| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Trevor
Joined: 16 Nov 2005
|
 Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:06 am Post subject: |
 |
|
1. Go to Google
2. Type in "Porn for women"
3. View the results
The top three results are links to sites that are basically propaganda for women's sexuality and then the fourth result is for a book on Amazon.com
Three. Then a book.
Conclusion: Women don't look at porn too much. They aren't wired the same way as men.
(I'd post the links but I don't want to link to sexually explicit material -- even for sociological purposes) 
'nuff said. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
NovaKart
Joined: 18 Nov 2009
Location: Iraq
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Maybe women look at gay porn. Or a different google search would give different results. I have known some women who look at porn. They were exceptionally outspoken women who didn't care at all about shocking people. Probably more would do it if they didn't feel like they were freaks for doing it. I would agree that even aside from the sociological reasons there would be less women who look at porn than men. But I'm wondering if there are more women who look at porn than we realize. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Trevor
Joined: 16 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I'm wondering if there are more women who look at porn than we realize |
Nope. They don't. Women are different.
They can't do philosophy, either. There are no decent women philosophers. That's right, none. For some reason, porn and philosophy go together. I don't know why. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NovaKart
Joined: 18 Nov 2009
Location: Iraq
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Well, since you apparently know everything I won't argue with you about it. Perhaps someone else can chime in. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 11:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Adventurer wrote: |
| 2)What effect do pictures or pornography have on people? I know both sexes watch pornography and images. |
Yes, but men watch by far in greater proportion as they are much more sexually responsive to visual stimuli.
| NovaKart wrote: |
| Well, since you apparently know everything I won't argue with you about it. Perhaps someone else can chime in. |
Actually, on this topic Trevor has been spot on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NovaKart
Joined: 18 Nov 2009
Location: Iraq
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 12:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I'm not debating whether men do it at a much greater proportion. What I'm saying is that perhaps women either would look at porn more if it was more socially acceptable and perhaps women actually do look at porn more than most people realize. I'm not saying this is necessarily true but I think people might at least think about the idea before flat out saying that they don't. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| NovaKart wrote: |
| I'm not debating whether men do it at a much greater proportion. What I'm saying is that perhaps women either would look at porn more if it was more socially acceptable and perhaps women actually do look at porn more than most people realize. I'm not saying this is necessarily true but I think people might at least think about the idea before flat out saying that they don't. |
Socially acceptable or not, porn doesn't 'excite' me at. I'm not afraid to look at it, and there's plenty available on the internet. But I rarely watch it out of anything other than idle curiosity (and there are some curious things out there, dog on woman, man on goat, 6 blokes sharing 3 holes, and other bizzare sights that pr!ck at curiousity but do nothing to stir the loins). That might not be the same for all women, but I think it is for most. Some naked bloke bonking a naked woman? Ho hum... boring, after you've seen it once or twice. On a women's forum I sometimes go to, there is currently a thread where girls post pictures of hot guys. It does nothing for me at all. The guys I find 'hot' are hot for reasons other than their scantily clad bodies (nor their wallets).
Before some idiot jumps up thinking I'm condemning men for responding to pictures of scantily clad women, let me assure you I'm just pointing out that NovaKart's theory is almost certainly quite wrong - and I'm not judging men for wanting to **** off to porn. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Trevor wrote: |
So what's your solution?
| peppermint wrote: |
I think the guys are missing the point a little bit. The problem isn't that you're sexually aroused by hawt chicks. That's just normal.
It's that when you're aroused, you want to do words I'm not allowed to say here to those women rather than with them. You guys are seeing these women as objects to be enjoyed rather than as people who just might enjoy doing things I'm not allowed to say here to you as well. |
|
Perhaps peppermint just wants to remind some guys that 'that object' they're 'acting on' or trying to 'act on' is a sentient being with feelings. From the way a lot of guys brag about their 'conquests' you wouldn't think they'd have realised this.
Even if you are closely related to the bonobo, you've got this new add on celebral hardware that allows you to reflect on this kind of stuff. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Adventurer wrote: |
| I am sure women objectify men in many ways, too. |
In what ways?
I only ask, because as a woman (though just one example of a woman of course) I couldn't feel sexually attracted to man unless I could relate to him as a person first. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
And Peppermint, playing off the so-called study's objectives, is behaving like a feminist, moving to speak for what all women want and thus introduces ideology and even politicizes sex. Please do not do that. Some women, and many women at least sometimes, for example, love strong men doing things to them in bed. (Some men even prefer it the other way around.) Do you speak for all women (and men)? Why would you do this to sex and reproduction? Why must we always have sex with each other and never to each other?
