Can I ask you for some links about porn please?

[EhricLovesTeamQhuay]

Specifically accounts of ex porn actors talking about abuse/coercion in porn films, and anything academic about the effects of porn on male sexuality and sexual attitudes?

I've read bits, but I'm already convinced. This is for a friend whose new boyfriend doesn't get it and she feels like she doesn't have the evidence to show him.
Thanks

There's a lot bubbling under the surface when it comes to consent.

Expectations on both sides being a big big one. Porn creates a new normal and we all know you often don't question normal, it's a big thing to step back from something and examine it.

Consent is the tip of the iceberg.

Paper - You said if I explained why I asked, you would say if you are a woman or a man. I explained. So could you please answer the question?

I suggest you read the thread on consent. I believe in more than consent.

What sort of evidence do you expect? It's the constant whine refrain of pro-porn or pro-pimps. You, for example, are advocating decriminalisation of hard drugs but you don't have any evidence of the social implications of doing such a thing.

sinister - I quite agree. which is why the whole question of consent and what you base your decisions on is so important. critical reading and research.
it must all be tackled at home and school

my concern is that censorship comes with even bigger issues. where does the ban porn argument go? where does it end up? essentially with state control of what you can and can't know.

I'm on the fence on the hard drugs question.actually as I am on porn.

the hard drugs argument comes from following a recent parliamentary paper on the subject which amongst other matters looked at the decriminalisation of using ( not selling smuggling or production of drugs) hard drugs in Spain.

issues of consent have come from much of my reading on mumsnet oh and bdsm

red- how regulation works I don't know, I don't know enough. higher penalties for violence against women across the board should be a must. why rape isn't persued effectively through the courts. how woman are treated on a financial level through marriage and divorce.

plus I haven't seen how a widescale ban would work

eg enforced internet server bans. yes I can see why but for me it's too much state control how far do you let a government control what you can and can't search for on the internet
opt in maybe but opt out.

Because of social conditioning of women – patriarchy. Are you a woman or a man?

To me this reads as 'Are you a woman socially conditioned by the patriarchy or a man concealing your gender for the purposes of patriarchy BS.' Either way all opinion is negated. Seems quite bizarre or am I losing something in translating? Defining gender gives us the proper context to justify to ourselves the denial of relevance of counter-opinion?

Why has lib changed his NN to AngryFrank? Banned again John?

i've no idea what you are on about?

Buffy
I reach this conclusion from having opened websites like PornHub in my time and seen the sorts of thing available to watch there.

, so you base your theory on what is mainstream from those crappy low quality streaming sites. That are also split into different categories some softcore, some hardcore, and some extreme, so it also a bit vague on which ones people are watching anyway. They are effectively search engines for low quality streaming videos. They may be fairly popular but as there are billions of adult content sites out there, they would still only represent a tiny percentage (

Discounting search engines? Surely most internet porn is accessed through search engines? I certainly imagine that is how children will access it.

If people are watching hardcore porn, it's not much consolation that more people are looking at less hardcore porn so I'm not sure what your point is lib angry

flora - the answer to that is simple.

essential to your argument is that the position of women is deteriorating because porn puts more pressure on women and young woman to perform acts that are sexually degrading. the argument falls apart if only a very small portion of men are actually accessing the material (particularly as I have argued frequently explicit material which we approve of or not has been present for hundreds of years).

search engine stats are provided. a fact. is there anything wrong with the fact? you raise what is left out, critical thinking great love it. but Instead of sneering find search engine stats to support your argument.

I suspect anecdotally from seeing a few porn users histories the porn being accessed is for the most part not as hardcore as woman think.

the person who did access disgusting porn, kept it the most hidden and I did not find the porn until many years after we split. but had so many other red flags I should have left anyway.

but that is the point teach kids the red flags, teach girls the courage of their convictions to walk away. teach kids to report what they are uncomfortable with teach courts to listen better and punish harder.

I suspect the proliferation of hardcore porn is no where near as widespread as mainstream media such as geordie shore which normalises awful relations between men and women. where do you stop? soon censorship becomes the norm and acceptable. I think it's fair to say women suffer the most in societies based around censorship.

but to return to the op. if you are resorting to anti porn literature to remove porn from your relationship you've already lost the argument. porn fan simply trots out the ethical porn argument. objection overcome. and I suspect that this isn't the real problem with the porn else ethical porn would actually solve that.

