Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Your partner watching porn

13468921

Posts

  • SpeakerSpeaker Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    I don't think defering to what your partner feels comfortable with in this area is unreasonable.

    Speaker on
    Being walkers with the dawn and morning,
    Walkers with the sun and morning, we are not afraid of night,
    Nor days of gloom, nor darkness -
    Being walkers with the sun and morning.
  • JohannenJohannen Registered User
    edited November 2008
    Dman wrote: »
    You can sort of experience/fulfill many of your fantasies via porn+masturbation, not so much with your partner. You likely have wildly different fantasies many of which you have no interest in actually going through with in real life for practical reasons.

    When it comes to relationships yes you often have to compromise for the sake of your partners happiness and the person who is in the right might decide its just not worth fighting over, but that doesn't mean one person can't be theoretically "right" and the other "wrong".

    What if I tell a girl she can never read her romance smut novels ever again because they make me jealous and insecure and I've got low self esteem am I in the right? Maybe the problem here isn't the smut novels. People are insisting in blaming porn for things and insisting that it is more acceptable to tell someone they can't watch porn then it is to tell them they can't play golf.

    Really, you believe that the reason why you wouldn't want them reading smut novels and fantasizing about other people is because you have low self esteem? You don't think it's because the thought of your partner having sex, or wanting sex with someone else is uncomfortable for anyone?

    Also, if you want to fulfill fantasies, why couldn't you just think of the fantasy and imagine carrying it out with your partner if it doesn't seem possible in the relationship. Yes porn is a masturbatory aid, but it's still watching other people have sex and imagining having sex with them yourself (or getting yourself off to someone else).

    Johannen on
  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS
    edited November 2008
    Speaker wrote: »
    I don't think defering to what your partner feels comfortable with in this area is unreasonable.

    That's basically what both sides are saying. Good job.

    ViolentChemistry on
    DAMM
    Drunks Against Mad Mothers
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited November 2008
    Speaker wrote: »
    I don't think defering to what your partner feels comfortable with in this area is unreasonable.

    That's basically what both sides are saying. Good job.

    Some people are saying that one person asking his SO to give up porn is necessarily unreasonable. You may or may not be one of them; I really have no idea what your stance is anymore.

    ElJeffe on
    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • SpeakerSpeaker Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Speaker wrote: »
    I don't think defering to what your partner feels comfortable with in this area is unreasonable.

    That's basically what both sides are saying. Good job.

    Ah, consensus.

    Speaker on
    Being walkers with the dawn and morning,
    Walkers with the sun and morning, we are not afraid of night,
    Nor days of gloom, nor darkness -
    Being walkers with the sun and morning.
  • DmanDman Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Well, I just feel like something is wrong if refusing to have sex is grounds for divorce but asking them to give up masturbatory aids which they use when your not around is automatically reasonable.

    yeah its something to discuss and you might decide to give up porn if its bothering your SO, but your doing it because you love your SO, not because its automatically reasonable. Maybe your partner wants you to give up ever eating bananas again. You might go along with it because bananas don't really mean much to you but it doesn't make the request reasonable.

    Dman on
  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS
    edited November 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Speaker wrote: »
    I don't think defering to what your partner feels comfortable with in this area is unreasonable.

    That's basically what both sides are saying. Good job.

    Some people are saying that one person asking his SO to give up porn is necessarily unreasonable. You may or may not be one of them; I really have no idea what your stance is anymore.

    In some contexts that request would be unreasonable. Many people have gone and pressed that request into those contexts to try to promote the idea that that request is universally reasonable. Nobody has said, however, that it's unreasonable to adapt some aspects of your behavior to your partner's comfort levels. Of course it's also perfectly reasonable to dump someone for making unreasonable requests instead of conforming to them. It is foolish, though maybe not unreasonable, to default to one side or the other without even talking about it. Expecting someone to default to one side or the other without even talking about it is definitely unreasonable.

