# HER Pornage Usery- Your FEELINGS



## Green Eyed Fairy (Sep 10, 2009)

This is the sister thread to the first one started on the BBW board discussing how women feel about their guys using/viewing porn materials.

Click on this link to see it:
http://www.dimensionsmagazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=63798

Women....some of us use it, too.....(well not MOI of course...but anyway )

How does it make you feel when/if your Significant Other uses porn in your relationship? Some couples use it together, I suspect. Does your Lady use it without you? Does it make you feel like you aren't doing something right?
Do you think she has a porn addiction? 

Wondering about the viewpoint of the menfolk - from the opposite angle. 

And just like the other thread.....any and all constructive replies are welcome.


----------



## pdgujer148 (Sep 11, 2009)

I haven't met that many women who are into porn. I briefly dated a woman who was into gay porn--she said the guys were hotter. It didn't really bother me at all. Even the fact that what she considered "hotter" was younger, prettier, and more muscular than I wasn't that big of an insult.

However, I'll admit, if that relationship had blossomed, and she was spending her nights [what is a feminine synonym for fapping?] to "Full Metal Jack-off" at the expense of our sex life I would have a problem. 

A quickie to relieve tension? Fine. Something to do when I'm not around? Cool.

Facilitate while she watches? No. Probably not. There a couple lines there that are outside my comfort zone. I certainly would not ask a woman to do the same for me.


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 11, 2009)

Haha! I was headed over here to see about starting a thread after you posted your wish on the BBW Board. Then I thought maybe an FA would've started it. Then I saw you did!

Gooooood thread, my lady friend. :bow:


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Sep 12, 2009)

Thankee Fasc 

Hoping it gets a lot of input from the guys. This could be interesting....

Added a poll. If there is not an option up there to your liking, then please feel free to just express your different opinion/ideal in a thread post


----------



## Cors (Sep 12, 2009)

I am fine with a partner watching porn as long as it is legal and doesn't influence sex in a way I am not comfortable with. I would prefer if we are into the same stuff, but there is so little porn I like that this is not realistic. I won't dictate what she gets off to, but she should have the good sense NOT to tell me if she is watching something that might trigger one of my many angry rants (eg. defloration, nonconsent, racial stereotypes, til-the-male-lead-walks-in faux-lesbian porn).


----------



## Fuzzy Necromancer (Sep 12, 2009)

An individual has no right to police their partner's recreational materials.

If it turns out she's a big Twilight fan, then I might consider heading for the hills, but porn is no problem.

I won't watch it with her, but that has more to do with my preferences regarding erotic material than the relationship.


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 12, 2009)

Fuzzy Necromancer said:


> An individual has no right to police their partner's recreational materials.



If these recreational materials interfere with the quality of a relationship, I'd say the "individual" is directly affected by it and has every right to make his feelings about it known, wouldn't you say?


----------



## imfree (Sep 12, 2009)

Fuzzy Necromancer said:


> An individual has no right to police their partner's recreational materials.....snipped......



That's true. "In a good relationship, neither partner should
mind trading places with the other" Inappropriate porn 
usage, however, can ruin a relationship and give his/her 
partner a good reason to leave.


----------



## StarWitness (Sep 12, 2009)

pdgujer148 said:


> [what is a feminine synonym for fapping?]



The first usage of the term "fap" that I am familiar with comes from the sadly defunct webcomic Sexy Losers. The onomatopoeic expression that the author used for female masturbation was "shlick." Example. (NSFW/NSFL)


----------



## gangstadawg (Sep 12, 2009)

Fuzzy Necromancer said:


> An individual has no right to police their partner's recreational materials.
> 
> If it turns out she's a big Twilight fan, then I might consider heading for the hills, but porn is no problem.
> 
> I won't watch it with her, but that has more to do with my preferences regarding erotic material than the relationship.



AGREE! reminds me of a ex i used to have that didnt want me to play video games AT ALL period. lets just say she is a ex for a reason.


----------



## marlowegarp (Sep 13, 2009)

Yeah. As long as it isn't coming between the two, wanting to control someone else's viewing seems insecure and unattractive to me.


----------



## Melian (Sep 13, 2009)

If it's ok with GEF, I'd like to add a secondary question:

What would happen if you found out that your gf/wife regularly looked at porn (or sexy-but-not-pornographic) pics of men who were way fatter than you?


----------



## Captain Save (Sep 13, 2009)

How could any one complain about the SO being ready to go when you get home from work? Porn is GREAT!

In all seriousness, I can't really see much of a problem if she has her collection of porn; it can provide ideas to enhance fantasies and activities. As long as it fuels her imagination and desire, we can either enjoy it together or solo when the SO isn't available. If it makes our activities more enjoyable, I won't have a problem being the Most Valuable Customer at Cockstroker Video, complete with my picture over the Adult movie section...yes, that picture on the left.

Of course, if our activities require the services of an attorney, cause embarassment or pain to others, or ends in an arrest, then we might have a problem. Same goes for neglecting the demands of daily life; no one wants to hear, 'honey, I had to let that 9 to 5 job go; Pornhub is running a contest this week!' I think a relationship is in serious trouble when the SO enters the house and it appears to be a drug den, complete with week old trash and rats everywhere, curtains drawn and no sounds except for the woman who clearly hasn't gotten up except to change the batteries in her toys.


----------



## marlowegarp (Sep 13, 2009)

Melian said:


> If it's ok with GEF, I'd like to add a secondary question:
> 
> What would happen if you found out that your gf/wife regularly looked at porn (or sexy-but-not-pornographic) pics of men who were way fatter than you?



I think a lot of the point of porn is a departure from reality. I would pretty much expect that any porn actors would look different from me. As long as it didn't affect our sex life, I would be cool with it.


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 14, 2009)

marlowegarp said:


> As long as it didn't affect our sex life, I would be cool with it.



What if your sex life was OK but the fantasizing affected other parts of your SO's life? For instance, what if it was taking time away from her work or other responsibilities/commitments? Would you be cool with that, too?


----------



## marlowegarp (Sep 14, 2009)

I suppose not entirely, but managing work life and other individual commitments would be her concern, just as my time management problems would be my own. Has porn ever made me late for work? Yep. So has sex with a significant other. Priorities I guess.


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 14, 2009)

marlowegarp said:


> I suppose not entirely, but managing work life and other individual commitments would be her concern, just as my time management problems would be my own. Has porn ever made me late for work? Yep. So has sex with a significant other. Priorities I guess.



lol I'm assuming you're not even close to thinking about being in a long-term relationship with someone, of the co-habitatin' kind where you're both equally responsible for certain things.

Managing work life would be her concern? If your SO gets fired for poor performance and you lose half a household's income, I'll show you how quickly it is _both_ people's concern. And mmm, if she's spending time online that she should be spending talking to the kids' teacher or something... No, that wouldn't be a problem.


----------



## marlowegarp (Sep 14, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> lol I'm assuming you're not even close to thinking about being in a long-term relationship with someone, of the co-habitatin' kind where you're both equally responsible for certain things.
> 
> Managing work life would be her concern? If your SO gets fired for poor performance and you lose half a household's income, I'll show you how quickly it is _both_ people's concern. And mmm, if she's spending time online that she should be spending talking to the kids' teacher or something... No, that wouldn't be a problem.



Umm...did that happen to _you_? That seems like an extreme, Maury-type scenario. 

Firstly, you would be correct in assuming that I don't want children, buuut...that's about it. Do you call your SO's boss to make sure everything's cool? I hope not. Co-habitation between two adults doesn't mean one gets to make calls like that for the other. 

And equally responsible for what things? Honestly, I feel like you asked the question with a specific anti-porn "right answer" in mind. Am I wrong? I will concede that I need to wrap this up as I need to go to work. I'm on my third porn warning.


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 14, 2009)

marlowegarp said:


> And equally responsible for what things? Honestly, I feel like you asked the question with a specific anti-porn "right answer" in mind.



Nah. Just a reality check. Just having a convo with you. You know?



> Am I wrong?



Yes. Definitely.



> I will concede that I need to wrap this up as I need to go to work. I'm on my third porn warning.



Ha! Your pimp keeps you in strong check, don't he? It's odd he doesn't want you into the whole porn thing. What moral ground has he to stand on? But business is business, I guess...

Oh, just kidding you, you big galoot.

Have a good day gnashing your teeth at the anti-porn brigade that lives in your head!


----------



## snuggletiger (Sep 14, 2009)

Doesn't matter to me, I am used to the woman dreaming of someone other then me. Someday I'll be dreamable.


----------



## Tad (Sep 14, 2009)

1) This is all in the context that to the best of my knowledge my wife does not use porn (although I make a point of not trying to further my knowledge in this regard).

2) Anything that significantly interferes with handling life can obviously be an issue. In my mind most people use porn in a way which either doesn't interfere or actually enhances their ability to handle life. But obviously there are exceptions. If it started to interfere, sure we'd have to talk about it. Trying to say more would be all speculation, as things could go off in all sorts of directions.

3) At the risk of falling into stereotypes, I've heard more complaints from guys about their female SO being into some form of pap romance....harlequin romances, endless romantic comedies, or the like. I think that falls under point 2. To me the issue is the effect on living life well, rather than the source (effect is what matters to me more than source).



Melian said:


> What would happen if you found out that your gf/wife regularly looked at porn (or sexy-but-not-pornographic) pics of men who were way fatter than you?



4) Personally I'd be freaking delighted to find out that she had an FFA side I'd not fully discovered, and would start dropping hints about how I might achieve such a physique  

I might be more bothered if she was always mooning over pics of super-buff guys. But I long ago accepted that I don't have a physique to set women's hormones surging, so it would essentially be confirmation of what I already assume. I'd rather not have all doubt removed, but sometimes that is just how life is.

5) Just generally I think that it is unlikely that any one person will totally match and fulfill any other person's sexuality. We all have our own areas of interest and dis-interest. Obviously you need your sexualities to have enough over-lap to keep things interesting. How you handle the un-matched parts so that they don't become a problem is an individual thing. Some couples will be able to stretch to partially provide to their partners, some will manage to suppress or ignore them, others will use porn or other sources of stimulation to scratch those itches. My wife finds nothing erotic about fat, while she has some things that turn her crank that leave me totally cold. So we each have our own 'thing' to handle on our own. Our responsibility to the relationship is to handle it without hurting the relationship.


----------



## marlowegarp (Sep 14, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> Yes. Definitely.
> 
> Ha! Your pimp keeps you in strong check, don't he? It's odd he doesn't want you into the whole porn thing. What moral ground has he to stand on? But business is business, I guess...
> 
> ...



Of course I gnash my teeth! I work with the public!


----------



## joswitch (Sep 14, 2009)

@GEF - I don't know if any of my ex gfs had much of a porn habit.. They didn't share if so.. Now.. if that one ex gf had been schlicking (@StarWitness - I fuckin loved Sexy Losers! So funny!) all those weekday nights - when she said she went to bed early instead of seeing me, cos she was tired from work.. Well then i woulda been totally gutted... Pretty damn sure not tho!  Her job did exhaust her... I have written porny stories to order for my ex's in the past.. Either in absentia for a long distance gf.. or aurally on the fly "en friggante al digitale" to help her "O" when I could tell thoughts of paperwork on a Sunday morning were distracting her from joy.. On the whole I'd be cool with gf being into porn* and would be up for playing with /doing for her while she watched her chosen vid... Altho I'm mostly dom there's a reason I have "switch" in my handle.. Brings me [email protected] no I'd be cool with gf scoping the SSBHMs as long as she was getting off on what lil chub I've got when we're together.. I wouldn't want to feel I had nothing of the thing that most dings her bell.. I can accept that other guys might have more... And if she wants to look sometimes and get off then no biggy..... *Nothing illegal and no shit, nor violence..


