Do you guys like this kind of porn?

[Jersey Shortie]

Okay Tiny Dancer.

[A O]

Tiny Dancer (Elton John - kewl) responds to Jersey Shortie's lament - "If a woman works at trying to fullfill her partner and being exciting, and attractive and all that; then why does he still need to self-satisfy himself outside of that? It's about more and more and more and more and more....ect ect ect."

 

with this...

 

"Men and women are different, that is something everyone needs to get their head around.

 

Why does a woman continually need to wear make-up, dress up, look attractive when not around her man. Why does she need to do that? Why isn't looking attractive the sole preserve of her man? Why does she need more, why, why, why? This is the same dynamic you're describing but in reverse. Simple fact of the matter is that we are different, we have different needs, different wants, different desires. We need to respect them, we need to respect this. Trying to pummel everyone into being the same is simply unhealthy and unrealistic."

 

And around and round we went.

 

.

[Jersey Shortie]

You are as ridiculous and selfish as ever AO. Women wearing make up and looking presentable has nothing to do with needing "more" validation! Men are much MORE explotive of women then the reverse. We all understand basic laws of attraction. Again, I don't ask for perfection. I ask for more self control from men that I don't think men really want to give because it's too hard for them at the end of the day. I don't think it's asking too much for more loyatly. A man oggling every woman that walks by isn't the same thing as a woman putting on make up and going out in the world! You can twist it around as much as you please, which of course you will.

[A O]

You are as ridiculous and selfish as ever AO. Women wearing make up and looking presentable has nothing to do with needing "more" validation!

I'm simply using the same logic that you use towards men. You ask, why do men need more than what their partner offers. The same question can be asked of women - why do they need more. Why do men need to look at women other than their partner simply transfers into why do women need to make themselves look attractive to men other than their partner also.

 

Why do men need to look and why do women need to be looked at - its all the same deal.

 

I ask for more self control from men that I don't think men really want to give because it's too hard for them at the end of the day.

Well then, if you want men to stop looking (across the board), then as I've said many times before, I'd imagine that you'd also want women to stop wanting to be looked at.

 

A man oggling every woman that walks by isn't the same thing as a woman putting on make up and going out in the world!

Yes it is. She's dressed to impress, and he is very much impressed. You simply can't have one without the other. Now, if she's dressed in non-figure hugging clothes, if she's devoid of make-up, expensive hair-do and the like and guys still ogle her - then you'd have a point.

..

[Des]

Recently I was in another debate of the same nature, more or less about the same thing, but not exclusively about porn or any specific type of porn. After a slight change of heart since my last posts in this thread, I've been arguing for your side believe it or not, and partially I have you to thank Jersey. Though I've teetered on the fence of this for quite a long time and have stood fully on the other side before, the more I argued for your side, the more it made sense.

 

When I said that you have made good points, I meant it, my only argument was that they were irrelevant, and ultimately you couldn't tell people what to do (which still holds true). But I've come to realize just how right you were about some things, most notably, pornography.

 

Basically, we live in a man's world. A society that mostly values men based on skill, intelligence, success, and wealth. As where women are valued mostly on physical appearance, and sex appeal. Hence why those are usually the qualities each sex desires in the other for a potential mate. Would most men be attracted to a woman solely because she comes across with an overwhelming sense of intellect, or simply because she has an impressive job title and makes a lot of money? Would most women be truly interested in a guy simply because he has a nice body?

 

In todays society and culture, what we have is basically men objectifying and debasing women without even actually realizing that it's what they're doing for the most part, partly due to their hardwired sexual nature and because quite honestly, society gives them the encouragement. As for women, they also learn from a young age not only to accept it, but to strive for it. They build their self-esteem and confidence around their appearance and sex appeal, the things that men value most in them, not only do they not reject objectification, instead it becomes a compliment for them. Quite a vicious cycle.

 

Sexual objectification of women is alive and rampant, so long as your willing to see it. This is the essence of pornography, objectification, and of course when one sexually objectifies someone, they in turn dehumanize them, this is why people say porn debases and degrades women. And it does, I no longer deny that. I think this is what you were getting with your argument before Jersey, "How can a man indulge in objectifying (dehumanizing) women, and then turn around and claim to not think degradingly of them?" Respect isn't worth much, if what you respect them for is being a sexual object. Women are not often given this much credit or praise for other their other achievements.

 

The women in porn are of course the most debased and degraded, and are among the most entranced in objectification, fulfilling their needs to be desired and praised by men. This is why they choose to do porn in the first place, for men. It's going the full distance in being everything you can be as a woman that men desire and give attention to. This is where their self-esteem issues come into play, they are the most desperate and negatively effected of women, victims of this vicious societal structure.

Edited November 23, 2009 by Des

[Des]

I think this thread only serves point out the severity that it has come to, and it's apparent how thin the denial is wearing.

 

The truth is... We've reached an era where aggression, violence, and verbal abuse directed towards women now makes up the alarming majority of mainstream porn, and has thusly become (and is still becoming) accepted. The kind of porn originally discussed in this thread is really only one example of it, one undefendable example. There is no denying that it is entirely about male gratification - gratification that comes at the expense of women, whether it's the man doing it to the woman in the porn video, or the thousands of men (to whom it is directed at) getting off seeing it done to her. An act that is no doubt dehumanizing, degrading and physically abusive and punishing for these women. No less, it is seen in nearly every other popular porn title you come across these days, with frequency increasing.

 

It's tiring how I keep hearing people tell me "oh that's fetish porn"... no, no it isn't. It is quickly becoming the bulk of mainstream porn, I know first hand because I have been a user of it. Not only that, but there are studies and facts that reflect exactly what I am saying. The only people who really don't know any better by now, are the ones who have no personal experience with the pornography that is truly mainstream in America today, the top sellers. Not the Debby Does Dallas's of the past, but the porn of today. Often I've heard complaints of modern porn by long time porn users, claiming that they can never find any porn to watch that doesn't turn abusive or degrading five minutes into it... it is what porn has largely become. The youngest generation have never know it differently, and there for are complete desensitized and see nothing wrong with.

