babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » walking the talk   » feminism   » porn for women

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: porn for women
skadie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2072

posted 15 January 2002 09:41 PM      Profile for skadie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Any other women out there find a serious lack of erotica geared for them? Also, do you think if women ran the porn industry it would be less exploitive?
From: near the ocean | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Twilight-Cedar
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1685

posted 15 January 2002 10:59 PM      Profile for Twilight-Cedar        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Most women I know don't really like porn.
From: Gabriola Island | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
oldgoat
Moderator
Babbler # 1130

posted 15 January 2002 11:24 PM      Profile for oldgoat     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Well, it's time for new bi-focals for this old goat. I spent a minute or so under the misapprehension that the poster of this thread was Skdadl!
From: The 10th circle | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Debra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 117

posted 15 January 2002 11:31 PM      Profile for Debra   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Well, it's time for new bi-focals for this old goat. I spent a minute or so under the misapprehension that the poster of this thread was Skdadl!

Ah well ya know what they say oldgoat IF wishes were horses beggars would ride.


From: The only difference between graffiti & philosophy is the word fuck... | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Timebandit
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1448

posted 15 January 2002 11:34 PM      Profile for Timebandit     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
When it comes to pornography, female-produced is not much different than male-produced. Both entail exploitation and objectification.

Check out any lesbian porn you find, it's different, but the same.

Or so I've heard....


From: Urban prairie. | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Loretta
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 222

posted 16 January 2002 12:08 AM      Profile for Loretta     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The terms erotica and porn seem to be used interchangeably but for me, I make the distinction that porn involves exploitation and objectification whereas erotica is the telling of a story rich in sensuality and/or sexuality in an atmosphere of equality. I think of the "Herotica" books compiled by Susie Bright in the latter category. Are there films made like this?
From: The West Kootenays of BC | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Doug
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 44

posted 16 January 2002 12:26 AM      Profile for Doug   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I thought that was the Home and Garden channel - or at least you'd think it was from how much my mother watches it.
From: Toronto, Canada | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
andrean
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 361

posted 16 January 2002 12:37 AM      Profile for andrean     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I've seen very few lesbian-made porn films, though dyke porn fiction and photography can be very good (thinking of On Our Backs magazine as an example). Alternately, it can be truly dreadful.

Of the porn I've seen, gay men's is certainly the hottest but not every woman is turned on by that. Straight porn tends to be silly in my opinion. I'm always reminded of Erica Jong who said about watching pornography, "After the first twenty minutes, I feel like going home and screwing. After the next twenty minutes, I feel like going home and never screwing again."

As to the objectification of women, I don't necessarily think that it's wrong to present the female body as an object of desire. As a queer woman, the female body is the object of my desire. Perhaps what is objectionable in much straight porn is that because it's created for the male gaze, there's no balance. There's not a shift in view to allow the man to be seen as the object of desire. Because of that, there's no interplay - only the woman is seen as desireable, the man is incidental. And how much of a turn-on factor can that possibly have for the average straight girl, who sees men as the object of desire? Little to none, I'd guess.

Personally, I find the written word far more exciting than any film or photograph. But for sexy, woman-positive examples of both check HerCurvemainly for queer and transgendered women or Sexilicious for straight, queer, transgendered, etc, etc, women and their friends/lovers of any gender.

And, as a little p.s. - re: Loretta's distinction between porn and erotica. To me erotica has a sense of softness, of watered-down-ness. Flowing gauze draperies, and such. Porn, on the other hand, sounds like a good, hard bang. In my humble opinion, most of our lives have space for both!

oh, and p.s. #2 - the porn industry might not be less exploitative if women ran it - it would be less exploitative if good employers who may or may not happen to be women ran it.


From: etobicoke-lakeshore | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Quirk
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1977

posted 16 January 2002 02:07 AM      Profile for Quirk   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
oh, and p.s. #2 - the porn industry might not be less exploitative if women ran it - it would be less exploitative if good employers who may or may not happen to be women ran it.


From: Toronto | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged
uh clem
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1078

posted 16 January 2002 07:33 AM      Profile for uh clem   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
The terms erotica and porn seem to be used interchangeably


Oh no!

If I like it, it's erotica. If you like it, it's porn.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 16 January 2002 08:38 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Welcome to babble, skadie. I am skdadl.

We are going to have a lot of fun giving oldgoat (also known -- to me -- as Spring Chicken) a run for his money.

quote:
I spent a minute or so under the misapprehension that the poster of this thread was Skdadl!

Spring Chicken, you don't think I'm as susceptible to getting all hot and bothered as all the fresher, cuter grils around here? You have not seen the finesse with which I've dispatched Li'l Jimmy Flaherty repeatedly on this board, and yet still have him coming back for more?

Sadly, actually, you are right -- but for the wrong reasons, oldgoat. I take skadie's topic entirely seriously. If I'm feeling a little distanced from the erotic at the moment, it's not because I'm old, you guys; I'm just resting for a bit.

The older I get, actually, the more interested I become in the ways that desire can come and go, as it were. I feel I am seriously out of date, though, not only in the supply terms that skadie raises but more in terms of the theoretical and political issues that andrean breezes through so charmingly. I would be happy to sit at her feet and take instruction in these things for a while.

I don't like exploitation, but I really like both sex and art, and I think it's important that women lead in the reinvention, rejuvenation, re-creation of both.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
oldgoat
Moderator
Babbler # 1130

posted 16 January 2002 12:54 PM      Profile for oldgoat     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Hi skadie, and welcometo babble. If someone named Little Jimmy Flaherty should ever come panting after you, just give him a good solid wedgie and stuff him in the nearest locker.

Well skdadl, SHOCKED I was, to think of someone of your *ahem* dignified station in life to be speaking of such things!!