    [Killinger]Compromise iz ze essence of diplomacy, and diplomacy iz ze corner stone of love, SVEEEEEET LOOOOOOVVVVVE![/Killinger]

    ViolentChemistry on
    DAMM
    Drunks Against Mad Mothers
  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS
    edited November 2008
    Dman wrote: »
    Well, I just feel like something is wrong if refusing to have sex is grounds for divorce but asking them to give up masturbatory aids which they use when your not around is automatically reasonable.

    yeah its something to discuss and you might decide to give up porn if its bothering your SO, but your doing it because you love your SO, not because its automatically reasonable. Maybe your partner wants you to give up ever eating bananas again. You might go along with it because bananas don't really mean much to you but it doesn't make the request reasonable.

    Basically.

    ViolentChemistry on
    DAMM
    Drunks Against Mad Mothers
  • JohannenJohannen Registered User
    edited November 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Speaker wrote: »
    I don't think defering to what your partner feels comfortable with in this area is unreasonable.

    That's basically what both sides are saying. Good job.

    Some people are saying that one person asking his SO to give up porn is necessarily unreasonable. You may or may not be one of them; I really have no idea what your stance is anymore.

    In some contexts that request would be unreasonable. Many people have gone and pressed that request into those contexts to try to promote the idea that that request is universally reasonable. Nobody has said, however, that it's unreasonable to adapt some aspects of your behavior to your partner's comfort levels. Of course it's also perfectly reasonable to dump someone for making unreasonable requests instead of conforming to them. It is foolish, though maybe not unreasonable, to default to one side or the other without even talking about it. Expecting someone to default to one side or the other without even talking about it is definitely unreasonable.

    [Killinger]Compromise iz ze essence of diplomacy, and diplomacy iz ze corner stone of love, SVEEEEEET LOOOOOOVVVVVE![/Killinger]

    Then you must also concede that there are times at which this request is reasonable also?

    Johannen on
  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS
    edited November 2008
    Johannen wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Speaker wrote: »
    I don't think defering to what your partner feels comfortable with in this area is unreasonable.

    That's basically what both sides are saying. Good job.

    Some people are saying that one person asking his SO to give up porn is necessarily unreasonable. You may or may not be one of them; I really have no idea what your stance is anymore.

    In some contexts that request would be unreasonable. Many people have gone and pressed that request into those contexts to try to promote the idea that that request is universally reasonable. Nobody has said, however, that it's unreasonable to adapt some aspects of your behavior to your partner's comfort levels. Of course it's also perfectly reasonable to dump someone for making unreasonable requests instead of conforming to them. It is foolish, though maybe not unreasonable, to default to one side or the other without even talking about it. Expecting someone to default to one side or the other without even talking about it is definitely unreasonable.

    [Killinger]Compromise iz ze essence of diplomacy, and diplomacy iz ze corner stone of love, SVEEEEEET LOOOOOOVVVVVE![/Killinger]

    Then you must also concede that there are times at which this request is reasonable also?

    Sure. I never denied that. I can also see where it would be reasonable to try to get someone to limit the content of their porn in certain ways. Either way I don't think the porn is the problem, though. The problem is something inside one or both of the people.

    Edit: Hint: whether or not something is unreasonable is determined by the reasons behind the something. By definition.

    ViolentChemistry on
    DAMM
    Drunks Against Mad Mothers
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited November 2008
    I'm not talking about young teens having problems, and this is about more than just 'awkwardness'.

    Why can't we have teens in this discussion? You get older, you have more relationships, you learn. I don't see how this only applies to adults.
    Not in its current form (it was a fuckload tamer), and it was a lot harder to access.

    Xagarath already did a good job of addressing this, but I'd just like to add that there are ancient Bibles with pictures of raunchy sex drawn in every page margin.

    Let's also not forget about things like brothels and prostitution. The world's oldest profession.

    Sheep on
    QlBGc.jpg
  • ScalfinScalfin __BANNED USERS regular
    edited November 2008
    Sheep wrote: »
    I'm not talking about young teens having problems, and this is about more than just 'awkwardness'.

    Why can't we have teens in this discussion? You get older, you have more relationships, you learn. I don't see how this only applies to adults.
    Not in its current form (it was a fuckload tamer), and it was a lot harder to access.