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Sep 14, 2009)

The question about the people in the porn being fatter....it could also be flipped into thinner. 

What if the SO gave you reason to believe that she PREFERRED watching the porn over sex with you? Would you deem it a problem then?


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 14, 2009)

joswitch said:


> I wouldn't want to feel I had nothing of the thing that most dings her bell.. I can accept that other guys might have more... And if she wants to look sometimes and get off then no biggy.....



You could put on some weight for her and you'd BOTH win. Let's face it, when one likes fat, nothing but a mountain of it will do. And if you can't or won't get fatter, wouldn't your GF then be entitled to "look" more than just "sometimes" (as in, "just about every chance she got"!)? After all, she likes what she likes. And she needs it to be happy.
'
The more I think about it, the more I think this relationship is doomed. Better go find a GF who's not as inflexible in what she likes. :bow:


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 14, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> What if the SO gave you reason to believe that she PREFERRED watching the porn over sex with you? Would you deem it a problem then?



I think joswitch implied that he'd be hurt if he knew that was going on, Greenie: His statement that if it turned out the GF had just preferred getting off to her fantasies over being with him, and had "made up" the excuse that she was tired from work.

AM I wrong, jo?


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Sep 14, 2009)

Hmmmmm for some reason....I feel the need to talk about fetishes in this thread. The mention of "fatter" sparked the thought of "not being able to please the SO" in my head. Porn that caters to a certain fetish.....should it replace the intimacy of a couple?

I was in a relationship with a person that had a fetish for a long time. It grew problematic for me at some point. In the beginning, I would do things to please him....that was really okay with me because I thought of it as a mutual thing. 
Over time though, I started realizing that it wasn't a "part-time fetish" thing with him (yes call me naive- I was very young when I got into that relationship...plus...he was also young and just discovering his fetish/desire) but it was what he desired most....even more than good old fashioned sex with me.....or that's how I started seeing it as days went by..... 
I grew resentful....and didn't want to do those things anymore. It hurt for me to do them....and I grew to hate the box full of fetish porno that I had previously ignored. Why was he collecting it when he had me? The same me that had tried so hard to please him and had made that relationship my whole life....
Hmmmm....what am I trying to say? I suppose I would rather just ask....does the porno lead a relationship in directions it wasn't meant to take? Shouldn't have taken? 
Or can it be more of a stress factor....and yes, I realize that relationships can have many other things to add stress....to an already struggling, burdened relationship? 

Porn can be hurtful.....or something to add resentment in a relationship that is just holding on....so does that change or enhance any opinions? 

**Also...since it was brought up I want to say that I like porn....I didn't start this thread to be "anti-porn". Just curious about the attitudes towards it INSIDE a relationship and what place does it have in the realm of a real, sexual relationship...if any.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Sep 14, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> I think joswitch implied that he'd be hurt if he knew that was going on, Greenie: His statement that if it turned out the GF had just preferred getting off to her fantasies over being with him, and had "made up" the excuse that she was tired from work.
> 
> AM I wrong, jo?



Thanks. I read his response....just have trouble absorbing what he says sometimes because....of how he types? The layout of the words? Unsure....but I tend to skim his paragraphs a lot....not because I find it uninteresting or to be disrespectful of another poster- but because I honestly have trouble reading it in it's format.....:blink:
*Disclaimer: I DID read it in it's entirety because it said @GEF at the top.....just felt my eyes crossing while trying to absorb it  

Sorry....oh and I have always read the name as "Jos Witch" in my mind....interesting to read that it's Jo Switch instead.....

I also wanted to know how others felt, too, about that question.


----------



## joswitch (Sep 14, 2009)

@GEF - if porn is preferred to sex > end of relationship.. @Fascinitia.. Yeah, if my gf was a feeder/FFA then yeah I'd gain some for her but only if it REALLY turned her on.. (again I ="switch" in that aspect too ;P ) And no *I* for one am not all about extreme size... once a girl is a BBW (about size 20 uk) then sizewise she's got it IMO.. and my whole feeder thing calms right the fuck down, thankfully*** (as far as gain) and can cheerfully be relegated to ceremony/play (gain not important)... Don't get me wrong I also dig much bigger girls.. And if a gf happens to put on some then woo! Extra hotness! But if I'm with a gorgeous BBW then she=plenty for me... I'm not thinking about cutting into our time together and going and looking at porn of a bigger girl.. What the hell for? Real. Hot. Girl. Right. Here. =  ***That my feeder thing revs right up if I'm with a girl smaller than this is a major reason why I try only to date BBWs or Feedees (anymore.. as of ten years ago) - it being bad, bad, bad to date someone with a view to change them.. Unless they so desire to change for themselves anyway... ;P


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 14, 2009)

GEF, don't mind me... jo and I have an ongoing argument about inflexible erotic requirements and my post was aimed in that direction.

Apropos your next-to-last post above, I'll add (because I started that other thread on the BBW board, and because I hear the "anti-porn" accusation aaaaaallllll the time) that it surprises me how little debate is allowed to take place around the subject of porn. Wanting to talk about it, about its influence, about its full scope, about its impact--because as something so entirely pervasive at this point, it's bound to be a complicated thing--is enough to get anyone branded as part of some sex-hating--woman-hating, too, natch... because if you want to challenge the _real_ (as opposed to fantasy) aspect of, mmm, female subjugation promoted by the porn industry, maybe in the hope that porn becomes truly the woman-empowering thing some claim it to be, it somehow gets twisted into a simplistic "you want to take women's choices away"--brigade of prudery.

It's not ironic, or anything, that it ends up it's the people screaming "Prude!" that actually don't want to discuss these things.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Sep 14, 2009)

joswitch said:


> @GEF - if porn is preferred to sex > end of relationship.. @Fascinitia.. Yeah, if my gf was a feeder/FFA then yeah I'd gain some for her but only if it REALLY turned her on.. (again I ="switch" in that aspect too ;P ) And no *I* for one am not all about extreme size... once a girl is a BBW (about size 20 uk) then sizewise she's got it IMO.. and my whole feeder thing calms right the fuck down, thankfully*** (as far as gain) and can cheerfully be relegated to ceremony/play (gain not important)... Don't get me wrong I also dig much bigger girls.. And if a gf happens to put on some then woo! Extra hotness! But if I'm with a gorgeous BBW then she=plenty for me... I'm not thinking about cutting into our time together and going and looking at porn of a bigger girl.. What the hell for? Real. Hot. Girl. Right. Here. =  ***That my feeder thing revs right up if I'm with a girl smaller than this is a major reason why I try only to date BBWs or Feedees (anymore.. as of ten years ago) - it being bad, bad, bad to date someone with a view to change them.. Unless they so desire to change for themselves anyway... ;P



I read the whole thing 

and liked it


----------



## joswitch (Sep 14, 2009)

Sorry GEF - bad layout cos I typing on phone.. Can't paragraph!!  Yeah if I can BE my gfs fetish - at least up to point - and she's up for equal give and take on that front.. And we're both up for some vanilla sometimes, so the fetishes don't eat the whole relationship... Then.. Cool beans!  It sounds like your ex wasn't too interested in YOUR turn ons GEF.. A big no no in my book! Gotz to give to get! Love/loving/sex = two way street..


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Sep 14, 2009)

joswitch said:


> Sorry GEF - bad layout cos I typing on phone.. Can't paragraph!!  Yeah if I can BE my gfs fetish - at least up to point - and she's up for equal give and take on that front.. And we're both up for some vanilla sometimes, so the fetishes don't eat the whole relationship... Then.. Cool beans!  * It sounds like your ex wasn't too interested in YOUR turn ons GEF.. A big no no in my book*! Gotz to give to get! Love/loving/sex = two way street..


That's how it felt often time....but looking back now outside of the relationship, I think he might have felt he wasn't pleasing me enough either....and perhaps gave up? Or went inside a shell? He wasn't a good communicator. Doesn't matter anymore though since it's over....*shrugs*


----------



## Tina (Sep 14, 2009)

marlowegarp said:


> That seems like an extreme, Maury-type scenario.


You wouldn't believe what has happened before to couples where addiction to porn has caused job loss, the end of marriages, disease from taking it from cyber to real life and on and on and on. If you try researching it you'd find that her scenario was really quite tame compared to what has happened with some.


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 14, 2009)

joswitch said:


> whole feeder thing calms right the fuck down, thankfully*** (as far as gain) and can cheerfully be relegated to ceremony/play (gain not important)...



This is refreshing. I hear and see so much of the other thing: wanting bigger and bigger bodies (just as, in the "thin" world, one can "never be too thin") into infinity or... :bow:


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Sep 14, 2009)

Tina said:


> You wouldn't believe what has happened before to couples where addiction to porn has caused job loss, the end of marriages, disease from taking it from cyber to real life and on and on and on. If you try researching it you'd find that her scenario was really quite tame compared to what has happened with some.



Porn addiction seems to be like any other addiction....it's escapism. Like addiction to drugs, alcohol, gambling, food, internet, etc......

It all wreaks the same havoc on life and relationships.


----------



## Tina (Sep 14, 2009)

Yep, pretty much.


----------



## Lastminute.Tom (Sep 14, 2009)

well that question certainly came out of the blue for me, in all of my ramblings concerning porn the number of times female porn usage came up could be counted on one hand

at first I think I'd feel jealous, inadequate maybe, but I think I could grow to dig it, after all it's only a big deal if you make it one, as long as its not detrimental to your overall well being and who you want to be within the relationship then it's an oppertunity to explore yourself and your partner*.

I guess it all depends upon the context of the relationship anyway.

*_while I can preach that, I'm not sure I could practice it_


----------



## mossystate (Sep 14, 2009)

I think buckets of men are ok with their significant others enjoying porn...because so many men only think of the porn that turns them on so much, and that feels safe enough for them. Since there is no way I will see in my lifetime, an understanding of how the ' typical ' has shaped and formed how so many of think of erotic images and ideas...seems things will be safe for a lot of men...for a long time.


----------



## mossystate (Sep 14, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> GEF, don't mind me... jo and I have an ongoing argument about inflexible erotic requirements and my post was aimed in that direction.
> 
> Apropos your next-to-last post above, I'll add (because I started that other thread on the BBW board, and because I hear the "anti-porn" accusation aaaaaallllll the time) that it surprises me how little debate is allowed to take place around the subject of porn. Wanting to talk about it, about its influence, about its full scope, about its impact--because as something so entirely pervasive at this point, it's bound to be a complicated thing--is enough to get anyone branded as part of some sex-hating--woman-hating, too, natch... because if you want to challenge the _real_ (as opposed to fantasy) aspect of, mmm, female subjugation promoted by the porn industry, maybe in the hope that porn becomes truly the woman-empowering thing some claim it to be, it somehow gets twisted into a simplistic "you want to take women's choices away"--brigade of prudery.
> 
> It's not ironic, or anything, that it ends up it's the people screaming "Prude!" that actually don't want to discuss these things.



Bingo. If history had been a little different in terms of who has been allowed to express and delight in....whatever.....this conversation would be soooo not like it is.


----------



## joswitch (Sep 15, 2009)

@mossy - ok then what are these categories of porn of which you speak? That will make us menz blanch and tremble and weep? Other than the obvious men-on-men/huge cocks (often enjoyed by het women, I hear) which is not a turn on of mine but I'd have be cool if gf was into it..


----------



## LillyBBBW (Sep 15, 2009)

I vote that this thread be CAST OUT and COMPLETELY OBLITERITATED due to the inflammatory and exclusionary language set forth therein. I feel marginalized, violated, agreeved and invalidated. *places back of hand on forhead for dramatic effect* I have been stripped of my dignity and value as a woman by this travesty of inquisitive inquiry question pole about HER porn. *gasps* Have you no SHAME?  

