Monday, 24 September 2007

Pornography and the End of Masculinity

quote [ Mainstream porn has come up with more ways than ever to humiliate and degrade women. Why then, is porn more popular? ]

From the article: The danger isn't in sex, but in a particular conception of sex in patriarchy. And the way sex is done in pornography is becoming more and more cruel and degrading, at the same time that pornography is becoming more normalized than ever. That's the paradox.
[by yogi@5:49amGMT] [+10 Interesting]

Comments

yogi said @ 5:54am GMT on 24th Sep
I've been:
--thinking a lot about our patriarchy and how crazy it is;
--reading a lot about human prehistory and how it differs from "history";
--knowing that any time we support the women in a culture we all do better; and
--wanting a discussion on this issue here on SE.

Maybe we've had this discussion before, maybe not, but I think it's always good to recheck.
myheadhurts said @ 7:02am GMT on 24th Sep
The first two are sort of addressed in the book Story of B by Daniel Quinn. Interesting stuff.
Azoth said @ 9:48am GMT on 24th Sep
Out of curiosity, what do you mean about the difference between prehistory and history? In what way does this relate to patriarchy?
yogi said @ 4:17am GMT on 25th Sep
Thanks for these two comments. I certainly know of Quinn's work.

The simple answer as to prehistory versus "history" is that prehistory is what was before writing was invented. Since there's no written record prior to about 5K or 6K years ago, our only way to know what happened is inference from the archeological record.

Some people think the prehistory/history divide can be noted by the times that hunter-gatherer societies dominated moving to agricultural societies dominating, a la Quinn, Zerzan, Sahlins.

The presumption is that HG societies were more egalitarian, and the record shows they were. Once ag happened, stratification of classes occurred and women got the raw end of the deal. When you lock away the food, which was once free, the only ay to control who eats is through violence. And violence is more easily perpetrated by the stronger gender. Jared Diamond calls agricuture the single most amazing innovation of humankind, and says it has a tragic flaw--violence.

Hope that helps. It's the easy answer to a complex question. Felt like an essay question and I liked it. Thanks.
yogi said @ 4:21am GMT on 25th Sep
Thanks for these two comments. I certainly know of Quinn's work.

The simple answer as to prehistory versus "history" is that prehistory is what was before writing was invented. Since there's no written record prior to about 5K or 6K years ago, our only way to know what happened is inference from the archeological record.

Some people think the prehistory/history divide can be noted by the times that hunter-gatherer societies dominated moving to agricultural societies dominating, a la Quinn, Zerzan, Sahlins.

The presumption is that HG societies were more egalitarian, and the record shows they were. Once ag happened, stratification of classes occurred and women got the raw end of the deal. When you lock away the food, which was once free, the only ay to control who eats is through violence. And violence is more easily perpetrated by the stronger gender. Jared Diamond calls agricuture the single most amazing innovation of humankind, and says it has a tragic flaw--violence.

Hope that helps. It's the easy answer to a complex question. Felt like an essay question and I liked it. Thanks.
yogi said @ 4:21am GMT on 25th Sep
Thanks for these two comments. I certainly know of Quinn's work.

The simple answer as to prehistory versus "history" is that prehistory is what was before writing was invented. Since there's no written record prior to about 5K or 6K years ago, our only way to know what happened is inference from the archeological record.

Some people think the prehistory/history divide can be noted by the times that hunter-gatherer societies dominated moving to agricultural societies dominating, a la Quinn, Zerzan, Sahlins.

The presumption is that HG societies were more egalitarian, and the record shows they were. Once ag happened, stratification of classes occurred and women got the raw end of the deal. When you lock away the food, which was once free, the only ay to control who eats is through violence. And violence is more easily perpetrated by the stronger gender. Jared Diamond calls agricuture the single most amazing innovation of humankind, and says it has a tragic flaw--violence.

Hope that helps. It's the easy answer to a complex question. Felt like an essay question and I liked it. Thanks.
yogi said @ 4:26am GMT on 25th Sep
Thanks for these two comments. I certainly know of Quinn's work.

The simple answer as to prehistory versus "history" is that prehistory is what was before writing was invented. Since there's no written record prior to about 5K or 6K years ago, our only way to know what happened is inference from the archeological record.

Some people think the prehistory/history divide can be noted by the times that hunter-gatherer societies dominated moving to agricultural societies dominating, a la Quinn, Zerzan, Sahlins.

The presumption is that HG societies were more egalitarian, and the record shows they were. Once ag happened, stratification of classes occurred and women got the raw end of the deal. When you lock away the food, which was once free, the only ay to control who eats is through violence. And violence is more easily perpetrated by the stronger gender. Jared Diamond calls agricuture the single most amazing innovation of humankind, and says it has a tragic flaw--violence.

Hope that helps. It's the easy answer to a complex question. Felt like an essay question and I liked it. Thanks.
yogi said @ 4:37am GMT on 25th Sep
Thanks for these two comments. I certainly know of Quinn's work.

The simple answer as to prehistory versus "history" is that prehistory is what was before writing was invented. Since there's no written record prior to about 5K or 6K years ago, our only way to know what happened is inference from the archeological record.

Some people think the prehistory/history divide can be noted by the times that hunter-gatherer societies dominated moving to agricultural societies dominating, a la Quinn, Zerzan, Sahlins.

The presumption is that HG societies were more egalitarian, and the record shows they were. Once ag happened, stratification of classes occurred and women got the raw end of the deal. When you lock away the food, which was once free, the only ay to control who eats is through violence. And violence is more easily perpetrated by the stronger gender. Jared Diamond calls agricuture the single most amazing innovation of humankind, and says it has a tragic flaw--violence.