    Xagarath already did a good job of addressing this, but I'd just like to add that there are ancient Bibles with pictures of raunchy sex drawn in every page margin.

    Let's also not forget about things like brothels and prostitution. The world's oldest profession.

    There's an old bible with a picture of a man being anally penetrated by a giant toucan!:lol:

    Scalfin on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    The rest of you, I fucking hate you for the fact that I now have a blue dot on this god awful thread.
  • DmanDman Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Yeah I'll concede there are certainly times when its reasonable to ask someone to stop doing something. I can think of 100 scenarios where it would be reasonable to ask someone to stop looking at porn because their current habit is unhealthy and they need a clean break so they can change.

    Dman on
  • JohannenJohannen Registered User
    edited November 2008
    Johannen wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Speaker wrote: »
    I don't think defering to what your partner feels comfortable with in this area is unreasonable.

    That's basically what both sides are saying. Good job.

    Some people are saying that one person asking his SO to give up porn is necessarily unreasonable. You may or may not be one of them; I really have no idea what your stance is anymore.

    In some contexts that request would be unreasonable. Many people have gone and pressed that request into those contexts to try to promote the idea that that request is universally reasonable. Nobody has said, however, that it's unreasonable to adapt some aspects of your behavior to your partner's comfort levels. Of course it's also perfectly reasonable to dump someone for making unreasonable requests instead of conforming to them. It is foolish, though maybe not unreasonable, to default to one side or the other without even talking about it. Expecting someone to default to one side or the other without even talking about it is definitely unreasonable.

    [Killinger]Compromise iz ze essence of diplomacy, and diplomacy iz ze corner stone of love, SVEEEEEET LOOOOOOVVVVVE![/Killinger]

    Then you must also concede that there are times at which this request is reasonable also?

    Sure. I never denied that. I can also see where it would be reasonable to try to get someone to limit the content of their porn in certain ways. Either way I don't think the porn is the problem, though. The problem is something inside one or both of the people.

    Edit: Hint: whether or not something is unreasonable is determined by the reasons behind the something. By definition.

    Why did you "edit:hint". You're condescendence here is not necessary, I understand what the word means (and I think we all do), it just felt as if you're argument was on the side of "this request is unreasonable, but there's times when it' o.k to ask and conform to it".

    I actually think that porn is fine to use in a relationship, but I find watching it with your partner not for me as I think that the partner is the one who should be able to arouse you. But that's just my school of thought and I understand that people differ immensely in opinions.

    And you also say that there is a problem. Why does there have to be a problem if people don't want their partners to watch porn? Because if you're saying it's an insecurity thing or jealousy thing that's just rubbish.

    The thought of your partner having sex with, or wanting to have sex with someone else is uncomfortable for anyone. Jealousy is wanting what you don't have and being annoyed at that, insecurity is thinking your unloved or worthless in the relationship, and I don't see why either of these should apply, or any "problem" should have to be present for not wanting your partner to watch porn to be an ideal a person has.

    Johannen on
  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS
    edited November 2008
    Johannen wrote: »
    Why did you "edit:hint".

    Because earlier bowen claimed that the reason had nothing to do with whether the request was unreasonable.

    ViolentChemistry on
    DAMM
    Drunks Against Mad Mothers
  • JohannenJohannen Registered User
    edited November 2008
    Johannen wrote: »
    Why did you "edit:hint".

    Because earlier bowen claimed that the reason had nothing to do with whether the request was unreasonable.

    But.....But!!
    In some contexts that request would be unreasonable. Many people have gone and pressed that request into those contexts to try to promote the idea that that request is universally reasonable. Nobody has said, however, that it's unreasonable to adapt some aspects of your behavior to your partner's comfort levels. Of course it's also perfectly reasonable to dump someone for making unreasonable requests instead of conforming to them. It is foolish, though maybe not unreasonable, to default to one side or the other without even talking about it. Expecting someone to default to one side or the other without even talking about it is definitely unreasonable.