 

It really does make you wonder, what effect will this modern pornography have on our culture? In all honesty, I've seen where it has already begun to effect it... it is a bit worrisome for the long term.

Edited November 23, 2009 by Des

[A O]

Basically, we live in a man's world. A society that mostly values men based on skill, intelligence, success, and wealth. As where women are valued mostly on physical appearance, and sex appeal.

Might of been the case a generation or two ago, doesn't hold true anymore.

 

In todays society and culture, what we have is basically men objectifying and debasing women without even actually realizing that it's what they're doing for the most part, partly due to their hardwired sexual nature and because quite honestly, society gives them the encouragement.

First off, to truly objectify a person is to see and treat them as less than human, as nothing more than an object. Most people who do this are either behind bars or soon will be. Now, the more popular view of objectification is to concentrate on parts of the body ahead of everything else. Men, as you rightly point out, tend to objectify far more than women do. But, and this is the big but, women play on this fact every bit as much as men play into it. Women set themselves up to be objectified every bit as much as men objectify. You simply cannot have one without the other (and for the record, I'm not talking only about porn here, I'm talking in general).

 

As for women, they also learn from a young age not only to accept it, but to strive for it.

They're not taught - it's as hard-wired in them as it is for men to look. Its, as you pointed out for men, something that they don't even realize they're doing (attracting, objectifying themselves). You need to look at the full picture here.

 

They build their self-esteem and confidence around their appearance and sex appeal, the things that men value most in them, not only do they not reject objectification, instead it becomes a compliment for them. Quite a vicious cycle.

Men do not value looks above all else. Where on earth did you get that from? Looks play an important role (as it does for women) but not thee most important role.

 

For the record, the natural order of things is for women to attract, and for men to be attracted. This is why women have so many issues around looks, because the ability to attract is all important to them (given that few women actually initiate anything themselves). But, just like women have issues surrounding their looks, then so do men have issues surrounding their ability to provide. Because, even though in this modern world, women can easily provide for themselves, most women still require men to either provide as much as them or out provide them. Few basically, date down. Point being, both sexes have issues holey unique to them. It is not, Des, one-way traffic against or for one gender which is the overwhelming tone I get from your posts.

 

This is the essence of pornography, objectification, and of course when one sexually objectifies someone, they in turn dehumanize them, this is why people say porn debases and degrades women. And it does, I no longer deny that.

And neither do I. But like a lot of people, probably far more than you realize, I turn away from this shyt.

 

I think this is what you were getting with your argument before Jersey, "How can a man indulge in objectifying (dehumanizing) women, and then turn around and claim to not think degradingly of them?"

First off, that's just one part of her argument. To simply 'think' of someone else is to cheat on them. That's her most extreme view.

 

Respect isn't worth much, if what you respect them for is being a sexual object.

You shouldn't assume that to view a person in a sexual sense is to disrespect them overall.

 

Women are not often given this much credit or praise for other their other achievements.

Said who?

 

The women in porn are of course the most debased and degraded, and are among the most entranced in objectification, fulfilling their needs to be desired and praised by men. This is why they choose to do porn in the first place, for men.

Right, so this has nothing to do with money? You make some good points but then you undo it all with some absolute rubbish.

 

The truth is... We've reached an era where aggression, violence, and verbal abuse directed towards women now makes up the alarming majority of mainstream porn, and has thusly become (and is still becoming) accepted.

This is a big assertion that needs validation (links) to hold any real meaning. I for one, am well aware that crap like this is out there and is a major problem without doubt, but extremely dubious that this rubbish makes up the majority of porn out there.

 

There is no denying that it is entirely about male gratification - gratification that comes at the expense of women, whether it's the man doing it to the woman in the porn video, or the thousands of men (to whom it is directed at) getting off seeing it done to her.

You do understand that there's also no shortage of degradation towards men porn out there also don't you?

 

It is quickly becoming the bulk of mainstream porn

Quickly becoming was the alarming majority earlier on in your post. Hmmm...

 

Not only that, but there are studies and facts that reflect exactly what I am saying.

Great, this is what I look forward to seeing.

 

The only people who really don't know any better by now, are the ones who have no personal experience with the pornography that is truly mainstream in America today, the top sellers

I agree with this. What I'd like to see, and can't see why it wouldn't be possible, is to see a disclaimer,a warning sign, similar to what you see on cigarette packets, on every porn site and every porn pic, video. Disclaimers like, "this is simulated", "this is not real" ....name your slogan...is what I'd like to see, is what I fully expect will happen before long.

 

 

.

[Juniper22]

The truth is... We've reached an era where aggression, violence, and verbal abuse directed towards women now makes up the alarming majority of mainstream porn, and has thusly become (and is still becoming) accepted. The kind of porn originally discussed in this thread is really only one example of it, one undefendable example".

 

 

I agree, and since this is my thread that I orginally started. That was kind of my point. To me it has gotten worse over the years. With what men/women do. I never said I didn't like some porn, but SOME is just way to extreme.

 

I recently read where porn star Jenna Jamison was on Oprah. She was telling some things about the industry etc etc. However there had been some women who used to be in the porn industry and wanted to come on Oprah too, to share their story about the truth behind porn and what really goes on etc etc, but yet Oprah wouldn't have those people on the show. She only was showing one side of it.

[A O]

I agree, and since this is my thread that I orginally started. That was kind of my point. To me it has gotten worse over the years. With what men/women do. I never said I didn't like some porn, but SOME is just way to extreme.

Porn is but one symptom of how society in general has changed in recent times, be it the increased violence and disrespect from video games and various forms of music, texting and the rise of text bullying and social networks and the bullying that occurs on those also.

