable to admit. Please let us know what you consider to be normal sex.

Femme_Fatale · 21-01-2014 12:39PM

The Corinthian wrote: »

He could also quite rightly reciprocate and imply that your opposition to porn may be due to your blaming it for the failure of one of your past, or present, relationships.

It's no use Corinthian, my opposition to specfically hardcore porn (not all porn) is due to its dreadful depictions - nothing deeper. It's a stance that lots of people with no axe to grind/agenda to push/projecting to do, would have. And a pretty logical stance too.
He couldn't "quite rightly" reciprocate that at all (I have never been with a man who enjoys hardcore porn - to my knowledge anyway; I have been with a number of men who enjoy "softer" porn, and I have enjoyed it with them). Anyway, as I said numerous times, I wasn't aiming that comment at him personally. You might not have seen those posts?

Whereas someone who watches extreme hardcore porn and is not willing to admit depictions of gang-rape, with a side measure of beatings and humiliation, are problematic, and are even dismissive of these concerns - which I have encountered over and over - it's... fair to say the denial and the dismissiveness is due to them not wanting to face up to certain home truths. It doesn't mean they're a sexual deviant who'd do those things to a woman themselves - if anything it indicates they have a conscience.

The Corinthian · 21-01-2014 01:04PM

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

It's no use Corinthian, my opposition to specfically hardcore porn (not all porn) is due to its dreadful depictions - nothing deeper. It's a stance that lots of people with no axe to grind/agenda to push/projecting to do, would have. And a pretty logical stance too.

Fair enough. Personally, my own 'support' of porn here is partially because I don't like people telling me what I can or cannot look at (even if I don't want to look at it), I don't trust Anglo-Saxon societies where it comes to sex and self-regulation and because it seemed like the more fun side to argue on in this thread.

He couldn't "quite rightly" reciprocate that at all (I have never been with a man who enjoys hardcore porn - to my knowledge anyway; I have been with a number of men who enjoy "softer" porn, and I have enjoyed it with them). Anyway, as I said numerous times, I wasn't aiming that comment at him personally. You might not have seen those posts?

Again, fair enough. I already had someone on this thread convinced that I was directing comments at them, so it's possible that he overreacted too. However, you do have to be careful as even without naming someone in particular, you can imply someone in particular based on the thread context.

Whereas someone who watches extreme hardcore porn and is not willing to admit depictions of gang-rape, with a side measure of beatings and humiliation, are problematic, and are even dismissive of these concerns - which I have encountered over and over - it's... fair to say the denial and the dismissiveness is due to them not wanting to face up to certain home truths. It doesn't mean they're a sexual deviant who'd do those things to a woman themselves - if anything it indicates they have a conscience.

My view is people are into weird shìt - men and women - and it seems to be a particularly Anglo-Saxon, amongst Western cultures, preoccupation to tell people what weird shìt is OK for them to be into and what weird shìt is not.

Of course, if such depictions encourage non-consensual enactments of sex, in real life, then I'd agree that we should act upon it as a society, but even if that it the case it does open Pandora's box of how many other depictions in fiction may also encourage other anti-social acts. And that's a dangerous road and not one we should tread upon carelessly.

goz83 · 21-01-2014 01:55PM

SuperGrover wrote: »

I had to google PIV.

Particle Image Velocimetry, apparently.

Now I'm really confused.

I think it means:

Python Inside Vicky

tritium · 21-01-2014 02:01PM

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

So, this thread is about porn now?

Apparently so. We went via the well trusted men vs women route, with a scenic detour to visit Whataboutery National Park

GalwayGuy2 · 21-01-2014 03:48PM

@FemmeFatale

I'm kind of confused by your posting. You say gangbang, and then you change it to gang rape. You say hardcore in the same way I'd say rape porn.

When your talking about rape porn are you talking about things you find 'rapey' or where the woman is actually actively resisting?

Fukuyama · 21-01-2014 05:54PM

GalwayGuy2 wrote: »

@FemmeFatale

I'm kind of confused by your posting. You say gangbang, and then you change it to gang rape. You say hardcore in the same way I'd say rape porn.