Sexual totalitarianism and feminist prudishness out of control. |
I don't see that peppermint is being either prudish nor a 'sexual totalitarian' Gopher. Suggesting men might consider a woman's feelings or wishes is not to be an ideologue or a sexual fascist. Stop being so totalitarian yourself!
Certainly it's true that "some women, and many women at least sometimes, for example, love strong men doing things to them in bed" but they would hope that their sexually assertive playmate would also be considerate of their feelings and wishes, and not see her merely as a 'thing' to do 'things to.' I think that's basically what peppermint was saying. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Trevor
Joined: 16 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Even if you are closely related to the bonobo, you've got this new add on celebral hardware that allows you to reflect on this kind of stuff. |
I thnk you meant even if "we" are closely related to the bonobo (ahem).
Bonobos, by the way, are matriarchal and the females can be incredibly despotic in their manipulative use of egalitarianism against males in the group. (An analogy between bonobo gender interaction and modern corporate culture could easily be made).
While your point is well-taken, I think it is worth pointing out that in the past thirty years or so, women have been insisting that men do A LOT on the subject of curbing their natural instincts and socializing themselves more to womens' liking. To a remarkable extent, men have complied a great deal witin a short time frame. But have women been willing to make any modifications? It seems to me that any substantial modifications you can point to would be those having the effect of making women more like men.
That's interesting. Criticize us, then try to be more like us. (We do too like porn!) 
Besides the endless finger-wagging, workplace legislation, 'zero-tolerance' policies bordering on fascism, divorce and custody laws clearly favoring women, have women shown any willingness to make any modifications themselves? It seems to me that equality is no longer the issue. Opportunistic upper-handedness is much, much more often the obvious motive. Subtleties such as suggesting men ('you') and not women are descended from monkeys are all too common and for the most part ignored.
Women are descended from apes as well. Jane Goodall documented cannibalism in a mother-daughter pair of chimps that went on for years.
Last edited by Trevor on Mon Jan 04, 2010 7:10 pm; edited 6 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Trevor
Joined: 16 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nothing personal, Novakart, but one of my real pet peeves about society in general is peoples' insistence on trying to make something true even when it clearly is not. I understand why people do it -- sometimes is is even necessary, I think. I am curious, though as to why it is important to you that women be interested in porn? Is there some underlying point that it would enable you to make if they were?
No ulterior motive to the question. I am truly curious.
| NovaKart wrote: |
| I'm not debating whether men do it at a much greater proportion. What I'm saying is that perhaps women either would look at porn more if it was more socially acceptable and perhaps women actually do look at porn more than most people realize. I'm not saying this is necessarily true but I think people might at least think about the idea before flat out saying that they don't. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
peppermint
Joined: 13 May 2003
Location: traversing the minefields of caddishness.
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 8:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
You are relying on sociobiology/evolutionary psychology and "the immortal gene."
And Peppermint, playing off the so-called study's objectives, is behaving like a feminist, moving to speak for what all women want and thus introduces ideology and even politicizes sex. Please do not do that. Some women, and many women at least sometimes, for example, love strong men doing things to them in bed. (Some men even prefer it the other way around.) Do you speak for all women (and men)? Why would you do this to sex and reproduction? Why must we always have sex with each other and never to each other?
Sexual totalitarianism and feminist prudishness out of control. |
If this is what you mean by sexual totalitarianism:
http://www.yhchang.com/CUNNILINGUS_IN_NORTH_KOREA.swf
then i've gotta say, I'm down with it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| peppermint wrote: |
| Gopher wrote: |
You are relying on sociobiology/evolutionary psychology and "the immortal gene."
And Peppermint, playing off the so-called study's objectives, is behaving like a feminist, moving to speak for what all women want and thus introduces ideology and even politicizes sex. Please do not do that. Some women, and many women at least sometimes, for example, love strong men doing things to them in bed. (Some men even prefer it the other way around.) Do you speak for all women (and men)? Why would you do this to sex and reproduction? Why must we always have sex with each other and never to each other?
Sexual totalitarianism and feminist prudishness out of control. |
If this is what you mean by sexual totalitarianism:
http://www.yhchang.com/CUNNILINGUS_IN_NORTH_KOREA.swf
then i've gotta say, I'm down with it. |
Thank you, peps - that was hilarious! And almost as good as it's subject matter... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 9:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Trevor wrote: |
| Subtleties such as suggesting men ('you') and not women are descended from monkeys are all too common and for the most part ignored. |
Nice try darling. But I was using 'you' in its singular. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