Seriously though, Porn and Erotica; was there ever anything so subjective and in the eye of the beholder. As evolved and enlightened as I like to tell myself I've become, I will never shake the early guilt inducing influences of the nuns, priests, and a stern grandmother, which haunted my formative years. I have to agree with the above, that it is an issue of exploitation. If all involved in the production of porn or erotica are adults, doing so with informed consent, and no one gets hurt, then go for it!!

And yet... can a woman allow her body to be used in such a manner, to have such intimate images produces for public consumption without a psychological price to which she can't predict or give informed consent. Maybe consent is given under the duress of limited circumstances.

A voice in the back of my head says that this is somehow pathological. Is this voice just the echoes of the nuns, priests and my dear old Gran?? Maybe,... I honestly havn't a clue, so go ahead and enjoy. My doubts needn't be the doubts of others.

[ January 16, 2002: Message edited by: oldgoat ]


From: The 10th circle | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 16 January 2002 01:16 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I am devoted to Heather Corinna, who runs Femmerotic. Nerve is smart and sexy, too, and there are some nice sites listed in Bust Magazine's Girl Wide Web.
From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
vaudree
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1331

posted 16 January 2002 02:37 PM      Profile for vaudree     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I've watched the look on women's faces coming out of the theatre with their children after watching Brendan Frasier in "George of the Jungle" and there was one point in the movie where I wished I had a pause button.

I think was ruins erotica for women is that part of the sexual pleasure is the belief (at least for that moment) that the person you are having sex with loves you, desires you and could not possibly look at anyone else. Which is why I found "A walk in the Clouds" erotic - it was raw desire mixed with a sense of faithfulness and duty - rather than selfishness and irresponsibility. But how would one capture that in porn? How do you when many women get antzy if it is obvious that the guy is more interested in them than they are in the guy. How do you sell mutual desire in porn? Practically impossible.


From: Just outside St. Boniface | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Trinitty
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 826

posted 16 January 2002 02:46 PM      Profile for Trinitty     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Hmm.

I found a Walk in the Clouds really boring... no offense vaudree!

Why can't we just have a really good story line that just so happens to have long and involved sex scenes? No cameras between the legs and junk like that, just sensuous, consentual, athletic? loving sex. Hmm?

Have any of you seen Red Shoe diaries? I've seen them a few times, they're "geared" for women.


From: Europa | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Adam
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 358

posted 16 January 2002 02:53 PM      Profile for Adam     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Gynomite: Fearless Feminist Porn is available from New Mouth from the Dirty South.

quote:
Containing work by Nancy Agabian, LJ Albertano, Liz Belile,Lee Christopher, Jane Creighton, tatianna de la tierra, Shaila Dewan, Ammi Emergency, Maggie Estep, duVergne Gaines, Gwynne Garfinkle, Amber Gayle, Michelle Glaw, Tammy Gomez, Trish Herrera, Olive Hershey, Melissa Hung, Sassy Johnson, Miriam R. Sachs Martin, Mary McGrath, Pia Pico, Andrea Roberts, Carlisle Vandervoort, Pam Ward and Diana Wolfe.

This is more than just a collection of dirty stories. This is a milestone document from an ongoing movement to change the world, one orgasm at a time.

[ January 16, 2002: Message edited by: Adam ]


From: MurderHouse Nation | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Debra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 117

posted 16 January 2002 02:57 PM      Profile for Debra   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I guess I'm going to have to save this entire thread...oh wait did I say that out loud?
From: The only difference between graffiti & philosophy is the word fuck... | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Trespasser
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1204

posted 16 January 2002 05:40 PM      Profile for Trespasser   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
And there's, of course, the big debate in lesbian/queer/alternative sexualities feminism that could be summed up as Kink vs. Vanilla. Pat Califia, Dorothy Allison and Gayle Rubin are on the side that argues that S/M can be liberatory -- er, nevermind. If I go down this road, I'll end up in too detailed descriptions.

I heard Anais Nin wrote womanist pornography but I've never read it. I've only read Henry and June, which left me disappointed.

AndreaN mentioned Erica Jong - now that brings back teenage memories. The only book of hers that I liked was The Fear of Flying, and that one was the least sexually explicit of all. Most sexual episodes in her other books sounded somehow phoney and for commercial purposes. (Well, other than perhaps the scene in which she's making love with a guy on the day she gets her period - I think the title of the book had Parachutes in it.) Her account of having sex with a woman in another book was appalling. Bad, bad stuff.

Who else? I think that Jeanette Winterson and Ann-Marie MacDonald have some interesting things to say about a woman's desire for another woman (and surprisingly Jonathan Franzen).

Visual representation... Difficult to think of anybody. They say that Emmanuelle series is friendly to women's tastes, anyone seen it?


From: maritimes | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 16 January 2002 05:50 PM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The only people I know who enjoyed The Taking of Sleeping Beauty by Anne Rice were women. I found it terribly boring.
From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
skadie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2072

posted 16 January 2002 07:11 PM      Profile for skadie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
It seems that a lot of women enjoy the writing over the image when it comes to getting turned on. I go for a bit of both. But is it a natural difference between men and women (that men are more visually stimulated) or is it one of those culturally instilled things?

I didn't really discover that I enjoyed "naughty" movies until adult-hood but men's first sexual experience is usually with porn (or so I've heard.) I'd say that has a lot to do with it. And porn is so male oriented that I'd bet women just never give it a chance.


From: near the ocean | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 16 January 2002 10:37 PM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The Webster's dictionary explains the difference between between erotica and pornography this way:
Erotica is what turns me on. Pornography is that awful, disgusting stuff that turns you on.

Kidding. That's my deffinition.