 

Point is though, as much as I firmly believe that crap porn is on the rise, in an overall sense, crap - disrespectful porn and the negative influence it has on the younger generation mostly, is still very much in the minority. I base this on the fact that despite these negative influences being more prevalent than ever before, we are not seeing huge increases in violence, in crime, in dysfunctional relationships or disillusioned women (in particular).

 

In short, reality does not reflect the doomsday type scenario that some are portraying here in regards to porn especially.

 

.

[Jersey Shortie]

 

Recently I was in another debate of the same nature, more or less about the same thing, but not exclusively about porn or any specific type of porn. After a slight change of heart since my last posts in this thread, I've been arguing for your side believe it or not, and partially I have you to thank Jersey.

 

Well hey thank you right back at you Des. That's really cool to hear. I like reading other people's stuff that makes me think, and I take pride in when I can make other people think differently as well.

 

 

 

I think this thread only serves point out the severity that it has come to, and it's apparent how thin the denial is wearing.

 

The truth is... We've reached an era where aggression, violence, and verbal abuse directed towards women now makes up the alarming majority of mainstream porn, and has thusly become (and is still becoming) accepted. The kind of porn originally discussed in this thread is really only one example of it, one undefendable example. There is no denying that it is entirely about male gratification - gratification that comes at the expense of women, whether it's the man doing it to the woman in the porn video, or the thousands of men (to whom it is directed at) getting off seeing it done to her. An act that is no doubt dehumanizing, degrading and physically abusive and punishing for these women. No less, it is seen in nearly every other popular porn title you come across these days, with frequency increasing.

 

EXACTLY. That's exactly how I see it too. And I hate how alot of men, that I have no doubt in my mind do sincerly love the women in their lives, think women should not care about what's going on. Or not care about the kind material their man is looking at and not make natural conclusions about how he feels about women because of it. Or not care that women are used and discarded like they are nothing. Basically, it's like they don't want women to care if they are disrespected as long as she shows up to make dinner and give bjs. You think that sounds tough or mean? What is tough or mean is defending an industry that regularly treats women like they are worthless, deserve to be called names and all that men can like them for are their t&as.

 

It really does make you wonder, what effect will this modern pornography have on our culture? In all honesty, I've seen where it has already begun to effect it... it is a bit worrisome for the long term.

 

I agree again. While we have improved with technology, modern culture is really very conflicted. We see a spike in alot of things that didn't happen 50 years ago. I think young men and women, teenagers, have less respect for each other and more anger then even older generations might have had. I have heard 15 year old girls and boys make the most bitter comments about members of the opposite sex.

 

 

A.O:

Might of been the case a generation or two ago, doesn't hold true anymore.

 

BS AO, BS. Why don't you talk about why it doesn't hold true anymore. I would be really interested in what examples you can come up with that prove your comment.

[A O]

BS AO, BS. Why don't you talk about why it doesn't hold true anymore. I would be really interested in what examples you can come up with that prove your comment.

Easy. Would a man get paid more for doing your job. Or would you get paid less for doing the job of a male co-worker of yours?

 

Next, we have a myriad of legislation the world over that penalizes anyone or any organization that favours male over females. Now, if it were a man's world, now days, these laws simply wouldn't exist. Next, we have abortion laws that whereupon the role of the mother supersedes the role of the father. Now, if it were a man's world, this wouldn't be happening. Along similar lines, we have custody laws and the like that generally favour the role of the mother over the father. How - 'its a man's world' is that one.

 

Next, the majority of university graduates are women now. Academic studies suggest that girls are flourishing moreso than boys. I could go on, you get the point. The days of it being a man's world have long since ended.

 

.

[Des]

Firstly AO, being a native New Zealander, I can't be sure how knowledgeable you could be in the areas of American culture and the effects that American pornography has on it... Then again, I realize the influential nature of the States, and it's possible that the majority of porn that you see is in fact American.

 

Might of been the case a generation or two ago, doesn't hold true anymore.

 

I find it hard to believe that you would disagree.

 

to truly objectify a person is to see and treat them as less than human, as nothing more than an object. Now, the more popular view of objectification is to concentrate on parts of the body ahead of everything else.

 

This is redundant. Whether one is focusing or indulging solely on the physical aspects of someone, or the gratification received from them thereby, is objectification all the same. The men in these porn films, and the many masturbating to them are not behind bars.

 

Women set themselves up to be objectified every bit as much as men objectify. You simply cannot have one without the other (and for the record, I'm not talking only about porn here, I'm talking in general).

 

They're not taught - it's as hard-wired in them as it is for men to look. Its, as you pointed out for men, something that they don't even realize they're doing (attracting, objectifying themselves). You need to look at the full picture here.

 

This is a weak counter than I often run across, one that really proves my point in itself. Women setting themselves up for objectification by men somehow makes it ok for them to be objectified?

 

There is a reason women do this, and it's not because they are hard-wired by nature in wanting to be objectified. It is in there nature to be desired and loved, and to achieve this, as they learn, is through objectification. Of course they don't actually recognize it as objectification, they just know that it's what they need to do in order to appeal to men, to garner the attention, desire, and praise of men. They do what they have to, to get what they need, as men do. Whether it's wearing skimpy clothing at the mall, or participating in a hardcore porno shoot. Self-esteem and confidence are achieved through this objectification, as praise is given to them. This is the bigger picture.

 

 

Men do not value looks above all else. Where on earth did you get that from? Looks play an important role (as it does for women) but not thee most important role.

 

Superficiality can be found in most of us, yes. But in an society where women, not men, are largely considered the eye candy, and are so often portrayed as desirable through physical appearance, there is no doubt that men value looks a great deal more than women do.

 

For the record, the natural order of things is for women to attract, and for men to be attracted. This is why women have so many issues around looks, because the ability to attract is all important to them (given that few women actually initiate anything themselves). But, just like women have issues surrounding their looks, then so do men have issues surrounding their ability to provide.

 

I swear AO, you are proving my points for me. This "natural order of things" is what is so profoundly wrong with our societal structure, in that is isn't nature that dictates this, it is socially conditioned, learned behavior. Monkey see, monkey do. Society dictates these rules that women need to objectify themselves to attract and that men are obligated or free to indulge.