Hope that helps. It's the easy answer to a complex question. Felt like an essay question and I liked it. Thanks.
Todomanna said @ 6:11am GMT on 24th Sep
I prefer porn where the man is dominated by the woman, anyways.

*insert Family Guy clip here*
Baxter_UK said @ 8:02am GMT on 24th Sep
"When's it gonna be my turn ..."
Hactar said @ 6:20am GMT on 24th Sep
I think part of it comes from the internet. When you have people downloading 1-2 minute clips at a time, what are you going to show besides the sex? With limited bandwidth the first thing to go is going to be the plot. I think gonzo is a symptom of that. No one is downloading the entire porn movie with a plot. They want the "good bits."

Umberto Eco's definition of a pornographic movie is one in which you find yourself bored waiting for someone to finish driving somewhere or get off the bus or just get there. How many full length porn movies have you seen where they didn't have extended shots of someone driving or walking or riding a bus from one location to another for no good reason?
the master said @ 6:22am GMT on 24th Sep
But I'm serious, hold on. This other head likes to clean my genitals with his mouth. I know it sounds weird, I let him do it because it feels great. Oh yeah. The problem is that I can taste it. So, I taste my own genitals. In my mouth. It's a... conundrum.
headlessfriar said @ 7:13am GMT on 24th Sep
So, still working a new handle, MP?
Grand Galactic Inquisitor said @ 8:00am GMT on 24th Sep
IGNORE ME!
Brock Sampson said @ 12:37pm GMT on 24th Sep
*gets Edgar Allen Poe in a headlock*
snowfox said @ 9:25am GMT on 24th Sep
...it's a venture bros quote
Kimota said @ 6:50am GMT on 24th Sep [Score:5 Underrated]
"Mainstream porn has come up with more ways than ever to humiliate and degrade women."

It has? Hmmm. And me thinking that modern mainstream porn was all boring straight on sex pieces with completely willing participants, quite less extreme than the seventies, for one.


ut, of course, the author is right, and the evidence is in the fact that the patriarchy is almost inexistent everywhere where there's no porn. Like in the fifties, whern men and women were completely equal, or when the talibans ruled Afghanistan. No patriarchy there, no sir.
Xiph0 said @ 6:53am GMT on 24th Sep
This guy, for a libertarian especially, seems awfully eager to get the Government regulating what's still a harmless industry.
donnie said @ 7:06am GMT on 24th Sep [Score:1 Insightful]
No libertarian would vote for government controls on pornography, full stop. As long as it is produced and purchased by willing parties and nobody is being swindled or physically abused, then more power to them. If this guy calls himself libertarian, he isn't.
Baxter_UK said @ 7:11am GMT on 24th Sep
In the fist paragraph he says he's "always been part of the collective liberal progressive libertarian value system", but then goes on to call the First Amendment "liberal shoulder-shrugging". He worries that it "could lead to the repression of other freedoms", but then says he wants to ignore that and do it anyway.
Nihil said @ 7:57am GMT on 24th Sep [Score:1]
Ah, so he's a Ron Paul libertarian.
donnie said @ 8:06am GMT on 24th Sep
Nonsense, Ron Paul is a consequentialist libertarian.
ring riot said @ 7:22am GMT on 24th Sep
Well, let's see here:

The average salary for a female porn star is $100,000 to $250,000 per year, and that's strictly for the films, not counting appearances, etc.

That's compared to $40,000 for the male actors.

I realize that this has nothing to do with the cultural effects of the more "brutal" porn sites that they're talking about. But you have to face the fact that most of these "actresses" are doing all right...
mrcookieface said @ 7:34am GMT on 24th Sep
But you have to face the fact that most of these "actresses" are doing all right...

Yah, 100K a year certainly offsets and longstanding lingering effects of being repeatedly choked, gagged, slapped, punched, pinched, pissed upon, etc. etc. etc just so Johnny Paycheck can bust out some knuckle babies while having a visual reference for his power trip fantasies about that emasculating bitch Irene in Accounting...

On the whole pornography is a predatory business for both the participants and the consumer. Don't get me wrong: I like porn, but I still recognize its flaws.
ring riot said @ 7:44am GMT on 24th Sep
No, I understand that, not disagreeing. I'm only saying that these women aren't exactly being kept in a cage between scenes and being thrown dog bones.

Although, I'm sure there IS a porn film about that somewhere.
jitterfish said @ 6:10am GMT on 25th Sep
If you find it let me know -L-
Kimota said @ 8:31am GMT on 24th Sep [Score:2]
Dude, seriously, I don't even want to know what sort of porn sites you go for a wank, but in the mainstream ones there's nothing of that sort, except for a few niche ones, and even there it's all pretend s/m.
mrcookieface said @ 8:47am GMT on 24th Sep
I cannot for a moment imagine that a visitor to a site called 'Sensible Erection' could deny that porn has creeped it's way ever closer the mainstream. An effect of the same is that fringe and fetish porn inches proportionally to the center as well.

Case in point: When I was younger, 'anal' was not by any means the norm in porn. It was a rare (and due to its scarcity, more exciting) moment in porn. Now anal is not just commonplace but its offshoots (gape, etc) are increasingly prevalent as well. Hell, I'd wager a goodly chunk of the internet population has seen (or is at least aware of) goatse. Thus it no longer remains fringe or taboo.

And for fuck's sake, the fact that I'm capable of discussing degrading or humiliation porn doesn't equate a preference for it. I can discuss creationism and religion as well. That don't mean I believe in it.
Kimota said @ 9:00am GMT on 24th Sep
Maybe there's more anal (though I saw lots of that ten years ago too, then again, European porn was probably more daring than American porn) but I hardly consider that as degrading.