The porn for women thing is a kind of chicken and egg argument. Do women shy away from porn because it's for the most part male orientated? Or is it for the most part male orientated because men are more attracted to it?

I tend to think it has something to do with the differences between the genders. Men do arouse more quickly, so photographs would seem to cater to their sexuality. Literature might appeal to female sexuality better. Then again, Penthouse "Forum" is a popular feature with men, and that's literature of a sort.

I read the "Beauty" series by Anne Rice. I didn't find it boring, but her shotgun approach to the various aspects of BDSM sexuality had me humming and skimming through some passages. For those like me looking for clues into the submissive mind though, it proved interesting.

And, there were some images Rice conjured that stick in my mind. Some for good reasons, some for not so good reasons.

Anais Nin's book "Delta of Venus" opens with a story of incest. I didn't find that anything but appalling. And in fact more shocking than Donatien Alfonse de Sade's "Euginie de Franvalle", a gothic tale if there ever was one. I read Nin thinking it might be an insight into female sexuality, but in retrospect, I'm sure that was wrong. It has to be remembered that Nin used to write porn at a dollar a page, on order from customers. It could be many of her stories were fantasies not from her head, but from the heads of male customers. What comes from Nin in that book might be guessed at, but we are never sure.

And there was great debate over the book "The Story of O" because it was published anonymously. The debate was over the gender of the author. Was it a book written by a man, from the prespective of what he'd want a woman like "O" to think and feel? Or was it written by a woman, the sexuality a reflection of a certain kind of female mind?

I read the book with that in mind, trying to see where I'd have come down in the debate. Hard to do when you know the truth ahead of time. But yes, there are clues both subtle and not so subtle that the author was female. Pauline Reage, who passed away not too long ago.

Even porn made by and for women today can't escape the influence of what has come before, and what has come before is pornography geared towards men. It should be fun exploring this.

As an aside, my prefered porn (I don't go spellunking on line as much anymore....it took about three years, but finally, I seem sated) doesn't usually include nudity.

My favorite "Porn" star: Betty Page. And, I prefer pornographic photo's to be done in black and white, not colour.

[ January 16, 2002: Message edited by: Tommy_Paine ]


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 16 January 2002 11:00 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I read about half of the Story of O, and found it the most disgusting, degrading piece of trash I had ever read. I would be willing to bet a man wrote it. I think submissive fantasies are quite common among women to some extent (I don't remember where I read that, so sorry, no source), and I know there is a broad range of submission that turns different women on (from no submission at all to very submissive).

But I have never met a woman yet who has read The Story of O and enjoyed it, or thought that it had any redeeming qualities. I'm usually pretty open-minded about the stuff that makes sexual fantasies. My own tend toward the more submissive rather than dominant. But that book - well, I don't think I've ever read anything so misogynistic in my life. Bar nothing. That book was a total turn off.

In case anyone hasn't read it and wonders what I'm talking about, the text is here.

Don't say I didn't warn you.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 16 January 2002 11:24 PM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
While your conclusions are right on, I'm preplexed at your condemnation.

The "Story of O" wasn't a primer, it was a cautionary tale, a tragedy.

Arg, I have to go to work. Get mad at me and I'll answer tomorrow.

[ January 16, 2002: Message edited by: Tommy_Paine ]


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 16 January 2002 11:29 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Who was it a cautionary tale for? Women? I'm not sure I agree with you there, Tommy. The sex scenes are constant and very detailed - that seems more like whacking material than big-sisterly advice, you know what I mean? Judging also from the many "Story of O" sites I saw over the course of a few minutes while looking for the text of the book online, it was a sexual fetish book that is read for pleasure (at least by the people running the fan sites) rather than a sexual dystopia.

But maybe I'm reading it wrong, I don't know. As I said, I've only read half of it, and someone else told me how the book ends, so I can't say I've read the whole thing. But from what I read, it seems more like the intent is to arouse, not to warn.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 16 January 2002 11:31 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
BTW, there's no reason for me to get mad at you! What did YOU think of the book when you read it?
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ian the second
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 732

posted 17 January 2002 12:07 AM      Profile for Ian the second   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Well I'll be darned. I'm pleasantly surprised by the overall tone of this thread. I wouldn't have thought that the Canadian feminists on babble would actually have anything but a totally negative view of pornography. I'm so shocked I'm almost inclined to take up the anti-porn argument and never masturbate again. But let's face it, that's never going to happen. And yes it is my opinion that porn and masturbation goes "hand in hand" if I may use that term, because masturbation almost always involves some form of fantasizing, and I think you'd have to use a purely technical, rather than esthetic, definition to say that porn doesn't.

Like I say, gals. I like this thread alot. I like it so much I'm going to read and reread every sinewy sentence while I touch myself.

I

[ January 17, 2002: Message edited by: Ian the second ]


From: Toronto City, Toronto | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Debra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 117

posted 17 January 2002 12:10 AM      Profile for Debra   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Wot no pictures?
From: The only difference between graffiti & philosophy is the word fuck... | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ian the second
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 732

posted 17 January 2002 12:27 AM      Profile for Ian the second   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The pictures are in your head.
From: Toronto City, Toronto | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 17 January 2002 12:30 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Oh, yeah! Got 'em. Thanks.
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 17 January 2002 01:01 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
I'm pleasantly surprised by the overall tone of this thread. I wouldn't have thought that the Canadian feminists on babble would actually have anything but a totally negative view of pornography.

Um...thanks...I think?

quote:
Like I say, gals. I like this thread alot. I like it so much I'm going to read and reread every sinewy sentence while I touch myself.

I'm almost speechless. I'm so glad I read this at home and not at the 'pooter lab at school - I'm pretty much doubled over laughing right now.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
uh clem
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1078

posted 17 January 2002 06:17 AM      Profile for uh clem   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
The pictures are in your head.