 

Women have issues around their image because society objectifies them, pressures the standards and importance of looks as what makes a woman, and that achieving this is really all they need in order to be successful. Haven't you ever heard people say, a great looking woman could get through life well off and never have to work a day in her life? As long as she can stand there and look sexy, or sexually satisfy men, she has achieved. ...and exactly, men are put up to the obligation of everything else. That doesn't justify anything though. This is the true issue of inequality between men and women.

 

And neither do I. But like a lot of people, probably far more than you realize, I turn away from this shyt.

 

As far as sales records and Internet traffic reports indicate, you can hardly justify saying "a lot of people". As I mentioned earlier in this thread, one gagging video was reported by the site as having views upwards of 90,000 since it's posting, just one video of many, and just one site of many containing many videos like that... and that's more than the population of some small cities. While many don't, many do.

 

First off, that's just one part of her argument. To simply 'think' of someone else is to cheat on them. That's her most extreme view.

 

It is extreme, but it's honest even if many of us are guilty of it. It's not unlike adultery in the sense that, when one thinks sexually or becomes aroused at the thought of someone else other than who they claim their loyalty to, the value of that loyalty is diminished.

 

You shouldn't assume that to view a person in a sexual sense is to disrespect them overall.

 

To view an individual in a purely sexual sense doesn't disrespect them, it simply disregards the elements of their humanity, other than their physicality as a sexually stimulating object.

 

Said who?

 

Take a look at the ratio of iconic women who receive praise through industries that objectify them, as compared to those that credit them for their skill, intellect, and important real world achievements. Jenna Jamison vs Hilary Clinton... or dare I say it, Sarah Palin?

 

Right, so this has nothing to do with money? You make some good points but then you undo it all with some absolute rubbish.

 

Of course, but what does that tell women? That they can make a nice living through objectification and degradation much easier than they can through other means. Why? Because society demands it, they pay more to see it.

 

You do understand that there's also no shortage of degradation towards men porn out there also don't you?

 

You disappoint me, my friend. That, is what fetish porn is, almost tongue-in-cheek really. A shortage compared to the amount of porn directed towards a male audience of the opposite nature, there certianly is. You know better. Most of the porn market-share is of men's porn.

 

Disclaimers like, "this is simulated", "this is not real" ....name your slogan...is what I'd like to see, is what I fully expect will happen before long.

 

Huh? But it's not simulated, what happens on porn sets is very real... and watching it on a video doesn't make it any less real. The only fantasy element there is, is that the men watching desire to act these things out themselves with real women in their lives. I think what you mean is, there should be disclaimers saying "women were abused and degraded in the making of this film... don't try this at home."

Edited November 24, 2009 by Des

[Des]

Great, this is what I look forward to seeing.

 

You got it AO. Consider this analysis that was conducted studying levels of increasing violence in porn, as reported by ABC News.

 

50 of the top selling dvds, as according to AVN (adult video news), were selected to conduct this study. The study team recorded each instance of "aggression" that they saw in each scene... including but not limited things like slapping, spanking, gagging, verbal abuse etc, etc. Their definition of aggression being "any action causing physical or psychological harm to oneself or another person, verbally or physically".

 

Their findings were that nearly 95% of the aggression was directed towards the women in the videos, and 95% of the female characters who were targets of the aggression "expressed enjoyment or had no response at all".

 

- Though I'd be interested in hearing the amount who expressed "enjoyment" as opposed to those who had no response. I've seen both, but most of them lean more toward a non-expressive reaction.

 

"Sun noted a much higher frequency of aggression than reported in an earlier group of content analysis studies that also evaluated porn, conducted in the early '90s."

 

"Violence is met with acceptance or pleasure. So what does that mean for the viewer?"

 

"The question is often asked, 'Does pornography cause rape,' and the answer is obviously 'No.' I think the question is better framed, 'Does pornography contribute to a culture in which rapes happen at the epidemic levels it does?'"

 

Here is the link - http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/Story?id=6256523&page=2

Edited November 24, 2009 by Des

[A O]

Firstly AO, being a native New Zealander, I can't be sure how knowledgeable you could be in the areas of American culture and the effects that American pornography has on it

Yes, the American influence is all encompassing. Nonetheless, the production of porn is wide spread and hardly limited to US based sources.

 

I find it hard to believe that you would disagree.

Well, I'm sure you can give me a decent amount of examples to back up your claim that it is "still" a man's world.

 

This is redundant. Whether one is focusing or indulging solely on the physical aspects of someone, or the gratification received from them thereby, is objectification all the same. The men in these porn films, and the many masturbating to them are not behind bars.

No, there is a huge difference between the true meaning of objectification and the popular meaning of objectification.

 

This is a weak counter than I often run across, one that really proves my point in itself. Women setting themselves up for objectification by men somehow makes it ok for them to be objectified?

I didn't say it was OK, I'm simply stating the full picture. If you believe in hard-wiring, then you need to understand that this dynamic exists for both sexes. Objectification simply cannot happen in a vacuum.

 

There is a reason women do this, and it's not because they are hard-wired by nature in wanting to be objectified. It is in there nature to be desired and loved, and to achieve this, as they learn, is through objectification

You can't have desire without attraction, and you can't attract without some form of objectification (in the popular sense), be it, figure hugging clothing, make-up designed to imitate certain sexual organs or accentuate other parts of the body, shoes designed to accentuate height, and on and on it goes. This is objectification, this is attraction, this leads to desire, this is one half of the dating/relationship dance.

 

But in an society where women, not men, are largely considered the eye candy, and are so often portrayed as desirable through physical appearance, there is no doubt that men value looks a great deal more than women do.

I can agree with this. Its a far more balanced observation than your earlier 'men 'value looks above all else' comment.