However.. this did not prevent me from voting in it. I voted for answer number 1. Don't flame me for my opinion it's just how I feel. I'm a woman of deep passions.


----------



## Tad (Sep 15, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> What if the SO gave you reason to believe that she PREFERRED watching the porn over sex with you? Would you deem it a problem then?





Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Porn addiction seems to be like any other addiction....it's escapism. Like addiction to drugs, alcohol, gambling, food, internet, etc......
> 
> It all wreaks the same havoc on life and relationships.



I think you answered your own question?


----------



## Tau (Sep 15, 2009)

I honestly don't think most men would care very much if their SO was into traditional porn simply because I don't think most women view traditional porn the way men do. When I've watched porn with my friends, or even alone, there's always a part of me yawning or giggling away just cos some of it is so stupid. Or really gross - like what's up with all the spitting ??  Same as when my girls and I visit a strip club: I love getting lap dances from delicious, sweaty young men and yes, I have been aroused occasionally. But even when I was at my hottest and most flustered I didn't really mean it, I never got that sort of click in my head that signaled to my body that 'you need to get it on immediately!' I think men should rather be concerned when their SO has an alarming pile of romance novels piling up on her side of the bed and would 'rather just read a book' than do the nasty with you  

Most of the women I have spoken to - we did a survey of 300 female students while I was at university as part of my politics class on feminism and pornography (not a massive number but substantial) - are left completely unmoved by traditional porn and are more likely to pop a woody while reading a book, watching Pride and Prejudice (the 6 hour long, UK version), the spanking scenes from The Secretary, or getting a foot massage. Seriously, these were the answers we got from females ages 17 to 22. I'm at 27 now and the women in my life are still left mostly unmoved by traditional porn. The extreme, fetish variety I think gets everybody's motor running for a bit, but then that fades too and you need to see something even more extreme to achieve that same level of arousal. 

So, long story short, I don't think your question is realistic. I honestly do not believe that large numbers of women can or do become addicted to porn, or even use it in the same way as male consumers, which is why it is still made for men. As a result of this, I don't think most men have ever or would ever have occasion to become upset or intimidated by their partners porn use. I do, however, know a man who burnt his wife's romance novel stash...but that relationship was FUBAR anyway and doomed almost from the beginning.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Sep 15, 2009)

joswitch said:


> @mossy - ok then what are these categories of porn of which you speak? That will make us menz blanch and tremble and weep? Other than the obvious men-on-men/huge cocks (often enjoyed by het women, I hear) which is not a turn on of mine but I'd have be cool if gf was into it..



How about if your GF enjoyed watching young men dressed & made up to appear far younger than 18 going at it?


----------



## mossystate (Sep 15, 2009)

@ jos...you did not understand my comment

Lilly...if this had been on a protected forum, I would not have touched it ( I have posted once on the fa forum, when a man asked for any and all to comment )...so, there you HAVE it...


----------



## LillyBBBW (Sep 15, 2009)

mossystate said:


> @ jos...you did not understand my comment
> 
> Lilly...if this had been on a protected forum, I would not have touched it ( I have posted once on the fa forum, when a man asked for any and all to comment )...so, there you HAVE it...



Wha...? Not sure what you mean but just to clarify I was directing this as a tease to GEF for gearing this poll towards men only. I prefer this poll setting to the generalized discussion in the other thread and wanted to vote in it. I don't have any problems with anybody posting in here, haven't even read them all.


----------



## mossystate (Sep 15, 2009)

LillyBBBW said:


> Wha...? Not sure what you mean but just to clarify I was directing this as a tease to GEF for gearing this poll towards men only. I prefer this poll setting to the generalized discussion in the other thread and wanted to vote in it. I don't have any problems with anybody posting in here, haven't even read them all.



Oh...lol...then it is just an amusing meshing.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Sep 15, 2009)

mossystate said:


> Oh...lol...then it is just an amusing meshing.



Yeah, I'm not really that sharp. I posted impulsively without reading through first. Sorry if I struck a sour note with anyone, I really wasn't trying anything funny. 'Cept where GEF is concerned of course which so far has been an epic fail.



joswitch said:


> @mossy - ok then what are these categories of porn of which you speak? That will make us menz blanch and tremble and weep? Other than the obvious men-on-men/huge cocks (often enjoyed by het women, I hear) which is not a turn on of mine but I'd have be cool if gf was into it..



I think this attitude display towards female sexuality is problematic if you don't mind my butting in, yet again. Your post about the tremblesome workings of female sexuality come off as condescending and superior, an attitude that is often on display. To generalize it seems that on average men express their sexuality differently than women do. Great efforts have been made to legitimize and make male sexuality understood and accepted and as women we are often called to be non reactive and understanding. Then in return we get to be the brunt of jokes and flowery derisive comments. Are we supposed to be embarassed by our weakened and inferior tunrnons that aren't really all that noteworthy compared to the girl on girl double penetration edition? Seriously jo, don't flag us off as inconsequential in the scheme of life. If you want understanding give some in return please.


----------



## Admiral_Snackbar (Sep 15, 2009)

I won't go into a reiteration of my diatribe on the other thread (for which in retrospect I should have just backed slowly out of) except to say the poll seems to have too many categories and missing a critical one--although maybe my read is off--that implies that you use porn together when needed, alone as necessary but not to replace your SO.

Also, with the advent of stars like Sapphire, Samantha 38G and April Flores, you have more and more BBW actresses crossing into the mainstream arena and being very successful at it. April more than anyone I think has appeal for a BBW, and she's been in at least a few flicks where the story and hotness has worked well together (I think Voluptuous Life is one example, and she's become a feature star in several of Belladonna's movies).



TraciJo67 said:


> How about if your GF enjoyed watching young men dressed & made up to appear far younger than 18 going at it?



I believe they are called "twinks" and from what little I've seen are quite popular in gay male porn. It's even a sub-genre of the BHM gay male bear groups where the younger, thin gay men are called "cubs". I believe that fantasy of desiring the forbidden flesh swings both ways regardless of gender.

I would also say that in the wake of the Max Hardcore (a.k.a. Paul Little) conviction, there is less and less of this done in today's market; the 'barely legal' genre is carefully produced now to remove any overt references that imply the women are underaged--doesn't always work but the industry has now seen that it is litigable and are backing off from the emphasis on jailbait.



joswitch said:


> @mossy - ok then what are these categories of porn of which you speak? That will make us menz blanch and tremble and weep? Other than the obvious men-on-men/huge cocks (often enjoyed by het women, I hear) which is not a turn on of mine but I'd have be cool if gf was into it..



Actually I think a popular alternative is the more lesbian-centric movies put out now (there's one that is actually up to part 30 or 40 in a series that tells a soap opera-type story) that actually have a lot of plot/romance as well as hot raunchy bedroom fun. They use younger and older actresses and cover a wide range of subjects. 

My understanding based on women I've spoken with is they watch gay male porn for the curiosity factor and the fact that the men tend to be much more attractive/fit; this gulf has narrowed extensively with the advent of Viagra--no more are we straight men consigned to fap vicariously through a Randy West, Herschel Savage or Ron Jeremy as we imagine ourselves boffing some young starlet.


----------



## joswitch (Sep 15, 2009)

@mossy- you implied that women have been kept from expressing aspects of their sexuality (in porn) that you claim would disturb and upset men.. i asked what those are.. How have I misunderstood you? @TraciJo- ah, tbh I "squick" somewhat at any "barely legal" stuff gender notwithstanding.. I avoid it myself.. If my gf was into it, I'd want to double check the legality and ethics of the producers.. In part to protect myself&her legally.. In part cos I hate the pimps/exploiters of the sex industry and what they do to people.. Given legal&ethical.. Well ok.. I don't think it'd make me feel any more of a fossil than when my last ex (who's 23) was gushing about Zac bloody Ephron... @Lilly - What?!? I was snarking at mossy's ominous and vaguely phrased assertions.. I must've missed the memo where she was appointed spokesperson for all of womankind..  And despite the snark>mossy my question was serious&genuine.. (see above) I am not dissing women's turn-ons at all.. I've always embraced my gfs turn-ons..  Only time I ever was freaked out was the very first time I was about to get it on with one particular girl.. Who had suddenly hit on me that night... All very passionate and exciting.. Once we'd stripped and jumped into bed.. She suddenly whispered "Rape me!" ... Now that made my blood run cold.. Way to kill the moment.. I think if we'd been dating a bit and she'd told me about this as her fantasy then I'd've been cool.. It's a bit bloody heavy to spring on someone on a first encounter! A bit of mutual trust needed for that kink! @Tau - Secretary was a coool movie.. A couple of my gfs were well into that.. i only watched it the other month.. And I was like "Oh!" now I know why! (given what they liked about/from me) *cough* and btw - I=King of Foot Rubs (and no I'm not a foot fetishist... It is HOTT to give pleasure tho..  ) @Admiral - i have zero problem with girl-on-girl! Hell I wrote that for my gfs! (bi girls seem to like me.. Go figure.. )


----------



## thatgirl08 (Sep 15, 2009)

It's odd to me that so many people in this thread and in the poll have mentioned not knowing or wanting to know if there partner watches porn. To me it seems like an important thing to know about someone you're getting into a relationship with. I honestly don't care if my partner watches porn but I'd still like to know, mostly just out of curiosity and to spur conversation re:sex, fetishes, whatever. My boyfriend and I discussed porn usage before we were even committed. It seems so strange to think you'd be married to someone and not know one way or the other.

ETA: Not wanting someone to watch porn or trying to control what they watch? pffff fuck that, I'd never be in a relationship with a person like that.


----------



## rollhandler (Sep 15, 2009)

The most prodigious sex organ every person possesses is their brain.
The most most erotic tool in a persons sexual arsenal is their imagination.
The second most powerful drive in nature is the sex drive, and second only to seeking sustenance. 
Porn is just as much an extension of our imagination, as it relates to sexual stimulation, as is direct visual stimuli. Porn has only one purpose, to stimulate erotic sexual response, utilizing our imaginations as a bridge between our brain and our physical sex organs.

What is porn? If I look at the pictures of a fat woman eating? If my partner gets a look of excitement on her face watching men in shorts with or without shirts on at the beach?
If we watch a love scene in a movie and it turns one or both of us on? If we are discussing sex with others and the mental imagery gets us excited? Or, is it only considered porn if a sex act is involved directly? Each couple defines and uses it differently but by definition anything by which the only purpose served is to stimulate a person sexually is considered pornographic. In other words it is whatever you imagine it to be.
The question here isn't whether porn is acceptable for use by men or women but the manner in which we use it in a relationship and how men and women perceive its use in their relationships with each other, and do they feel belittled or threatened by its use at all.

That being said, by logical extension of the definition, all humans use porn on one level or another be it only in the imagining of a sexual stimulus or by viewing it directly to provide fodder for imagination to be used at a later time, for more instant gratification or to intensify the sexual experience. Some use it with a partner, some prefer to use it only in the absence of one. Some can see a person on the street and be able to utilize that vision in their imagination later without needing to view porn in the contexts of story, magazine, or video directly. Some can use the image to stimulate arousal as foreplay tool turning it off when their partner is present prefering to substitute the fantasy for the reality of the person before them.
Some use it for stimulating a stale sexual relationship, some as an intensifier for mutual gain, some for other reasons, but both men and women use it on one level or another in an active sex life. Some choose it as a substitute of something missing in their own sex lives, some as an extension of it, some as a pairing with it. 