They are, and a disgusting and vile set they are too. Please stop posting trash like that in my head. Audra, make them get these pictures out!!! Aaargghhh

And Michelle, "Story of O" is now known to be written by Pauline Reage, though as she wroteit as a divertisement for her lover, one could argue it was his point of view she was appealing to. I've certainly known and read women who did find it erotic...Pat Califia's work comes to mind.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 17 January 2002 09:10 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Like I say, gals. I like this thread alot. I like it so much I'm going to read and reread every sinewy sentence while I touch myself.

This excites me.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Sumi- your reptilian friend
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2097

posted 17 January 2002 09:17 AM      Profile for Sumi- your reptilian friend   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
"After the first twenty minutes, I feel like going home and screwing. After the next twenty minutes, I feel like going home and never screwing again."

That was so good, I had to repeat it.

I don't know about other women, but I need more plot to get me hot. Just watching people randomly screw without much of a story is about as erotic as Animal Planet.

Unless you're into that sort of thing...


From: Underpants | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
vox
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2033

posted 17 January 2002 10:28 AM      Profile for vox        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
i thought that the whole "porn = objectification of women" one to one reductive ratio had been thrown out the window by now.

gimme some jemma jameson any day!

*rowr*


From: toronto | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Adam
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 358

posted 17 January 2002 10:34 AM      Profile for Adam     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
But the etymology, people!
From: MurderHouse Nation | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 17 January 2002 11:07 AM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Just watching people randomly screw without much of a story is about as erotic as Animal Planet.

You and me baby ain't nothin but mammals so let's do it like the do on the Discovery channel.

A while back I made a very unscientific discovery that, at best is obscure. One night my wife and I were watching the tube and landed on the Pride channel. Here we found a group of guys getting all frisky and what not. Now I, like all the guys I have talked to, quite enjoy watching two (or more) girls getting together for a little hunt and peck, but watching two guys doing the same thing has just about the opposite effect.

So I says to the wife I says, "Whoohoo! Now if that isn't just the thing a girl could get into watching, what is?"

So my wife told me that this was not interesting at all to her. That got me thinking a bit, so at the next few adult parties we went to, I posses this question to my female peers. Do you find watching two women making love exciting, and does watching two men have a similar effect?

Every woman I asked agreed that watching two women was exciting but two men in the same situation was a turn off.

Now I have no idea where the attitudes of the other members of this board reside, but I would like to ask if people of both genders feel more comfortable watching two women together than watching two men, while in the company of others?
And if so, how come?


From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Adam
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 358

posted 17 January 2002 11:39 AM      Profile for Adam     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I've found a similar thing among male friends. It seems to have something to do with the idea that a man surrenders his ever-so-important "maleness", which our society holds so dear, in opting out of the prescribed male role. "Lesbian pornography" is typically packaged for male consumption. While on the surface it may seem that women in "lesbian" pornography have avoided a prescribed role, but they still serve the pleasure of males. Males maintain the element of control. I think the idea can carry over to many females-- in a patriarchal society, one of the worst crimes is for a male to renounce his "maleness".

One of my female friends who identifies as a lesbian finds that "lesbian" porn that is made for males (and most of what enters the "mainstream" is) is generally unappealing. The female roles just aren't realistic. She personally finds the roles of those women to be completely rooted in the patriarchal fantasy of submissive female.

[ January 17, 2002: Message edited by: Adam ]


From: MurderHouse Nation | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 17 January 2002 11:43 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Isn't that odd. I would much rather watch two men getting it on than two women. In fact, I never find the OLS (Obligatory Lesbian Scene) in porno movies a turn on at all. Strange.

I haven't talked to very many other women about it, but the very few I have mentioned it to have agreed with me. However, now that it's come up on babble, it would be interesting to see what other women think.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
andrean
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 361

posted 17 January 2002 01:54 PM      Profile for andrean     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I know I'm repeating myself, but...

quote:
Of the porn I've seen, gay men's is certainly the hottest...

The boys certainly know how to do it up right!

I'm not quite sure why more women don't find men together appealing - to me, it's a logical progression. One man is good, well, two should be better! That's how I feel anyway, though I'm an equal-opportunity prevert.

However, I know a few straight women who feel, not quite threatened per se, but certainly superfluous in the presence of gay men. The basis of their "power" in interactions with men (i.e. their sexual attractiveness) is removed and they can find that unsettling. I can imagine that feeling being carried into viewing guy porn - the feeling of being replaced as the object of desire.

Perhaps for some folks the pleasure of watching porn is imagining what's happening on the screen happening to themselves. The opportunity for that doesn't exist for straight women in gay men's porn


From: etobicoke-lakeshore | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ian the second
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 732

posted 17 January 2002 02:06 PM      Profile for Ian the second   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Fag hags don't feel "superfluous" around gay men, and I don't feel superfluous around lesbos. Not that I'm a (what's the opposite of fag hag, "lesbo Joe"?).

There are a couple theories about why men like seeing lesbo sex. If a guy doesn't have to jump in and have intercourse, he can sit back and spank off. Also, it might represent a challenge to the straight man. Straight men often "hunt" for their women.

I've discussed at great length with my mom what the socio-anthropological origins of the fag hag are... any ideas?


I


From: Toronto City, Toronto | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 17 January 2002 02:23 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
[re: The Story of O]

quote:
I read the book with that in mind, trying to see where I'd have come down in the debate. Hard to do when you know the truth ahead of time. But yes, there are clues both subtle and not so subtle that the author was female. Pauline Reage, who passed away not too long ago.

Just to add a little data... 'Pauline Reage' was actually a pseudonym for a woman named (I think) Dominique Aury, an author and editor well-known in French literary circles. The New Yorker had a feature on her a few years ago, while she was still alive I believe. I hadn't heard about her death since.