    [Killinger]Compromise iz ze essence of diplomacy, and diplomacy iz ze corner stone of love, SVEEEEEET LOOOOOOVVVVVE![/Killinger]

    Johannen on
  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS
    edited November 2008
    Johannen wrote: »
    Johannen wrote: »
    Why did you "edit:hint".

    Because earlier bowen claimed that the reason had nothing to do with whether the request was unreasonable.

    But.....But!!
    In some contexts that request would be unreasonable. Many people have gone and pressed that request into those contexts to try to promote the idea that that request is universally reasonable. Nobody has said, however, that it's unreasonable to adapt some aspects of your behavior to your partner's comfort levels. Of course it's also perfectly reasonable to dump someone for making unreasonable requests instead of conforming to them. It is foolish, though maybe not unreasonable, to default to one side or the other without even talking about it. Expecting someone to default to one side or the other without even talking about it is definitely unreasonable.

    [Killinger]Compromise iz ze essence of diplomacy, and diplomacy iz ze corner stone of love, SVEEEEEET LOOOOOOVVVVVE![/Killinger]

    Und zis iz my Magic Murderbag?

    ViolentChemistry on
    DAMM
    Drunks Against Mad Mothers
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited November 2008
    So it appears VC and bowen and I are on the same page.

    ElJeffe on
    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • JohannenJohannen Registered User
    edited November 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    So it appears VC and bowen and I are on the same page.

    What? Really?

    Johannen on
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited November 2008
    As best I can tell, we're all saying "Sometimes it might be reasonable to give up porn, other times not, depending on the specific details of the situation and as a result of suitable discussion of the matter."

    ElJeffe on
    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS
    edited November 2008
    Johannen wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    So it appears VC and bowen and I are on the same page.

    What? Really?

    Page 4, if you're viewing 50 posts per page. We're all on that page.

    ViolentChemistry on
    DAMM
    Drunks Against Mad Mothers
  • JohannenJohannen Registered User
    edited November 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    As best I can tell, we're all saying "Sometimes it might be reasonable to give up porn, other times not, depending on the specific details of the situation and as a result of suitable discussion of the matter."

    Yes this is also what I am saying.

    Johannen on
  • JohannenJohannen Registered User
    edited November 2008
    Johannen wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    So it appears VC and bowen and I are on the same page.

    What? Really?

    Page 4, if you're viewing 50 posts per page. We're all on that page.

    I'm not viewing 50 posts per page, and what was with the kissinger line?

    Johannen on
  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS
    edited November 2008
    Killinger.

    ViolentChemistry on
    DAMM
    Drunks Against Mad Mothers
  • JohannenJohannen Registered User
    edited November 2008
    Killinger.

    I apologise. I read it wrong.
    dick

    Johannen on
  • DmanDman Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Johannen wrote: »
    Killinger.

    I apologise. I read it wrong.
    dick

    [Killinger]Compromise iz ze essence of diplomacy, and diplomacy iz ze corner stone of love, SVEEEEEET LOOOOOOVVVVVE![/Killinger]

    This line made perfect sense to me. Neither side is automatically correct when it comes to porn or anything else, it is dependent on circumstances and you need to make compromises, negotiate and come up with solution you both can live with.

    Dman on
  • JohannenJohannen Registered User
    edited November 2008
    Dman wrote: »
    Johannen wrote: »
    Killinger.

    I apologise. I read it wrong.
    dick

    [Killinger]Compromise iz ze essence of diplomacy, and diplomacy iz ze corner stone of love, SVEEEEEET LOOOOOOVVVVVE![/Killinger]

    This line made perfect sense to me. Neither side is automatically correct when it comes to porn or anything else, it is dependent on circumstances and you need to make compromises, negotiate and come up with solution you both can live with.

    This is exactly the point I've been making throughout. So why have we been arguing this?

    Edit: and that killinger line didn't really go with what he was saying, he was saying the unreasonable and reasonable sides but he was still seemingly arguing for the fact that it was an unreasonable request to make.