 

I swear AO, you are proving my points for me. This "natural order of things" is what is so profoundly wrong with our societal structure, in that is isn't nature that dictates this, it is socially conditioned, learned behavior. Monkey see, monkey do. Society dictates these rules that women need to objectify themselves to attract and that men are obligated or free to indulge.

Tell all this to the rest of the animal world. It is nature, and it isn't limited to humans. Its that simple.

 

As far as sales records and Internet traffic reports indicate, you can hardly justify saying "a lot of people". As I mentioned earlier in this thread, one gagging video was reported by the site as having views upwards of 90,000 since it's posting, just one video of many, and just one site of many containing many videos like that... and that's more than the population of some small cities. While many don't, many do

Crap like that is a shame, more to the point though, is quantifying those that simply don't look in the first place and or quantifying the real world effect that these videos actually have.

 

It is extreme, but it's honest even if many of us are guilty of it. It's not unlike adultery in the sense that, when one thinks sexually or becomes aroused at the thought of someone else other than who they claim their loyalty to, the value of that loyalty is diminished.

Therefore the question becomes - how much disloyalty is too much. Think once, think twice, think a dozen times about someone else, what do you or JS quantify as a launchable 'disloyal' offence?

 

To view an individual in a purely sexual sense doesn't disrespect them, it simply disregards the elements of their humanity, other than their physicality as a sexually stimulating object.

So, what you're saying then is that you can respect a person as a sexual object, it just isn't worth much to you.

 

Take a look at the ratio of iconic women who receive praise through industries that objectify them, as compared to those that credit them for their skill, intellect, and important real world achievements. Jenna Jamison vs Hilary Clinton... or dare I say it, Sarah Palin?

So, you're telling me that for every landmark moment a woman makes, she's unlikely to receive the same level of acclaim as a man would in a similar situation. Well, I simply don't believe you.

 

Of course, but what does that tell women? That they can make a nice living through objectification and degradation much easier than they can through other means. Why? Because society demands it, they pay more to see it.

What this tells me is that there are other motivations involved, rather than the overly simplistic 'women do this because of men' line you sprouted earlier.

 

You disappoint me, my friend. That, is what fetish porn is, almost tongue-in-check really. A shortage compared to the amount of porn directed towards a male audience of the opposite nature, there certianly is. You know better. Most of the porn market share is for men.

Point is, you implied that 'fetish porn' is "entirely" about male gratification, gratification that comes at the expense of women. I don't doubt for one minute that this type of porn, as most types of porn are aimed mostly at men. But you made an absolute statement, one of many in fact. I simply want proper context.

 

Huh? But it's not simulated, what happens on porn sets is very real... and watching it on a video doesn't make it any less real. I think what you mean is, there should be disclaimers saying "women were abused and degraded in the making of this film... don't try this at home."

Like I said - name your disclaimer, name your slogan. If you want to use the one you've mentioned, then go for it. It opens debate, namely around why women would allow themselves to be treated this way, which is a far more important debate than this one.

 

Point is, its one way of dealing with the very real problems that people have mentioned here. It is a start.

 

You got it. Consider this analysis that was conducted studying levels of increasing violence in porn, as reported by ABC News.

I thank you for your one link.

 

"Violence is met with acceptance or pleasure. So what does that mean for the viewer?"

Yes, what does this mean in a real world context?

 

I think the question is better framed, 'Does pornography contribute to a culture in which rapes happen at the epidemic levels it does?'"

And does it? Has rape increased in your neck of the woods? I'm not seeing what transpires in the realms of fantasy cross over into the real world.

 

.

 

 

.

[Des]

production of porn is wide spread and hardly limited to US based sources.

 

Yes, women are degraded on a world-wide scale much in the same way...

 

decent amount of examples to back up your claim that it is "still" a man's world.

 

Redundancy is obviously getting us nowhere fast. Refer to the response above, also...

 

Why is it that of the fortune 500, only a handful of the CEOs are female? Why is it that all world leaders, most lawmakers, politicians and people of power are overwhelmingly male? Better yet, why is it the only truly female dominated areas tend to be stardom in pornography and housekeeping?

 

I didn't say it was OK.

 

/point

 

You can't have desire without attraction, and you can't attract without some form of objectification (in the popular sense), be it, figure hugging clothing, make-up designed to imitate certain sexual organs or accentuate other parts of the body, shoes designed to accentuate height, and on and on it goes. This is objectification, this is attraction, this leads to desire, this is one half of the dating/relationship dance.

 

You are merely explaining further into the mechanics of what I've already pointed out, as if it justifies anything. I can't believe that you're arguing that women objectifying themselves, and being objectified is "natural". What you are basically saying is that a man's initial interest in any woman is through sexual objectification. Is this "natural" or is this a "symptom" of a sex obsessed, porn entranced culture? Women didn't dress the way they do now, say, 70 years ago you know. Before porn culture, before the culture of their objectification was prevelant.

 

Tell all this to the rest of the animal world. It is nature, and it isn't limited to humans. Its that simple.

 

When was the last time you saw a handful of male squirrels objectifying a female squirrel? Maybe shooting a porn or two. Because the "natural" aspects of all of these things we've discussed, ends at the natural instinct to procreate. We have created the rest, it's what separates us from the animals. You could say that nature never intended the recreational exploitation of women for male gratification. Nature never even intended the recreational use of sex, period. These are not ideals I live by, I'm simply stating common knowledge. Humans have strayed far from nature, in more ways than just sex.

 

Therefore the question becomes - how much disloyalty is too much. Think once, think twice, think a dozen times about someone else, what do you or JS quantify as a launchable 'disloyal' offence?

 

Such a silly question - "How much disloyalty am I permitted?" If you're not into this whole idea of monogamous relationships, so be it, but damn. Obviously you can't be sexually satisfied through the one person you claim loyalty to, so what's the point of monogamy anyway?

 

Point is, you implied that 'fetish porn' is "entirely" about male gratification, gratification that comes at the expense of women.

 

I implied no such thing.