If I remember right, it wasn't so much a divertissement for her lover, as a love letter or attempt to seduce her editor, whose name escapes me.

I haven't read the book, so I can't comment on its literary merits, but it was supposedly agreed to have some -- why the s/m stuff, particularly, I don't know, and can't recall the explanation(s) in the New Yorker feature.


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 17 January 2002 06:46 PM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Michelle,

Perhaps I didn't read the book the way others might, it's hard to say. I didn't find too many passages in it erotic or arousing.

I spent the entire book trying to figure out what it was I thought was missing from "O". I don't recal any indication that she enjoyed her masochism for it's own sake. She endured for her love.....and I question that she loved anyone in the book, but was in fact a slave to the concept of love.

That was the master she served, and, it seemed to me, would aquiese to the whim of the figure she was fixated on at the time. And, who could love such a person? who could find that erotic? Who could find it anything but contemptable?


The thing that I found "missing" from "O" was her imagination. There wasn't a hint that the character had one of her own.

And such a person is of no interest to me. The fact that they might offer up their body as some kind of paltry substitute for imagination is sad.


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 17 January 2002 06:55 PM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I think most of the "lesbians are arousing, gays are a turn off" thing has to do with the perception that women have more dimensions, sexually, than men do. We all know what men think, gay, straight or Nova Scotian. There's a tendancy to believe there is a mystique about female sexuality. Therefore, we're always going to look at women, alone or in concert, as a chance for mysteries to be revealed.
From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 17 January 2002 07:12 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I think you might be right, though I've recently come (pardon) to find the idea of gay male sex rather arousing indeed. I'll have to get recommendations from andrean, perhaps.
From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 17 January 2002 08:07 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Re: The Story of O:

I was mistaken above. Dominique Aury (who died in 1998, aged 91) did indeed write the book in an attempt to keep her lover, Jean Paulhan. It was partly in the nature of a dare; he was an admirer of de Sade, and doubted that a woman could write compelling s/m.

Here's a link to a Salon feature on Aury and her book.


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 17 January 2002 08:25 PM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
I think you might be right, though I've recently come (pardon) to find the idea of gay male sex rather arousing indeed.

everbody dance now ! (boom, boom, boom boomboom.)

I reviewed a gay porn cite that a friend of mine has just got up and running. He wanted to know how it worked mechanically, and I also tried to let him know my impressions of it in terms of "porn".

I thought I'd be quite useless at that, but in fact when I got the feedback from him about my feedback, it seems to me there are constants in porn/erotica that transcend orientation. Sure, garters and stockings might be traded in for athletic socks and white jockey shorts, but it's still fetish, and even if one doesn't find it arousing, one can still understand the art of the erotic photograph, and the subtleties that make a good shot are the same whether it's for straight or gay erotica.


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 17 January 2002 08:30 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Sure, garters and stockings might be traded in for athletic socks and white jockey shorts, but it's still fetish, and even if one doesn't find it arousing, one can still understand the art of the erotic photograph, and the subtleties that make a good shot are the same whether it's for straight or gay erotica.

Sex is sex, way I look at it, and erotica's erotica.

I'm almost certain that white jockey shorts and athletic socks won't do it for me, however. Garters and stockings typically don't either, come to that. Ptui! on cliches.

[ January 17, 2002: Message edited by: 'lance ]


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 17 January 2002 08:36 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
mmmmmm...jockey shorts...white socks...mmmmmm

er, did I say that out loud?


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 17 January 2002 08:41 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
OK Michelle, but what about, say, those close-fitting boxer briefs, worn over muscular thighs beneath nicely toned abs?

.... er, did I say that out loud?


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
skadie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2072

posted 17 January 2002 08:45 PM      Profile for skadie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I have yet to figure out the quote thing that you folks do so effortlessly, but here goes:

skdadl, we must have a lot in common. It excited me too!
__________________________________________________
andrean
"The basis of their power in interacitions with men (ie. their sexual attractiveness) is removed."

Ian the Second
"Straight men often "hunt" for their women."

Boy, am I disillusioned... Thanks guys.
_________________________________________________

Tommy_Paine "gay straight or Nova Scotian."

NOW THAT'S COMEDY!!!! Loved it.


From: near the ocean | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 17 January 2002 08:50 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
skadie, to quote you can highlight the text and copy it. Then when you're posting your reply, look below the window to the "instant formatting" options.

Clicking on the Quote button gives you two open and close quote codes, thus:

[ QUOTE ] [ /QUOTE ]

(I added spaces so they'd appear in this message as text).

Put your cursor in between, paste in the text, and there you are.

Edited to add:

But where are my manners? Welcome to babble!

[ January 17, 2002: Message edited by: 'lance ]


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 17 January 2002 08:50 PM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I confess I stole that from a line I heard somewhere on t.v. I liked it so much, I've been using it every once and a while.
From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
skadie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2072

posted 17 January 2002 09:05 PM      Profile for skadie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
I confess I stole that from a line I heard somewhere on t.v. I liked it so much, I've been using it every once and a while

Ooo la la, I may have figured it out.


From: near the ocean | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
andrean
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 361

posted 17 January 2002 11:02 PM      Profile for andrean     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
mmmmmm...jockey shorts...white socks...mmmmmm

There is no room for white socks in my porn. Or anywhere else in my universe. They are a fashion crime against humanity. And heaven help all those straight boys who wear their socks (and nothing else) to bed - they will pay for it in their next lives.


