To be upset about DPs porn habit?

[Flojo1979]

Ok, too much info for a monday morning. I dont get the whole porn thing, i hate it. I think its my DP getting off on another woman etc etc. Told him this a few months ago, b4 he moved in and expected him to respectfully refrain from such things. Since then hes moved in and well to put it blunt, got it on tap so has no reason to watch ever again, right?
So last night i said lets go for an early night (nudge nudge wink wink) and he said no I'll stop up for a bit u go up etc, fair enough, a guys allowed to say no ta too and off i toddled to bed. I heard his laptop boot up and when he went to work this morning in my usual suspicious ways, i checked his history, and he was on porn last night, when i was in bed!
Angry, furious, annoyed, upset, betrayed and oh feeling like he prefers that to me, and i must be rubbish!

and also if he was to watch porn he would normally put it on and then show me what he was watching - hoping to turn me on.

will check it out af

Well, quite.

canny Did I not make it clear that I no longer watch porn since learning a lot about the industry? Allow me to be clear now. Since learning a lot about the 'industry' my conscience or my stomach would not allow me to use porn. In fact since learning about the industry I think it would be pretty impossible to watch any porn for the purpose of getting turned on. Once you know there's no turning back. It just can't be sexy anymore.

Porn does devalue all of us

Here's the thread on the documentary so you can read in the meantime and decide if you can bear to watch it:

Max Hardcore documentary thread

x-posts with AF's link - sorry!

yes hell you made it very clear you no longer watch porn.

Once again we get all the arguments about porn being degrading to women / facilitating trafficking etc - all of which are perfectly valid arguments

However, the OP was not concerned about this aspect - she was only concerned about where she was left emotionally and sexually by her DP having a wank over porn rather than having an "early night" with her

I wonder why lots of MNers can't address that withuot going down the demeaning route, which imho, is adifferent thread

The reason is Curry, is because loads of people pile in eager to tell OP's on this type of thread, that her feelings and instincts are invalid.

And she needs to know that they're not.

I think a lot of women feel at a gut instinct level, how degrading porn is. But they're unable to articulate it because everyone else in the world is telling them that it's just a bit of a fun and they should get over it and get with the programme.

I think it's important that they hear the still small voice of a different message.

i have no problem with being disagreed with, whats the point of any of these treads if we all agreed, and i wasnt being over-sensitive , it was just starting to think there was no point, it was becoming a slanging match . and quite frankly you would all be glad to be rid of me.
so. ok. i'll stick around
no one responded BTW to what i said about amatuer porn made my couples and put out there on the net for free...does anyone think even that is exploitiaive ?

Mona - there are no moderators here - why be coy about spelling wank? If you can talk about it, don't mind your husband doing it (no one on this thread so far has objected to their husband/wife wanking) then you can type it straight out can't you?

Would you be bothered if you said 'come to bed early tonight?' wink wink and he said ' oh no can't I am going to have a big long think over this bird getting banged by her next door neighbour on this DVD I picked up on the way home?

Of course you wouldn't! You have already declare yourself so easy-going and liberated and all go with the flow look how I don't need to control my man because I am sooooo secure! Good luck with that.

What is only porn? To dismiss something out of hand you've got to first be able to define it haven't you, in order to know what you're dismissing.

What if the porn shows actual rape? Real torture, real pain, real gagging?

What if the porn shows barely pubescent teens (16, legal age but on their 16th birthday)? Or what if the porn isn't actually legal porn and shows women being forced to fellate horses or, and this is where the word porn should never be used, filmed/photographed sexual abuse and rape of children?

Where's your limit? Before you so glibly dismiss it is only porn? What are you dismissing as ok? Or have you not really considered that?

oh dad i meant to bring that up but forgot, damn.

I disagree HerBeX - I think it's more like you validadting her feelings but telling her it's not because she feels rejected, it's because porn is degrading.

I think you all disregard her own personal situation and focus o the porn, not the poster

Like I say, start a thread about the problems with porn generically, but I think this OP is looking for an insight into her own emotional dilema, not a lecture about the porn industry (which may all be valid, just not here imho)

Dad Do you know that the amateur couples were both consenting to being filmed and have consented to it being on the internet? Do you know that an ex-gf or ex-bf didn't happily consent at the time 'for fun' and is now being spitefully being blackmailed/humiliated by the ex by them putting it up there.

hell do you know that they didn't or are not. so because some are or do, all is bad and agenda driven?

and millions and millions of pounds/

CurrySpice I have been involved in the wider debate hugely but I have also responded several times personally to the OP but my response to the OP was sparked by people telling the OP she was being uptight and insecure, when in actual fact her DP knew her views on porn, had agreed and moved in and then, in preference to actual sex with her, chosen to use porn instead. Subsequent posters seem to forget that she didn't catch DP having a sneaky wank when she'd said she was tired (no more forgiveable if she'd made her views clear) but that he had actually turned down sex to wank to porn. In no way did the OP say she objected to wanking either. That has all been projected by subsequent posters who want to tell her she is overreacting and it is only porn. Which is the point at which the debate widens as I have said to Mona above - if you want to dismiss something as only something (not the greatest intellectual rebuff but still...), at least be capable of defining what it is you're dismissing.

HellAtWork Mon 13-Jun-11 17:28:39

Mona - there are no moderators here - why be coy about spelling wank? If you can talk about it, don't mind your husband doing it (no one on this thread so far has objected to their husband/wife wanking) then you can type it straight out can't you?

Would you be bothered if you said 'come to bed early tonight?' wink wink and he said ' oh no can't I am going to have a big long think over this bird getting banged by her next door neighbour on this DVD I picked up on the way home?

Of course you wouldn't! You have already declare yourself so easy-going and liberated and all go with the flow look how I don't need to control my man because I am sooooo secure! Good luck with that.

What is only porn? To dismiss something out of hand you've got to first be able to define it haven't you, in order to know what you're dismissing.

What if the porn shows actual rape? Real torture, real pain, real gagging?

What if the porn shows barely pubescent teens (16, legal age but on their 16th birthday)? Or what if the porn isn't actually legal porn and shows women being forced to fellate horses or, and this is where the word porn should never be used, filmed/photographed sexual abuse and rape of children?

Where's your limit? Before you so glibly dismiss it is only porn? What are you dismissing as ok? Or have you not really considered that?

-----------------
As i use various forums, some forums dont allow the word wank. If you see i used the @ once and then realised i was on MN and used the used Wank the second time.

As for asking my husband to bed and him refusing so he can watch porn - if he said that i'd say 'well il watch it with you and then we can go to bed' - turns him on, turn me on.

I think there is a difference between porn and ''Porn'' theres soft porn and hten theres porn that is just sick. Even my DH wouldnt sit and watch something like that. Hes not into the domineering type of porn or the gangbangs or what not. Just plain porn.
And im not soooooooo secure id rather my husband watch porn then me REFUSE him and he go out and find someone else. So actually it suits us but actually my husband doesnt watch porn that often im not being biased and saying oh he doesnt do that because he does. Its like the women who say oh my husband doesnt have a wank - Fuck off ALL men have a wank.

I think only one person told her she was insecure because she doesn't like porn HellatWork. (although I do think she lacks self-confidence as it happens, but not because she doesn't like porn, more because her DP sounds pretty insensitive)

I think every time this problem comes up on MN it is seen as a general invitation to discuss the evils of porn when, TBH, the OP posted about her relationship and her objection to porn is that she doesn't like her DP getting off on another woman.

The thread is about trust and self-confidence and a pretty one-sided relationship from what I can see. Not about the exploitation of women (which I will say again is a perfectly valid debate before I get accused of being a man! ) which I don't think is actually helping the OP at all

nobody says no men (or women) wank

why do people keep coming back to that ? it's a nonsensical argument

curry I have on two occasions on this thread (and I'm not the only one) referred back to the OP (remember her ? well, yes I do...) but since it appears she has done one, it's not really relevant now, is it ?

and if you are a regular user of MN, you will have noticed that threads always go off on a tangent, particularly if the Op disappears

Wow, do you really think your DH would go and find someone else if you refused to watch porn with him Mona?