I still don't see porn getting more extreme, just that thanks to the internet there's more of it, and more of an outlet for niche acts.

And I wasn't saying literally that you watch girls getting punched to get your jollies, just a joke about you mentioning al those violent practices (unheard and unseen by me, by the way) as if they were commonplace.
mrcookieface said @ 9:16am GMT on 24th Sep
By definition if more niche and fetish porn is being produced, that would typically mean that there is more of an audience for it. I think the Internet's role in mainstreaming previously niche porn is not just providing a means of distribution, but it normalizes the process of getting it in the first place. It's one thing to walk into a sex shop, pick up the most fucked up titles in the place and then have to pay an actual human being to buy/rent them. It's another to have the entire process anonymized and streamlined without ever having to leave your chair.

The audience for gonzo porn is obviously much greater than it was in the early days of Seymour Butts, otherwise it wouldn't be so prevalent.

Kimota said @ 9:24am GMT on 24th Sep
S? People with extreme urges would still have them with or without porn marketed to them.

And what's wrong with gonzo? Last time I checked it only meant "bunch of unscripted and underedited scenes without narrative". Hardly see that as particularly linked with sexism.
mrcookieface said @ 9:56am GMT on 24th Sep
You're missing my point: The anonymous aspect of Internet transactions removes a 'shame' barrier to purchases that might otherwise hinder someone from buying extreme fetish porn in person.

And 'Gonzo' includes stuff like Bang Bus, etc. since the premise (real or not) is that they are unscripted scenes with 'real' people. A lot of the degradation/humiliation pr0n is gonzo themed, hence the link.
Kimota said @ 10:04am GMT on 24th Sep
Again, so? How does that reinforce the concept of patriarchy at all?
mrcookieface said @ 10:18am GMT on 24th Sep
Would you care to look back over the comments we've gone back and forth with and point out where exactly patriarchy came into it? I realize that's part of the post article's point, but I've yet to even discuss it.
Kimota said @ 10:27am GMT on 24th Sep
"Yah, 100K a year certainly offsets and longstanding lingering effects of being repeatedly choked, gagged, slapped, punched, pinched, pissed upon, etc. etc. etc just so Johnny Paycheck can bust out some knuckle babies while having a visual reference for his power trip fantasies about that emasculating bitch Irene in Accounting.."

So this wasn't you equating porn with sexism? Because it certainly did looked like that to me...
mrcookieface said @ 10:34am GMT on 24th Sep
No, that was me responding to ring riot's comment about how porn stars were 'doing alright' by illustrating a psychological cost that outweighs any monetary gain.

Yes, I used that example to showcase how degradation/humiliation porn is very much fuel for sexual and cultural panic (a point I address more at length farther down in the comments), but it wasn't an illustration of sexism.
Kimota said @ 9:48pm GMT on 24th Sep
Sure, but, you see, the problem here is that in reality, in the real world, I've never seen a porn actress punched or any of that shit. Even the few "extreme" examples I've seen were all make believe.. Now, if you find anywhere porn where that happens, maybe in one of those infamous Max Hardcore flics, you have my permission to cry for forbidding it and jailing its perpetrators.

But that has nothing to do with regular porn.
EPT said @ 1:00pm GMT on 24th Sep [Score:1 Insightful]
Hell, I'd wager a goodly chunk of the internet population has seen (or is at least aware of) goatse.

To be fair, most of the internet population was initially surprised by it through a camoflagued link rather than searching out the image.
leswilkerson said @ 5:26pm GMT on 24th Sep
Truer words have never been spoken.
Baxter_UK said @ 7:27am GMT on 24th Sep
This post is kind of relevant.
cr33p3rs said @ 7:33am GMT on 24th Sep [Score:1 Interesting]
As a film maker I have always wanted to make pornographic movies, most film makers have. What stops you is the mean, bipolar, drugged up actresses you meet out there. I am sure there some nice ones, but its few and far between. So the videos from bang bus of them driving away with out paying is just part of the act and more of sign that they're broken hearted little boys.

Porn is made because people need to make it as much as people need to watch it. People just need to work on asking them selfs why they are doing either part of it making or watching and deal with the answers they get. Like I have always found double penetration pretty fucking gay. So if you are doing it or watching DP maybe your pretty fucking gay.
Kimota said @ 8:36am GMT on 24th Sep
Maybe, but you are mistaking cause and effect: it's not "people who do porn are screwed up", but "porn is irrationally ostracized by society, therefore the only people willing to work there are the screwed up ones."

And, actually, your sort of homofobia (ahhh! two male genitalia touching! gross) is usually part of the denial process. But don't worry, this is SE, and for the most part we will celebrate your homosexual desires. Just let it go, man, don't keep it inside you.
cr33p3rs said @ 8:59am GMT on 24th Sep
More like I want you inside of me. I am just saying you wish the girl wasn't there, thats the part the ruins it for you. I am not homophibic I want to fuck you as much as you want fuck me, which is a lot. I LOVE YOU...See you tonight sweetie.

I don't think porn is as ostracizing as you think, and thats the idea behind the article as well. Porn has aways been around because there are people out there that need to make it and those people are often users. We all love sex but doing at as living would make it less appealing. I love to eat but doing it for 8 straight hours would ruin it for me. But not for some other people and those are the ones with problems.
Kimota said @ 9:10am GMT on 24th Sep
Hey, I have no problem with you, me, or whomever getting it in the ass, just sayin' that your comment was classic textbook closet talk.

And your second paragraph makes no sense. Should people never eat or drive or anything else in movies? Ever?
cr33p3rs said @ 9:28am GMT on 24th Sep
People don't eat for hours and hours on end for a living. What movies beside porn has people doing one thing for 2 hours and nothing else. The movie "Transporter," for instance didn't just have him driving for two hours he also did some other shit, i guess, I don't know I didn't see it.

AND YES I AM SAYING PEOPLE SHOULD NEVER HAVE SEX... WHY IS DADDY HURTING MOMMY.

OH GOD...

Breakthrough!!!
Kimota said @ 9:39am GMT on 24th Sep [Score:1 Insightful]
Musicals. Musicals has nothing but people singing. Not only that, but the bald British whatshisface bloke from Transporter had to drive everyday for a couple of months, while you average porn production lasts a couple of days.
eIfish said @ 10:43am GMT on 24th Sep
No, no more than soap opera has nothing but people talking.

But musicals and martial-arts films, have a lot more similarity than you'd imagine: both have a flimsy plot that no-one's reall y that interested in, because it only serves as a premise for the singing/fight scenes, and a structure that basically goes: Big fight scene/song, series of smaller fight scenes/songs, enourmous fight scene/song, explosion/curtain, interspersed with short episodes of dialogue to set up for the next fight scene/song. Popcorn action movies also do this.

Seriously.

Watch the Transporter, Rush Hour, or Taxi, and follow it with South Park (there may be other musicals. I can't be sure/). You'll see what I mean.

Hell, do the above anyway.
landsky said @ 2:09pm GMT on 24th Sep
f00m@nB@r said @ 2:40pm GMT on 24th Sep
ah, no. good musicals have a plot. try any musical by sondheim. or opera. i'd say gilbert and sullivan, but they only wrote one show and changed the title 13 times.
landsky said @ 2:58pm GMT on 24th Sep
Sacha Baron Cohen & Johnny Depp in Sondheim's 'Sweeney Todd' - a good musical with quite an interesting plot....
sweeneytoddmovie.com
f00m@nB@r said @ 10:39pm GMT on 24th Sep
you should watch sondheim's "assassins", then.
leswilkerson said @ 3:30pm GMT on 24th Sep
The term "good musical" is an oxymoron. There is no such thing.

;)
landsky said @ 2:04pm GMT on 24th Sep
Let's combine the two...musicals & nudity!
f00m@nB@r said @ 2:50pm GMT on 24th Sep
watch "oh, calcutta!" full frontal male and female nudity. it's out on dvd.
mrcookieface said @ 7:40am GMT on 24th Sep [Score:1 Underrated]
I think porn has become more hateful and degrading as a response to a pervasive feeling of hopelessness and powerlessness. Men (rightly or wrongly) are feeling more ostracized and diminished, and the traditional avenues of superiority are being deconstructed more and more every day.

We're a competitive sex, and we've lost many of our traditional outlets so humiliating and degrading porn serves a need to exert dominance over a group that far too many cultural references insist should be subservient to ourselves.

It's both a sign of sexual (in terms of gender) panic, as well as cultural panic.
Baxter_UK said @ 8:01am GMT on 24th Sep
I agree that the increase in this type of pornography is a reaction to something, rather than the cause of it. I'm not sure just what that is, however. Like the video game-influencing-violence debates, I don't think that it makes sense to say that porn makes people sexually deviant, or that games makes them violent. This stuff is selling, and it has to be bought before it can influence anything. The demand is there for these things.
Azoth said @ 9:02am GMT on 24th Sep [Score:1 Insightful]
Nobody likes porn, because it represents people's fantasies. Fantasies are, by definition, things that people want to do but (in the vast majority of cases) have not done for a variety of reasons.

It isn't fun to see what people secretly fantasize about, because we don't want to admit that many people want terrible things, and we certainly don't want to admit that there are much deeper problems in our society or in human nature. It's much easier to attack porn as the problem itself, rather than to admit there are more bigger problems underlying it.
Azoth said @ 9:08am GMT on 24th Sep [Score:1 Funny]
It's also not easy to admit that there are more bigger problems with my grammar. Shit.
danshyu said @ 12:33pm GMT on 24th Sep
I don't see what's the problem. As long as both parties are welling to be part of the paticular fantasy. IE choke each other, giving each other enemas, or pretend to rape one another in a violent roleplay. As long as they're clear headed enough to not let it affect their social lifes in negative ways. It doesn't hurt anybody or damage the society.

It almost sound like you're judging what kind of fantasies are ok and what are not. If all parties are welling, what happens in their bedroom (or basement) should be their own business.

Heck, there are people who thinks homosexualism is steering the society to the worst, that is terrible. But does it really?
Azoth said @ 3:07pm GMT on 24th Sep
Rape and violence are real problems, and not the porn fantasies which reflect these problems. I have no problem with sexual fantasies among consenting adults, filmed or not.
Azoth said @ 12:13pm GMT on 24th Sep
An interesting point; assuming we were to grant the article some credence, one could easily argue that increasingly misogynist porn is a good sign. Misogynists are feeling increasingly threatened by their inability to control women in real life and therefore they are overcompensating for it in their power fantasies. This phenomenon has been observed in other contexts so it would be consistant with things we already know about human psychology...
RedRiverRat said @ 12:24pm GMT on 24th Sep
I think that there is a place in this world for porn. Just like there is a place in this world for drugs. Some people desperately need it, some people just like it. With demand comes supply.

I don't really have an opinion on the people who make or act in porn because I've never met any. Maybe the actresses are 'mean, bipolar and drugged up' and all the guys are sleeze. I dunno. I'm sure that plenty of young girls got into the game to make a quick buck and got caught up in an ugly business, and for them I'm truly sorry. I'm also sure that there are plenty of manipulative, unfeeling girls who went into with calculation. Who can say.

But to the point, I think that sex has become more hateful and degrading is a result of there being TOO MUCH porn. Some sad wanker who looks at porn day after day just gets bored seeing the same old MF regular positions. It takes anal to get his fire started, then he just progresses into more and more bizarre sex acts just to get it up.

Where there is demand, there is supply.

Blame the porn industry all you want, but the consumer drives the market. We're only getting what a marketable segment of the consumer asks for.
RedRiverRat said @ 12:26pm GMT on 24th Sep
3rd paragraph, sex=porn
perilikid said @ 7:47am GMT on 24th Sep [Score:1 Insightful]
I'm wondering if pornography has any more impact on the psyche, on character and on relationships than films, books or videogames. If it doesn't, does this argument have any more validity than the criticism that games like GTA et al accrue?

I enjoy p0rn, but I'm not convinced that the way I interact with women suffers; nor have I found myself seeking out increasingly demeaning acts in the p0rn that I watch. I still trust myself to make the right decisions, given the education that I received.

Here's another thought, though: is p0rn more or less demeaning than lads' magazines, that regularly portray women as nymphomaniacs (witness every single highlighted quote in these features) but fail to be regulated in any significant manner?
Azoth said @ 9:31am GMT on 24th Sep
Kids model their social behavior largely on their parents. Porn can't compete with the influence of family, especially in the way children learn gender roles and form ideas about how relationships are supposed to work.
v21 said @ 9:44am GMT on 24th Sep
Actually, I don't think that's true. Kids model their social behavior largely on their peers. Parents obviously play a role, but it's not as large as peers. The point largely holds, except for kids who have trouble hanging out with other kids. And their social skills and interactions with women are going to be fucked anyway (for a while at least) and I'll be fucked if I'm going to mandate restrictions on what everyone else can consume just for them.
Azoth said @ 12:01pm GMT on 24th Sep
I should clarify my comment. Children who have a good relationship with their parents have been found to model their _romantic_ relationships on their parent's relationship; this is where most children get their first concept of "this is what a healthy romantic partnership looks like" long before they or their friends are old enough to have their own dating experiences.
v21 said @ 12:30pm GMT on 24th Sep
Oh, fair enough. I hadn't heard that myself, but it sounds reasonable enough.
Muefigilo said @ 7:54am GMT on 24th Sep
Somehow I have difficulty caring about this after watching The Constant Gardener.
fishandring said @ 8:01am GMT on 24th Sep [Score:4 Underrated]
...and then there are men like me who love porn but refuse to watch the kind spoken of here for exactly the reasons that many of you posit that people watch it. I like me some homemade or amateur any day over this max payne kind of crap.
phunkeybuddha said @ 10:02am GMT on 24th Sep
What the hell is max payne pr0n? Is it CGI? Is it some gun & sexplay fetish with matrix-style bullet time?
headlessfriar said @ 11:15am GMT on 24th Sep
Maybe he means Max Hardcore, the stage name of a tall white guy who does stuff like pee in girl's eyes and other hideous shit. I don't know how people can get off on that myself.
Kupo said @ 11:27am GMT on 24th Sep [Score:1 Informative]
Rule 34
fishandring said @ 11:35am GMT on 24th Sep
Oops. Ya, its machinima porn. :)
electron.rotoscope said @ 7:43pm GMT on 24th Sep
PIX PLZ!!!!
EPT said @ 12:49pm GMT on 24th Sep
It's where you can slow down your partner in time so you can rapidly move to a new position, surprising them.
Dissonant said @ 8:31am GMT on 24th Sep
How dare he? How dare he throw Playboy and slutbus.com into the same category and then extrapolate generalizations from that? It's a tremendous equivocation. I swear, I just want to run off and scream looking at this stuff.

I believe that not all porn is degrading, even stuff that ostensibly "reduce[s women] to a thing to be penetrated" Although I can see that influence specifically in the stuff that Jensen mentions, I fail to see any evidence that that is the "mainstream" stuff that is being popularized or that said "mainstream" stuff "reduces" women to anything, rather than simply focusing on a particular part of sexual behavior, and I find the claim that that is a "reduction" to be patently absurd. Certainly I wouldn't put Playboy in that category, and IMNSFHO he has no business even mentioning it in that context.

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I just missed out on that aspect of our culture, but you'd think I would have heard something in my daily life that reflects this.

I grew up watching the women in my family being severely abused, and I resolved to make sure I would never, ever do anything like that. Thing is, I like reading Playboy, and I wouldn't even touch slutbus.com or anything like it. Am I the sort of man who degrades women? If so, why don't I just give up now and stay home for the rest of my life?

Guess what? This kind of writing hurts me. Granted, probably not as much as slutbus.com hurts women, but certainly quite a bit.

Finally, I want to see some studies that indicate that we have indeed "gone backwards" regarding sexual violence. Until then, I am sceptical of such a claim.

Sorry for the disorganized rant. I'm too hurt and angry to be particularly coherent.
sacrelicious said @ 8:41am GMT on 24th Sep
yeah, and what about gay porn?










^^^^^^tagline!^^^^^^
Azoth said @ 9:43am GMT on 24th Sep [Score:1 Insightful]
Seriously though, 20 years ago you probably couldn't find any number of kinks which are degrading to men, such as gay bukkake, gay bdsm, gay poopin'-on-each-other porn (sorry, don't know the technical term), and that's not even mentioning women-dominating-men porn, which has also grown along with the rest of the porn industry.

You can now get dominatrix-led aerobics in Manhattan, where men pay extra to be kicked, slapped, stepped on, whipped, degraded and insulted while they do push up and sit ups to muscle failure. You could as easily ask why has the porn industry become so misanthropist?

It's easy to cherry pick extreme examples to make your case while totally ignoring overall trends.
theolypse said @ 5:03pm GMT on 24th Sep
Soiling.
t_naifeh said @ 6:43pm GMT on 24th Sep
I'm sure you heard of Betty Page. She was (among other things) a male domination icon.
b said @ 12:57pm GMT on 24th Sep
gay pron for all!
t_naifeh said @ 6:36pm GMT on 24th Sep [Score:1 Funny]
I object in the strongest possible terms to gay porn, as it treats men as nothing more than objects to be used for perverse gratification. How dare they objectify men like that! Men should be treated as equals, not filthy repositories for hot semen. And some of these scenes depict such horrific acts of degradation as ass-to-mouth, double penetration of both mouth and anus, spankings and whippings, even urination. Clearly, any man who participates in such an act has been brainwashed to believe that, as a man, his role must be that of subjugation. These acts of abuse against men suggest an alarming trend in our culture, regressing backward to the days when men were considered almost as property. This violence against men should be monitored closely (I know I'll be watching like a hawk) and our government should consider stringent regulation, before people everywhere start patterning their behavior after this sort of pornography and start having wild circle jerks at the local supermarket.
maryyugo said @ 8:45am GMT on 24th Sep [Score:3]
commercial pr0n just plain sucks because in almost all instances, nobody, not even the guys, seem to be enjoying it-- they're just going through the motions. it's usually as fast a rabbits, looks like st. vitus's dance rather than sex, avoids much of the fun (like kissing and fondling).

the guys have trouble staying hard (yup-- even in this day of viagra) and the women aren't wet unless they're liberally lubed like an old jalopy. the emphasis is on unusually orifices, uncomfortable venues and ridiculously contorted positions, and the weirder the places the guy comes (after seemingly hours of trying with futility to reach a climax), the more they seem to prefer it.

at least that's what it was like when i stopped watching it. there are a few exceptions... maybe like some scenes in a few shane's world videos, but they are inconsistent.

so commercial pr0n is mainly for freaks, kids too young to try real sex, people so jaded or bound to fetishism that they can't function normally, and those who can't or can't be bothered to find partners. it must be a lot of people because there is a seemingly endless amount of it and it earns a fair amount of money. but then so does homeopathy.
maryyugo said @ 8:46am GMT on 24th Sep
unusually should be unusual
sacrelicious said @ 8:50am GMT on 24th Sep
usual is usually unusual in an unusually usual way.
Forestgump'smom said @ 12:42pm GMT on 24th Sep
usual is as usual does.
sacrelicious said @ 8:49am GMT on 24th Sep [Score:1 Insightful]
I hate commercial porn. I only watch porn made by people who are doing it purely for the love of the porn. porn stars that are concerned about the money are sellouts.
maryyugo said @ 5:22pm GMT on 24th Sep
they're not only sellouts-- they are trite, boring, sometimes plain sickening, and very rarely erotic in any way. imho of course-- nothing about humans is more variable than what they like in the way of sex.
endopol said @ 8:55am GMT on 24th Sep
+1 St Vitus's dance
perilikid said @ 10:07am GMT on 24th Sep
so commercial pr0n is mainly for freaks, kids too young to try real sex, people so jaded or bound to fetishism that they can't function normally, and those who can't or can't be bothered to find partners

Really? Is that what you really think? Blimey.
t_naifeh said @ 2:16pm GMT on 24th Sep
Yeah, really. Ya know, normal people with normal tastes like porn too. Bless their little cotton socks.
theolypse said @ 4:39pm GMT on 24th Sep
Oh, come on. Mary's saying that normal people with normal tastes like a kind of porn different from what is commercially most available.
maryyugo said @ 5:27pm GMT on 24th Sep [Score:2]
exactly. try "rafian at the edge" (torrents available on puretna.com). some of that's erotic. it's how people really make love and have sex. try home made videos. sex is fun-- not the grunting, hard work, commercial porn portrays with its strained and pained expressions, faked cries, and humorless contortions and athletism. b o o o o o r r r i i i n n n n g!
leswilkerson said @ 5:31pm GMT on 24th Sep
Wow! Something you and I agree on COMPLETELY.
EPT said @ 12:25am GMT on 25th Sep
whooooooooooooooooooooooooosh!
tomintroy said @ 9:49am GMT on 25th Sep
Two thumbs up on the "rafian at the edge" reference. Real couples caught unaware (therefore not acting), true amateur porn!
lopodyne said @ 8:47am GMT on 24th Sep [Score:1 Insightful]
I understand how this article could be troubling to someone with just a passing familiarity with internet porn. The most celebrated pieces are usually the most offensive, unless they involve celebrities. As in any human endeavor, the cutting edge extends the boundaries and refines the interior, but the former is easiest to see.
I think there will always be a high demand for bread-and-butter pornography, the stuff many of us turn to at the end of a hard day - tits, moist vaginas, and horny men and women getting each other off however they can. The best stuff, in my opinion, has low production values and everyday-looking people - more convincing, more familiar, and thus more stimulating. And as a frequent visitor to jesuslovesporn.net, I feel that it is the mainstream.

I dunno. Here's another conversation piece:
"Proof that internet porn prevents rape"
cr33p3rs said @ 9:13am GMT on 24th Sep
They talk about that as well in "Ted Bundy: Natural Porn Killer" from Channel 4. Check it out

www.google.com/s2/sharing/stuff?user=109249171507765356997
ComposerNate said @ 9:17am GMT on 24th Sep [Score:1 Informative]

Pussy Snorkel
eIfish said @ 10:34am GMT on 24th Sep [Score:2]
I fucking despise Love Hina
danshyu said @ 12:21pm GMT on 24th Sep
+1 so ronery
maryyugo said @ 1:18pm GMT on 24th Sep
one of those devices one wishes had no application but it does.
VictorTyne said @ 9:44am GMT on 24th Sep [Score:2 Underrated]
"Employment at will". Heard of it?