From: etobicoke-lakeshore | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 17 January 2002 11:11 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
So, we know what you do not want next christmas?
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Twilight-Cedar
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1685

posted 17 January 2002 11:24 PM      Profile for Twilight-Cedar        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Some BC women like S & M.

http://www.cbc.ca/gfx/photos/campbell_cuts020117.jpg


From: Gabriola Island | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
meades
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 625

posted 17 January 2002 11:34 PM      Profile for meades     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:

There is no room for white socks in my porn. Or anywhere else in my universe. They are
a fashion crime against humanity. And heaven help all those straight boys who wear
their socks (and nothing else) to bed - they will pay for it in their next lives.

y'know, I have to agree.

-------------
What? You thought a 15 year old could stay out of a porn thread? You people have some serious delusions about today's youth
-------------

I also find the clichés so absolutely horrid.

As for the porn vs. erotica- there's definitely a difference. "porn" is something you hear straight high-school boys shout the minute they see nudey pictures- and keep repeating it; usually every other word in the sentences after the initial discovery- and with special emphasis to boot, as in "PORN!". Erotica, however, is much more sophisticated, and I would classify anything above whacking material, that is still sensual as such.

[ January 18, 2002: Message edited by: meades ]

[ January 19, 2002: Message edited by: meades ]


From: Sault Ste. Marie | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Doug
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 44

posted 18 January 2002 12:48 AM      Profile for Doug   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
What if I wear black socks and nothing else to bed? I've gotta have my socks! I hate having bare feet.
Though personally I don't care whether or not socks make an appearance in porn - I'm not looking at the feet.

From: Toronto, Canada | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Dawna Matrix
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 156

posted 18 January 2002 01:33 AM      Profile for Dawna Matrix     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I would like to ask a question, and feel free to answer, or not, as you wish.

When having sex, what percentage of the time are you thinking about:
A)How your own body feels
B)How you look
C)How your partner feels
D)How your partner looks

I have a theory that objectification is not only done TO a person, but by a person to themselves. Please be honest if you choose to respond, and even though I'm sure that half the time you're thinking of the laundry anyways, let's pretend that choices A-D account for 100% of your 'sex-thought-time'.


From: the stage on cloud 9 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Debra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 117

posted 18 January 2002 08:40 AM      Profile for Debra   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Some BC women like S & M.

Twilight-Cedar I'm sure that's true, however, your picture seems to have to do with politics. Perhaps you'd like to start a thread about that there.


From: The only difference between graffiti & philosophy is the word fuck... | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Trinitty
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 826

posted 18 January 2002 12:01 PM      Profile for Trinitty     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Hey Michelle, I read some of the link you gave, and I must agree with you. Ick. It started out kinda neat... I like the idea of consentual S&M, but it must be consentual.... this was just horrid to me.
From: Europa | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 18 January 2002 12:10 PM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
When having sex, what percentage of the time are you thinking about:
A)How your own body feels
B)How you look
C)How your partner feels
D)How your partner looks

Though it is hard to think of percentages with all that blood loss, I would guesstimate 35%, 1%, 25%, 39%. But I must add that this fluctuates wildly on any given day. As well not to mention the many other variables that are common for us anyway.


From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 18 January 2002 12:45 PM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
E) The television show you're missing.
F) The porno magazine in the bedside table.

[ January 18, 2002: Message edited by: Victor Von MediaBoy ]


From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 18 January 2002 02:02 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
There is no room for white socks in my porn. Or anywhere else in my universe. They are a fashion crime against humanity.

Agreed. Although... confession time? I do sometimes wear white socks at the gym, though I've begun to cast about for a reasonable alternative. But then some of my gym wear might qualify as a fashion crime, if not necessarily one against humanity, were I to wear it in the public streets.

quote:
And heaven help all those straight boys who wear their socks (and nothing else) to bed - they will pay for it in their next lives.

Agreed II. But, based on no experience with straight boys/men whatsoever, I can't help but feel that the frequency of this occurrence is wildly exaggerated (like, for example, the number of hockey players who ever lost an eye to a stick with an un-taped butt end). Quite understandably, of course.

Perhaps I credit straight boys/men, as a group, with more sense than they actually have. (That's understandable too, I submit). And naturally, I'll defer to anyone else who cares to comment.


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 18 January 2002 02:08 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Some BC women like S & M.

I'm sure, but they're not visible in this picture. What, Twilight-Cedar, no turtle-porn?


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 18 January 2002 02:11 PM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Elizabeth Nickson on Porn
From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 18 January 2002 02:44 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Hmm. So many thoughts...

quote:
This is the secret about sex without love: You need more stimulation every time, whether it's rubber slings, bondage, six-year-old fluffers or German shepherds.

Well, that's certainly true. Though six-year-old fluffers have rather small jaws. Er, I'm told.

quote:
and without porn, it is entirely arguable, there would be much much less disease, much less cervical cancer, AIDS, Hep C to G (G!), and the populations of Africa and now China, would not be in the process of decimation. Babies are raped in South Africa because ignorant men think sex with an infant can cure you of AIDS.

The scourge of porn is probably behind the rise in Islamic fundamentalism, as well. To say nothing of retreaded 1970s fashions.

quote:
Mick Jagger was, for most of my generation of men, the opinion makers anyway, the bomb. He was the model of ideal manhood, snaky hips, and rubbery lips and outlaw sex drive. Last gossip I heard had this grandfather sodomizing a stranger in the public bathroom of the Viper Room, so let's not kid ourselves that if half the middle class, educated white boys of the '70s wanted to be him, the entire population of Third World males, without the alternative satisfactions of ambition, accumulation and a happy family to distract them, would take Jagger's behaviour and the advocacy of outsize sexuality in his music as imperatives. The summer of love has become the scourge of the Third World and we are responsible. There are at least 50 new STDs since Mick Jagger came on the scene, and unlike 40 years ago, when syphilis was as rare as a white elephant, they are rampant, everywhere.

Now, what Mick Jagger has to do with all this, I'm not sure I understand. Nor about his influence on the Third World.