Erotic stimuli and sexual imagery can be triggered by any one or several sources. Some can be as simple as a memory, or scent, but the most powerful is visual. It is what engages more of our brain sexually than any other. With it we can visualize a memory or the scent of a lover past or present, or the touch of a caress, or the sting of a lash and the thrill of a first experience. Some can achieve orgasm based on this alone.

As humans since the dawn of recorded man we have hidden, repressed, or been ashamed of our sexuality considering it to be not a celebrated aspect that makes us human, but moreover an annoying or distracting impulse in need of being controlled either for social, economic, or religious reasons. We reason that our ability to control our urges, sexual or otherwise, is what separates us from lower life forms or other animals. In some cases human sexual urges are seen as something to tolerate as merely necessary to propogate the species not recognizing it as part of the complex social dynamic of humans as a species. In doing so we project a sense of entitlement, ownership, or sole rights, to our partners and attach a sense of self worth to ourselves relative to our ability to achieve this. In short, we are taught that just about anything used to stimulate our sex drive for purposes other than simple procreation within specified boundaries threatens our control and is therefore bad.

We rate and judge our own and others ability to excersize sexual control using the concept of morality as a barometer. Based on this ability to control our sexual urges or how we choose to act on them, we associate moral and character judgements [to each gender] relative to how males and females are allowed to behave sexually toward the other and enact circumstances and standards by which these socially acceptable levels of behaviour are to be followed by each gender. We expect our men to be more aggressive in satisfying the needs of our sex drives but, expect women to be stronger in controlling theirs. Our conditioning teaches us also that if we cannot assert this level of control or, if we can't meet our sexual needs based on this narrow parameter of accepable behaviour, then there is something wrong with us as individuals. We project a sense of lesser significance to our sex drive and its needs than what is relevant to it's place in the relationship yet a couples sex life is a primary marker used in many cases to indicate the health of a relationship overall.

We project a sense of shame to our sexuality if we cannot control it to be within the parameters of what the majority has determined to believe is socially acceptable. We also assign a degree of shame relating to the act in question and in the past the degree of shame was in linked to whether or not the act was directly procreative. In todays society the degree of shame is more in proportion to what is considered "normal" by acceptable standards but there is still an innate sense of individual shame associated with what most consider fetishes not directly associated with procreative sex acts even though the fetish activity may lead up to it or be used as part of the act itself. Viewing porn is considered fetishistic/deviant behaviour and many perceive the act of viewing porn from this standpoint. From this shame comes a fear of sharing our "deviances" openly with our partners. We fear rejection or loss if our partner does not share our idea of what turns us on. In some cases we fear the loss of our souls place in the afterlife if we cannot control our sexual urges to fit into the confines of social and religiously taught acceptability standards. 

I believe that this way of thinking is a bastardized version of the human sociosexual dynamic and not natures design. Sex is a life process and a behaviour that does not need to be taught or learned in order to be desired and performed. Sexuality relating to each gender is taught and enacted through conventions of conditioned behaviour. In our hubris we attempt to divine natures will then inflict it upon ourselves to control our human urges. Humans seek things that excite, and please us, and have a part of the brain that responds when something gives us pleasure. This hormonal reward drives us to continue to seek that which gives us pleasure. In this case, sex and in some cases porn to heighten or intensify the pleasure. In the absence of what turns us on (if a partner can't or wont provide it) we seek to fill the need by other means.

Nobody can be all things sexual to all partners. Even when two partners share a fetish they may be turned on by different aspects of the same act.
When we as humans perform sex acts with ourselves or each other the acts themselves are pornographic in nature and by definition, we are merely acting them out in a socially acceptable format, usually behind closed doors. 

Men and women percieve sexuality differently, and as such we percieve emotionally, and psycologically the implications of porn use differently as it relates to our partners and project back on ourselves what we believe the impact of external porn sources to be in relation to how our partner uses them. We also imply, more times than not, a negative sexual self worth if our partner uses these additional sources because we seem to be "not enough to satisfy their needs" or assume that there is something wrong with ourselves or the relationship if external porn sources are needed to fulfill the sexual aspect of the relationship, be it imagining a different partner or sex act being performed while performing sexually with the partner in bed with us, or by watching it in an external format.

In my case, I am almost always exclusively aroused by my partner, however on a given day what may heighten the arousal may be different. Most times just having her near and desireous of me is sufficient but sometimes although she gets me hard and makes me desire her it takes a bit of imagination to heighten the arousal. Some days no amount of external or imagined stimulus can arouse me but her touch or presence is all that is needed to enjoy a fulfilling sexual experience. What person here doesn't want every sex act to be intense, satisfying, and mind blowing? Is her foreplay not enough? Most times it is but if what gets my motor running today is thinking of something she isn't willing to do or a situation/circumstance she isn't comfortable with then porn in the form of imagination comes into play. I may fantasize the aggressive behaviour she desires that I cannot bring myself to perform physically toward her. If I run out of imaginative scenarios for that there is always external porn to stimulate fresh ones. I imagine that in her case the cute guy in those shorts she likes so much, or the thought of more aggressive behaviour may be what gets her motor to move from idle to redline. This being the case then I understand that this is what she will fantasizing about while at the same time enjoying what I offer in bed. By this method I satisfy the physical which is intensified by the mental stimulation. If she also needs to refresh the mental scenarios or have visual/mental/imaginative stimulation outside of what I can offer directly or to her level of satisfaction why should I stop her from being satisfied herself in the manner she needs to feel sexually fulfilled as a woman and my partner. 

Some consider external source porn to be an extension of a couples sexuality, some perceive even the thought of a partner using porn on any level including imagining or fantasizing another partner as a threat to their own sexual ego. This is why many of us hide our sexual fetishes, turn ons, and porn use from our partners and others. We fear the negative aspects that may come as a result of our sharing. We fear that by sharing what we may consider a "perverted" fantasy or sex act that our partner may not find it an appealing aspect of our sexuality and rather than take the risk of what may be percieved as an individual characteristic aspect of their own sexuality as not acceptable. By extension we view our sexual acceptablility to a partner in this light and react, by communicating or withholding aspects of our sexuality accordingly. Discussions about porn use by our partners is evidence of this behaviour and its perceptions. More often than not it isn't the porn that is at issue but what the use of it implies to one partner or another, at what level, and how it affects their ego or emotional/psycological state as a partner in a relationship.

I am not an aggressive male sexually. Don't know how to make myself be more aggressive and although there have been women willing to teach me what they like, it comes off fake, forced or ends in frustration when I try it. It isn't in my nature to be overtly aggressive, sexually, with a woman. If porn helps her fulfill any part of what makes our sex life more satisfying then I am all for a woman enjoying it on whatever level she deems sufficient to get her needs met. 

If use of porn strikes an unreasonable imbalance by either partner then they need to communicate more and consider whether or not they are sexually compatible with each other and what they can do to accomodate each other and bring it more into balance.
Rollhandler


----------



## Fuzzy Necromancer (Sep 16, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> If these recreational materials interfere with the quality of a relationship, I'd say the "individual" is directly affected by it and has every right to make his feelings about it known, wouldn't you say?



First, I doubt that the actual material could interfere with the quality of the relationship, as it has no will of its own, unless it's a dating sim with a very advanced AI. 

Second, if we assume it is, then the individual is INdirectly affected by it. 

Third, how would that? What do you define as "interfering"? I suspect that any serious effect on the relationship would come from unrelated problems between the partners, and porn is simply an outlet for feelings related to an existing conflict or something to argue about. 

Fourth, you could use the same vague hypothetical argument to claim that the partner has a right to police almost anything. Replace "these recreational materials" with comic books, wall paneling, the planet Saturn, or oceanography.


----------



## marlowegarp (Sep 16, 2009)

Tau said:


> Most of the women I have spoken to - we did a survey of 300 female students while I was at university as part of my politics class on feminism and pornography (not a massive number but substantial) - are left completely unmoved by traditional porn and are more likely to pop a woody while reading a book, watching Pride and Prejudice (the 6 hour long, UK version), the spanking scenes from The Secretary, or getting a foot massage. Seriously, these were the answers we got from females ages 17 to 22. I'm at 27 now and the women in my life are still left mostly unmoved by traditional porn. The extreme, fetish variety I think gets everybody's motor running for a bit, but then that fades too and you need to see something even more extreme to achieve that same level of arousal.
> 
> So, long story short, I don't think your question is realistic. I honestly do not believe that large numbers of women can or do become addicted to porn, or even use it in the same way as male consumers, which is why it is still made for men. As a result of this, I don't think most men have ever or would ever have occasion to become upset or intimidated by their partners porn use. I do, however, know a man who burnt his wife's romance novel stash...but that relationship was FUBAR anyway and doomed almost from the beginning.



The romance novel burning was for her own good! Those things will rot your brain. 

I have anecdotal evidence to support your claims! "The Secretary" is the uber-constant of women's porn in my experience. I have known 6 women personally who have gone on at length about how hot they think that movie is. Or consider Anais Nin. I have NEVER met a straight man (myself included) who tried to read "Delta of Venus" and didn't abandon it after 50 or less pages and exclaim "boooooorrrring!", but tons of women love it. It's kind of apples and oranges.


----------



## Brach311 (Sep 16, 2009)

When my grilfriend first showed me the porn that she was into, I was shocked..it was pretty rough stuff....

Anyway once I found out she liked that stuff and she wasn't the nice girl I thought she was, I started acting out her porn during sex. I also showed her some of the weirder stuff I liked that I had been keeping to myself and she followed suit.

Think sharing our favorite types of porn with each other improved our sexual relationship 200%


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Sep 16, 2009)

Brach311 said:


> When my grilfriend first showed me the porn that she was into, I was shocked..it was pretty rough stuff....
> 
> Anyway once I found out she liked that stuff and she wasn't the nice girl I thought she was, I started acting out her porn during sex. I also showed her some of the weirder stuff I liked that I had been keeping to myself and she followed suit.
> 
> Think sharing our favorite types of porn with each other improved our sexual relationship 200%



Funny.....that nice girl comment. You assumed that a nice person doesn't like sex or have sexual fantasies? 

I'm a "nice woman" that likes to f*ck.....is that a bad thing? or an oxymoron?


----------



## Brach311 (Sep 16, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Funny.....that nice girl comment. You assumed that a nice person doesn't like sex or have sexual fantasies?
> 
> I'm a "nice woman" that likes to f*ck.....is that a bad thing? or an oxymoron?



Yep. I assume all nice people dont like sex 

(I was just saying her kinkiness took me by surprise)


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 16, 2009)

Fuzzy Necromancer said:


> Fourth, you could use the same vague hypothetical argument to claim that the partner has a right to police



I said "make one's feelings about it known," not "police."

I'm curious about where you got "police."


----------



## LillyBBBW (Sep 17, 2009)

Fuzzy Necromancer said:


> First, I doubt that the actual material could interfere with the quality of the relationship, as it has no will of its own, unless it's a dating sim with a very advanced AI.
> 
> Second, if we assume it is, then the individual is INdirectly affected by it.
> 
> ...



I think though that this is the heart of the matter. Porn happens to be the sacred cow in this discussion but just about anything can interfere with the workings of a relationship. A workaholic, an avid golpher, a Yankees fan -any of these things can impede the workings of a relationship. At one point there was a woman in my choral group selling t shirts that read, "I can't, I have rehearsal." I bought two. It's hard to cultivate a relationship with so much going on and it's natural for a partner to have feelings about it. Making mention of it need not be construed as policing. I do know that people have cut down or disappeared from my singing group altogether in favor of persuing degrees, relationships, a family and other interests. In relatinships compromise is mandatory, it's just hard to define where the lines should be drawn at times.


----------



## KnottyOne (Sep 17, 2009)

Honestly I have no problem unless it gets out of control. I mean if a girl I'm with wants to watch porn when I'm not there, so be it, it's not my thing but who am I to judge. And hey, everyone gets horny when their bf/gf isnt around so they need something to fix that. When it gets to the level of all the time though, like a few times a day, then a problem starts to occur.

The biggest issue I ever had was with my one ex I was with for over a year. At the beginning t wasn't that bad, she only watched it when I wasn't around and she needed some help, but as the time went on she got a lot worse. By the end she would choose watching porn over actual sex, so it pretty much had made her a vouyer (sp?) This is when an issue occurs, when porn causes more arrousal than actual sex, then there is a major problem. Needless to say she was dumped pretty fast. So yea, as long as porn use doesn't go to like.... psycho levels, I don't reaaly have a problem with it.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Sep 17, 2009)

Brach311 said:


> Yep. I assume all nice people dont like sex
> 
> (I was just saying her kinkiness took me by surprise)



Lol, okay I understand. Yeah, it's those ones that you take for vanilla that are usually the kinkiest, IMO


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Sep 17, 2009)

LillyBBBW said:


> I think though that this is the heart of the matter. Porn happens to be the sacred cow in this discussion but just about anything can interfere with the workings of a relationship. A workaholic, an avid golpher, a Yankees fan -any of these things can impede the workings of a relationship. At one point there was a woman in my choral group selling t shirts that read, "I can't, I have rehearsal." I bought two. It's hard to cultivate a relationship with so much going on and it's natural for a partner to have feelings about it. Making mention of it need not be construed as policing. I do know that people have cut down or disappeared from my singing group altogether in favor of persuing degrees, relationships, a family and other interests. In relatinships compromise is mandatory, it's just hard to define where the lines should be drawn at times.




Yes, I think that in most relationships most people don't like to feel as if they are always coming "second" to things such as sporting games, jobs, porn videos.....
I suspect that most people like the idea of being "that special person" in another's life.....partly the concept of love/loving perhaps?


----------



## Admiral_Snackbar (Sep 17, 2009)

LillyBBBW said:


> I think though that this is the heart of the matter. Porn happens to be the sacred cow in this discussion but just about anything can interfere with the workings of a relationship. A workaholic, an avid golpher, a Yankees fan -any of these things can impede the workings of a relationship. At one point there was a woman in my choral group selling t shirts that read, "I can't, I have rehearsal." I bought two. It's hard to cultivate a relationship with so much going on and it's natural for a partner to have feelings about it. Making mention of it need not be construed as policing. I do know that people have cut down or disappeared from my singing group altogether in favor of persuing degrees, relationships, a family and other interests. In relatinships compromise is mandatory, it's just hard to define where the lines should be drawn at times.



Computer gaming is coming in a close second to porn in terms of relationship breakups; I can count on two hands the number of LTRs/marriages I know of that were destroyed on account of either computer gaming, erotic chat/e-dating behind the scenes or just surfing in general (online gambling, eBay, etc.). The one guy I knew who lost his wife due to his sports addiction was because his wife knew of his special "game friend" who accompanied him to out of state games (and back to his hotel). Porn is just an easy excuse because it gets an almost ubiquitous bad rap, although I am not discounting the valid cases where it was directly responsible for the breakup of a relationship. "My husband goes to the basement and watches SportsCenter every night for five hours..." Oh, he's just a guy and a fan. Deal with it. "My hubby goes to the basement and jerks off to porn for three hours a night." Oh, boot his ass out of there, NOW. 



Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Yes, I think that in most relationships most people don't like to feel as if they are always coming "second" to things such as sporting games, jobs, porn videos.....
> I suspect that most people like the idea of being "that special person" in another's life.....partly the concept of love/loving perhaps?



I agree. In the beginning of a relationship, everything is new and you sacrifice some of your "me" time for your partner. Once the getting-to-know you stage is over, you have to find some commonality. If you have zero in common with your partner other than the relationship, people are going to go their separate ways with self-interest. Some couples are happy with that, and dare I say go crazy and terrorize each other if they're stuck together for days on end with no time apart. Other couples thrive on this joined-at-the-hip idea. It may work for them, but I wouldn't subject my wife to 4 hours of the Matrix no more than I'd expect her to do the same to me when she's watching a Bridezilla marathon.

And to put someone first, it's a two-way street. They need to put you first as well. Otherwise it's just feeding someone else's ego or neediness. If you want me to spend the weekend with you at the in-laws, don't snub your nose when I want a couple days out with the guys to game with. You wash my back and I will gladly wash yours.


----------



## Rojodi (Sep 17, 2009)

Most of my wife's literature porn I've either written or purchased for her. She likes to read about sex: fantasies, true life confessions, BDSM, girl/girl. Her video/dvd collection on the other hand, I found last summer after she made a confession to me. I like her taste in porn!


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 17, 2009)

Admiral_Snackbar said:


> "My husband goes to the basement and watches SportsCenter every night for five hours..." Oh, he's just a guy and a fan. Deal with it. "My hubby goes to the basement and jerks off to porn for three hours a night." Oh, boot his ass out of there, NOW.



This is, I'm guessing, because when he's watching SportsCenter it doesn't feel like he's engaging in a facsimile of the intimacy he shares (or should be sharing) with his SO in sex. There's no comparison between a person and a sports team. And maybe there shouldn't be between a person and photographs of other people. But I imagine that when one's SO seems to _need_ to engage with the porn, even at the cost of neglecting _your_ needs, it becomes a problem exactly of figuring out what they feel they can't find in _you_. 

Sex is sex, and if you're having it with yourself, you're not having it with your partner. I've always been of the mind that, if all other things are equal and no one is feeling neglected and everyone's getting their needs met, have at it! But if you're neglecting your relationship for the sake of anything else, of course there's a problem. 

Maybe it's a matter of people who want to zone out of relationships also wanting to have their cake and eat it, too: You want the benefits of being in a relationship, but are incapable of putting in the work it takes to be in a relationship and would rather goof off and do minimum maintenance with your SO--this sometimes gets people very far with SOs who are prone to co-dependency, etc. 

I suppose it's just a matter of statistics: try around until you find someone willing to put up with your BS. Then pout and accuse your SOs of "policing" you unfairly whenever the SO tries to bring the problem up for discussion. Deny that in fact things are unfair to your SO at all and continue to rationalize your behavior--after all, people who act like this believe they are entitled to more than other people. That should keep things afloat for a while. And if your SO should get wise and split--why, there's plenty of fish in that sea.



> If you want me to spend the weekend with you at the in-laws, don't snub your nose when I want a couple days out with the guys to game with. You wash my back and I will gladly wash yours.



This is just silly. Come on. (Maybe it's a joke?)

"If you want us to act like a couple, you have to let me go hang out with my fun friends"?

Not to mention that it puts forth a vision of relationships that is essentially a hostage situation.


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 17, 2009)

Rojodi said:


> I've either written or purchased for her.



That you know of!


----------



## Admiral_Snackbar (Sep 17, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> This is, I'm guessing, because when he's watching SportsCenter it doesn't feel like he's engaging in a facsimile of the intimacy he shares (or should be sharing) with his SO in sex. There's no comparison between a person and a sports team. And maybe there shouldn't be between a person and photographs of other people. But I imagine that when one's SO seems to _need_ to engage with the porn, even at the cost of neglecting _your_ needs, it becomes a problem exactly of figuring out what they feel they can't find in _you_.


I was simply stating that in both examples, it's one member of a relationship ignoring (not always intentionally) the other's needs for emotional and/or physical intimacy. All I am pointing at is that people tend to pooh-pooh the sports distraction but not so much the porn, because it implies a replacement; OMG he's watching porn there must be something wrong with ME, why doesn't he want me, etc. etc.. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

There are also what I consider viable differences between how men and women sometimes regard orgasm. Read into it what you will, but sometimes it's just a release. That's it, end of story, sexual endorphins released, all systems go. It's five minutes, I get my rocks off, and I go do whatever. It has nothing to do with selfishness, nothing to do with ignoring or preferring porn over a partner. There have been times I've had sex with the wife, fallen asleep, got up later in the night, went to my office and still did the deed--had nothing to do with ignoring her, she was sleeping and was done for the night. _Sometimes you just gotta take the edge off_. 

There were times in days past before marriage I treated jerking like cracking my back or putting my feet in a massager. Would I have preferred a woman? Of course, but not always. Quick fix vs. sustained pleasure. Went to college with guys who would jerk TEN TIMES A DAY, simply because it felt good. It was a guy in a dorm stroking that lever and being his own personal Skinner pigeon, and sometimes he'd go out and have sex with a real live woman. I don't ever recalling any of them feeling bad about it, except if they were dumb enough to complain of chafing.


----------



## Admiral_Snackbar (Sep 17, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> This is just silly. Come on. (Maybe it's a joke?)
> 
> "If you want us to act like a couple, you have to let me go hang out with my fun friends"?
> 
> Not to mention that it puts forth a vision of relationships that is essentially a hostage situation.


So you expect that a couple should do everything together at all times, and not compromise on time apart, a break from the kids and the day-to-day structure? That if I feel it's my marital duty to be around for my wife and her family at a holiday (with in-laws that I may not enjoy being around), that I don't deserve a little fair play if I need time to do something I like but she has no interest in?

If that's the case, it's not me telling the joke here.


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 17, 2009)

Admiral_Snackbar said:


> So you expect that a couple should do everything together at all times,



Oh, please. Get serious, Snackbar. I'm not the kind of person who thinks a relationship made up of someone who feels trapped (and needs to bargain to 'get away') and someone else who may or may not be trying to trap him/her is a good relationship. That's all.


----------



## Jack Skellington (Sep 17, 2009)

My personal interest in porn is pretty non-existent and have my limits and comfort level on porn that I would hope a potential partner would respect. Anything with scat, snuff, violence, degrading, underage or abusive is way beyond my limits. Those are deal breakers. Consensual non violent sex between adults fine, just don't expect me to watch it.


----------



## Fuzzy Necromancer (Sep 17, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> I said "make one's feelings about it known," not "police."
> 
> I'm curious about where you got "police."



I used it in my post that you were quoting in the previous post. I didn't realize the employed word terminology had shifted. Sorry.


Tau: I'm curious to know what definition of "traditional porn" your study and personal inquiries used.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Sep 18, 2009)

I think there is danger in someone comparing themself to an object or passtime in someone's life as a weight of importance. The temptation to do so may be too hard to resist due to the stress of the circumstance for sure. Speaking from an outside and conveniently detatched view though it seems like comparing apples and oranges and the person is in danger of demeaning themself in a subtle way moreso than it makes a point to the other individual. Why should they shoot themself in the foot? If someone liked "xyz and bla bla fishkcakes" before, they will not like it less when a wonderful person appears and that is _*NOT*_ due to any fault or failing of the wonderful person. There is no further to go on that thought process in my view.

I think for the most part relationships work because of the compatability of the people involved, not because they meet with a checklist of traditional circumstances viewed as ideal. I have been shocked, SHOCKED I say!, to see totally awful people I've known find relathionships that last years and years and are seemingly happy and without incident. As I watched one ex plan his wedding with a seemingly normal young woman my mind couldn't help but reach for that old saw, "What the hell's the matter with ME? " Then I remember why I broke up with him and the feeling goes away. I think the bottom line is if someone's habits or lifestyle is problematic and they are either unwilling or incable of compromise then they're not the right person you, period. It's not a reflection on you and may not be a reflection on them either. It just is what it is. 





Fascinita said:


> This is, I'm guessing, because when he's watching SportsCenter it doesn't feel like he's engaging in a facsimile of the intimacy he shares (or should be sharing) with his SO in sex. There's no comparison between a person and a sports team. And maybe there shouldn't be between a person and photographs of other people. But I imagine that when one's SO seems to _need_ to engage with the porn, even at the cost of neglecting _your_ needs, it becomes a problem exactly of figuring out what they feel they can't find in _you_.
> 
> Sex is sex, and if you're having it with yourself, you're not having it with your partner. I've always been of the mind that, if all other things are equal and no one is feeling neglected and everyone's getting their needs met, have at it! But if you're neglecting your relationship for the sake of anything else, of course there's a problem.
> 
> ...


----------



## Tina (Sep 18, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> That you know of!



Brings to mind an old Newlywed Game show I saw ages ago. The question was, "what was the worst gift you got for your wedding?"

The guys are out and the women are answering. One woman said, "this condiment set. It was ugly and horrible. Very tacky."

The men come back and her husband has to answer the question. He says, "a personal massager. I think it's up in the hall closet." She says, "no, it's not," to which he does a double-take with a shocked look on his face. 

We all have our private spaces and that's cool and as it should be. I do know what you're saying, though, Fasci.

I think that sports has ruined some relationships, too, understandably, if the guy is in the basement for five hours in the evening that means they're not seeing each other all night. Too much of that and they might as well be roommates. We're discussing porn here but it doesn't have to be porn if it's an effective wall between the couple. Anyway.


----------



## mossystate (Sep 18, 2009)

@jos...I was saying that there is no way to truly know, in terms of porn, what ' women ' desire. It has been so made and talked about from a male point of view, that, unless there is a time machine, or an eraser of some sort...it will continue to be difficult to get to something that really includes women...and I am not talking about that tape...or that magazine...or that website....it is all...tainted...and, since you will probably ask...no, I am not saying women can't and don't like some of the sexual stuff that is already in existence...I am talking about a cat that cannot be stuffed back into a bag..and that is very sad


----------



## Rojodi (Sep 19, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Lol, okay I understand. Yeah, it's those ones that you take for vanilla that are usually the kinkiest, IMO



I understand that completely!!!! :smitten:


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 19, 2009)

mossystate said:


> @jos...I was saying that there is no way to truly know, in terms of porn, what ' women ' desire. It has been so made and talked about from a male point of view, that, unless there is a time machine, or an eraser of some sort...it will continue to be difficult to get to something that really includes women...and I am not talking about that tape...or that magazine...or that website....it is all...tainted...and, since you will probably ask...no, I am not saying women can't and don't like some of the sexual stuff that is already in existence...I am talking about a cat that cannot be stuffed back into a bag..and that is very sad



_IIIIII _think I know what you mean, Mossy. 

Pornography itself is entrenched in the socio-political arena. It mirrors gender relations as they appear through the lens of male desire, even as it seeds and breeds new ideas about gender and sex that often have the effect of solidifying the centrality of male desire and power.

To imagine a "woman's porn" (one that reflected true female desire), we'd have to be able to imagine a whole new world, almost.

Literary critics since at least the 1950s have especially wrestled with the questions of whether it's possible to represent female experience (desire as part of that experience) without abandoning the patriarchal models of representation. 

Some critics even claim that we have no idea yet what feminine expression might look like--it simply has not been allowed to take place yet in Western culture. Luckily, these critics theorize that the future of writing and representation is feminine. It's coming. Oh, yes. Oh, yes.


----------



## mossystate (Sep 19, 2009)

Well...fucking hell...I knew YOU would.


----------



## Rojodi (Sep 19, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> _IIIIII _think I know what you mean, Mossy.
> 
> Pornography itself is entrenched in the socio-political arena. It mirrors gender relations as they appear through the lens of male desire, even as it seeds and breeds new ideas about gender and sex that often have the effect of solidifying the centrality of male desire and power.
> 
> ...



I belong to several erotica/literary erotic lists and forums. This has been debated for the entire time I've belonged to them. 

Woman's Porn, what is it really?

And from what I gather, women can't be generalized like men. Each member I've chatted with one-on-one have their own idea of what makes good erotica, what makes good literary porn. It's up to the individual reader. One woman I chat with loves group sex stories, while another dislikes it, rather liking a romantic setting to what she reads. And a third LOVES girl-on-girl stories, though she's never explained why - and I've never pushed to answer why.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Sep 19, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> _IIIIII _think I know what you mean, Mossy.
> 
> Pornography itself is entrenched in the socio-political arena. It mirrors gender relations as they appear through the lens of male desire, even as it seeds and breeds new ideas about gender and sex that often have the effect of solidifying the centrality of male desire and power.
> 
> ...



Fascie....it's BEEN here.....ever read any of those historical romances...the ones with the juicy fuckfests in them? Those tend to be written by women....we just write sex around romance/love/monogamy and use a different media. 
Like my own erotic stories- I'm just "More to the Point" in my sex stories but I could write a romance novel with some juicy scenes in it.

In the male-centric porn aka male fantasies, they have women wanting to scream and yip about screwing and being used 57 ways to Sunday with no strings attached- having a dick is enough to get you laid. The women write about being romanced/swept off their feet.....aka having some of the control.
In the end though, we all get fucked how we want to be in both mediums.


----------



## marlowegarp (Sep 19, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Fascie....it's BEEN here.....ever read any of those historical romances...the ones with the juicy fuckfests in them? Those tend to be written by women....we just write sex around romance/love/monogamy and use a different media.
> Like my own erotic stories- I'm just "More to the Point" in my sex stories but I could write a romance novel with some juicy scenes in it.
> 
> In the male-centric porn aka male fantasies, they have women wanting to scream and yip about screwing and being used 57 ways to Sunday with no strings attached- having a dick is enough to get you laid. The women write about being romanced/swept off their feet.....aka having some of the control.
> In the end though, we all get fucked how we want to be in both mediums.



I'm confused by this turn of the discussion. Isn't any porn written and made by women for women by definition women's porn?


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Sep 19, 2009)

marlowegarp said:


> I'm confused by this turn of the discussion. Isn't any porn written and made by women for women by definition women's porn?



That's what I said, wasn't it? Perhaps *I* misunderstood something.....I read Fascie's post as saying "women's porn is coming" and I said "it's BEEN here" just not on video......


----------



## marlowegarp (Sep 19, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> That's what I said, wasn't it? Perhaps *I* misunderstood something.....I read Fascie's post as saying "women's porn is coming" and I said "it's BEEN here" just not on video......



You're right. I pretty much repeated you. In other news, "Fascie" just made me think of a Muppet Babies-type cartoon show featuring young Mussolini.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Sep 19, 2009)

marlowegarp said:


> You're right. I pretty much repeated you. In other news, "Fascie" just made me think of a Muppet Babies-type cartoon show featuring young Mussolini.



Fascie is my friend. Not sure what you mean there but I meant my comments in a factual type of discussion way. Not as an insult against her or her opinions.
Not sure if that is what you meant but please let's keep this thread going in a polite manner whether we agree with each other or not.


----------



## joswitch (Sep 19, 2009)

@mossy - ok now I get what you're saying.. I agree that in the vast majority porn is a male driven game.. But I disagree that there's NO women's porn in existence.. For reasons already posted by Rodoji, GEF & marlowg.. It's what? 30+years since "the Female Eunuch" was published and we have Diva magazine on the shelves of most corner shop newsagents.. Given those and many other indicators of female expression I find it verrry hard to believe that porn by women for women has not been produced & sold in some considerable amount.. Unless, by your definition you think this is only possible in some kind of Themyscria* / world sans men? Hmm... I think it's revealing that you use the -ve. "tainted" (eww! btw) rather than the neutral "influenced"... I'm interested to hear how you think that heterosexual porn can be created that is not influenced by the opposite sex?? (*in DC comics, invisible Island of the Amazons, devoid of men & home of Diana - Wonder Woman) .... @GEF - I think marlowg was just riffing harmlessly on FASCInitia's handle (Il Duce having been a FASCist... I get that our Fascinitia's handle may be nothing to do with such.. But you see the connection...) oh and GEF on the one hand I agree that romance novels = porn by women.. But I guess mossy would respond that they are heavily influenced by trad. gender roles / power differentials.. And thus "tainted".. (eww! again.. "Taint" - the area between genitals & asshole..)


----------



## Rojodi (Sep 19, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Fascie....it's BEEN here.....ever read any of those historical romances...the ones with the juicy fuckfests in them? Those tend to be written by women....we just write sex around romance/love/monogamy and use a different media.
> Like my own erotic stories- I'm just "More to the Point" in my sex stories but I could write a romance novel with some juicy scenes in it.
> 
> In the male-centric porn aka male fantasies, they have women wanting to scream and yip about screwing and being used 57 ways to Sunday with no strings attached- having a dick is enough to get you laid. The women write about being romanced/swept off their feet.....aka having some of the control.
> In the end though, we all get fucked how we want to be in both mediums.



Somewhere I've found a formula for writing historical romances, and it did include where and when to place "love making" scenes and "pure sexual" scenes. Thought it rather drull


----------



## marlowegarp (Sep 19, 2009)

Someone should invent a computer program that turns porn into a period romance. Certain words would automatically convert while every so often, descriptions of lavish fripperies would be inserted. I am more of an ideas man though, so I leave it to programmers who are much cleverer than I.


----------



## Rojodi (Sep 19, 2009)

marlowegarp said:


> Someone should invent a computer program that turns porn into a period romance. Certain words would automatically convert while every so often, descriptions of lavish fripperies would be inserted. I am more of an ideas man though, so I leave it to programmers who are much cleverer than I.



I found this link, http://www.likesbooks.com/periods.html, this should be a starter to help, then do research what words were used/not used during the periods. Sorry, no easy way out.


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 20, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> .ever read any of those historical romances...the ones with the juicy fuckfests in them? Those tend to be written by women....we just write sex around romance/love/monogamy and use a different media. ...
> 
> 
> The women write about being romanced/swept off their feet.....aka having some of the control.



I think the critique is, GEF, that this constitutes erotica that represents women as they see themselves in relationship to male power. So that it doesn't fit the requirements of an "authentic" woman's porn.

That would have to represent autonomous female desire, i.e., what do women as free subjects desire in the world? Since women are essentially not free subjects, almost universally, autonomous female desire mostly tends not to exist--or at least tends not to be likely to find venues of representation or reception.

In fact, the "maleness" of writing and representation itself is germane to this issue. What would a "woman's writing" look like? Would it look and act the same as ours does now? What if women reinvented expression such that it reflected a state-of-being where women were free from male socio-political control? Would even the words and symbols we use to represent meaning look and act the same? These questions get at the core of what's at stake in a debate about how women are represented: Not the establishing of the singular "wrongness" of representations of male desire that take place in most pornography (there is nothing inherently wrong with representations of desire), but the posing challenges against wholesale claims that those desires are "universal" whereas, in fact, they both represent and further male socio-political power.



Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Fascie is my friend.



Made me smile.


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 20, 2009)

marlowegarp said:


> young Mussolini.



Mussolini is the new Hitler. :bow:

Your name, by the way, ALWAYS makes me think of Robin Williams. 

*shudder*


----------



## joh (Sep 20, 2009)

I don't care what she watches as long as she doesn't make me watch it if it's something I'm not into.


----------



## mossystate (Sep 20, 2009)

@ jos...no...not what I was saying. Has nothing to do with eliminating men ( wtf )...or the simple producing of whatever expression. I am talking about what has been whispered and shouted in ears over many a year. None of us live within 4 walls. We are also sponges. Yeah, I am asking you to open your aperature a bit. Ta!


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 20, 2009)

OT: This is derailing the thread a bit further, but since the question of representing women's desires has come up in the debate, maybe this link will be useful.

The author engages in a thought experiment to envision a world where women relate to men the way that men relate to women in the world as we live it now. It's kind of a "bizarro world" version of a male-centered dystopia.

Please note, if it's not evident, that this author is not proposing this fantasy as one that represents women's desires. But I think that her thought experiment does illustrate the reasons why some people believe that women's authentic and autonomous desires are impossible to articulate in our current circumstances: It isn't that women are incapable of wanting to subjugate those around them--we all know there are plenty of singular cases of powerful women--but that a hypothetical pornography that illustrated "the shoe on the other foot" (in the vein of the ideas listed in the piece), so to speak, really might make it evident how shockingly violent and disempowering for a majority of women the current state of things at large is.


----------



## marlowegarp (Sep 20, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> I think the critique is, GEF, that this constitutes erotica that represents women as they see themselves in relationship to male power. So that it doesn't fit the requirements of an "authentic" woman's porn.



And here I was regretting not taking mushrooms this summer. I now realize I did and I have just been tripping hard the last 24 hours.

Seriously, where does this end? Anything written in English is not "female" because what we consider English was not completely engineered by women? Every philosophy held by men or women is in part a product, a reaction, of the world that philosopher lives in. Saying that things created by women for women do not constitute something female is in direct conflict with this notion. Ayn Rand, Germaine Greer, Carol Gilligan and Ann Coulter all based their expressions from their experiences in the world we all live in. What else does anyone have to go on? Should we build an elaborate de-patriarching simulator from which we can hear opinions from those raised from birth to be unbiased from even so domineering and powerful an institution as reality?


----------



## marlowegarp (Sep 20, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> Mussolini is the new Hitler. :bow:
> 
> Your name, by the way, ALWAYS makes me think of Robin Williams.
> 
> *shudder*



I tend to think of Mussolini as a proto-Hitler. I'm not trying to call you a fascist, it's more just word association.

Robin Williams makes most people shudder, I think. Really everything post-Flubber is suspect. Except Insomnia and Death To Smoochy. Those were darling!

My name is an amalgam of Philip Marlowe and T.S. Garp, so I suppose that makes sense. I always thought the book The World According To Garp was pretty much unfilmable, but they had to try!


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 20, 2009)

marlowegarp said:


> Seriously, where does this end?



Take that up with, like, the philosophers, man. 

OR maybe Oprah'll send out an e-mail blast to her fans soon.


----------



## marlowegarp (Sep 20, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> Take that up with, like, the philosophers, man.
> 
> OR maybe Oprah'll send out an e-mail blast to her fans soon.



Good, cuz we tweet at each other pretty regularly.


----------



## joswitch (Sep 20, 2009)

@Fascinitia - ah, yeah now I get ya (kinda, I think) I grokked your "Bizarro" link.. Verrry interesting/illustrative! The comments also! Did you read the one responder's short story? That was cool.. Love me a bit of gender role swap sci-fi! Also little postscript in last post about how the priveledged/powerful are also prisoners in a power structure.. Just in very different circumstances.. (there was some famous French psychoanalyst who talked about this.. i forget the name..) ... Anywhoo I'm really enjoying the Discordian turn this thread has taken! Particularly your last response to marlowg.. Fnord!  P.S. Did you read the article on "Slut-shaming in the City" ?I thought that was good critique.. And was broadly what Katherine22 was talking about in her "double standards" thread...


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Sep 20, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> I think the critique is, GEF, that this constitutes erotica that represents women as they see themselves in relationship to male power. *So that it doesn't fit the requirements of an "authentic" woman's porn.*
> 
> That would have to represent autonomous female desire, i.e., what do women as free subjects desire in the world? Since women are essentially not free subjects, almost universally, autonomous female desire mostly tends not to exist--or at least tends not to be likely to find venues of representation or reception.
> 
> In fact, the "maleness" of writing and representation itself is germane to this issue. What would a "woman's writing" look like? Would it look and act the same as ours does now? What if women reinvented expression such that it reflected a state-of-being where women were free from male socio-political control? Would even the words and symbols we use to represent meaning look and act the same? These questions get at the core of what's at stake in a debate about how women are represented: Not the establishing of the singular "wrongness" of representations of male desire that take place in most pornography (there is nothing inherently wrong with representations of desire), but the posing challenges against wholesale claims that those desires are "universal" whereas, in fact, they both represent and further male socio-political power.





Fascinita said:


> OT: This is derailing the thread a bit further, but since the question of representing women's desires has come up in the debate, maybe this link will be useful.
> 
> The author engages in a thought experiment to envision a world where women relate to men the way that men relate to women in the world as we live it now. It's kind of a "bizarro world" version of a male-centered dystopia.
> 
> Please note, if it's not evident, that this author is not proposing this fantasy as one that represents women's desires. But I think that her thought experiment does illustrate the reasons why some people believe that women's authentic and autonomous desires are impossible to articulate in our current circumstances: It isn't that women are incapable of wanting to subjugate those around them--we all know there are plenty of singular cases of powerful women--but that a hypothetical pornography that illustrated "the shoe on the other foot" (in the vein of the ideas listed in the piece), so to speak, really might make it evident how shockingly violent and disempowering for a majority of women the current state of things at large is.



I don't know Fascie.....I'm not inclined to disagree with you about the "state of the world"....and was reminded of Gloria Steinem's "If Men Had Periods", too, while reading that link. It all makes a hard hitting point....and does make a person (myself anyway) step back and think of "The World At Large". 
Also, reading Garp's post about "how much is enough" reminded me of a question I recently asked a male poster on the BBW board about who is he to say "enough is enough" when he's not the person that had to fight for a fair shake to begin with.....so I'm with you....for the most part. 

Where do we part? The ideal that *I*, or another woman, cannot write HONEST desires in our erotica. That's how your post reads, we are brainwashed or unable to evaluate our own wants, because of the male-centric world/media. If that's not what you mean, then it's my misunderstanding. 
However, I'm going to beg to differ now in this post. What I want? It's not told to me.....I took a good look at what's around me, I complain about it frequently p), but my vagina and little heart's desires....those come to me of my own accord. Another woman might not like what I like....but I think that comes down to individuality because I also realize that there are women that like what I like, as well. It seems....WRONG...to imply that what a woman wants has to be a mistake because of the factors of XYZ. I mean....isn't that what some men do to us sometimes? Try to convince us we are crazy for liking/wanting what we like? Why would we assume that about ourselves? 
It seems like we are giving ourselves the same headfuck we are protesting to approach it from that stance......

***********************************

I am going to ask Garp the same thing I asked the other guy- who are you to say enough is enough when it's not something that really even seems to concern you? Had someone taken something from you? That's how some people act....like something has been stolen when others get a fair shake. 





marlowegarp said:


> Anything written in English is not "female" because what we consider English was not completely engineered by women? Every philosophy held by men or women is in part a product, a reaction, of the world that philosopher lives in. Saying that things created by women for women do not constitute something female is in direct conflict with this notion. Ayn Rand, Germaine Greer, Carol Gilligan and Ann Coulter all based their expressions from their experiences in the world we all live in. What else does anyone have to go on? Should we build an elaborate de-patriarching simulator from which we can hear opinions from those raised from birth to be unbiased from even so domineering and powerful an institution as reality?





Now....I have to agree with Garp on this part....if, as women, we see ourselves as strong and capable, why would we discount the experiences and desires of ALL women? Are only the feminist writers the correct ones? 
As I grow older, I question the stereo-types and PLACEMENT of women in the world. I see, and have felt, the frustration of other women in the workplace, in relationships and in the sexual arena. I get it......

Just don't get the part where there is no women porn if the women are the ones writing it....
I don't need my sexuality and desires defined for me by other women any more than I want it defined by men.

In a perfect world, we all get to like what we like....


----------



## Rojodi (Sep 20, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Now....I have to agree with Garp on this part....if, as women, we see ourselves as strong and capable, why would we discount the experiences and desires of ALL women? Are only the feminist writers the correct ones?
> As I grow older, I question the stereo-types and PLACEMENT of women in the world. I see, and have felt, the frustration of other women in the workplace, in relationships and in the sexual arena. I get it......
> 
> Just don't get the part where there is no women porn if the women are the ones writing it....
> I don't need my sexuality and desires defined for me by other women any more than I want it defined by men.



I'm a reader, voracious reader, of erotica and porn. Woman's porn, written by women, has been becoming more and more previlent recently. Look at the anthologies in bookstores, woman's fantasies are now almost exclusively written by women.

And from what I've seen on HBO, women have been involved with porn from the start. Women LOVE porn! Exciting, ain't it?


----------



## marlowegarp (Sep 20, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> I am going to ask Garp the same thing I asked the other guy- who are you to say enough is enough when it's not something that really even seems to concern you? Had someone taken something from you? That's how some people act....like something has been stolen when others get a fair shake.



GEF, I'm not saying you put words in people's mouths but you seem quick to jump to conclusions on this thread. Saying "enough is enough" wasn't an attempt to quantify equality. I don't know in what context the other fellow said it, but I meant it as "if you want to create something, create it. Don't waste energy lamenting that the proper framework for your creation doesn't exist and that not everyone agrees with you. If you feel a new mode of thought is required to express yourself, then get to that place." That may be the most Randian thing I've said all week. Must be all the Mad Men. 

As to whether or not someone else's thinking _concerns_ me...well, we're debating intangibles on a forum on a thread on the internet, and the original point of said thread was to glean opinions. While it may not a have a direct bearing on my life...it's kind of the point of what we're doing. I have the right to say "enough is enough" and at times do so to excess when I feel that excessive jargon and attempts to reinvent the wheel interfere with things that most people just do (like fantasize about things that turn them on) and go about their business. Similarly you have the right to rebuke my thinking as symptomatic of a patriarchy and (as I suspect you might) tell me that you don't need me to tell you _your_ rights.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Sep 20, 2009)

marlowegarp said:


> GEF, I'm not saying you put words in people's mouths but you seem quick to jump to conclusions on this thread. Saying "enough is enough" wasn't an attempt to quantify equality. I don't know in what context the other fellow said it, but I meant it as *"if you want to create something, create it. Don't waste energy lamenting that the proper framework for your creation doesn't exist and that not everyone agrees with you. If you feel a new mode of thought is required to express yourself, then get to that place." *That may be the most Randian thing I've said all week. Must be all the Mad Men.
> 
> As to whether or not someone else's thinking _concerns_ me...well, we're debating intangibles on a forum on a thread on the internet, and the original point of said thread was to glean opinions. While it may not a have a direct bearing on my life...it's kind of the point of what we're doing. I have the right to say "enough is enough" and at times do so to excess when I feel that excessive jargon and attempts to reinvent the wheel interfere with things that most people just do (like fantasize about things that turn them on) and go about their business. *Similarly you have the right to rebuke my thinking as symptomatic of a patriarchy and (as I suspect you might) tell me that you don't need me to tell you your rights.*



Seems like we agree this time then


----------



## marlowegarp (Sep 20, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Seems like we agree this time then



Here here!


----------



## StarWitness (Sep 20, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Where do we part? The ideal that *I*, or another woman, cannot write HONEST desires in our erotica. That's how your post reads, we are brainwashed or unable to evaluate our own wants, because of the male-centric world/media. If that's not what you mean, then it's my misunderstanding.
> However, I'm going to beg to differ now in this post. *What I want? It's not told to me.....I took a good look at what's around me, I complain about it frequently p), but my vagina and little heart's desires....those come to me of my own accord.* Another woman might not like what I like....but I think that comes down to individuality because I also realize that there are women that like what I like, as well. It seems....WRONG...to imply that what a woman wants has to be a mistake because of the factors of XYZ. I mean....isn't that what some men do to us sometimes? Try to convince us we are crazy for liking/wanting what we like? Why would we assume that about ourselves?



I think you raise a great counterpoint to Fascinita's great initial point. Go discource, ra ra ra!  I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle. 