But I'm sure the degradation of women has nothing to do with a society of daycare kiddies and adults who let TV and the internet teach their children everything from language skills to morals.

Isn't it great to be able to blame someone else for your total lack of responsibility? And hey! Since you're blaming porn, nobody can argue against you since anyone who argues against porn is a dirty, smut-loving, woman-bashing, semen-encrusted asshole! Talk about win-win!
mrcookieface said @ 9:59am GMT on 24th Sep
Who exactly is blaming porn here?
eIfish said @ 10:29am GMT on 24th Sep [Score:1 Underrated]
The article, I presume. tl;dr, and all that. Or maybe the mindset that usually starts such discussions.

Anyhow, every time I hear the word 'patriarchy', I kinda tune out, because it's a term that is, in its literal meaning, obviously and demonstrably inapplicable to society today, and in it's oh-but-we-don't-really-meanthat-when-we-say-that sense a pointer that the piece you're about to read will contain a lot of proof-by-repeated-assertion, choir-preaching, collective responsibility, and general man-blaming.

To be more succinct, almost every piece with the word 'patriarchy' in it, outwith the field of ancient history, reads, roughly:

IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT patriarchy IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT
Azoth said @ 2:45pm GMT on 24th Sep
The Patriarchy: turning women's rights movements into fringe conspiracy theories since 1971.
Kimota said @ 10:00am GMT on 24th Sep [Score:1 Insightful]
But there is no degradation of women in society! At the very least modern western societies are a hundred times more egalitarian than thirty years ago, and a thousand times better than a century ago.

Seriously, people, we are discussing about the causes for a problem that was so much worse when said causes din't exist! This is pure idiocy!
v21 said @ 10:00am GMT on 24th Sep
I hate it when people blame society wide problems on individuals (unless it's one or two specific individuals). Fuck the truth of it, it's a useless thing to say.
CrazyBertus said @ 10:04am GMT on 24th Sep
and this is a bad thing, because?
animus kadmon said @ 10:51am GMT on 24th Sep
Looks like another excuse for a monster hunt to me. Sad.
t_naifeh said @ 2:09pm GMT on 24th Sep
If you mean monster hunt like the kiddie-porn witch hunt that landed Pete Townsend in jail, I wouldn't characterize it like that. I feel it's less about individuals who may are may not be "one of THOSE sorts of people" and more about the big bad institutions, like EC Comics in the fifties, destroying the moral fabric of our society, profiting on our sins.
Azoth said @ 11:47am GMT on 24th Sep [Score:2 Informative]
You know what I find offensive? The demeaning stereotypes of women as fragile, helpless, childlike victims by feminist writers. Intentional or not, perpetuating the stereotype that women are inherently more fragile than men and need to be protected supports a patronizing, unempowering view of women that I suspect is far more harmful to women than sexual objectification.

Men who think that women are docile, passive sex objects are in for a rude awakening when they meet a real woman.
danshyu said @ 12:48pm GMT on 24th Sep
There are no men who has some common sense of obersvation would actually believe that every women are docile, passive sex objects. But there are certainly men who perfer to have a partner who are docile and passive. And there are indeed women who are into being docile and passive.

I don't believe there are actually stereotypes saying women are fragile and helpless. But there are certainly stereotypes that implies women who are fragile and helpless makes better romantic partner.

But that's like saying spicy food always tasts better. Anybody who has an ounce of sense would see right through it, that it's just personal preference that determines what food would tast best for them.

To blame pr0n industry for demeaning women as fragile and helpless is just silly. There are also pr0n featuring dominatrix and masochist men. Or bad girls on helpless geeky guys. Hell, there are pr0n that features people dressing up as animals.

Pr0n is way more diversed then what you would think. You can't just use small portion of it to serve as examples for your argument while ignoring the fact that there are also many other portions that contradicts to what you're arguing.
t_naifeh said @ 11:59am GMT on 24th Sep [Score:5 Insightful]
Hah! you guys should all have been wary if this sad apologist-feminist the moment he started agreeing with Andrea Dworkin. Like Andrea, this guy has found his fetish, which is watching the worst most objectionable porn over and over and then getting off by feeling indignant and self-righteous. Unlike Andrea, this article writer is able to come off as reasonable, until you notice the constant detailed descriptions of the heinous acts he finds upsetting. I tend to stay away from stuff like this, because by reading it, I become an unwilling participant of this guy's sick fetish, just as much as a flasher's victim. He wants everyone to listen to the lurid details, and then get all indignant with him. I remember as a kid watching Geraldo Rivera's show about children being forced to participate in satanic rituals (which I found highly implausible even at the time) and the look of glittering titillation on Geraldo's face even as he bellowed with indignation told me everything I needed to know about that show.

Personally, I've seen most of this stuff on the internet, and participated in some of it myself, but gosh, I still manage to be a decent, loving, caring man according to my girlfriend. And of all the people I've discussed this issue with, the one with the most extreme tastes for female degradation is herself a woman.

Frankly, if you ask me, the reason extreme porn seems on the increase is because, in an increasingly feminist world, it lets of steam from the pressures of sexual equality for both for men and for women. We live an changing times, and I think porn is just a way of dealing with changing values, through sexuality, and yes, even through anger.