"No I don't like that" is a complete argument im itself. it recognises the validity of your own choice and opinion - once of the first things that an abusive man removes.

problem is you then give the other person the freedom to say but "I do". at that point either you have to accept a compromise or walk away.

anecdotal evidence suggests a man who uses porn will not stop (it may wax abd wane) but will find better ways of hiding it. if you are strongly anti porn the first time you find it you prob should walk. But that is the same as setting your boundary wherever that may be.

that's to me why educating about consent seems a far more beneficial exercise

and also the importance of boys to say no to what they feel uncomfortable with to especially in terms of the consumption of porn

I don't think porn has to be hardcore to be objectifying, to give people a false idea of what sex and human bodies are like, and to be hugely exploitative of the people who work in the industry.

that argument falls down at the first hurdle. why aren't men arguing the same thing about the chippendales? I assume you also wouldn't find the full monty acceptable....

that argument leads to widescale censorship. never a good thing

it also assume men don't have the intelligence to tell fact from fiction.

more relevant to your concerns about unrealistic images of women's bodies is the proliferation of airbrushing throughout the media. that is portraying fake bodies as real. and to my mind a far more wide reaching problem than porn.

if this is really our biggest objection with porn is unrealistic depictions of woman's bodies, why isn't the anti airbrushing campaign getting anyway near the amount of space as anti porn?

an unrealistic protrayal of sex I've asked why?

the evidence offered was that specific practices apparently come from porn which it is stated categorically woman don't like. that's simply bollocks. I know I very much enjoy some of them, threads on mumsnet (eg bumsex) show the variety of female sensuality.

What it fails to recognise is that regular sex can be just as demeaning in the wrong circumstances.

If you think the Chippendales have any relevance to this argument I don't think we are on the same page enough to even discuss this. You'll be bringing up the Diet Coke guy next FFS

(Clue as to why they are not the same - 2 Diet Coke guys in 30 years vs the unmeasurable objectification of women in the same era)

I am going to go out on a limb here and say having a strangers's bodily fluids squirted in your face and/or body is inherently degrading. That's not to say people can't and don't 'rise above it' and perhaps even enjoy it - fair enough, I guess, each to their own. But there is a psychological process of acceptance here, a personal thing that everyone decides for themselves. Porn doesn't show anything like acceptance or personal boundaries. It just shows the degradation and people beat off and reward themselves to the degradation of women.

"If you think the Chippendales have any relevance to this argument I don't think we are on the same page enough to even discuss this. You'll be bringing up the Diet Coke guy next FFS"

SinisterSal- I have opted out of this discussion for that very reason. There is an agenda being pushed. And not everybody is who they seem. Sad, but true.

Well said Buffy - it's all very well saying men can separate fantasy from reality, but actually I'm not sure adolescent males necessarily can. Truth is I have no idea what the solution is, but there's certainly a problem and I worry for girls of my daughter's generation.

No idea what I'm on about AngryLib or FrankDancer or whatever you're called? Oh sorry, did I make a massive assumption there? Honestly the FWR board is becoming like a game of Where's John Ridgely! Try another name! Go on! Let me have another go!

Group sex and multiple penetratiion are not inherently wrong. Nor is enjoying a partner's ejaculating on your body. Another ongoing problem with the pro-censorship camp is that they always have a very narrow, prescriptive view of sexuality: anything other than 'normal' sex (ie heteromonogamous and 'gentle' is horrible and disgusting, and only wicked men like or want it.).

Women's sexual desires and fantasies are pretty wide-ranging - check out Nancy Friday's My Secret Garden for evidence of this. Certainly sex education should focus on the ideal of enthusiastic participation from a partner rather than depicting sex as something that men 'get from' women which it is women's duty to withold as long as possible.

What's the point of "expanding sexual boundaries"?

Seriously?

Expanding which sexual boundaries? Where to? For what purpose? How?

From where are we expanding them? SGB's gentle missionary position sex? From alsation dogs, whips and nipple clamps?

I think it's useful to define what you're actually talking about.

"Another ongoing problem with the pro-censorship camp is that they always have a very narrow, prescriptive view of sexuality: anything other than 'normal' sex (ie heteromonogamous and 'gentle' is horrible and disgusting, and only wicked men like or want it.)."

That is such a ridiculous, sweeping statement that it's hardly worthy of comment.

I notice, by the way, that the pro porn camp always carefully avoid the points about the exploitation of women involved in making porn. Presumably because they are all either paid mega bucks, or do it because they love sex so much, or just find it such a convenient way to earn money to fund their PhDs?