Oh dear, I'm sorry.

Actually some men don't wank, if they have medical probs or whatever.

But as AF says, noone says men don't wank anyway. Most women wank too, why are we pretending it's only a male activity.

These are the arguments on the first page (on my screen) curry as for why the OP needs to accept her DP's porn usage, and neither of them are the poster you are referring to I suspect. Words can be used directly and indirectly, hence how we are able to infer meaning from things words have implied. I think more than one poster directly told the OP she was being insecure - a few more implied she should be looking to herself to blame for her DP's porn usage with points like this:

One poster at 0936:

1. "your man will still have a wank even though he "has it on tap" he wouldn,t have just moved in with you if he thought you were crap in bed,do you have a regular sex life?"

How is the frequency of the OP's sex life related to her DP agreeing to not use porn and then using it instead of having sex with her? How is holding the view that ALL men use porn consistent with also holding the view men use porn because their partner is crap in bed? I am sure it was not meant in a mean way, but really, how was that helpful to the OP to imply the only way for her DP not to be using porn was to be servicing him sexually as regularly as he wishes - EVEN when he had just refused her offer of sex! Mindboggling.

One poster at 0945

1. Paraphrased: Are you not catering to any fetishes he might have? How about being broadminded and embracing those? (subtext: Then you might have a chance of distracting him from the porn so he wants to have sex with you. You are not servicing him sexually in the way that he wants - that is why he is using porn)

1. ^"a fun 10 minutes wanking over pretty girls , lots of images , different types" (subtext - You are just one woman, why would he have sex with you when he can wank over pretty girl(s), in the plural? No one woman is ever enough for any one man. At the time of this post we had no idea what the DP was wanking to - male, female, legal, illegal but the assumption was made as pretty girls, begging the question Are you pretty OP?)

1. "are you being arrogant to assume that the manner you get turned on is acceptable and the way he does isnt?" (OP - in not wanting a partner who uses a porn, said they wouldn't use porn and has now used porn in preference to having sex with you - YOU are being arrogant.) The logic if this one goes right to the heart of male privilege/entitlement and the weasle way in which this has been turned around to be the OP's arrogant fault - again - mindblowing frankly!

I have to keep a separate list for the relax it's only porn brigade! I reckon there must be about 5 or 6 "its only porn posters".

The thing is none of them know or can say if what they are actually saying when they say "It's only porn!" is "It's only anal rape!", "It's only being forced to lick shit off a penis!", "It's only photos of child sex abuse!" "it's only a druggy woman incapable of sobering up long enough to get off the streets, earn some money without selling her body or her soul to be fucked repeatedly in order for her to be able to buy more drugs to try and forget the fact that she sold her body and her soul to be fucked in order to get more drugs....." Ad Nauseum.

Like RGB leaping to the conclusion that it was vanilla porn/soft porn/The Sun, the It's only porn brigade want to believe what they are dismissing is harmless - otherwise they wouldn't dismiss it would they? After all they are empathic fully emotionally developed individuals with a moral code.

So they start saying....but but but....what about amateur porn. It exists doesn't it? Those people want to have sex and they're not being paid so they can't be being exploited can they?

I don't know any other type of debate I have where people can agree that 60 - 70 - 80 - 90 - 99.9% of the 'industry' product /thing/whatever it is is being discussed is morally repugnant but because 0.00001% of it isn't - that's the percentage that wins!

It's like saying, well, no I don't agree with child slavery, not at all, but you know what I don't mind a bit of 'insert high street cheapo brand here' because only 0.00001% of their clothes are produced by children who die in the process of being exploited. I'm pretty sure the dress I bough yesterday was not made by a starving abused child made so that makes it ok doesn't it?

And if challenged on it - they will say - well how do you know the dress I bought WASN"T made by a starving abused child huh? Huh? How do you know that child didn't want to make that dress?

FFS. If you've bought into it, you've bought into it. Just because YOU or the other person on the other side of the debate cannot precisely point out which specific images/films were made through abuse or exploitation - when the probability is as high as 60/70/80/90 + percent you have to start taking a look at yourself and wondering WHY that does not bother you?