As another poster pointed out, porn is fantasy. Sexuality is fantasy, and so long as no one is being forced to do something they don't want to do (which, of course, is rape and is already illegal) politics should stop at the bedroom door, and everyone should do what they both want to do. I know a guy who runs a major hard S&M porn site. My girlfriend has messed around with him, and found him a complete gentleman.
Dissonant said @ 1:26pm GMT on 24th Sep
+1 probably the most insightful comment I could ever read on this issue.
suicideunit3351 said @ 1:56pm GMT on 24th Sep
I actually have to disagree with what he says women will or will not do. I find that my g/f and I have a healthy sexual relationship that includes such acts as double penetration (TOY no other man will touch mah woman) whips, whips, dirty talk and other supposedly degrading and violent acts.

Funny thing though, she's the one who suggest these things.
Wouldn't that mean that she feels empowered?

(is now the envy of every straight man in SE)
t_naifeh said @ 2:12pm GMT on 24th Sep
That's awesome. Actually, my girlfriend would do just about anything to convince me to give her DP with another guy. Alas, we haven't found one that I'd be cool enough with to get that gay. I'm sure he's out there though.
imanangel said @ 3:12pm GMT on 24th Sep [Score:2]
And now come the PMs...
theolypse said @ 4:31pm GMT on 24th Sep
Almost every straight man.

:D
maryyugo said @ 5:29pm GMT on 24th Sep
"I find that my g/f and I have a healthy sexual relationship that includes such acts as double penetration (TOY no other man will touch mah woman) whips, whips, dirty talk and other supposedly degrading and violent acts."

that's fine but i bet a video of what you do would *not* resemble in any way (except for the acts themselves) what the industrial grade porn portrays. in fact, why don't you make and post a video for us? we can judge for ourselves! (thanks in advance)
suicideunit3351 said @ 7:02pm GMT on 24th Sep
You first!!
EPT said @ 12:23am GMT on 25th Sep
I dunno... there's a guy about that sleeps with twins. Hard to top that.
G-Unit said @ 12:12pm GMT on 24th Sep [Score:1 Funny]
I hate this style of porn thats popular nowadays.
For Example:
1. They slap the tits, asses, and pussies of these women. Is there any women that actually want the guy to do that?
2. They choke the women for some reason that I don't understand.
3. The women sucks on the guys toes and the guys do the same to the women, if it isn't fetish porn why is it in there?
4. The MOST important of all. The worst fucking plots ever! I guess nowadays any kind of crap can get by, but I miss the movies like Vixen or Taboo where the pornstars could also do a bit of acting.

I saw a clip for Naughty Office where the female boss was upset at the guy for throwing a pop can in the glass bottle bin. They starting arguing, he said, "You're fuckin' crazy"
Then she says "No I'm not"
Then he says "Yes you are I mean you're not crazy your pretty hot in the sack"

How the FUCK do you go from putting a can in the wrong bin to arguing to having sex.

It's Amy Amoure on the Naughty office website if you want to see my point.
http://www.naughtyofficegallery.com/upg/NOFHGH/fhgs/676.990/?9147
danshyu said @ 12:20pm GMT on 24th Sep
To answer your questions. Yes, there are woman and guys who's into being humiliated and/or hurt by their sex partner.

Masochism isn't something invented by the porn industry. It really exists.
Dissonant said @ 1:14pm GMT on 24th Sep [Score:1 Underrated]
It's a pretty despicable portrayal of so-called "normal" behavior and is highly upsetting, even torturous to watch.

On points 1, 2, and 3, though, I agree with Danshyu.
G-Unit said @ 3:55am GMT on 25th Sep
Yes I know that masochism exists, but mainstream porn shouldn't have any fetish whatsoever
buzhidao said @ 3:00pm GMT on 24th Sep

you've neglected the smacking in the face with the erect penis. over and over and over.
G-Unit said @ 4:38pm GMT on 24th Sep
Your right I completely forgot about that. I hope all those guys that do it get a dildo up the ass from those girls.

Plus how about those pregnancy scare sites?
I guess those stars are on birth control or whatever so they don't get pregnant
iamajohnson said @ 5:55am GMT on 25th Sep
1. Spitting into the woman's mouth. Why is that even called for? For that matter, spitting at any time is not necessary.

2. Slapping the women on her face is not sexy.

3. Anal sex is fine, but when the sphincter starts to look like ground round it's time to stop. I also am not a proctologist, so I don't need to see the inside of the colon.
CommanderCherkinov said @ 12:49am GMT on 25th Sep [Score:1 Insightful]
The men in porn are reduced to mere prop cocks. The women make more money and command the desire of multiple millions of men, even if only for 15 minutes at a time. Who is really degraded in that instance?

The women, however fucked up in the head they might be, sign contracts to make the movies where the acts are spelled out. Women who bitch, whine and balk don't get work, so the girls you see are more than willing to do these things. When a man works construction and beats up his body for 25 years and gets all kinds of pain, you don't cry a river for him because he signed up for it and obviously couldn't or wouldn't do anything else. It's the same with the girls. They want a lot of money and attention and the future be damned.


Are women really so weak and stupid that we have to stop treating them like adults and begin treating them like children who are too ignorant to make their own life decisions and live with them?


I would say no to that.

Post a comment
[note: if you are replying to a specific comment, then click the reply link on that comment instead]

You must be logged in to comment on posts.
home | home2 | Sensible Election | about | conduct | galleries not logged in | log in



Members

Registered: 22186
Classifieds

BOOBLE
Search sites, pics, movies, personals.

Best Porn
Reviews of the best porn sites with pics, vids, scene desription and member area preview

LONELY GUYS
Meet Women Near You