    Johannen on
  • gtrmpgtrmp Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    The Cat wrote: »
    Dare I say that the assumption that you need porn to wank it (and VC isn't the only one who failed to question that until just now) is part of the problem I'm describing?

    Oh I think I do dare

    Some guys just don't get physically aroused very easily. I'm not talking about people who've suffered sexual trauma or botched circumcisions or whatever, but also people who, for whatever reason, don't get physically turned on to the point that they can actually get off without some sort of external stimulus, regardless of whether than stimulus is a partner or porn or some other sexual aid.

    Granted, most of the guys who literally need porn to get off are obviously jerking it way too often.

    gtrmp on
  • WashWash Sweet Christmas Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    gtrmp wrote: »
    The Cat wrote: »
    Dare I say that the assumption that you need porn to wank it (and VC isn't the only one who failed to question that until just now) is part of the problem I'm describing?

    Oh I think I do dare

    Some guys just don't get physically aroused very easily. I'm not talking about people who've suffered sexual trauma or botched circumcisions or whatever, but also people who, for whatever reason, don't get physically turned on to the point that they can actually get off without some sort of external stimulus, regardless of whether than stimulus is a partner or porn or some other sexual aid.

    Observing someone for the sake of arousal, as is the case with porn, is no better or worse than creating a mental image of someone else. There pretty much is always a stimulus, whether it's pornography or something else outside of yourself, or something you've conjured up in your imagination. How is imagining another person as bad as watching another person? Because I doubt many people would argue that anyone, even an SO, has any right to request you stop imagining certain things.

    I realize the argument's pretty much over, what with the consensus on complying to an SO's request being reasonable depending on the situation, but I just wanted to throw that out there.

    Wash on
    gi5h0gjqwti1.jpg
  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS
    edited November 2008
    Johannen wrote: »
    Edit: and that killinger line didn't really go with what he was saying, he was saying the unreasonable and reasonable sides but he was still seemingly arguing for the fact that it was an unreasonable request to make.

    I've only ever been arguing that it can be unreasonable, and that the person making the request is just as capable of being the jackass as the person whacking it to internet-titties. If you decided to extrapolate a bunch of stuff from that that wasn't there so that you could get offended, that's not really my problem.

    ViolentChemistry on
    DAMM
    Drunks Against Mad Mothers
  • PotatoNinjaPotatoNinja Fake Gamer Goat Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    gtrmp wrote: »
    The Cat wrote: »
    Dare I say that the assumption that you need porn to wank it (and VC isn't the only one who failed to question that until just now) is part of the problem I'm describing?

    Oh I think I do dare

    Some guys just don't get physically aroused very easily. I'm not talking about people who've suffered sexual trauma or botched circumcisions or whatever, but also people who, for whatever reason, don't get physically turned on to the point that they can actually get off without some sort of external stimulus, regardless of whether than stimulus is a partner or porn or some other sexual aid.

    Observing someone for the sake of arousal, as is the case with porn, is no better or worse than creating a mental image of someone else. There pretty much is always a stimulus, whether it's pornography or something else outside of yourself, or something you've conjured up in your imagination. How is imagining another person as bad as watching another person? Because I doubt many people would argue that anyone, even an SO, has any right to request you stop imagining certain things.

    I realize the argument's pretty much over, what with the consensus on complying to an SO's request being reasonable depending on the situation, but I just wanted to throw that out there.

    There's a logical difference between internal imagination, outside stimulus, and actual event. Thinking about killing your boss because you are angry is different than creating a plan to do so. Thinking about a scary forest is different than watching a scary movie.

    Logically, we can assume that someone who is unfaithful and looks at pornography will also have internal fantasies that are unfaithful, but that's a separate issue. Having a thought is different than viewing an outside form of stimuli confirming or exaggerating that thought.
    Because I doubt many people would argue that anyone, even an SO, has any right to request you stop imagining certain things.