But wait! That film of the 1972 Stones tour of the US was called "Cocksucker Blues." Now it all begins to fit together! Sure, the thing was never released; maybe not more than a few thousand people have ever seen it. But surely they were influential -- film and media people, that sort.

Yes, I really think she's got something there.


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 18 January 2002 02:45 PM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Yes, I really think she's got something there.

Writing ability sure ain't it.


From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 18 January 2002 02:50 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 

I wish I had a loonie for every time Elizabeth Nickson has ordered what she calls "the intelligentsia" to "shut up for once."

Notice, though, how she always has to drop at least one reference to the latest gossip she has from somewhere like the Viper Room. ('lance, WingNut, dahlings, do you happen to remember exactly which room was the Viper Room?)


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 18 January 2002 02:55 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
'lance, WingNut, dahlings, do you happen to remember exactly which room was the Viper Room?

Now I'm a dahling. Sheesh. Is there no end to this woman's wily, seductive ways?

After my time, dear. I moved away from the CotU in that year of grace nineteen hundred and eighty-nine, and haven't spent much time there since.


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
vaudree
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1331

posted 18 January 2002 04:10 PM      Profile for vaudree     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
I found a Walk in the Clouds really boring... no offense vaudree!
You were watching it wrong. Some movies you get drawn into and they are interesting in and of themselves. Others you have to draw the whole of your social experiences into them to make them interesting. If you just look at the movie it was two hours of Keanu Reeves not having sex. But you have to contrast him with Al Bundy from "married with children" for end result, with Meatloaf from "Paradice by the Dashboard Light" and "For Crying out Loud" for ability not to give in to whims. He made meatloaf look weak because he was able to control what meatloaf couldn't. You have to compare KR to Elvis at the end of his skate when he won gold in Nagano. You have to listen to your friend's then boyfriend complain that this was another Atwood-like male bashing movie and that KR's two love interest were the most pathetic of women.

The problem I think is that if we are with a guy and he is not trying to get into our pants - how do we tell whether we are stuck with KR or AB?

quote:
It seems that a lot of women enjoy the writing over the image when it comes to getting turned on.
I watched a couple of those movies at my other friends place when she had that jerk boyfriend - I got a bit bored, started feeling sorry for the charactors and almost started crying in the first one. The other was this one about stupid nuns before they decide whether to take the last vows. Note how the men don't look to happy and they don't seem to have much emotional attachment to the women. Also note for the most part they were ugly.

Meatloaf may not be that good looking but he had desire, emotion you could almost believe he could die without it. I don't think it's visual - I think the idea of a beautiful woman being attracted to you when you are as ugly as sin and financially not her typê is most guy's fantasy. Actually putting commitment in there with sex just reminds the guy that they would be considered a poor catch.

That nun being stuck in the washroom with the lineup basically reminded me of showing up at work as a dishwasher with dishes piled all over the place. It reminds me of all the home work I haven't done yet. Only a person who doesn't do housework could think that was interesting!

My fantasy man has to be kind, caring, good sense of humour, faithful, creative, intelligent, and in love with me. None of those porn guys even came close to that fantasy.


From: Just outside St. Boniface | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
skadie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2072

posted 18 January 2002 05:07 PM      Profile for skadie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
[QUOTEMy fantasy man has to be kind, caring, good sense of humour, faithful, creative, intelligent, and in love with me. None of those porn guys even came close to that fantasy.

] [/QUOTE]

My reality guy has to be kind, caring, faithful etc. My fantasy guy has to be rock hard and oiled up!!! I don't pretend fantasy and reality are the same thing. Maybe that's why I enjoy porn...


From: near the ocean | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
vaudree
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1331

posted 18 January 2002 06:03 PM      Profile for vaudree     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
What did you think of the "Tarzan" cartoon put out by disney a few years ago? Was he oil up enough for you? Can you imagine his tongue...

What about that fantasy when you are sick in bed and that night in shining armer comes in and takes care of everything and carresses you until you are totally relaxed. Note that I only have that fantasy when I am sick - otherwise I value my autonomy too much.


From: Just outside St. Boniface | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 18 January 2002 06:16 PM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
... I like the idea of consentual S&M, but it must be consentual.

The motto roundly adopted in the BDSM community is "Safe, Sane and Consentual". There's no end of safety tips available for those that want to include a bit or a lot of this type of activity in thier lives, and submissives have safe words, sounds or signals for activity to stop when something isn't right physically or emotionally. The term "Hard Limits" refers to the line that submissives draw in regards to what they are willing to do. A Dominant recognizes that crossing those hard limits, or ignoring a "safe word" is rape. "No means No" in this activity as well as it does anywhere else. Perhaps more so.

I always get a chuckle when tough sounding Dominants claim that they don't tollerate being "topped from the bottom." The great irony is that the submissives are the ones actually in control, and true "Sadists" in the psychological sense need not apply.

This doesn't mean everyone with that interest adopts this, (those that don't find themselves expelled from the community or not invited to be part of it) and there are some variations on these ideas, but in the main this is the culture taking shape.


quote:
Note how the men don't look to happy and they don't seem to have much emotional attachment to the women. Also note for the most part they were ugly.

I was never much for porn video's, but my ex had a taste for them. We watched some once, and later I was telling my gay friend at work how I expected to see guys who... I *ahem* couldn't measure up to, but in fact if anything, I um...at least measured up. He said, "They hire guys like that for films like that so guys like you don't feel threatened."

Touché


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Debra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 117

posted 18 January 2002 06:20 PM      Profile for Debra   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
HAHAHAHA Did that leave you feeling a little ummm deflated?
From: The only difference between graffiti & philosophy is the word fuck... | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 18 January 2002 06:33 PM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
I blame porn, and our silly First World intelligentsia who have cowed our flaccid courts with legalistic arguments that conflate obscenity with free speech, and hence pollute public opinion, so that we think that women having sex with goats for money, anywhere in the universe, is OK.