 

What is said was this: When I describe the content of modern mainstream porn, it is often misinterpreted as some sort of minority "fetish porn", by people who are ignorant to the current trending of porn that has become popular. Though, as I've pointed out from personal experience and the link I gave you, it is in fact widespread in the industry, targeted mostly at a male audience, and is becoming increasingly popular.

 

It opens debate, namely around why women would allow themselves to be treated this way, which is a far more important debate than this one.

 

More important yes, and one we've already addressed, and it's not that you even disagreed for the most part. Your response was, in a nut shell. "It's natural" and "men are victims of objectification too, ya know".

 

Yes, what does this mean in a real world context?

 

I think the effects can already be seen, and with time, will we seem more consequence. How could you not think it will have a profound effect on a generation of young, impressionable people who have never know it to be any different, and therefor see nothing abnormal or wrong with it?

Edited November 24, 2009 by Des

[Des]

Taken from Wikipedia, I feel this is an example of what the "popular" idea of sexual objectification is, AO.

 

"Sexual objectification is objectification of a person. It occurs when a person is seen as a sexual object when their sexual attributes and physical attractiveness are separated from the rest of their personality and existence as an individual[clarification needed], and reduced to instruments of pleasure for another person."

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_objectification

[A O]

Yes, women are degraded on a world-wide scale much in the same way.

So - what can we do about this?

 

Why is it that of the fortune 500, only a handful of the CEOs are female? Why is it that all world leaders, most lawmakers, politicians and people of power are overwhelmingly male?

There are few, if any barriers to women succeeding, as much and more, as any man. The world is whatever you wish it to be.

 

Better yet, why is it the only truly female dominated areas tend to be stardom in pornography and housekeeping?

The fashion industry ring any bells?

 

What you are basically saying is that a man's initial interest in any woman is through sexual objectification.

No, that's what you're saying.

 

When was the last time you saw a handful of male squirrels objectifying a female squirrel? We have created the rest, it's what separates us from the animals.

What we have created are artificially inflated standards of attraction. That much is very true (and a travesty IMO). But attraction is both natural and essential for the survival of most species.

 

Such a silly question - "How much disloyalty am I permitted?" If you're not into this whole idea of monogamous relationships, so be it, but damn. Obviously you can't be sexually satisfied through the one person you claim loyalty to, so what's the point of monogamy anyway?

If you believe that simply thinking sexual thoughts about another person equals disloyalty, then it stands to reason that you'd have a threshold upon which you'd consider - enough is enough. What would you recommend a reasonable threshold to be?

 

I implied no such thing.

Actually, not only did you imply it, you said it.and I quoted as much. Porn is entirely about male gratification. Those are your very words.

 

Your response was, in a nut shell. "It's natural" and "men are victims of objectification too, ya know".

I'm not interested in playing victim. I am interested in putting forth the full picture however.

 

I think the effects can already be seen, and with time, will we seem more consequence. How could you not think it will have a profound effect on a generation of young, impressionable people who have never know it to be any different, and therefor see nothing abnormal or wrong with it?

As I've pointed out already, I'm far from blind about the effects of porn, on the younger generation especially. The disclaimer/warning idea for instance, is aimed very much at these people. My point is though, I am not seeing a degradation of society, namely of attitudes from young men towards young women in the real world. I'm simply not seeing it. So, while I share the same concerns as you, in certain instances, I'm also very aware that I'm not seeing anything even remotely significant in a shift in attitude out there in the real world.

 

Taken from Wikipedia, I feel this is an example of what the "popular" idea of sexual objectification is, AO.

 

"Sexual objectification is objectification of a person. It occurs when a person is seen as a sexual object when their sexual attributes and physical attractiveness are separated from the rest of their personality and existence as an individual[clarification needed], and reduced to instruments of pleasure for another person."

This is not the popular definition, this is close to the proper definition I'm used to debating.

 

The popular definition of objectification simply reduces the parts of a person to pieces of meat, to be viewed, ogled, etc. But the popular definition rarely crosses the line into the last element of the proper definition, whereupon an individual is reduced to sub-human status. to a true object where anyone is free to have their way with them anyway they feel (akin to rape basically)

 

Few people actually ever consider objectification in its truest sense, henceforth, why I tend to separate the two.

 

.

[Jersey Shortie]

AO:

Easy. Would a man get paid more for doing your job. Or would you get paid less for doing the job of a male co-worker of yours?

 

LOL, why did you just ask me the same question twice but used "or" in it and changed the wording around? Yes, a man WOULD get paid more for doing my job. Yes, I would get paid less for doing the job of a male co-worker of mine. There is a man here that is younger then me, has been here less then I have and makes more then me.

 

Do you know what the top male actor earns? It's Harrison Ford and he earns $65 million.

 

Do you know what the top female actress ears? It's [FONT=Arial]Anglia[/FONT] [FONT=Arial][sIZE=2]Jolie and she earns $27 million. [/sIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=Arial][sIZE=2][/sIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=Arial][sIZE=2]That's no coidence special to the movie business. That's a business model about how much men and women earn. Women still make less money then men. [/sIZE][/FONT]

 

 

Next, we have a myriad of legislation the world over that penalizes anyone or any organization that favours male over females. Now, if it were a man's world, now days, these laws simply wouldn't exist.

 

What "myriad of legislation" laws are you refering to? Most CEOs, executives are men. If men were being so hugely slanted against, men wouldn't be as successful as they are.

 

Next, we have abortion laws that whereupon the role of the mother supersedes the role of the father. Now, if it were a man's world, this wouldn't be happening.

 

Wow. Now women aren't even allowed to be incharge of their own bodies? Are you kidding me? How would you like it if some woman told you what you could or couldn't do with your body? Do you agree or not that women do infact have a more invested interest in what happens to her body and baby?

 

How many men decide to leave their families and not be an active participating role in their own kids lives? How many men infact want women to abort their babies? It's not abortion laws that are superseding a father's role in their child's life. Women stick around more times then not. Men don't. Men go off and bang new chicks and forget about their kids or responsiblities or only take the kids a weekend every month and think that makes him a good father.