    Actually, your S.O. has no ability to discern what you are imagining, and therefore logically cannot enforce any right to know what you fantasize about. That is different that your assumption, which is that what you fantasize about is irrelevant to your S.O., or what you think about or fantasize about is irrelevant to your relationship, or at least irrelevant to the point where your partner has no logical interest or right in it. If you were to honestly say to your S.O. "I have sexual fantasies about people other than you," I imagine the ensuing conversation would be..... tense. "Hey PotatoNinja, baby, sugar, love, just FYI I mastrubate while fantasizing about my ex-boyfriend" would probably put me in a pretty foul mood, and I'm pretty open / relaxed when it comes to an individual's right to personal sexual fantasies.

    There are degrees of this, as there are varying degrees and gradients of all the things this thread has been discussing, and as such there are going to be times when the fantasies you have are towards the benign / innocent end of the spectrum, and times when they are towards the malignant or destruction. There is a world of difference between constant and active fantasies about other individuals or other specific individuals as opposed to passing, fleeting thoughts or the recognition of biological urges. And all of these are different than partially experiencing those fantasies through pornography.

    Oh yes, if you strawman me into saying "lolol you can't think what you want to think about sex because women read your mind and kill you if you find people sexy" I will construct a voodoo doll of you and do terrible things to it.

    Ultimately, I don't find anything wrong with porn or porn-based sexual stimulus, but I'm not going to remain intentionally daft and assume that my perspective on pornography is the only viable perspective or that my experiences with faithfulness, trust, body image, and sexuality will be perfectly reflected in everyone I decide to sleep with. Additionally, I'm not going to lie and say that I would have absolutely no concerns if an S.O. were to view pornography. Those concerns may be extremely minor, or they may be exceeded by more positive connotations related to the activity ("Hey, that guys cock is bigger than mine and HOLY CRAP MY GIRL LIKES SEX AS MUCH AS I DO WOOOOOOOOOOOOOO"), and along those lines I'm willing to recognize that my particular balance in terms of positive vs. negative reactions to pornography will not be matched by every single person I meet.

    PotatoNinja on
    Two goats enter, one car leaves
  • TrowizillaTrowizilla Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Because I doubt many people would argue that anyone, even an SO, has any right to request you stop imagining certain things.

    Actually, your S.O. has no ability to discern what you are imagining, and therefore logically cannot enforce any right to know what you fantasize about. That is different that your assumption, which is that what you fantasize about is irrelevant to your S.O., or what you think about or fantasize about is irrelevant to your relationship, or at least irrelevant to the point where your partner has no logical interest or right in it. If you were to honestly say to your S.O. "I have sexual fantasies about people other than you," I imagine the ensuing conversation would be..... tense. "Hey PotatoNinja, baby, sugar, love, just FYI I mastrubate while fantasizing about my ex-boyfriend" would probably put me in a pretty foul mood, and I'm pretty open / relaxed when it comes to an individual's right to personal sexual fantasies.

    Actually, yeah, I'm going to argue that "what you think about or fantasize is irrelevant to your relationship, or at least irrelevant to the point where your partner has no logical intereste or right in it." This holds true EXACTLY to the point where you make it relevant to the relationship.

    If you fantasize about, say, Transformers fucking, it is precisely none of your partner's business unless you do one or more of the following things:
    - Neglect them sexually in favor of fantasizing about Transformer porn.
    - Try to get them to wear painted cardboard boxes and make clanking noises during sex.
    - Fill their computer up with Transformer porn and viruses gotten from obtaining the same.
    - Spend all your waking time and/or money in pursuit of videos of Optimus Prime doing the nasty with Starscream.
    - Talk constantly about Transformers porn in a way that makes them uncomfortable.

    You get the idea. However, if you just quietly look at Transformers porn on your own computer, take care of your partner emotionally and sexually, don't spend all your money on robot sex pictures, etc., your interest in Transformers fucking each other should be irrlelevant to your partner.

    If the mere knowledge that, at some points, you might be fantasizing about someone or something other than them, with or without some sort of aid, bothers your partner so much that he or she asks you to stop, your partner is being unreasonable. Your response can be reasonable, whether or not you decide to accede to their request, but the request itself is unreasonable.

    Trowizilla on
  • JamesKeenanJamesKeenan Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    How do you know me so well?!