Well that's hyperbolic and assinine, not as bad as the reference to six year olds, but idiotic all the same.

Gee whiz Elizabeth, after three or four years of spellunking on the internet, I've not been confronted with the images of kids and goats that YOU put out there for our consideration.

If anyone should "just shut up" it might be Nickson.

quote:
The only thing that will stop this revolting wallpaper is for ordinary men and women, not the judiciary, not the police or the intelligentsia, who should shut up for once, saying no. We don't want this filth in our communities, on our airwaves or in our magazines, and we want its purveyors prosecuted and convicted.

Maybe we should bring charges against Nickson. After all, she's the one putting ideas about goats and children in people's heads, in a medium one would not not normally expect to find it.

Wallpaper indeed.

Elizabeth Nickson can bite me.


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 18 January 2002 06:41 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
O, but Tommy, you neglect entirely the possibility that she's writing brilliant satire. What else can explain the lengthy diatribe about Mick Jagger? Last I heard, he hadn't much to do with the porn business, 'cept maybe as a humble consumer like the rest of us.

Ahem. The rest of you, that's to say.


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Dawna Matrix
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 156

posted 18 January 2002 06:47 PM      Profile for Dawna Matrix     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I'm sad. Only one person answered my question.
From: the stage on cloud 9 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 18 January 2002 06:56 PM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I haven't got to it yet, Dawna.

Just a sec. (demands demands.... my daughter's want rides this place and that {what time? I dunno, what time do you want to go? Well, what time will you be ready?} and all I want to do is talk about porn)

Nothing but "A".

OHHHHHHHH you probably meant sex with someone else

In that case, if memory serves, it's alot of "C" then a little bit of "A" at the end.


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 18 January 2002 07:02 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Meanwhile, Dawna Matrix, I'm till thinkin'!
From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Debra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 117

posted 18 January 2002 07:06 PM      Profile for Debra   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
A&C equal combinations

B&D a little bit say 10%


From: The only difference between graffiti & philosophy is the word fuck... | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 18 January 2002 07:07 PM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
, but Tommy, you neglect entirely the possibility that she's writing brilliant satire

Logic my dear 'lance.

In this Universe, there's no positive linkage between the words "Elizabeth Nickson", "writing" or "brilliant".


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 18 January 2002 07:13 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
B&D a little bit say 10%

I'd go for B&D a good deal more than... O dear, I've misunderstood, haven't I? Never mind.

quote:
In this Universe, there's no positive linkage between the words "Elizabeth Nickson", "writing" or "brilliant".

So I gathered on my first reading of her, which was this very afternoon. Never even heard of her before.

Did you ever have any truck with her stuff in your late lamented "Columnists" feature, or would that have been just too easy?


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 18 January 2002 07:15 PM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
HAHAHAHA Did that leave you feeling a little ummm deflated?

Actually, when someone hits me between the eyes with a truth about myself I missed, I always reacted with good humour-- I've learned something.


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Debra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 117

posted 18 January 2002 07:19 PM      Profile for Debra   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Actually, when someone hits me between the eyes with a truth about myself

Oh I thought he hit rather lower than that.


From: The only difference between graffiti & philosophy is the word fuck... | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
skadie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2072

posted 18 January 2002 07:47 PM      Profile for skadie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
[QUOTE] [When having sex, what percentage of the time are you thinking about:
A)How your own body feels
B)How you look
C)How your partner feels
D)How your partner looks

I have a theory that objectification is not only done TO a person, but by a person to themselves
/QUOTE]

I think I know what you mean Dawna. But how much of our self-objectification is spawned by the media and or porn in the first place?

And to answer your question:
As I get older it gets to be more about how we feel. It's a wonderful and exciting process! Hurrah for aging!!!!


From: near the ocean | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 18 January 2002 08:42 PM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
So, getting back to the topic at hand, I was wondering how I would do up a "porn for women" website.

I think I'd go heavy with text, and I'd probably put thumbnail's into the text. Something perhaps in black and while, and with accent on imagination more than the explicit, tying into the story.

Of course, there would be more explicit photo pages in the websight for those women who wanted them, and the I'd try to collect story submissions that ran from "erotica light" to as "pornographic" as the law, and my own "rules", allowed.


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 18 January 2002 08:43 PM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Oh I thought he hit rather lower than that.

Oh lord, I've become Earthmom's straightman in a thread on porn.


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Debra
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 117

posted 18 January 2002 08:45 PM      Profile for Debra   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Oh lord, I've become Earthmom's straightman in a thread on porn.

ooooohhhh and Tommy I do love a straight man.


From: The only difference between graffiti & philosophy is the word fuck... | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 18 January 2002 08:50 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
ooooohhhh and Tommy I do love a straight man.

Yeah, but don't we all... whooops
*(71-9
oh dear
)-k;a0

NO CARRIER


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
skadie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2072

posted 18 January 2002 09:20 PM      Profile for skadie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Tommy

Don't assume women don't like explicit. I like explicit. How about a spot on this womens site where men can show off their stuff. There must be guys out there who like to be watched doing...whatever.


From: near the ocean | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 18 January 2002 10:16 PM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I wasn't assuming that. I know a woman who sends me explicit fetish/bdsm porn all the time. And still another (born again Christian, to boot) who asked me if I knew of any "men in bondage" websites that catered to women and not gay men. (My inability to find such a website first started me wondering about the dichotomy of "male/female" porn) I'd just present it in such a way that women who don't like it wouldn't have it thrown in their face on the first page, but was there for those seeking it.
From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca