I caught my boyfriend looking at porn on his computer. No explanation will suffice.

[dyermaker]

If you seriously feel that where one chooses to dip their wick is some sort of litmus test of intimacy and connection in a long term relationship I'd say you have some issues yourself.

 

Pardon me for expecting commitment and valuing the emotional and unavoidable connection of sex--I'll check myself into treatment right away.

 

Back to the ice cream,just because I have orange sherbet instead of chocolate ice cream doesn't mean that I no longer love chocolate and will never have any again.

 

I ignored your ice cream analogy the first time, not because it was disarming, but because it is stupid. The entire nature of ice cream is that selection is healthy, and there's no emotion involved, nor reciprocal action expected.

 

The reason you feel this way is because you're afraid of loss and intimacy, and I do NOT need you to admit this to me, it's so friggin evident it bleeds from my monitor and stains my desk.

 

I'm not saying every couple that functions this way is unhealthy, I don't make such generalizations. But in your case, you aren't making this noble choice to be apathetic towards the emotional value of sex. Rather, you are resigning to it, because it's easier to say "when you want me come to me" than to work at a relationship that creates such a desire.

[soserious1]

Originally posted by dyermaker

Pardon me for expecting commitment and valuing the emotional and unavoidable connection of sex--I'll check myself into treatment right away.

 

 

 

I ignored your ice cream analogy the first time, not because it was disarming, but because it is stupid. The entire nature of ice cream is that selection is healthy, and there's no emotion involved, nor reciprocal action expected.

 

The reason you feel this way is because you're afraid of loss and intimacy, and I do NOT need you to admit this to me, it's so friggin evident it bleeds from my monitor and stains my desk.

 

I'm not saying every couple that functions this way is unhealthy, I don't make such generalizations. But in your case, you aren't making this noble choice to be apathetic towards the emotional value of sex. Rather, you are resigning to it, because it's easier to say "when you want me come to me" than to work at a relationship that creates such a desire.

 

There's nothing "noble" about my choice but I never said there was did I?In fact it's been you assigning all sorts of horrible values to me and the way I've chosen to live.

 

Americians obess over food and sex,yet they have sky rocketing divorce rates and an obesity issue that makes them the fattest most unhealthy people in the world.

 

Men are visual creatures,they are also very good at separating the mere physical act of sex from emotional love.I really don't think it makes any more sense to worry about this issue than it would if my man asked for sherbet instead of ice cream.

[dyermaker]

Originally posted by soserious1

Americians obess over food and sex,yet they have sky rocketing divorce rates and an obesity issue that makes them the fattest most unhealthy people in the world.

[/Quote]

 

Europeans are condescending elitists who rarely bathe and talk like they have billiard balls in their mouths. See how fun irrelevant, fallacious, antagonistic generalizations are?

 

Men are visual creatures,they are also very good at separating the mere physical act of sex from emotional love.

 

Men are also capable of blurring the two, and often do.

 

Answer this, Is it okay for your man to emotionally love another woman? Isn't that just like him REALLY enjoying two ice cream flavors? He likes chocolate, but he likes vanilla two--can't he get some sort of combo-pint, or use the soft serve machine to mix the two into a clever swirl?

[soserious1]

Originally posted by dyermaker

Europeans are condescending elitists who rarely bathe and talk like they have billiard balls in their mouths. See how fun irrelevant, fallacious, antagonistic generalizations are?

 

 

 

Men are also capable of blurring the two, and often do.

 

Answer this, Is it okay for your man to emotionally love another woman? Isn't that just like him REALLY enjoying two ice cream flavors? He likes chocolate, but he likes vanilla two--can't he get some sort of combo-pint, or use the soft serve machine to mix the two into a clever swirl?

 

Lol,you got me there but in truth actually that would be fine with me if my wife in law(s) also took over some of the more mundane aspects of his life such as his laundry and errands.

 

You speak of "love" as if it were availble in only limited quantities,that if you love one person you cannot possibly love another.I know from my experiences that love is an amazing thing really because it has the ability to expand to almost limitless quantities.I have a very dear friend,does this mean that I cannot have another whom I love very much but for different reasons? A parent has a child,does this mean that their love will not expand to encompass a new baby?

[dyermaker]

Originally posted by soserious1

Lol,you got me there but in truth actually that would be fine with me if my wife in law(s) also took over some of the more mundane aspects of his life such as his laundry and errands.

 

I wonder what happened to you to make you neglect commitment in your life, and whether you know it--or whether you honestly think your behavior (behaviour to you ) is healthy.

[soserious1]

Originally posted by dyermaker

I wonder what happened to you to make you neglect commitment in your life, and whether you know it--or whether you honestly think your behavior (behaviour to you ) is healthy.

 

I am a very commited,loyal partner,mother,friend and worker.I just don't agree that physical fidelity is a true measure of a man's devotion to me.My partner has been there for me in dreadful situations that would have sent a lessor mortal packing his bags.That to me is loyalty and devotion.

[dyermaker]

Originally posted by soserious1

I am a very commited,loyal partner,mother,friend and worker.I just don't agree that physical fidelity is a true measure of a man's devotion to me.My partner has been there for me in dreadful situations that would have sent a lessor mortal packing his bags.That to me is loyalty and devotion.

 

There's a difference between dependency and mutual devotion. I believe you are capable of garnering devotion, physically even--you sell yourself short.

[soserious1]

Originally posted by dyermaker

There's a difference between dependency and mutual devotion. I believe you are capable of garnering devotion, physically even--you sell yourself short.

 

Text based communication really is difficult at times.I guess what I'm trying to convey to you is that my partner and I have been thru a lot together in life and we are very close.

 

I have a woman friend or two who's husbands act as if the fact that they are physically faithful and don't beat their wives makes them wonderful partners.They use these 2 facts to try to excuse and rationalize some pretty spotty actions on a regular basis.Sorry but I'd much rather have my life.

 

There is another aspect or two being overlooked here,one being that I have never had a particularly high sex drive and it goes even lower during illness or perioids of great stress in my career.My partner has a much higher drive then mine and our chosen lifestyle accomdates both of our needs.

[dyermaker]

It's not that I can't comprehend your rationalizations, it's just that I see through them--regardless of whether you do or don't. I understand you value the relationship that you have, but the fact that you both have 'been through a lot' made you CONCEDE to this relationship, because in your head, you fear the loss of it. You think that allowing your partner to satisfy his 'male' needs will make him more emotionally faithful to you, that somehow since you view sex as superficial, the "power" of your nonsexual connection supercedes any loyalty, and thus you value such an 'arrangement' more than a healthy partnership.

 

You're dependent, not devoted--because you won't take the risk of challenging his "male urges"--and the behavior is transparent to everyone except you, including, I venture, your partner.

[guest]

Originally posted by soserious1

Go where your appetites lead you,come to me when it's me you want.It's actually pretty simple and works for us.

Sounds like Mormon, and that works for a lot of people.

 

What is "unhealthy" anyway? There are ways to protect against physical disease -- but those diseases are all real, they exist under a microscope. What constitutes emotional health or unhealthy emotional aspects to a realtionship? Physical and mental abuse--and control. But even that may be a little difficult to define because it can be different for everyone -- there are far fewer boundaries that are clearly defined when dealing with emotional vs. physical.

[May]

I posted on this site quite a while back about my boyfriend looking at porn.

Although I don't think he's cheating on me I am upset that he looks at other women. It does upset me. Even though I know he loves me, even though I know he would choose me over any of them, even though he tells me he finds me more sexy than them. Even though I know all of this it still upsets me to know that he gets himself off looking at other women.

It doesn't bother me when he looks at a film star and goes 'she's gorgeous' because I do that too.

It doesn't bother me that he masturbates. I masturbate and have no problem with him doing the same. But I don't want to think about anyone else while I'm doing it. And if I did, I know I would feel terribly guilty at doing so.

I know I feel this way because I am utterly devoted to him. And like any idealistic woman I want him to be just as devoted to me.

I have told him on numerous occasions that what he looks at is offensive to me. I don't mind if he wants to introduce porn into our sex life and I don't mind him masturbating but I don't like him looking at other women privately. It hurts me. Now for whatever reason, it does and no matter how skewed my reasons might be the fact still remains that what he is doing is hurting me.

And yet he doesn't stop it.

I get from many people that it's 'just guys being guys' and animal urges and all that crap but I honestly don't care.

If he came to me tomorrow and said that I did something that really hurt him . I would stop.

If these women really don't mean anything to these guys why can they not stop looking at them for the women that do mean something!

It's not the porn I hate, it's not the masturbation it's the fact that he knows it hurts me and still does it.