There are a lot of intelligent women out there who think critically about what they want versus what they are told to want. Hell, if that wasn't the case, the lot of us probably wouldn't be on Dims because we'd be too busy worrying about losing weight as quickly as possible to be considered attractive to the majority of straight men.

On the other hand, it's pretty impossible to not be influenced by our surroundings. And, well... there are women out there whose desire is to be a passive object of desire. That's a little problematic in terms of this discussion: would they want the same thing outside the context of a patriarchal society, or are they reflecting the standards of patriarchy? Difficult to say.


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 20, 2009)

joswitch said:


> Also little postscript in last post about how the priveledged/powerful are also prisoners in a power structure.. Just in very different circumstances..



Exactly! OK, and now I <3 you.  Understanding: It's a beautiful thing.

It's true, I think. And it hurts men equally because it requires them to define themselves in terms of difference from women. A man is "not a sissy," "does not cry," "does not throw like a girl." That sorta thing...And worse. A prison. So it's heartening to smell even the whiff of a possibility to do things differently. But that requires knowing ourselves and what we've been doing, and how we've benefited from things as they are, both men AND women. And it requires envisioning something new that doesn't hinge on power differentials, maybe... And it requires work and courage, because how do we go about beginning and how do we trust that we even know what we're doing? So we have to find a really strong motive to push us forward... For me the motive is that I love people and hate abuse of power--like, with a passion. And now I'm sorta writing like you, lookit here! 




> (there was some famous French psychoanalyst who talked about this.. i forget the name..) ...



Do you mean Foucault? He has the best analysis of how power works through discourses, so that even what appears to be resistance really ends up purposed for the powerful. 

That's why I think it's important to get out of that model entirely. Attack the roots.




> Anywhoo I'm really enjoying the Discordian turn this thread has taken! Particularly your last response to marlowg.. Fnord!



Me, too! And I think marlowe is, too. 

I like your word. "Fnord!"



> P.S. Did you read the article on "Slut-shaming in the City" ?I thought that was good critique.. And was broadly what Katherine22 was talking about in her "double standards" thread...



No, haven't. Link?


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 20, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> The ideal that *I*, or another woman, cannot write HONEST desires in our erotica. That's how your post reads, we



No brainwashing. Women as a group participate and benefit from things as they are. That's one reason things are as they are. Men as masters have enjoyed our consent for much of history. We have benefited from this situation, though it's also true that we buy into these benefits because the alternative--going it alone as a woman--leaves us too individually too vulnerable to the climate that this situation has created: as you know, GEF, the subjugation of women is enforced through violence, economic disparities, and other methods of misogyny.



> I don't need my sexuality and desires defined for me by other women any more than I want it defined by men.



Well, I'm curious about why you think I'm trying to impose a definition on you. Have I been disrespectful or forceful?

I've been trying to have a conversation about reality as I see it. I'm confrontational and I kinda don't suffer foolishness, but isn't the same true of you? I don't think I've behaved in a way to suggest that I'm trying to define your sexuality. If you're saying it's not OK to share our ideas because it's too threatening (I hope this is not what you're saying!), I have to respect that and keep my ideas to myself? 

I know and love you :wubu:, and I know you're not trying to be confrontational, and I think you can say the same about me.  So I don't understand--and am genuinely interested in hearing the reasons--why you say I'm trying to define your sexuality for you. It's not disrespectful of me to call attention to how I think the world works, is it? And if I spend all this time explaining myself, it's only because I'm interested in engaging others in conversation. So I would love to see you say more--I really really believe we all benefit from talking about this stuff.


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 20, 2009)

marlowegarp said:


> "if you want to create something, create it.



Thanks! That's what I'm doing! And I need help. Which is why I'm trying to muster up troops. 

Who's with me?

Seriously, I think it's something both men and women have to create together, and not something that's going to happen through heroics. It'll take centuries of slow-but-steady work, likely.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Sep 20, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> Well, I'm curious about why you think I'm trying to impose a definition on you. Have I been disrespectful or forceful?
> 
> I've been trying to have a conversation about reality as I see it. I'm confrontational and I kinda don't suffer foolishness, but isn't the same true of you? I don't think I've behaved in a way to suggest that I'm trying to define your sexuality. If you're saying it's not OK to share our ideas because it's too threatening (I hope this is not what you're saying!), I have to respect that and keep my ideas to myself?
> 
> I know and love you :wubu:, and I know you're not trying to be confrontational, and I think you can say the same about me.  So I don't understand--and am genuinely interested in hearing the reasons--why you say I'm trying to define your sexuality for you. It's not disrespectful of me to call attention to how I think the world works, is it? And if I spend all this time explaining myself, it's only because I'm interested in engaging others in conversation. So I would love to see you say more--I really really believe we all benefit from talking about this stuff.




Did I miss something? I didn't say YOU were defining my sexuality for me :blink:
Nothing I wrote was against you or your beliefs....just a disagreement of how I interpreted your post....and was asking for more of your input on the subject.
I questioned why women cannot produce their own erotica...accurately? You posted things written about how the world is for women....I didn't disagree. I simply said that irregardless of that, we are still capable of knowing our own desires. 
I don't want the writings of feminists to define how I see the world either. I don't want men to define the world for me. I was calling for individuality and self expression. 
Some people may be stagnated in their views due to outside forces, but for the writings to imply that every woman is? That seems way off base to me...

I think women are strong and capable. If we don't see ourselves that way, then how do we expect others to do so?


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 20, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> we are still capable of knowing our own desires.



Oh, yeah, yeah! Totally. I'm saying that the system we've agreed to be part of requires us to think and act in relationship to male power and control. So that's critique on the system, not on women's faculties, obviously.

Let me make it clear: I believe we have the capacity for resistance and for creating space for autonomous female desire. I just don't believe we're there yet--we're only just beginning. By calling attention to the workings of the gendered system of sharing power we have created for ourselves, I'm also obviously betting that we're ALL (women AND men) capable of creating something different.

It's a case of "how do we run our house." Not of reinforcing that the house must be run by men because the little women are not capable of thinking for themselves.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Sep 20, 2009)

I agree with that Fascie....but still maintain the idea that not everything would change.....because not everything is under "total domination" for everyone. Men may "control the world" "control the government" "control the media"and even "control the military" but they do not control creative thought and impulses...no matter how hard they try. 
I do believe that I understand what you want and mean.....just saying that I think we are more closer to being there already......


----------



## LillyBBBW (Sep 21, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> Oh, yeah, yeah! Totally. I'm saying that the system we've agreed to be part of requires us to think and act in relationship to male power and control. So that's critique on the system, not on women's faculties, obviously.
> 
> Let me make it clear: I believe we have the capacity for resistance and for creating space for autonomous female desire. I just don't believe we're there yet--we're only just beginning. By calling attention to the workings of the gendered system of sharing power we have created for ourselves, I'm also obviously betting that we're ALL (women AND men) capable of creating something different.
> 
> It's a case of "how do we run our house." Not of reinforcing that the house must be run by men because the little women are not capable of thinking for themselves.



The problem may be that I don't sense this at all. Conceptually I think I know what you're saying but I don't really see that happening in person nor am I aware of this occuring elsewhere. Not that I'm doubting, this is just the first I've heard of it. It might help if you can give some examples of how one's desires might be misshapen due to a strong male presence, if I'm even understanding you correctly? I'm not certain I understand you.


----------



## joswitch (Sep 21, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> Exactly! OK, and now I <3 you.  Understanding: It's a beautiful thing.



New thinking = fun! 



> It's true, I think. And it hurts men equally because it requires them to define themselves in terms of difference from women. A man is "not a sissy," "does not cry," "does not throw like a girl." That sorta thing...And worse. A prison. So it's heartening to smell even the whiff of a possibility to do things differently. But that requires knowing ourselves and what we've been doing, and how we've benefited from things as they are, both men AND women. And it requires envisioning something new that doesn't hinge on power differentials, maybe... And it requires work and courage, because how do we go about beginning and how do we trust that we even know what we're doing? So we have to find a really strong motive to push us forward... For me the motive is that I love people and hate abuse of power--like, with a passion. And now I'm sorta writing like you, lookit here!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Just looked it up - Lacan was the dude I was on about! His entire thing is the idea that the construction of language = a false reality / represents submission to "the Name of The Father" (paralells, Zen, Shamanism, Discordianism) ...

(Hmmm.... I jus thought... this is linked to why food/eating/feeding/sex/sensuality/physicality/dancing/music all matter so much to me - cos they exist outside of language and so - are a direct connection to the real/t'au/chaos at the heart of things outside of the human invented frame of reference .... oooh  )

And yes - straightforward "opposition" = still trapped within an (often binary) system - good/evil, male/female and so on 



> That's why I think it's important to get out of that model entirely. Attack the roots.
> 
> Me, too! And I think marlowe is, too.



how about lots of new models of thinking!?... in the absence of true access to the Real... lots of different frames cover more bases... closer to the truth...
(grokking - temporarily or otherwise taking on a new, other frame of reference.....)



> I like your word. "Fnord!"



Ta. But I didn't make it! 
Grok and Fnord come out of Discordianism (Robert Anton Wilson's stuff originally I think) which either = a great big joke / absurdist Rinzai type Zen / neither / both / something else / all of the above

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



> No, haven't. Link?



http://community.feministing.com/2009/05/slut-shaming-in-the-city.html

ftr - shaming of women for their sexual desires = sucks... 

I continue to enjoy this thread - including GEF's stance on (her) creativity too!


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 21, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> I agree with that Fascie....but still maintain the idea that not everything would change.....because not everything is under "total domination" for everyone. Men may "control the world" "control the government" "control the media"and even "control the military" but they do not control creative thought and impulses...



This is true. Part of the problem, though, is that the "rules" we agree to (men AND women) require us to _control ourselves_, our creative thought and impulses. Not everyone plays by the rules, thank goodness. And that's where the hope for change exists.



> just saying that I think we are more closer to being there already......



I'm not a prophet, nor a doomsayer. So I dunno how close or how far we are. I mean that. I have no idea. 

I do think it's worth analyzing the way we work, talking about it and not being complacent. I think the change starts with awareness.


----------



## Fuzzy Necromancer (Sep 26, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> That's what I said, wasn't it? Perhaps *I* misunderstood something.....I read Fascie's post as saying *"women's porn is coming" *


*Rimshot*

(can't believe nobody picked up on the pun-opportunity there)


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Sep 26, 2009)

Fuzzy Necromancer said:


> *Rimshot*
> 
> (can't believe nobody picked up on the pun-opportunity there)




And here I thought that *I* was the dirty innuendo maker around here......


And yeah I got all turned on by Rimshot


----------



## Fascinita (Sep 26, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> It's coming. Oh, yes. Oh, yes.





Fuzzy Necromancer said:


> *Rimshot*
> 
> (can't believe nobody picked up on the pun-opportunity there)



Too late, Curly. Beat you to it miles ago. Nyuk nyuk nyuk.


----------



## Fuzzy Necromancer (Sep 27, 2009)

x.x doy. Sorry Fascinita, that one went over my head until you pointed it out.

Can we define our terms at this point? =o I think it's worth establishing exactly what pornography is for a discussion of this depth, since the term is has wide-reaching applications and a lot of strong connotations. The meaning of the word "pornography" as used in academic circles and the vernacular has altered as it's prevalence and treatment in society changed. The internet brings a lot of new factors into play, as well as fetish-driven pornography on subjects so outlandish and bizzare you would not know it was "porn" unless somebody told you beforehand. This forum on which we now converse, and the website it is attached to, would be considered "pornographic" by some standards.

In short, a lot of things have changed since the time when "pornography" was just a fancy word for Bob Crane's home video collection.


----------