 

Along similar lines, we have custody laws and the like that generally favour the role of the mother over the father. How - 'its a man's world' is that one.

 

This I do infact agree with. But i think that's more because of men's own fault and being less likely to support his own kids and stick around for the long haul. Women, mothers, tend to be the bigger caregivers for the most part. That's a fact.

 

 

Next, the majority of university graduates are women now. Academic studies suggest that girls are flourishing moreso than boys. I could go on, you get the point. The days of it being a man's world have long since ended.

 

AGAIN, that is men's own fault! Men today rather sit infront of their playstations then be responsible adults. And it actually hurts both men and women. Women aren't the ones holding men back from going to school Men are holding themselves back there.

 

You're ridiculous. I think men do have certain struggles in this world that are unfair. But this world is ultimately a man's world. And the fact that these are the things you complain about, proves it more. And how little understanding you have or even want to have on women.

[A O]

Yes, a man WOULD get paid more for doing my job. Yes, I would get paid less for doing the job of a male co-worker of mine. There is a man here that is younger then me, has been here less then I have and makes more then me.

And this man has the exact same credentials as you? I understand that their are disparities between rates of pay based on experience and qualifications and the like. So, what are his credentials...is he being paid more than you because he's a man or because of other factors? You do know that if his credentials are exactly the same as yours that you can take your employer to court if you feel he's being paid more for the simple fact that he's male. I would urge you to do this immediately if this is indeed the case, and I'd urge anyone in a similar situation to do the same.

 

Do you know what the top male actor earns? It's Harrison Ford and he earns $65 million.

Actors aren't a true reflection of society.

 

What "myriad of legislation" laws are you refering to? Most CEOs, executives are men. If men were being so hugely slanted against, men wouldn't be as successful as they are.

Again, there are few, if any, barriers against women achieving as much and more as any man.

 

Wow. Now women aren't even allowed to be incharge of their own bodies? Are you kidding me?

You said it was a man's world right. If this were true, then yes, we'd be in-charge of womens' bodies too. Silly isn't it when seen in this light.

 

How many men decide to leave their families and not be an active participating role in their own kids lives?

And how many men pay child support and the like. Now again, if it were a man's world we wouldn't have to pay a dime.

 

AGAIN, that is men's own fault! Men today rather sit infront of their playstations then be responsible adults.

I don't see it as a fault - its simply another indicator of women freely doing as they choose, something that would be extremely difficult to do if it were truly a man's world.

 

You're ridiculous. I think men do have certain struggles in this world that are unfair. But this world is ultimately a man's world.

As mentioned earlier, the days when it was truly a man's world ended a generation or two ago. This world is whatever anyone chooses to make of it as evidenced to the few (if any) barriers to success for any gender, culture or ability.

 

 

.

[RobM]

Yes, a man WOULD get paid more for doing my job.

 

I thought arguing about porn and men online was your job. That said, nice to see you again js.

[Jersey Shortie]

And this man has the exact same credentials as you? I understand that their are disparities between rates of pay based on experience and qualifications and the like. So, what are his credentials...is he being paid more than you because he's a man or because of other factors? You do know that if his credentials are exactly the same as yours that you can take your employer to court if you feel he's being paid more for the simple fact that he's male. I would urge you to do this immediately if this is indeed the case, and I'd urge anyone in a similar situation to do the same

 

I am not taking anyone to court. Ridiculous. You asked me a question. I gave you an answer. If you are only going to argue with my answer, then don't ask me the question in the first place. There is no answer I could have given here except the one you want to hear, that you would have admitted to.

 

No of course this man doesn't have the same credentials as me. Most people don't have the same exact repeat backrounds. I have more experience within this industry then he does. I make less. We have the same exact job title.

 

There is an article in TIME magazine from last month that talks about the fact that women still make less then men. I know it's in the print version, so I will see if I can find it online. Don't sit there and tell us that women are all 100% equal now because that's a load of crap.

 

Actors aren't a true reflection of society.

 

Attempt to gloss over the facts and you only make yourself look inept. Actors and their lives aren't a true reflection of society, their pay checks are. Female actresses make millions of dollars less then their male counterparts. Case and point H.F vs. A.J. That's not a reflection of only the entertainment industry. That's a business model. Why are these female actresses making so much less then their male counter parts? I would love to see you attempt to justify that one.

 

Again, there are few, if any, barriers against women achieving as much and more as any man.

 

This did nothing to answer the question I asked you. Lets try this again:

 

What "myriad of legislation" laws are you refering to? Most CEOs, executives are men. If men were being so hugely slanted against, men wouldn't be as successful as they are.

 

Men run the world. there are 4 times as many men in position of power then women. Now, I like a man in power. However, lets be honest, most men aren't really ready to give women equality. Men want to be in power and do what they can to keep it.

 

You said it was a man's world right. If this were true, then yes, we'd be in-charge of womens' bodies too. Silly isn't it when seen in this light.

 

I am really super glad you said this. Because in a manner of speaking, men are in charge of women's bodies. Men set the standard for which women run themselves ragged trying to meet. Men set the standard for the idea of beauty. And women are told that this is their greatest accomplisment. To be beautiful. Please go back and read some of Des's posts, she really made some great and articulate comments. Men have labeled women since the dawn of time by nothing more then how attractive their bodies are and how worthy that makes them of male attention. Women are called sluts for sleeping around and women are called prudes for not putting out enough. Because men DO want to control female sexuality and have set the tone today on how women should act and look to be considered sexy.

 

And how many men pay child support and the like. Now again, if it were a man's world we wouldn't have to pay a dime.

 

LOL. Really? Are you kidding me? So far you got abortion and child support. And that's your grand-standing on how this makes this a woman's world? There are things that were put inplace to protect women. Because during a certain time, men were even less likely to fullfill these duties then today. However, that is no way makes any sense in proving that this isn't infact a man's world.