    Get out of my teeth!

    JamesKeenan on
  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited November 2008
    The Cat wrote: »
    Dare I say that the assumption that you need porn to wank it (and VC isn't the only one who failed to question that until just now) is part of the problem I'm describing?

    Oh I think I do dare

    I don't need to question it unless someone establishes that porn is natively harmful. It goes like this; you're allowed to do stuff until it causes harm. Not like this; you're not allowed to do stuff unless it's necessary. The necessity or lack of necessity of porn is irrelevant to my argument.

    If you think that the creation of 99% of porn doesn't cause harm you're out of your mind. And no, the other 1% doesn't make that irrelevant.

    The Cat on
    tmsig.jpg
  • trevelliantrevellian Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    I haven't read most of this thread but I watch porn, my girlfriend of 8 years watches porn and we sometimes watch porn together.

    We still have a good sex life. We're not sexual deviants.

    Carry on.

    Same.

    *shrugs*

    trevellian on
    McGough_EA.png
  • trevelliantrevellian Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    The Cat wrote: »
    If you think that the creation of 99% of porn doesn't cause harm you're out of your mind. And no, the other 1% doesn't make that irrelevant.

    Care to back that statement up? You seem to be stating that 99% of porn causes harm.

    I can see that excessive exposure to some of the more violent forms of porn may have an effect on perception - but is porn the cause of the underlying issue or symptomatic of it?

    *edit*

    Just noticed that I missed you are talking about the creation of porn. It does change the boundaries of the argument, but it is still upon you to back up the 99% charge. I am not going to deny that the porn industry in general is manipulative and mercenary, and some people do not fully appreciate what they are getting in to - but that criticism can be levelled at many things. Provided that all participants are entering into things in full possession of the facts and that we are referring to legally produced material, then where can you attribute harm? Take Sasha Grey as a point in case.

    trevellian on
    McGough_EA.png
  • TrowizillaTrowizilla Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    It would help if we pinned down what we're talking about. Are we talking about porn as "generally explicit material intended to arouse"? Or "pictures or video of real people doing sexual things"? Because while the mainstream industry for the second one has plenty of horrific abuses and has a long, long way to go before it can be called "not harmful," I don't think all the fictional Scotsmen in the Harlequin novels need defending, nor do I worry about the worker's rights of the anime big-eyed schoolgirls who seem to run into tentacle demons with alarming frequency.

    Trowizilla on
  • The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited November 2008
    I was considering video/photo porn, because that seems to be the focus of the OP. I don't think anyone has a problem with ficitonal stuff, although I personally draw the line at even fiction if consent issues are apparent in the story, or relatives/children/animals are involved. And yes, the creation of the vast majority of mainstream porn for sale involves the direct exploitation of damaged people. Its not ok and it never will be.

    The Cat on
    tmsig.jpg
  • trevelliantrevellian Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    The Cat wrote: »
    And yes, the creation of the vast majority of mainstream porn for sale involves the direct exploitation of damaged people. Its not ok and it never will be.

    OK, I have to disagree with your comment that the vast majority is direct exploitation of damaged people - but there we are just arguing the scale of the problem. I would not deny that it hasn't been done and is still being done, but I do not think the "vast majority" is guilty of it.

    I agree completely that it is unacceptable when it does occur, but is that not an argument for better regulation and oversight?

    trevellian on
    McGough_EA.png
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    trevellian wrote: »
    The Cat wrote: »
    And yes, the creation of the vast majority of mainstream porn for sale involves the direct exploitation of damaged people. Its not ok and it never will be.

    OK, I have to disagree with your comment that the vast majority is direct exploitation of damaged people - but there we are just arguing the scale of the problem. I would not deny that it hasn't been done and is still being done, but I do not think the "vast majority" is guilty of it.

    I agree completely that it is unacceptable when it does occur, but is that not an argument for better regulation and oversight?
    The story of any pornstar always involves some degree of parental neglect, misguided rebellion, or more commonly just abuse. It goes with the territory.

    electricitylikesme on
13468921
Sign In or Register to comment.