Everyting else in our relationship is wonderful, and he seems to care for me so much in other ways. But I hate that he knows he is hurting me. It makes me doubt the rest of our relationship.

That's what I don't like about my boyfriend looking at porn and the horrible thing is I can do nothing about it.

[Errol]

Originally posted by May

 

It's not the porn I hate, it's not the masturbation it's the fact that he knows it hurts me and still does it.

Everyting else in our relationship is wonderful, and he seems to care for me so much in other ways. But I hate that he knows he is hurting me. It makes me doubt the rest of our relationship.

That's what I don't like about my boyfriend looking at porn and the horrible thing is I can do nothing about it.

 

I've posted before about this -- not all men are this way. I stopped looking at porn because it upset my spouse. I tried to explain it also, but the bottom line was -- it was upsetting the person I love. Some men cannot do this--perhaps its like smoking to them. They honestly want to, they know they should, but they just can't--even if the second-hand smoke endangers their loved one. I can understand your doubts about the relationship -- it took me a looooooong time to quit smoking for my family. I didn't love them any less when I smoked than I do now, and I don't think I valued them any less and they knew that I was totally devoted to them, I just couldn't stop smoking. Maybe its the same way with his porn. IMHO he should at least TRY to refrain from soliatary porn use for your sake - but maybe he's just not ready yet.

[beautifulme]

I don't see the big deal here after all he is a man. If it was me, I would have joined him in the room and made love to him.

 

There is not one man alive that doesen't watch porn and masturbates, it is normal.

[Errol]

Originally posted by beautifulme

I don't see the big deal here after all he is a man. If it was me, I would have joined him in the room and made love to him.

 

There is not one man alive that doesen't watch porn and masturbates, it is normal.

You do not speak for me nor do you speak for all men.

 

Good for you that you don't see it as a big deal -- then it won't be an issue in any of your relationships, but don't devalue someone else because they feel differently. There is no right or wrong.

[Darkangelism]

Its porn, its not an emotional connection, it is a tool for masturbation, masturbation is about the self, not about being unhappy.

[May]

Errol it was nice to see your post. So it can be done!

I was beginning to worry, reading all of the previous posts, that I was an insane stupid woman for not just accepting that men do this and nothing will stop them.

 

I've read many posts on changing people and how it's wrong. Well in my opinion we're changing all the time and we do it the most when we are in relationships be it a new spouse or a new child.

I changed a lot when I got into this relationship and I'm glad for it. It's the constant changing that makes me who I am today.

Some of those changes I've done conciously to help my partner and our relationship and I honestly think that this porn issue is just one of those things.

 

I love analogies. I use them all the time in conversation and I've loved some of the ones I've read in this thread.

But I'm not going to use one with this.

An action he claims means nothing to him is hurting me and he doesn't stop it.

It seems clear enough to me. It is an issue of love.

 

I really can't see why he can't do this for me. I don't think it's because I'm a woman and he's a guy, or that it has to do with sexual preferences or desires.

 

I have tried compromising. Does he want sexy pictures of me? Shall we watch porn together? I've even tried looking at porn myself in the 'if you can beat them join them' vein. That didn't work!

I don't want him to stop masturbating. What fun would that be!

I don't want to stop what he thinks about because I don't believe in the thought police. I just want him to stop looking at pictures of naked women.

 

Someone put something about porn v vibrators. That's silly. The correct battle would be hand v vibrator. They are things you put on your sensitive areas. Women don't stare at vibrators and orgasm. We wouldn't have to buy them if they did that!

 

I feel I've done all I can as a good partner apart from 'just settling'. And I don't do ignoring of problems. That's a silly idea.

 

Any opinions?

[Errol]

Originally posted by Darkangelism

Its porn, its not an emotional connection, it is a tool for masturbation, masturbation is about the self, not about being unhappy.

 

It's not an emotional connection for most men. But it IS emotional for many women. That is not going to change no matter how much people argue over it or try to convince men to stop, or women to not be bothered by it.

 

 

----I don't know why I have jumped on this particular band-wagon today. Almost everyone is making a good point and/or presenting their point of view. My point of view may not fit anyone elses, but I'll hold to my opinion anyway.

[May]

I just wanted to give a shout out to dyermaker and soserious1 who really entertained me with their banter.

 

Personally I agree with dyermaker (although I didn't agree with many of your earlier porn posts) about monogamy.

I think that staying faithful to your partner is one of the challenges and statements of your love to your partner.

I have never understood people who allow their special someone to go screw other people.

Never.

[dyermaker]

The porn issue is really a non-issue. Those who understand my posts, I'm preaching to the choir. Those who disagree with me ain't going to change anyway.

[kalira]

this is a similar post to one that i have used in another folder, but it seems to apply here, and I think it may provide a new aspect to the issues;

 

I am in a similar situation as some of the women. That is, my boyfriend, who I care about, is a frequent consumer of pornographic videos and dvds.

 

However, my concerns are not really of a 'personal' nature. That is, I am not jealous of the attention/ time he dedicates to watching other women, and am not insecure that he prefers them to me or compares them to me etc etc. In fact, I am quite sure that he cares about me alot and desires me.

 

My problem is that the porn itself, by and large, portrays women as little more than '****-objects'-attractive objects to **** and suck. The women's purpose in life seems to be little more than to provide an attractive hole for a man's penis, and further, the women in the movies are portrayed as being totally enraptured by merely satisfying that purpose.

This is not a new argument by any means, and much discussion and research has gone into uncovering the multitude of ways in which mainstram porn demeans and degrades women, and then eroticises that degradation.

 

I accept and acknowledge that not all mateial that is denoted 'porn' is the same, but i nevertheless believe that much mainstream material--material that is available in adult shops and on porn sites, is degrading to women.

Here are some examples from the back covers of videos that are widely available in regular adult stores, and are considered 'mainstream':

 

-Gentleman Dirty Dave Cummings:

“Caution; Ass-busting Anal inside”

“He’s 57...and very clever!...Dave invites the nastiest porn starlets...gets them to suck his knob ended cock, then ****s them, and EVEN CRAMS IT UP THEIR ASS!”

 

-Sea Sluts vol 1

“Bodacious and buxom Harmony gets her tight a**h*** TORPEDOED”

 

-Nineteen:

“You can guess what happens when a hot babe falls asleep poolside with two pool cleaners working about”

 

-**** em All 2

“More than a slogan...its a lifestyle!....**** em all!

 

-Filthy ****ers vol 57

“Slutty Blondes ...get royally ass-****ed, double penetrated, hosed down with hot sticky cum, and DEMAND MORE AND MORE!:"

 

Thus women are treated as sex objects to be used. They are also condemned as sluts. Sex here adopts a more violent, degrading, punishment construct-with the women, always as its playthings and victims.

Not only can these films harm physically and mentally the actresses involved (note that even though they are 'consenting'-actresses are commonly pressured into doing things they do not wish to do, or find painful and injurious. This also has been well-researched), but they can affect the way in which the viewer sees women in his or her life.

 

However we live in a society in which these harms are not commonly known or recognised. Thus, any women may find her partner (commonly male) watches porn frequently and is aroused by it. For the record, I believe that both men and women can be aroused by the demeaning portrayal of women in porn.

 

 

Here is my advice to anyone whose partners are consuming porn which they find degrading to women.

 

First, be confident in your disapproval. IT IS OK to not like porn. You may not be sure why you do not like it. That is ok. There is much written on porn wich may be of use to you.

I know it is not fashionable in this society not to like porn, especially with the current trend towards 'men are from mars, women are from venus'-type essentialism (of which i have seen much posted on this site), but that doesnt mean that the arguments against mainstream porn and their portrayal of women have no merit.

 

Understand that your partner has been socialised to be aroused by porn, but that these doesnt mean that the situation cannot change. read male feminist John Stoltenberg for more info.

 

Enlighten them to the harms caused by porn--porn is less arousing when the harms and demeaning portrayals are pointed out. There is an excellent book by Gail Dines, Robert Jensen and Ann Russo which analyses the content of mass-marketed porn which you could get him/her to read.

 

Tell them that you cannot go out with someone who watches porn frequently. If they respect you as a woman, they should understand why the perpetuation and consumption of demeaning images of women harms you.

 

Good luck and best wishes to all!

[dyermaker]

Your post was well thought out, and nice to read--it's always nice to read some new things about an old topic.

 

However, you miss a key point. These women, are ACTORS.

 

Porn doesn't degrade women--it's not the porn. These women degrade themselves, and are PAID for it. This is a job, just like any other. Captain dave isn't CRAMMING it up said starlet's ass without asking, it's been scripted. She's paid to take it, and paid to pretend to enjoy it.

[kalira]

"Porn doesn't degrade women--it's not the porn. These women degrade themselves, and are PAID for it. This is a job, just like any other. Captain dave isn't CRAMMING it up said starlet's ass without asking, it's been scripted. She's paid to take it, and paid to pretend to enjoy it."

 

 

Thanks for your reply. Your point is valid, but by simplifying it to an 'actors in a movie' construct, I think some of the problems with porn are missed, as well as the social context in which porn operates.

 

I acknowledge that many (though not all) women 'consent' to be involved in the types of videos I describe above. Indeed, most are well paid for their trouble. But does that render all the problems with it null and void? I think not.

 

Firstly, i might take issue with the PORTRAYAL. A woman can consent, and be paid to receive certain treatment-but does that change the nature of the treatment? Lets use the example of Dave Cummings--What portrayal of sex is being sold and consumed? What depiction of women? (albeit pretend and for money) What depiction of sex and women is being consumed, and further, perpetuated and made normal?

To use an inadequate analogy, what if a black person was paid to pretend that they enjoy servitude to, and disrespect from white people?, and this material was being sold for the consumption of whites who enjoyed seeing black people in that way? Does the payment of the black person mean that the material is not racist? Just because they could find a woman who would allow her body and herself to be used in that way for money, does that mean that the material is not demeaning to her and women in general?

 

You say it well yourself--it HAS been scripted, she HAS been paid to behave in a certain way, its all pretend--but the question that people like me pose is this....WHY? Why is there a demand for material in which women are called sluts and whores, and appear to be reduced to nothing more than a collection of holes to be penetrated? Why is there a demand in the market (which women take 'advantage' of) for these types of depictions?

The second question is-what is the effect of the widespread distribution of this depiction on women?

 

I might mention also, that this emphasis on portrayal does not suggest that the movie-making itself is unproblematic--far from it.

After all, the activities in porn are acted out on the bodies of real women.

 

The idea of porn stars as 'actors in a movie' is inadequate at least for the reason that 'porn' blurrs the lines between 'acting' and sex. The fact is that in much porn, the men are 'having sex' to the extent that they are becoming aroused, penetrating a women, and orgasming. That is not to say that there may be some acting on their part-but as a general rule, the men are merely required to 'get off' in various ways.

The situation for women is vastly different, and this is a factor that reveals much porn to be more problematic than many would recognise.

Women, by and large are 'acting'-firstly, they are expected often to act in a way that most women wouldnt act--as is almost evidenced by their need to 'act' at all!

That is, women in mainstream porn generally feel either pain or discomfort by the acts that they are performing. They are, however, 'pretending' to enjoy them, and often 'pretending' to enjoy things that most women wouldnt enjoy.

 

That is very problematic in a culture where we see porn as merely 'filmed sex', because its a sex in which one partner's real pleasure is unimportant. It is also sex in which one partner enjoys being treated in a way that implies she is not a diverse human, but merely a 'pleasure-toy'/'****-object'. Add to that the WAY in which the women are paid to act--often subservient, unintelligent, nymphomaniacal, masochistic.

 

Perhaps this wouldnt be as concerning if there wasnt significant evidence that this has an effect on the way consumers of porn see women. Almost in a propagandist sense, such depictions have been shown to decrease sympathy towards rape victims, increase willingness to be sexually violent towards women, increase sexual harassment and general disrespect towards women. It is well researched that women have been pressured to perform acts that their partners have seen in porn, and that most likely, the women in the porn pretended to enjoy. One notable example was the 70s fad of 'deep-throating': a response to the movie 'deep throat', starring Linda Lovelace. It is recorded that many men got their wives to 'deep-throat' them after watching the movie. It was only later revealed that Linda had despised every minute of the 'performance'/sex and had been physically and psychologically compelled to submit.

 

In this context-our understandings of 'sex' itself are challenged. Are both people in porn 'having sex'? If so, then women's real pleasure isnt important in sex. If not, are they 'acting sex', or 'pretending sex'?, -well we know the girl is pretending something..but is she pretending to be a 'girl' having sex? Probably not if not many women would enjoy the act, and she is pretending to enjoy it. So what is she pretending to be? To me, she is pretending to be 'not-girl', 'not-human'-something else--'not-real female construct' whose sole purpose is to enjoy whatever men want done to them, who enjoys being reduced to a sum of attractive parts, and penetrable holes.

 

As in my first post, I must add that not all material which comes under the umbrella of 'porn' is the same.(see the 'alternaporn websites cropping up). However, I believe that my analysis applies to much mainstream porn that is available today.

As always, I await your further criticism and discussion of this issue.

[kalira]

"Porn doesn't degrade women--it's not the porn. These women degrade themselves, and are PAID for it. This is a job, just like any other. Captain dave isn't CRAMMING it up said starlet's ass without asking, it's been scripted. She's paid to take it, and paid to pretend to enjoy it."

 

 

Thanks for your reply. Your point is valid, but by simplifying it to an 'actors in a movie' construct, I think some of the problems with porn are missed, as well as the social context in which porn operates.

 

I acknowledge that many (though not all) women 'consent' to be involved in the types of videos I describe above. Indeed, most are well paid for their trouble. But does that render all the problems with it null and void? I think not.

 

Firstly, i might take issue with the PORTRAYAL. A woman can consent, and be paid to receive certain treatment-but does that change the nature of the treatment? Lets use the example of Dave Cummings--What portrayal of sex is being sold and consumed? What depiction of women? (albeit pretend and for money) What depiction of sex and women is being consumed, and further, perpetuated and made normal?

To use an inadequate analogy, what if a black person was paid to pretend that they enjoy servitude to, and disrespect from white people?, and this material was being sold for the consumption of whites who enjoyed seeing black people in that way? Does the payment of the black person mean that the material is not racist? Just because they could find a woman who would allow her body and herself to be used in that way for money, does that mean that the material is not demeaning to her and women in general?

 

You say it well yourself--it HAS been scripted, she HAS been paid to behave in a certain way, its all pretend--but the question that people like me pose is this....WHY? Why is there a demand for material in which women are called sluts and whores, and appear to be reduced to nothing more than a collection of holes to be penetrated? Why is there a demand in the market (which women take 'advantage' of) for these types of depictions?

The second question is-what is the effect of the widespread distribution of this depiction on women?

 

I might mention also, that this emphasis on portrayal does not suggest that the movie-making itself is unproblematic--far from it.

After all, the activities in porn are acted out on the bodies of real women.

 

The idea of porn stars as 'actors in a movie' is inadequate at least for the reason that 'porn' blurrs the lines between 'acting' and sex. The fact is that in much porn, the men are 'having sex' to the extent that they are becoming aroused, penetrating a women, and orgasming. That is not to say that there may be some acting on their part-but as a general rule, the men are merely required to 'get off' in various ways.

The situation for women is vastly different, and this is a factor that reveals much porn to be more problematic than many would recognise.

Women, by and large are 'acting'-firstly, they are expected often to act in a way that most women wouldnt act--as is almost evidenced by their need to 'act' at all!

That is, women in mainstream porn generally feel either pain or discomfort by the acts that they are performing. They are, however, 'pretending' to enjoy them, and often 'pretending' to enjoy things that most women wouldnt enjoy.

 

That is very problematic in a culture where we see porn as merely 'filmed sex', because its a sex in which one partner's real pleasure is unimportant. It is also sex in which one partner enjoys being treated in a way that implies she is not a diverse human, but merely a 'pleasure-toy'/'****-object'. Add to that the WAY in which the women are paid to act--often subservient, unintelligent, nymphomaniacal, masochistic.

 

Perhaps this wouldnt be as concerning if there wasnt significant evidence that this has an effect on the way consumers of porn see women. Almost in a propagandist sense, such depictions have been shown to decrease sympathy towards rape victims, increase willingness to be sexually violent towards women, increase sexual harassment and general disrespect towards women. It is well researched that women have been pressured to perform acts that their partners have seen in porn, and that most likely, the women in the porn pretended to enjoy. One notable example was the 70s fad of 'deep-throating': a response to the movie 'deep throat', starring Linda Lovelace. It is recorded that many men got their wives to 'deep-throat' them after watching the movie. It was only later revealed that Linda had despised every minute of the 'performance'/sex and had been physically and psychologically compelled to submit.

 

In this context-our understandings of 'sex' itself are challenged. Are both people in porn 'having sex'? If so, then women's real pleasure isnt important in sex. If not, are they 'acting sex', or 'pretending sex'?, -well we know the girl is pretending something..but is she pretending to be a 'girl' having sex? Probably not if not many women would enjoy the act, and she is pretending to enjoy it. So what is she pretending to be? To me, she is pretending to be 'not-girl', 'not-human'-something else--'not-real female construct' whose sole purpose is to enjoy whatever men want done to them, who enjoys being reduced to a sum of attractive parts, and penetrable holes.

 

As in my first post, I must add that not all material which comes under the umbrella of 'porn' is the same.(see the 'alternaporn websites cropping up). However, I believe that my analysis applies to much mainstream porn that is available today.

As always, I await your further criticism and discussion of this issue.

[dyermaker]

Your detailed analysis of your thoughts and feelings are appreciated, when name-calling and self-important dogma had been the prior norm.

 

You seem to see women as the victim of porn. Aren't men subject to the same social pressure? While wives may feel that they have to deepthroat to keep up with miss lovelace, What about the incredible length and stamina of these men? Aren't we demeaning men as mere piledrivers of women, forcing us to view men as objects forced to exploit the afforementioned female holes?

 

You object to the women pretending they enjoy their job. I think that's *part* of a job. My dad works in the communications industry. He hates the people he works with, but puts on a smile because they pay him to. Porn is a business, and I see it as such. It's an unscrupulous business, people see it as dirty, because it's not socially acceptable, it caters to people who wouldn't readily reveal their constituency in porn's clientele. But is porn really less of a business than anything else?

 

Also, you delude yourself into thinking they pick out any old shmuck on the street and let them rape these actresses. I'm sure to a point, it feels good for the male, just as I wouldn't put it past a female to occaisonally get pleasure out of the stimulation either. However, these men aren't "having sex", they're acting. They are often drugged, and heavily desensitized so that they will last for the entire scene. They have stupid lines, are deprived of emotional connection (I do believe a man is capable of extrapolating an emotional attachment from sex), and they're playing a role. The physical sensation of sex distracts them from make-believing the physical sensation of sex, so often times it's eliminated.

 

Adult entertainment is a very competitive business, it's not something that someone is forced into because they are destitute, it's something you have to work to be successful in. If these women hated their jobs, I'm sure they could seek other employment.

 

I think you ought to take issue to how porn is viewed, not manufactured. I believe that guns are terrible, and that few should own them. But I still think guns should be made, it's a matter of freedom. I think that people should be free to watch porn, to make porn, to sell porn. I think that I'm a healthy person, who could view porn, and not be scarred by it. I think that I can tell the difference between an actress and a partner. I think that there are millions who cannot.

 

I'm against blaming inanimate objects for human problems, I'm against blaming fantasy for its effect on reality.

[parcifal]

"You seem to see women as the victim of porn. Aren't men subject to the same social pressure? While wives may feel that they have to deepthroat to keep up with miss lovelace, What about the incredible length and stamina of these men? Aren't we demeaning men as mere piledrivers of women, forcing us to view men as objects forced to exploit the afforementioned female holes?

 

You object to the women pretending they enjoy their job. I think that's *part* of a job. My dad works in the communications industry. He hates the people he works with, but puts on a smile because they pay him to. Porn is a business, and I see it as such. It's an unscrupulous business, people see it as dirty, because it's not socially acceptable, it caters to people who wouldn't readily reveal their constituency in porn's clientele. But is porn really less of a business than anything else?"

------------------------------------------------------------

 

Hmm... it doesn't seem to me that the claim that men are hurt by porn too supports your position on porn being A-okay; in fact, quite the opposite.

 

Neither do I think that "kalira"'s contention was that people don't make money off it ("it's a business"). In fact, she seems to agree with that, too. But comparing porn and "communications" as equivalent by reducing the specifics of both to "putting a smile on" [to satisfy the customer] is a spurious argument at best, and perhaps blatantly dishonest. When your dad's communication job includes giving men blow jobs, then bending over and taking up the ass, then your assertion that he does his job with a smile might be a reasonable point.

 

Perhaps the men are, in fact, "drugged and desensitized" (though likely by their own volition), but I fail to see how that counters the claims that porn is harmful to women.

 

Freedom is a good thing, but in a civilized society we generally do not tolerate freedom to perform acts and propagate material that adds nothing to society, and serves only to detract via harming others, or impinging on others' freedoms... with one exception:

 

When that freedom serves male interests, and against the interests of women.

 

Oh, one more thing -- the previous post asks whether we are demeaning men by depicting them as "the piledrivers of women". My answer: yes, we are demeaning men. But we are doing much worse to women, and I could not have worded it better to more accurately reflect the status of women in porn as the OBJECTS of male violence.

 

And yes, I am a man, if anyone is wondering.