 

Women have centuries of degradement and dehumanzation and sexual objectifcation, rape, men who don't pay child support, men who beat them etc etc etc.

 

 

I thought arguing about porn and men online was your job. That said, nice to see you again js.

 

Can't say I remember you or care.

[RobM]

Can't say I remember you or care.

 

ouch, that hurts, nice to see you are getting mellow in your old age

Edited November 25, 2009 by RobM

[A O]

I am not taking anyone to court. Ridiculous. You asked me a question. I gave you an answer. If you are only going to argue with my answer, then don't ask me the question in the first place. There is no answer I could have given here except the one you want to hear, that you would have admitted to.

How can you say this is ridiculous - don't you believe in equal rights? People do this all the time. If you truly believe someone is getting paid more than you simply because of their gender, and not because of other factors, then you have a legitimate grievance whereupon the odds of reparation of some sort for you are greatly in your favour.

 

I wouldn't dilly dally if I were you, this is a no-brainer....assuming you're legit of course.

 

There is an article in TIME magazine from last month that talks about the fact that women still make less then men.

Pay disparities are great news fodder. Rarely, if ever, do they compare the same job against each other. For instance, take two new McDonald's employees, one a young man, the other a young women, both with the exact same credentials and experience. Under these conditions, you won't see the young man getting paid more than the young woman simply because of his gender. It won't happen, and circumstances like these are the norm. Comparing the whole workforce and averaging out the pay rates between men and women has never been a true reflection of what each gender is paid, its never has been and never will be. There are too many variables at play that the news organizations simply aren't interested in. They're after headlines and disparities grab attention.

 

What "myriad of legislation" laws are you refering to? Most CEOs, executives are men. If men were being so hugely slanted against, men wouldn't be as successful as they are.

I shouldn' have to do this because it is fairly obvious...here's one for your neck of the woods

Equal Pay Act of 1963 (US)

 

Men run the world. there are 4 times as many men in position of power then women.

Now, to use the very same logic you used on me earlier....whose fault is that? Did men actively seek to hold back women from pursuing these roles? If so, then I'm sure you could provide evidence to back up your claim.

 

I am really super glad you said this. Because in a manner of speaking, men are in charge of women's bodies. Men set the standard for which women run themselves ragged trying to meet. Men set the standard for the idea of beauty

Women are the gatekeepers of their own bodies. There is no manner of speaking, no assumption here. Men do not tell women how to look, we simply don't hold that power. Women start enhancing their looks as young kids, long before they're ever interested in boys. Its nature. Its done to attract men, but it's not done because we tell you to do this. It is your decision. As for Des, I didn't know that poster was a woman, it all makes sense now.

 

 

Men have labeled women since the dawn of time by nothing more then how attractive their bodies are and how worthy that makes them of male attention.

Women label women as much, if not more, than men. And there's good reason for this...one of the chief differences.between women and men is discrimination. Women, in general, are more discriminant than men, as they have to be given the consequences of sex and choosing the wrong partner. Indiscrimant women threaten the ability for women to choose, hence they're brought back into line through the use of labels and the like.

 

Women are called sluts for sleeping around and women are called prudes for not putting out enough. Because men DO want to control female sexuality and have set the tone today on how women should act and look to be considered sexy.

Men don't get a free pass for being sexual beings, never have, never well have. One of the meanings of the term - slut - is a woman who has the morals of a man. Simple fact of the matter is that men are judged, sexually speaking from such an early age, that society at large, and women especially, simply forget that its ever been done. Phrases like 'he only wants one thing', 'watch out, he only wants to get into your pants', 'he only ever thinks with his little head'...these all too common phrases are prime evidence of a gender that's constantly judged.

 

In general, men have to prove that they're above that. Men, constantly have to prove to women that they're interested in them for more than their bodies. Our natural starting order is behind the eight-ball. Women on the other hand, they're already one up on us, and they can only go one way....back down in the gutter with the men. So, no - its a myth and a mighty big one at that, that women are the only one's that are judged or controlled (as you like to say) for their sexual urges.

 

 

Women have centuries of degradement and dehumanzation and sexual objectifcation, rape, men who don't pay child support, men who beat them etc etc etc.

I understand this part...its a little out of context but I understand this. That is why I said the 'it's a mans world' view ended a generation or two ago. I never said it didn't exist.

 

LOL. Really? Are you kidding me? So far you got abortion and child support. And that's your grand-standing on how this makes this a woman's world?

So now its your turn.

 

If this truly is a man's world then please provide us with as many relevant laws and privileges that you can find that puts the rights of man ahead of women, that gives rights and privileges to men instead of women, that gives rights and privileges to men that doesn't have the same female equivalent.

 

Now, if this truly is a man's world, then I'm sure you'll be able to rattle off a long list in double quick time.

 

 

.

Edited November 25, 2009 by A O

[Jersey Shortie]

ouch, that hurts, nice to see you are getting mellow in your old age

 

So you can dish it out but you can't take it Rob?

 

I am certainly not getting any more mellow.

 

How can you say this is ridiculous - don't you believe in equal rights? People do this all the time. If you truly believe someone is getting paid more than you simply because of their gender, and not because of other factors, then you have a legitimate grievance whereupon the odds of reparation of some sort for you are greatly in your favour.

 

I wouldn't dilly dally if I were you, this is a no-brainer....assuming you're legit of course.

 

Are you going to stick to the topic or try to give me legal advice that you are clearly unqualified to give? I am actually now amused because of your clear diversionary ploy here.

 

As for Des, I didn't know that poster was a woman, it all makes sense now.

 

I think Des is a woman but I could be wrong. Either way, does it matter? Does it make her points or opinions any less valuable? You seem to be insinuating it does..such as "oh she is a woman so her now I get why she thinks this..", instead of looking more logically at the whole thing.

 

As for your other "points". I am not going to go around in circles with you again. You're quite pointless to talk to.

[jerseyboy]

Are female masturbation vids misogynistic as well?