When your talking about rape porn are you talking about things you find 'rapey' or where the woman is actually actively resisting?

There were a couple of different genres discussed. Normal porn generally portrays women in a submissive, objectified manner and is hardcore. Then there's rape porn which actually portrays a rape.

Tbh, several posters are dissecting different genres of porn and making convoluted points. The simple fact is that porn has changed since the arrival of high speed broadband, and in my opinion it's extremely dangerous for young men and women to be watching.

We can go on and on until the cows come home about censorship and splitting hairs between literature, erotica and porn. The simple fact is the the porn industry is one of the most scummiest places of employment, the actors are normally weak minded or damaged people, and the subject content generally contains a woman being used as a receptical.

Confusing this with a matter of free speech or personal taste is missing the point - the point is that normal porn right now isn't for fun or a quick **** - it can be extremely damaging.

Wibbs · 21-01-2014 06:03PM

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

So, this thread is about porn now?

Giggidy.

newport2 · 21-01-2014 06:04PM

Dean0088 wrote: »

There were a couple of different genres discussed. Normal porn generally portrays women in a submissive, objectified manner and is hardcore. Then there's rape porn which actually portrays a rape.

Tbh, several posters are dissecting different genres of porn and making convoluted points. The simple fact is that porn has changed since the arrival of high speed broadband, and in my opinion it's extremely dangerous for young men and women to be watching.

We can go on and on until the cows come home about censorship and splitting hairs between literature, erotica and porn. The simple fact is the the porn industry is one of the most scummiest places of employment, the actors are normally weak minded or damaged people, and the subject content generally contains a woman being used as a receptical.

Confusing this with a matter of free speech or personal taste is missing the point - the point is that normal porn right now isn't for fun or a quick **** - it can be extremely damaging.

I'd be very opposed to censorship, but I've got to agree with what you say above.

It's one thing for adults now to be able to handle looking at this sort of stuff and be capable of seperating it from real life. I know I can seperate fantasy from reality, no problem. And porn doesn't make me think women are objects. But... if I'd had access to this sort of stuff when I was 14 or 15 years old, I can't see how it would not have had a damaging effect on me, this being my first introduction to women/sex/etc. I think my perspective of women and sex would have been very different by the time I became a young adult.

It's difficult to define "porn" as one thing any more, like you say there are just different categories of it. Looking at a naked woman in a shower Vs gangbangs with a girl screaming - two totally different things.

Fukuyama · 21-01-2014 07:11PM

newport2 wrote: »

I'd be very opposed to censorship, but I've got to agree with what you say above.

It's one thing for adults now to be able to handle looking at this sort of stuff and be capable of seperating it from real life. I know I can seperate fantasy from reality, no problem. And porn doesn't make me think women are objects. But... if I'd had access to this sort of stuff when I was 14 or 15 years old, I can't see how it would not have had a damaging effect on me, this being my first introduction to women/sex/etc. I think my perspective of women and sex would have been very different by the time I became a young adult.

It's difficult to define "porn" as one thing any more, like you say there are just different categories of it. Looking at a naked woman in a shower Vs gangbangs with a girl screaming - two totally different things.

This is precisely my point. I imagine I was one of the last few "years" of kids to not have a computer until my mid-teens, and broadband until I was around 17. So by then, sex was already a reality for me.

Previous to getting broadband, I did what lads had done for generations before: stayed up late and caught a sneeky pair of boobs on a late night movie or got hold of Penthouse. Now, kids as young as ten have access to extreme pornography which, even if parents wanted to, it's impossible to stop them from seeing. If you tell a fifteen year old he can't watch something, you can be damn sure he'll make it his life's mission to see what all the fuss is about.

I'm 100% opposed to any censorship. It simply doesn't work, makes criminals out of ordinary people, drives industries further underground and is a slipary slope for government to step onto. I just wish more people would wake up to what's actually turning porn viewers on these days because it sure isn't nudity or sex like it used to be.

Extreme radical "feminists" suffering sexual oppression unto them

Comments